FB pixel

Legal scholars developing guidance for biometrics legislation

European and US Law Institutes announce joint project
Categories Biometrics News
Legal scholars developing guidance for biometrics legislation
 

Two law institutes, one from Europe and one from the United States, launched a new collaborative project focusing on the ethical and legal implications of collecting and using biometric data.

Initiated by the Philadelphia-based American Law Institute (ALI) and the Vienna-headquartered European Law Institute (ELI), the main task of the project is defining a legal framework aimed at regulators working in different democratic countries.

The move comes at a crucial time for regulating artificial intelligence and biometric data on both side of the Atlantic. This year, the European Union finally launched its AI Act, while U.S. agencies have been developing AI guidelines and debating uses such as facial recognition.

The project, titled Principles for the Governance of Biometrics, has four initial goals.

“First, the project will define key terms and develop a classification system for biometric systems, technologies, and data,” says Nita Farahany, a professor at Duke Law School and the American Law Institute’s main project representative.

The second task of the project will be to examine technologies technologies and systems used to collect and process biometric data while the third phase will include evaluating the benefits and harms of biometric technologies, considering their impact on society.

“Finally, we will consider the legal frameworks governing data, AI, and related technologies in Europe, the United Kingdom, and the United States, in order to identify any gaps or inconsistencies,” adds Farahany.

Farahany will be joined by Karen Yeung, a representative from the European Law Institute. Yeung is a professorial fellow at the University of Birmingham’s School of Computer Science.

The Principles for the Governance of Biometrics will also analyze what is unique about different categories of biometric data, technologies, or inferences.

“For example, is biodata, from an ethical point of view, distinct from other forms of ‘sensitive’ data?,” adds Farahany. “Are there inherent issues with the collection and use of cognitive biometric data that require special consideration in particular contexts such as employment, advertising, or health – for example, due to their unique connection to the human body, or their potential to involuntarily reveal information?”

Related Posts

Article Topics

 |   |   |   |   |   |   | 

Latest Biometrics News

 

Sri Lanka’s biometric hardware market to grow with SL-UDI

Sri Lanka’s biometric hardware market is poised for growth with the implementation of Sri Lanka Unique Digital Identity (SL-UDI) by…

 

DHS’s compliance with AI privacy, civil liberties requirements lacking, IG says

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has made strides in developing policies and frameworks to govern its AI use, including…

 

Age assurance in shops reduces lineups, eases staff burdens and improves security

Age assurance technologies are increasingly being deployed for point-of-sale use cases, and proving effective at curtailing the sale of restricted…

 

Amazon firm: fired worker deserved it. Less so on its cop FR ban

The wrongful-firing lawsuit filed against Amazon Web Services in the UK has gained a new life. An October dismissal of…

 

Only 0.1% of people can tell a deepfake, says iProov

Only a tiny fraction of people – 0.1 percent – can accurately distinguish between real and fake content such as…

 

Ukraine tests compatibility with EUDI Wallet

Ukraine has successfully tested its compatibility with the European Union Digital Identity (EUDI) Wallet, allowing its citizens to use digital…

Comments

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Most Viewed This Week

Featured Company

Biometrics Insight, Opinion

Digital ID In-Depth

Biometrics White Papers

Biometrics Events