26th Annual Computational Neuroscience Meeting (CNS*2017): Part 3 - Meeting Abstracts - Antwerp, Belgium. 15–20 July 2017

This work was produced as part of the activities of FAPESP Research,\ud Disseminations and Innovation Center for Neuromathematics (grant\ud 2013/07699-0, S. Paulo Research Foundation). NLK is supported by a\ud FAPESP postdoctoral fellowship (grant 2016/03855-5). ACR is partially\ud supported by a CNPq fellowship (grant 306251/2014-0)

Modelling human choices: MADeM and decision‑making

Research supported by FAPESP 2015/50122-0 and DFG-GRTK 1740/2. RP and AR are also part of the Research, Innovation and Dissemination Center for Neuromathematics FAPESP grant (2013/07699-0). RP is supported by a FAPESP scholarship (2013/25667-8). ACR is partially supported by a CNPq fellowship (grant 306251/2014-0)

Diluted Privacy Law

Paraphrased translation from Dutch of the inaugural lecture by Prof.dr. Gerrit-Jan Zwenne on the acceptance of his position of professor of Law and the Information Society at the Universiteit Leiden on Friday, April 12, 2013.De bescherming van fundamentele rechten in een integrerend Europ

Privacy for the Homo Digitalis: Proposal for a New Regulatory Framework for Data Protection in the Light of Big Data and the Internet of Things

The authors analyze innovations in data processing as a result of developments such as 'big data' and the 'Internet of Things' and discuss why these developments undermine the effectiveness and legitimacy of the current as well as upcoming EU data protection regime, thereby focusing on the private sector. The authors undertake a detailed analysis of key data processing principles used in the European data protection regime (purpose limitation, informational self-determination and data quality) and argue that due to social trends and technological developments the principle of purpose limitation should be abandoned as a separate criterion. Also, other principles (such as consent and the performance of an agreement) should no longer be recognised as independent legal grounds to legitimize data processing. The authors propose, instead, a test based on whether there is a legitimate interest for data collection and processing (as well as further processing) of data. The authors argue that such a test will provide for a more effective data protection regime that will have more legitimacy than the assessment under the existing legal regime that is primarily based on the purposes for which data may be collected and further used. Based on their analysis, the authors develop a framework to be used by companies as the principal (and only) test for the whole life cycle of personal data processing (collection, use, further use and destruction of data). This test has been drafted in such a way that it enables companies to comply with the new requirements under the upcoming EU General Data Protection Regulation, that will become effective in 2018. The authors conclude their analysis with proposals to increase the (effectiveness of) enforcement of the data protection rule