Teikėjai, kurie savo tekste tiesiogiai nurodė būtent šį straipsnio numerį. Tai citata iš jų pačių teksto — ne mūsų vertinimas ir ne priežastinis ryšys.
| Kas | Šalis | Ką parašė |
|---|---|---|
| European Banking Federation | BE | op of mind, also because of the Artificial Intelligence Act, guidance on the interaction between the AI Act and the GDPR, notably Article 22 and its different elements, would be welcome, particularly with sector specific examples. ↗ |
| Information Accountability Foundation | US | rprise risk management, version 1.0. GDPR, AI, automated decision making The recent Court of Justice judgment in Schufa, covering article 22 of GDPR and automated decision making, has implications beyond credit scoring. The ruling by the court “to fill a legal ↗ |
| ISPA-Internet Service Provdiers Austria | AT | would be desirable. • Right to object (Article 21) • Meaningful explanation and human intervention in automated decision making (Article 22) Where possible please provide a quantification and information on the evolution of the exercise of these rights since ↗ |
| Confederation of Swedish Enterprise | SE | protection of property and trade secrets The right to meaningful explanation and human intervention in automated decision making (Article 22) is rarely exercised but as automation increases and becomes a competitive ground, it should be considered that a data ↗ |
| FEBIS | DE | ability (Article 20) • Right to object (Article 21) • Meaningful explanation and human intervention in automated decision making (Article 22) It would be important to better assess the division of duties between data controllers and data processors, as there m ↗ |
| Asociación Española de Economía Digital (Adigital) | ES | ability (Article 20) ● Right to object (Article 21) ● Meaningful explanation and human intervention in automated decision making (Article 22) Where possible, please provide a quantification and information on the evolution of the exercise of these rights sinc ↗ |
| German Insurance Association | DE | ns to protect data subjects. In addition, the interpretation of the terms "legal effect" and "similarly significantly affects" in Article 22(1) GDPR is currently unclear. In the absence of a statement by the ECJ in this regard, it is still uncertain whether ev ↗ |
| BDI e.V. (Federation of German Industries) | DE | eneral complaint about a product or a service, etc. ▪ Meaningful explanation and human intervention in automated decision making (Article 22) Rarely exercised. A challenge appears as automation increases and becomes a competitive ground: a data subject may be, ↗ |
| ACCIS | BE | f) and 14(2)(f) GDPR). Consumers also have the right to request a manual review, express their opinion, and contest the decision (Article 22 GDPR). Additionally, high-risk data processing may require a data protection impact assessment (DPIA) and consultation ↗ |
| Deutscher Juristinnenbund e.V. | DE | Ansprache der Nutzer*innen ausdrücklich zu verbieten. Verantwortliche einer automatisierten Verarbeitung nach Art. 22 DSGVO ausdrücklich zu verpflichten, sowohl zum Zeitpunkt der Festlegung der Mittel als auch zum Zeitpunkt der eigentlichen Verarbeitung geei ↗ |
| Selbstregulierung Informationswirtschaft e.V. (SRIW) | DE | ending Art. 40.2 GDPR, stating that Codes of Conduct may act as cross-regulatory harmonization. 15.2. Data Governance Act 15.2.1. Article 22 (3) Data Governance Act The DGA introduces a unified form of consent for altruism concerning data. According to Art. 22 ↗ |
| Bitkom e.V. | DE | h potential GDPR easements, but it is crucial to distinguish its application on customers to mitigate impacts. The exemption in Article 22 Subsection 2 GDPR on automated decisions should not be overly strict in interpreting the "necessity" of such decisions. ↗ |
| EDRi European Digital Rights | ES | te its exercise. • Right to object (Article 21) N/A • Meaningful explanation and human intervention in automated decision making (Article 22) Regrettably, data controllers persistently reject any involvement in automated decision-making processes. European Dig ↗ |
| MyData-TRUST | BE | er whether their customers want this type of personal data collected from them when using applications built using AI technology. Article 22 of GDPR states that users have the right to object to automated decision-making, including profiling, which is the basi ↗ |
| BSA | The Software Alliance | BE | ors that can “similarly significantly” affect data subjects in relation to AI decisions. Additionally, the Guidelines’ section on Article 22(1)(b) of the GDPR (performance of a contract) should be updated to reflect whether it is possible to rely on AI beyond ↗ |
| Council of the Notariats of the EU | BE | ability (Article 20) • Right to object (Article 21) • Meaningful explanation and human intervention in automated decision making (Article 22) Where possible please provide a quantification and information on the evolution of the exercise of these rights since ↗ |
| ACT | The App Association | BE | ability (Article 20) • Right to object (Article 21) • Meaningful explanation and human intervention in automated decision-making (Article 22) b. Do you avail of / are you aware of tools or user-friendly procedures to facilitate the exercise of data subject rig ↗ |
| EuroISPA (European Internet Services Providers Association) | BE | ability (Article 20) • Right to object (Article 21) • Meaningful explanation and human intervention in automated decision making (Article 22) Where possible please provide a quantification and information on the evolution of the exercise of these rights since ↗ |
| European Association of Public Banks and funding agencies (EAPB) | BE | .eapb.eu • EU Transparency Register: 8754829960-32 4. Meaningful explanation and human intervention in automated decision making (Article 22) The criterion of human intervention should be clarified, specifying that the controller is required to examine and app ↗ |
| Federation of the European Sporting Goods Industry (FESI) | BE | 20) -Right to object (Article 21) -Meaningful explanation and human intervention in automated decision making (Article 22) Where possible please provide a quantification and information on the evolution of the exercise of these rights since the entry into appl ↗ |
| French Association of Large Companies (AFEP) | FR | f these requests. • Right to object (Article 21) NA • Meaningful explanation and human intervention in automated decision making (Article 22) NA b. Do you avail of/are you aware of tools or user-friendly procedures to facilitate the exercise of data subject ri ↗ |
| ANITEC-ASSINFORM | IT | (Article 20) • Right to object (Article 21) • Meaningful explanation and human intervention in automated decision making (Article 22) Where possible please provide a quantification and information on the evolution of the exercise of these rights since ↗ |
| Bundesrechtsanwaltskammer | DE | ability (Article 20) Right to object (Article 21) Meaningful explanation and human intervention in automated decision making (Article 22) Where possible please provide a quantification and information on the evolution of the exercise of these rights since ↗ |
| Insurance Europe | BE | subject has the right to obtain human intervention and ultimately to contest the decision pursuant to Article 22 (3). If the data of third parties is processed, eg, in third-party liability insurance, the exemption in Art. 22 (2) (a) GDPR is not applicable. Ob ↗ |
| United Internet | DE | ability (Article 20) • Right to object (Article 21) • Meaningful explanation and human intervention in automated decision making (Article 22) Where possible please provide a quantification and information on the evolution of the exercise of these rights since ↗ |
| World Employment Confederation | BE | ered. Inadequate oversight due to improper training may lead to an AI system being considered non-partially automated, triggering Article 22 of the GDPR and its obligations. Considering this, objecting to automated decision-making, as outlined in the GDPR, sho ↗ |
| Telefonica, S.A. | ES | ability (Article 20) • Right to object (Article 21) • Meaningful explanation and human intervention in automated decision making (Article 22) Where possible please provide a quantification and information on the evolution of the exercise of these rights since ↗ |
| Homo Digitalis | EL | ability (Article 20) • Right to object (Article 21) • Meaningful explanation and human intervention in automated decision making (Article 22) Where possible please provide a quantification and information on the evolution of the exercise of these rights since ↗ |
| Federation of Austrian Industries | AT | n interpretation - seems to contradict with Art. 6. • Meaningful explanation and human intervention in automated decision making (Article 22) This right can give rise to discussions. We do not want to diminish the data subject´s rights but based on the fact th ↗ |
| La villa numeris | FR | mes complexes fonctionnant comme des boîtes noires, ou encore avec la notion de prise de décision automatisée dont les exigences (article 22) semblent également incompatibles avec ce type de développements. A ce titre la liste des contraintes ou précautions so ↗ |
Šaltinis: viešų konsultacijų atsiliepimai ir pozicijų dokumentai. n = 45 paminėjimų; skaičiuojama pažodinė nuoroda į straipsnio numerį.