Katja de Vries | Vrije Universiteit Brussel (original) (raw)

Papers by Katja de Vries

Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Multimedia AI against Disinformation

ML-generated media (speech, image, etc.) can be used for many purposes such as robojournalism, th... more ML-generated media (speech, image, etc.) can be used for many purposes such as robojournalism, therapeutic chatbots or the synthetic resuscitation of a dead actor or a deceased loved one. Can ML be a source of speech that is protected by the right to freedom of expression in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)? I first discuss if ML-generated (or: "synthetic") media fall within the protective scope of freedom of expression (Article 10(1) ECHR). After concluding that this is the case, I look at specific complexities raised by ML-generated content in terms of limitations to freedom of expression (Article 10(2) ECHR). The first set of potential limitations that I explore are those following from copyright, data protection, privacy and confidentiality law. Some types of synthetic media could potentially circumvent these limitations. Second, I study how new types of content generated by ML can create normative grey areas where the boundaries of constitutionally protected and unprotected speech are not always easy to draw. In this context, I discuss two types of ML-generated content: virtual child pornography and fake news/disinformation. Third, I argue that the nuances of Article 10 ECHR are not easily captured in an automated filter and I discuss the potential implications of the arms race between automated filters and ML-generated content. In this context I discuss the newly adopted Digital Services Act (DSA) [1] and the recent (26 April 2022) judgement [2] of the ECJ (European Court of Justice) on automatic filtering of copyrightinfringing content under Article 17 of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (DSM Directive).

YSEC Yearbook of Socio-Economic Constitutions

Critical Analysis of Law, Apr 2, 2021

This article gives a legal-conceptual analysis of the use of counterfactuals (what-if explanation... more This article gives a legal-conceptual analysis of the use of counterfactuals (what-if explanations) as transparency tools for automated decision making (ADM). The first part of the analysis discusses three notions: transparency, ADM and generative artificial intelligence (AI). The second part of this article takes a closer look at the pros and cons of counterfactuals in making ADM explainable. Transparency is only useful if it is actionable, that is, if it challenges systemic bias or unjustified decisions. Existing ways of providing transparency about ADM systems are often limited in terms of being actionable. In contrast to many existing transparency tools, counterfactual explanations hold the promise of providing actionable and individually tailored transparency while not revealing too much of the model (attractive if ADM is a trade secret or if it is important that the system cannot be gamed). Another strength of counterfactuals is that they show that transparency should not be understood as the immediate visibility of some underlying truth. While promising, counterfactuals have their limitations. Firstly, there is always a multiplicity of counterfactuals (the Rashomon effect). Secondly, counterfactual explanations are not natural givens. Instead, they are constructed and the many underlying design decisions can turn out for better or worse.

Blog post on "The Muffinman", belgian dumpster diver Steven de Geynst, and the ... more Blog post on "The Muffinman", belgian dumpster diver Steven de Geynst, and the legal dimensions of food waste

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

Machine Learning (ML) applications shape, and are shaped by, human values. In the last decade cla... more Machine Learning (ML) applications shape, and are shaped by, human values. In the last decade classificatory models have become the most widely applied type of ML. However, since the invention of Generative Adverserial Networks (GANs) in 2014, the field of generative ML is likely to become equally prolific in the years to come. GANs can generate convincing fakes of video footage, pictures, graphics, DNA strings, etc. Some have called their capacity to mimic and recreate any informational pattern ‘machine imagination’. In this paper I explore what this new ML technique means in terms of how machines and humans co-create and co-organize life. I will discuss three important aspects of GANs. Firstly, what does it mean that GANs are trained on unlabelled data? Does that make them less prone to human bias? Secondly, what are appropriate success and optimization criteria for GANs? In classificatory ML prediction accuracy is the most common measure of success. GANs lack such an obvious crit...

The historical framework in which a technology is placed can affect the direction of legal, socie... more The historical framework in which a technology is placed can affect the direction of legal, societal and philosophical thought about it. It is explored in which way "Ambient Intelligent" or "Intelligent Environments"-technologies are similar or different from the technologies which arose during the mechanical and the cybernetic revolution. The findings are applied to a possible new understanding of privacy: the protection of a "time of one's own" instead of "a private space of one's own".

Computers, Privacy and Data Protection: an Element of Choice, 2011

ABSTRACT That bodily, social, geographical or financial constraints play a less important role in... more ABSTRACT That bodily, social, geographical or financial constraints play a less important role in virtual worlds like Second Life (SL) than in real life (RL) does not imply, as many of SL’s inhabitants seem to assume implicitly, that it is a place much like RL only without any burdening constraints whatsoever. The simple transposition of everyday objects (car, house, etc.) and actions (driving a car, making love, etc.) from an RL to an SL context ignores the fact that every digital world has its own “affordances” and “constraints” (cf. Norman, Latour). I argue that acting upon the specific affordances and constraints which govern one’s environment, whether it is in RL or SL, allows for a more mature and enlightened way of living. As an inspiring example of such an enlightened way of relating to one’s digitally simulated environment the work of code-performer Gazira Babeli is presented. Moreover I argue that a heightened awareness of the affordances and constraints could also be useful from a legal perspective for two reasons. Firstly, because this heightened awareness allows one to go beyond the idea of simple transposition and move towards more accurate and productive ways of legally qualifying those behaviors within digital worlds which are perceived (at least by some) as being unethical or obnoxious (so-called “virtual” theft or murder, consensual role-play rape in SL, etc.). Secondly, a law which is created in order to regulate the life of enlightened inhabitants, that is inhabitants who are aware of the affordances and constraints of their digital environment, will differ from a law that is aimed at users who merely live their digital lives based on the surface level.

Ethics and Information Technology, 2010

A vision wherein Ubiquitous Computing (i.e., embedded computational intelligence in a multitude o... more A vision wherein Ubiquitous Computing (i.e., embedded computational intelligence in a multitude of day-today objects), Intelligent User Interfaces and Ubiquitous Communication (to other intelligent devices) create an environment which anticipates and interacts with users. See further: ''Identity in a world of profiling algorithms and ambient intelligence''. 2 Algorithms that are used to build user profiles, based on their ability to detect interesting correlations and patterns in implicit (e.g. browsing history) and explicit (address, age, etc.) user data. See further: ''Identity in a world of profiling algorithms and ambient intelligence''.

Computers, Privacy and Data Protection: an Element of Choice, 2011

On 15 March 2006, the Data Retention Directive, demanding the retention of telecommunications dat... more On 15 March 2006, the Data Retention Directive, demanding the retention of telecommunications data for a period of six months up to two years, was adopted. 2 Since then, this seemingly straightforward directive has 'generated' quite an impressive number of court judgments. They range from the European Court of Justice 3 (ECJ) to the administrative (e.g. Germany 4 and Bulgaria 5) and constitutional courts (e.g. Romania 6) of some Member-States. In particular, the judgment of the German Federal Constitutional Court, 7 delivered on 2 March 2010, has already caught the attention of several commentators, from civil society, lawyers, journalists and politicians (cf. infra, section 4). In the judgment, the Court annuls the German implementation laws of the Data Retention Directive. This paper has two main goals. On the one side, it aims at offering a first critical overview of this important judgment, highlighting some of the key features of the ruling and its main similarities and divergences with other similar judgments. On the other side, given the relevance of the issues at stake, it aims at contextualizing the judgment in the wider framework of European data processing and protection debates, assuming a critical posture on the increasing emphasis on proportionality as the "golden criterion" to assess and limit surveillance practices. 1 Earlier versions of this article have been published on the 23 rd of March 2010 at the TILT Weblog for Law and Technology (http://vortex.uvt.nl/TILTblog/?p=118) and on the 18 th of May 2010 in the CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe-publication series (http://www.ceps.eu/book/proportionality-overrides-unlimited-surveillance). The authors want to thank Patrick Breyer (AK Vorratsdatenspeicherung: German Working Group against Data Retention) and Caspar Bowden (Microsoft) for their salient comments. 2 Directive 2006/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publicly available electronic communications services or of public communications networks and amending Directive 2002/58/EC OJ L105, 13.04.2006. Hereinafter: Data Retention Directive.

Information, Communication & Society

View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 1 View citing articles You never fake ... more View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 1 View citing articles You never fake alone. Creative AI in action Katja de Vries a,b,c

Privacy, Due Process and the Computational Turn

Privacy, Due process and the Computational Turn: The Philosophy of Law Meets the Philosophy of Te... more Privacy, Due process and the Computational Turn: The Philosophy of Law Meets the Philosophy of Technology engages with the rapidly developing computational aspects of our world including data mining, behavioural advertising, iGovernment, profiling for intelligence, customer relationship management, smart search engines, personalized news feeds, and so on in order to consider their implications for the assumptions on which our legal framework has been built. The contributions to this volume focus on the issue of privacy, which is often equated with data privacy and data security, location privacy, anonymity, pseudonymity, unobservability, and unlinkability. Here, however, the extent to which predictive and other types of data analytics operate in ways that may or may not violate privacy is rigorously taken up, both technologically and legally, in order to open up new possibilities for considering, and contesting, how we are increasingly being correlated and categorizedin relationship with due process – the right to contest how the profiling systems are categorizing and deciding about us.

On 15 March 2006, the Data Retention Directive, demanding the retention of telecommunications dat... more On 15 March 2006, the Data Retention Directive, demanding the retention of telecommunications data for a period of six months up to two years, was adopted. 2 Since then, this seemingly straightforward directive has 'generated' quite an impressive number of court judgments. They range from the European Court of Justice 3 (ECJ) to the administrative (e.g. Germany 4 and Bulgaria 5) and constitutional courts (e.g. Romania 6) of some Member-States. In particular, the judgment of the German Federal Constitutional Court, 7 delivered on 2 March 2010, has already caught the attention of several commentators, from civil society, lawyers, journalists and politicians (cf. infra, section 4). In the judgment, the Court annuls the German implementation laws of the Data Retention Directive. This paper has two main goals. On the one side, it aims at offering a first critical overview of this important judgment, highlighting some of the key features of the ruling and its main similarities and divergences with other similar judgments. On the other side, given the relevance of the issues at stake, it aims at contextualizing the judgment in the wider framework of European data processing and protection debates, assuming a critical posture on the increasing emphasis on proportionality as the "golden criterion" to assess and limit surveillance practices. 1 Earlier versions of this article have been published on the 23 rd of March 2010 at the TILT Weblog for Law and Technology (http://vortex.uvt.nl/TILTblog/?p=118) and on the 18 th of May 2010 in the CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe-publication series (http://www.ceps.eu/book/proportionality-overrides-unlimited-surveillance). The authors want to thank Patrick Breyer (AK Vorratsdatenspeicherung: German Working Group against Data Retention) and Caspar Bowden (Microsoft) for their salient comments. 2 Directive 2006/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publicly available electronic communications services or of public communications networks and amending Directive 2002/58/EC OJ L105, 13.04.2006. Hereinafter: Data Retention Directive.

Human Law and Computer Law: Comparative Perspectives, 2013

Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics, 2013

"A comparative analysis of anti-discrimination and data protection legislations", B. CUSTERS et a... more "A comparative analysis of anti-discrimination and data protection legislations", B. CUSTERS et al. (Eds.) Discrimnation and privacy in the information society. Data mining and profiling in large databases,

None, 2008

KNAW Narcis. Back to search results. Publication D7.14a: Where idem-identity meets ipse-identity:... more KNAW Narcis. Back to search results. Publication D7.14a: Where idem-identity meets ipse-identity: Conceptual explorations (2008). Pagina-navigatie: Main. ...

Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Multimedia AI against Disinformation

ML-generated media (speech, image, etc.) can be used for many purposes such as robojournalism, th... more ML-generated media (speech, image, etc.) can be used for many purposes such as robojournalism, therapeutic chatbots or the synthetic resuscitation of a dead actor or a deceased loved one. Can ML be a source of speech that is protected by the right to freedom of expression in Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR)? I first discuss if ML-generated (or: "synthetic") media fall within the protective scope of freedom of expression (Article 10(1) ECHR). After concluding that this is the case, I look at specific complexities raised by ML-generated content in terms of limitations to freedom of expression (Article 10(2) ECHR). The first set of potential limitations that I explore are those following from copyright, data protection, privacy and confidentiality law. Some types of synthetic media could potentially circumvent these limitations. Second, I study how new types of content generated by ML can create normative grey areas where the boundaries of constitutionally protected and unprotected speech are not always easy to draw. In this context, I discuss two types of ML-generated content: virtual child pornography and fake news/disinformation. Third, I argue that the nuances of Article 10 ECHR are not easily captured in an automated filter and I discuss the potential implications of the arms race between automated filters and ML-generated content. In this context I discuss the newly adopted Digital Services Act (DSA) [1] and the recent (26 April 2022) judgement [2] of the ECJ (European Court of Justice) on automatic filtering of copyrightinfringing content under Article 17 of the Directive on Copyright in the Digital Single Market (DSM Directive).

YSEC Yearbook of Socio-Economic Constitutions

Critical Analysis of Law, Apr 2, 2021

This article gives a legal-conceptual analysis of the use of counterfactuals (what-if explanation... more This article gives a legal-conceptual analysis of the use of counterfactuals (what-if explanations) as transparency tools for automated decision making (ADM). The first part of the analysis discusses three notions: transparency, ADM and generative artificial intelligence (AI). The second part of this article takes a closer look at the pros and cons of counterfactuals in making ADM explainable. Transparency is only useful if it is actionable, that is, if it challenges systemic bias or unjustified decisions. Existing ways of providing transparency about ADM systems are often limited in terms of being actionable. In contrast to many existing transparency tools, counterfactual explanations hold the promise of providing actionable and individually tailored transparency while not revealing too much of the model (attractive if ADM is a trade secret or if it is important that the system cannot be gamed). Another strength of counterfactuals is that they show that transparency should not be understood as the immediate visibility of some underlying truth. While promising, counterfactuals have their limitations. Firstly, there is always a multiplicity of counterfactuals (the Rashomon effect). Secondly, counterfactual explanations are not natural givens. Instead, they are constructed and the many underlying design decisions can turn out for better or worse.

Blog post on "The Muffinman", belgian dumpster diver Steven de Geynst, and the ... more Blog post on "The Muffinman", belgian dumpster diver Steven de Geynst, and the legal dimensions of food waste

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

Machine Learning (ML) applications shape, and are shaped by, human values. In the last decade cla... more Machine Learning (ML) applications shape, and are shaped by, human values. In the last decade classificatory models have become the most widely applied type of ML. However, since the invention of Generative Adverserial Networks (GANs) in 2014, the field of generative ML is likely to become equally prolific in the years to come. GANs can generate convincing fakes of video footage, pictures, graphics, DNA strings, etc. Some have called their capacity to mimic and recreate any informational pattern ‘machine imagination’. In this paper I explore what this new ML technique means in terms of how machines and humans co-create and co-organize life. I will discuss three important aspects of GANs. Firstly, what does it mean that GANs are trained on unlabelled data? Does that make them less prone to human bias? Secondly, what are appropriate success and optimization criteria for GANs? In classificatory ML prediction accuracy is the most common measure of success. GANs lack such an obvious crit...

The historical framework in which a technology is placed can affect the direction of legal, socie... more The historical framework in which a technology is placed can affect the direction of legal, societal and philosophical thought about it. It is explored in which way "Ambient Intelligent" or "Intelligent Environments"-technologies are similar or different from the technologies which arose during the mechanical and the cybernetic revolution. The findings are applied to a possible new understanding of privacy: the protection of a "time of one's own" instead of "a private space of one's own".

Computers, Privacy and Data Protection: an Element of Choice, 2011

ABSTRACT That bodily, social, geographical or financial constraints play a less important role in... more ABSTRACT That bodily, social, geographical or financial constraints play a less important role in virtual worlds like Second Life (SL) than in real life (RL) does not imply, as many of SL’s inhabitants seem to assume implicitly, that it is a place much like RL only without any burdening constraints whatsoever. The simple transposition of everyday objects (car, house, etc.) and actions (driving a car, making love, etc.) from an RL to an SL context ignores the fact that every digital world has its own “affordances” and “constraints” (cf. Norman, Latour). I argue that acting upon the specific affordances and constraints which govern one’s environment, whether it is in RL or SL, allows for a more mature and enlightened way of living. As an inspiring example of such an enlightened way of relating to one’s digitally simulated environment the work of code-performer Gazira Babeli is presented. Moreover I argue that a heightened awareness of the affordances and constraints could also be useful from a legal perspective for two reasons. Firstly, because this heightened awareness allows one to go beyond the idea of simple transposition and move towards more accurate and productive ways of legally qualifying those behaviors within digital worlds which are perceived (at least by some) as being unethical or obnoxious (so-called “virtual” theft or murder, consensual role-play rape in SL, etc.). Secondly, a law which is created in order to regulate the life of enlightened inhabitants, that is inhabitants who are aware of the affordances and constraints of their digital environment, will differ from a law that is aimed at users who merely live their digital lives based on the surface level.

Ethics and Information Technology, 2010

A vision wherein Ubiquitous Computing (i.e., embedded computational intelligence in a multitude o... more A vision wherein Ubiquitous Computing (i.e., embedded computational intelligence in a multitude of day-today objects), Intelligent User Interfaces and Ubiquitous Communication (to other intelligent devices) create an environment which anticipates and interacts with users. See further: ''Identity in a world of profiling algorithms and ambient intelligence''. 2 Algorithms that are used to build user profiles, based on their ability to detect interesting correlations and patterns in implicit (e.g. browsing history) and explicit (address, age, etc.) user data. See further: ''Identity in a world of profiling algorithms and ambient intelligence''.

Computers, Privacy and Data Protection: an Element of Choice, 2011

On 15 March 2006, the Data Retention Directive, demanding the retention of telecommunications dat... more On 15 March 2006, the Data Retention Directive, demanding the retention of telecommunications data for a period of six months up to two years, was adopted. 2 Since then, this seemingly straightforward directive has 'generated' quite an impressive number of court judgments. They range from the European Court of Justice 3 (ECJ) to the administrative (e.g. Germany 4 and Bulgaria 5) and constitutional courts (e.g. Romania 6) of some Member-States. In particular, the judgment of the German Federal Constitutional Court, 7 delivered on 2 March 2010, has already caught the attention of several commentators, from civil society, lawyers, journalists and politicians (cf. infra, section 4). In the judgment, the Court annuls the German implementation laws of the Data Retention Directive. This paper has two main goals. On the one side, it aims at offering a first critical overview of this important judgment, highlighting some of the key features of the ruling and its main similarities and divergences with other similar judgments. On the other side, given the relevance of the issues at stake, it aims at contextualizing the judgment in the wider framework of European data processing and protection debates, assuming a critical posture on the increasing emphasis on proportionality as the "golden criterion" to assess and limit surveillance practices. 1 Earlier versions of this article have been published on the 23 rd of March 2010 at the TILT Weblog for Law and Technology (http://vortex.uvt.nl/TILTblog/?p=118) and on the 18 th of May 2010 in the CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe-publication series (http://www.ceps.eu/book/proportionality-overrides-unlimited-surveillance). The authors want to thank Patrick Breyer (AK Vorratsdatenspeicherung: German Working Group against Data Retention) and Caspar Bowden (Microsoft) for their salient comments. 2 Directive 2006/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publicly available electronic communications services or of public communications networks and amending Directive 2002/58/EC OJ L105, 13.04.2006. Hereinafter: Data Retention Directive.

Information, Communication & Society

View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 1 View citing articles You never fake ... more View related articles View Crossmark data Citing articles: 1 View citing articles You never fake alone. Creative AI in action Katja de Vries a,b,c

Privacy, Due Process and the Computational Turn

Privacy, Due process and the Computational Turn: The Philosophy of Law Meets the Philosophy of Te... more Privacy, Due process and the Computational Turn: The Philosophy of Law Meets the Philosophy of Technology engages with the rapidly developing computational aspects of our world including data mining, behavioural advertising, iGovernment, profiling for intelligence, customer relationship management, smart search engines, personalized news feeds, and so on in order to consider their implications for the assumptions on which our legal framework has been built. The contributions to this volume focus on the issue of privacy, which is often equated with data privacy and data security, location privacy, anonymity, pseudonymity, unobservability, and unlinkability. Here, however, the extent to which predictive and other types of data analytics operate in ways that may or may not violate privacy is rigorously taken up, both technologically and legally, in order to open up new possibilities for considering, and contesting, how we are increasingly being correlated and categorizedin relationship with due process – the right to contest how the profiling systems are categorizing and deciding about us.

On 15 March 2006, the Data Retention Directive, demanding the retention of telecommunications dat... more On 15 March 2006, the Data Retention Directive, demanding the retention of telecommunications data for a period of six months up to two years, was adopted. 2 Since then, this seemingly straightforward directive has 'generated' quite an impressive number of court judgments. They range from the European Court of Justice 3 (ECJ) to the administrative (e.g. Germany 4 and Bulgaria 5) and constitutional courts (e.g. Romania 6) of some Member-States. In particular, the judgment of the German Federal Constitutional Court, 7 delivered on 2 March 2010, has already caught the attention of several commentators, from civil society, lawyers, journalists and politicians (cf. infra, section 4). In the judgment, the Court annuls the German implementation laws of the Data Retention Directive. This paper has two main goals. On the one side, it aims at offering a first critical overview of this important judgment, highlighting some of the key features of the ruling and its main similarities and divergences with other similar judgments. On the other side, given the relevance of the issues at stake, it aims at contextualizing the judgment in the wider framework of European data processing and protection debates, assuming a critical posture on the increasing emphasis on proportionality as the "golden criterion" to assess and limit surveillance practices. 1 Earlier versions of this article have been published on the 23 rd of March 2010 at the TILT Weblog for Law and Technology (http://vortex.uvt.nl/TILTblog/?p=118) and on the 18 th of May 2010 in the CEPS Liberty and Security in Europe-publication series (http://www.ceps.eu/book/proportionality-overrides-unlimited-surveillance). The authors want to thank Patrick Breyer (AK Vorratsdatenspeicherung: German Working Group against Data Retention) and Caspar Bowden (Microsoft) for their salient comments. 2 Directive 2006/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 March 2006 on the retention of data generated or processed in connection with the provision of publicly available electronic communications services or of public communications networks and amending Directive 2002/58/EC OJ L105, 13.04.2006. Hereinafter: Data Retention Directive.

Human Law and Computer Law: Comparative Perspectives, 2013

Studies in Applied Philosophy, Epistemology and Rational Ethics, 2013

"A comparative analysis of anti-discrimination and data protection legislations", B. CUSTERS et a... more "A comparative analysis of anti-discrimination and data protection legislations", B. CUSTERS et al. (Eds.) Discrimnation and privacy in the information society. Data mining and profiling in large databases,

None, 2008

KNAW Narcis. Back to search results. Publication D7.14a: Where idem-identity meets ipse-identity:... more KNAW Narcis. Back to search results. Publication D7.14a: Where idem-identity meets ipse-identity: Conceptual explorations (2008). Pagina-navigatie: Main. ...