Logical Specification of the GLBA and HIPAA Privacy Laws

Author(s):  
Henry DeYoung ◽  
Deepak Garg ◽  
Dilsun Kaynar ◽  
Anupam Datta
Author(s):  
Dan Jerker B. Svantesson

This chapter observes how it may be inappropriate to apply a single jurisdictional threshold to diverse instruments such as data privacy laws. In the light of this observation, a proposal is outlined for a ‘layered approach’ under which the substantive law rules of such instruments are broken up into different layers, with different jurisdictional thresholds applied to each such layer. This layered approach is discussed primarily as a technique to be utilized in legal drafting, but it may also be applied in the interpretation and application of legal rules. Article 3 of the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation, which determines that regulation’s scope of application in a territorial sense, provides a particularly useful lens through which to approach this topic and, thus, the discussion is largely centred around that Article.


Nature ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stefanie Warnat-Herresthal ◽  
◽  
Hartmut Schultze ◽  
Krishnaprasad Lingadahalli Shastry ◽  
Sathyanarayanan Manamohan ◽  
...  

AbstractFast and reliable detection of patients with severe and heterogeneous illnesses is a major goal of precision medicine1,2. Patients with leukaemia can be identified using machine learning on the basis of their blood transcriptomes3. However, there is an increasing divide between what is technically possible and what is allowed, because of privacy legislation4,5. Here, to facilitate the integration of any medical data from any data owner worldwide without violating privacy laws, we introduce Swarm Learning—a decentralized machine-learning approach that unites edge computing, blockchain-based peer-to-peer networking and coordination while maintaining confidentiality without the need for a central coordinator, thereby going beyond federated learning. To illustrate the feasibility of using Swarm Learning to develop disease classifiers using distributed data, we chose four use cases of heterogeneous diseases (COVID-19, tuberculosis, leukaemia and lung pathologies). With more than 16,400 blood transcriptomes derived from 127 clinical studies with non-uniform distributions of cases and controls and substantial study biases, as well as more than 95,000 chest X-ray images, we show that Swarm Learning classifiers outperform those developed at individual sites. In addition, Swarm Learning completely fulfils local confidentiality regulations by design. We believe that this approach will notably accelerate the introduction of precision medicine.


2019 ◽  
Vol 42 (2) ◽  
Author(s):  
Alan Toy ◽  
Gehan Gunasekara

The data transfer model and the accountability model, which are the dominant models for protecting the data privacy rights of citizens, have begun to present significant difficulties in regulating the online and increasingly transnational business environment. Global organisations take advantage of forum selection clauses and choice of law clauses and attention is diverted toward the data transfer model and the accountability model as a means of data privacy protection but it is impossible to have confidence that the data privacy rights of citizens are adequately protected given well known revelations regarding surveillance and the rise of technologies such as cloud computing. But forum selection and choice of law clauses no longer have the force they once seemed to have and this opens the possibility that extraterritorial jurisdiction may provide a supplementary conceptual basis for championing data privacy in the globalised context of the Internet. This article examines the current basis for extraterritorial application of data privacy laws and suggests a test for increasing their relevance.


2000 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 245-257 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark A. Hall ◽  
Stephen S. Rich

Since 1991, over half the states have enacted laws that restrict or prohibit insurers’ use of genetic information in pricing, issuing, or structuring health insurance. Wisconsin was the first state to do so, in 1991, followed by Ohio in 1993, California and Colorado in 1994, and then several more states a year in each of the next five years. Similar legislation has been pending in Congress for several years. Also, a 1996 federal law known as the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) prohibits group health insurers from applying “preexisting condition” exclusions to genetic conditions that are indicated solely by genetic tests and not by any actual symptoms.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document