Discriminatory algorithms. A proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim?

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F61989592%3A15220%2F22%3A73617728" target="_blank" >RIV/61989592:15220/22:73617728 - isvavai.cz</a>

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://jelt.padovauniversitypress.it/2022/1/2" target="_blank" >https://jelt.padovauniversitypress.it/2022/1/2</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.14658/pupj-jelt-2022-1-2" target="_blank" >10.14658/pupj-jelt-2022-1-2</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Discriminatory algorithms. A proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim?

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Within the EU legal framework, cases of indirect discrimination are justifiable when suitable and proportionate means are necessary to achieve a legitimate aim. However, the technical reality attached to machine learning (ML) environments challenges this legal postulate from multiple angles. Previous academic writings suggest that, in most scenarios, discriminatory outputs produced by an AI system would meet not only the requirements for indirect discrimination but also the requirements for its justification. This research confirms those views by analysing the relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) to determine the current standing of the prohibition of indirect discrimination. The analysis is complemented by a case study in which it is discussed whether scenarios of proxy discrimination caused by an automatized recruitment tool would pass the CJEU test.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Discriminatory algorithms. A proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim?

Popis výsledku anglicky

Within the EU legal framework, cases of indirect discrimination are justifiable when suitable and proportionate means are necessary to achieve a legitimate aim. However, the technical reality attached to machine learning (ML) environments challenges this legal postulate from multiple angles. Previous academic writings suggest that, in most scenarios, discriminatory outputs produced by an AI system would meet not only the requirements for indirect discrimination but also the requirements for its justification. This research confirms those views by analysing the relevant case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) to determine the current standing of the prohibition of indirect discrimination. The analysis is complemented by a case study in which it is discussed whether scenarios of proxy discrimination caused by an automatized recruitment tool would pass the CJEU test.

Druh

J_ost - Ostatní články v recenzovaných periodicích

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

50501 - Law

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2022

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

Journal of Ethics and Legal Technologies

ISSN

2612-4920

e-ISSN

2612-4920

Svazek periodika

4

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

1

Stát vydavatele periodika

IT - Italská republika

Počet stran výsledku

22

Strana od-do

3-24

Kód UT WoS článku

—

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

—