Correcting Wrong AI Data Can the Right to Rectification be of Help?
summary
Panel argues Article 16 can cover AI-generated assessments and opinions, but enforcement is messy: two live NOYB complaints against OpenAI (one about Max Schrems birth date, one about a false ChatGPT murder claim) test whether controllers must delete, add corrective notes, or retrain models at scale. Expect concrete legal anchors cited (Deltit, Google search, Dun & Bradstreet, Schufa), technical remedies (fine‑tuning, blocking) and frontline evidence problems—why DPAs often demand burdensome proof and why outcomes remain unsettled.
AI-written summary · about
chapters (7)
- 0:00Panel introduction
- 6:47Right to rectification scope
- 21:15Enforcement challenges
- 35:20Burden of proof in AI
- 48:34Deciding AI accuracy
- 1:01:22Accuracy vs rectification
- 1:18:06Closing remarks
related talks
29mResponsible AI Challenges and Recommendations
01h 09mGOVERNANCE AND REGULATION OF AI FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF AUTONOMY AND PRIVACY
01h 06mEMPOWERING THE AI ACT: LIMITS AND OPPORTUNITIES
01h 15mCALIBRATING THE AI ACT - IS IT THE RIGHT FRAMING TO PROTECT PERSONAL AND FUNDAMENTAL RIGHT
38mIs My AI Racist? Or How Not To Break The Law With Machine Learning
30mAI Regulation - How to implement AI legally compliant?
01h 19mAligning Data Privacy and AI Governance
36mData privacy in an AI-driven world