Can Data Trusts Break the Barrier and Fix our Right to Privacy
Data trusts can assist in resolving issues that arise during daily data online services
The lack of diverse, high-quality original data is one of the most significant obstacles to AI adoption and growing. Organizations must share their data in order to solve it. However, the numerous legal constraints and ethical concerns affecting data protection present a significant impediment to doing so. A data trusts is a creative solution created to mitigate this problem.
As per Endpoint Protector report, according to the IBM and the Ponemon Institute Cost of a Data Breach report 2020, which interviewed 3200 individuals working for 524 organizations in 17 countries and regions, 52% of all data breaches were caused by malicious outsiders, a further 25% by system glitches and 23% by human error. Customers’ personally identifiable information (PII) which comprised 80% of all data breaches, was the type of record most often lost or stolen. This is hardly surprising given PII is the most valuable type of data due to its sensitivity. As a consequence, it is also the type of data most often protected by data protection regulations.
As a result, data trusts can assist in resolving issues that arise during daily data online services. They can be in a stronger position to advocate for privacy-protecting policies as specialists on behalf of the customers than specific individuals.
When a person or a group of individuals hand over their data resources or data rights to a trustee, a data trust is established. The trustee may be an individual or an entity with the authority to manage data on behalf of the community of trustees for a particular reason. The trust’s members may be the people who gave the data to it, or someone else. Pertinently, just as the physician has a legal responsibility to do what is beneficial for you, the trustee has a fiduciary responsibility to look out for the beneficiary’s desires. This also means that the trustee is prohibited from having a financial motive or, more broadly, a competing interest in the data or data privileges in its possession.
According to Financial Times, “A data trust may not be the answer to every situation. Other types of institutions already exist, such as more informal data clubs, which allow data to be exchanged between organizations for a common benefit. Yet public concerns are likely to remain, even if data is held in a trust. It is uncertain, for example, how such a trust could be regulated and whether a data trust might be able to conceal profits generated by data or evade responsibilities under data protection rules. There is also a risk of hackers trying to obtain data from a trust, which could reduce the incentives for governments or companies to share information in the first place.”
Expanding the data trusts
In the future, data trusts would probably be used extensively. They have the potential to promote data sharing, allowing organizations greater access to vast data sets while maintaining public trust through accurate data safety and security and public benefits in exchange for data sharing. The security mechanisms can be very different, and there can be a lot of legal problems with them. Certain clauses and regulations can make establishing and using data trusts easier and more straightforward in the future. Furthermore, technological developments could make it possible to avoid the legal issues surrounding data sharing, enabling the formation of data trusts.