Data Transfer Regulations in the Use of Artificial Intelligence: UK, US and TR Comparison
Data Transfer Regulations in the Use of Artificial Intelligence: UK, US and TR Comparison
With artificial intelligence (AI) technology developing so quickly, data privacy and protection concerns are becoming more and more crucial. Regulations from different nations apply, particularly to the processing and storing of data in cloud systems and the export of data outside. This article will examine the laws governing the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and data transfer in Turkey (TR), the US, and the UK. It will pay particular attention to how these nations' laws are implemented when data is transferred internationally for the purpose of using artificial intelligence in cloud computing. With artificial intelligence (AI) technology developing so quickly, data privacy and protection concerns are becoming more and more crucial. Regulations from different nations apply, particularly to the processing and storing of data in cloud systems and the export of data outside. This article will examine the laws governing the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and data transfer in Turkey (TR), the US, and the UK. It will pay particular attention to how these nations' laws are implemented when data is transferred internationally for the purpose of using artificial intelligence in cloud computing.
In the UK
The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Data Protection Act 2018, which went into effect in 2018, govern privacy and data protection problems in the UK. The GDPR's fundamental tenets are the following: processing data in a fair and legal manner, gathering it for particular, justified purposes, and safeguarding it with the necessary security measures.
EU AI Law: The goal of the EU AI Law is to provide a uniform legal and regulatory framework for AI inside the EU. It is anticipated that the law will be finalised soon. It assigns a risk level to AI systems and establishes stringent guidelines for high-risk AI applications utilised in vital infrastructure, law enforcement, and healthcare. This bill is anticipated to be passed by the UK as well.
The use of AI platforms, particularly cloud-based systems, frequently involves data transfer across international borders. The guidelines established by the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) apply in this situation. Data transfers outside of the United Kingdom need the implementation of suitable security measures. For the transmission of data overseas, the ICO mandates a Data transmission Agreement (DTA). The same DTA has to be signed if data is posted to AI platforms and then transported overseas.
In the USA
Unlike the EU, which adopts a holistic strategy, the US approaches data protection sectorally, enacting different rules for different businesses and categories of data. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Act, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), and the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) are significant rules.
Important clauses:
Industry-Specific Regulations: For instance, the CCPA protects Californian consumers' rights to know about, have their personal data erased, and refuse to have their data sold. HIPAA, on the other hand, governs health data.
Transparency and approval: Laws such as the CCPA mandate that companies notify customers of their data gathering methods and acquire their approval before using their data.
Security Measures: In order to prevent breaches of personal data, organisations are required under the FTC Act to put adequate security measures in place.
States and industries in the US may have different regulations regarding AI and data sharing. Generally speaking, though, US regulations governing data transmission abroad are less stringent than those of the EU and UK. This gives US businesses greater freedom when transferring data abroad. Nonetheless, there is a rising regulatory trend and awareness of data protection and privacy problems in the United States.
In Türkiye
The Law on the Protection of Personal Data (KVKK), which went into effect in 2016, governs privacy and data protection in Turkey. The LPPD has comprehensive rules on the processing and protection of personal data, as well as concepts that are comparable to those of the GDPR.
Article 9 of the LPPD is applicable if data is moved outside of Turkey utilising AI platforms. This article states that in order to transmit personal data overseas, the data subject must give their express agreement and that either the data controller or the recipient nation must provide sufficient protection. Furthermore, authorisation from the Personal Data Protection Board (PDP Board) is required.
Comparative Evaluation
Scope and strategy:
- EU: Strict data protection and high-risk AI control are the main goals of the GDPR and the impending AI Act, which together provide a complete and unified strategy.
- US: A fragmented and sectoral strategy with different rules for different businesses and data categories.
- United Kingdom: Pay attention to specifically designed regulatory structures that support AI innovation while upholding GDPR guidelines.
- Turkey: Using GDPR to implement AI initiatives and strict data protection laws, the country is taking a novel approach.
Accountability and Transparency:
Despite the emphasis on these concepts shared by all three areas, their actual implementations vary. The US approach differs depending on the industry, but the EU and the UK have more restrictive restrictions. Additionally, Turkey adds explicit clauses to the PDPL on consent and transparency.
Human Monitoring and Moral AI:
The US and the UK place more emphasis on broad ethical principles and industry best practices, whereas the EU AI Law expressly mandates human oversight for high-risk AI systems. In contrast, Turkey prioritises moral AI practices in its AI policies and plans.
Enforcement and Compliance:
While the US relies on several agencies, which might result in disparities in enforcement, the EU, the UK, and data protection authorities have centralised enforcement processes. In Turkey, KVKK is responsible for centrally managing compliance and enforcement of data protection laws.
Regarding the application of AI and data transport, the US, TR, and UK differ greatly from one another. The US takes a laxer stance on data transfer, whereas the UK and TR have more stringent laws. The various regulatory philosophies and interests in these areas are reflected in the EU's comprehensive approach, the US sectoral structure, the UK's balanced strategy, and Turkey's creative laws. Nonetheless, all three nations are seeing an increase in legislative focus and increased public awareness of data protection and privacy problems. For more precise information and updates, it is advised to speak with legal professionals and governmental regulatory authorities.