KAIST Global Center for Development and Strategy메인으로 이동

Abstract: AI models developed using scraped personal data pose an inherent risk of en-masse shadow profiling to the subjects, harming their privacy, autonomy, and dignity. This paper argues that the protection of public personal data is essential to mitigate AI-scraping risks, noting that the EU is among the few to confer such protection. The GDPR regulates both public and non-public personal data similarly but contains exemptions from notice provisions in the case of legitimate interest-based processing. This exemption contributes to the information asymmetry between stakeholders who enforce anti-scraping covenants i.e., data subjects and platforms, versus scrapers. Limited supervisory powers and the lack of other mechanisms to address the problems of enforcing privacy laws in public data contribute to the GDPR’s inefficiency in controlling AI harms. The AI Act strives to plug in GDPR loopholes via reporting obligations on general-purpose AI providers to disclose the sources of their training data. Other jurisdictions could consider the principles and mechanisms of the EU regime as a guide to regulate public data scraping. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2025.106150

Abstract: Indigenous peoples face persistent threats from extractive industries and state-led development, often without sufficient legal safeguards. International environmental treaties, while referencing Indigenous rights, typically use non-binding language that enables weak or selective implementation. This paper aims to identify how treaty design can more effectively protect existing domestic Indigenous protections. Drawing on trade and investment law examples—such as New Zealand’s Treaty of Waitangi clauses and Colombia’s reservation lists—it argues for systematically incorporating explicit carve-out mechanisms into environmental and human rights treaties. Naming Indigenous groups and domestic laws within treaty texts can strengthen legal certainty and shield protections from erosion. The paper concludes with recommendations for negotiators, including legal audits, inter-ministerial coordination, and capacity-building to help states, particularly in the Global South, design carve-outs that reinforce Indigenous sovereignty. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2025.127095