Can Transparency Into AI's Data Sets Curb Escalating Privacy Risk?
As data privacy regulations and public pressure intensifies, identifying the data sets machine learning programs use may become a necessity. But it's not always easily achieved.
February 14, 2020 at 12:00 PM
3 minute read
Tracking what data in used in a machine learning data set can be a daunting task, but as regulations and public scrutiny intensifies, lawyers say it could be a useful tool to stay compliant.
Last week Facebook Inc. joined other developers in the quest to better trace the data used in data sets. In a research paper titled "Radioactive Data: Tracing Through Training" Facebook announced a new method to trace images used in data set for training software.
To be sure, Facebook isn't the first to announce a method that provides transparency into data sets. In its report, Facebook highlighted numerous data tracking mechanisms including watermarking, differential privacy and membership inference.
Lawyers contacted by Legaltech News said confirming the usage of specific information in a data set throughout the development of a software could be necessary as regulatory and public pressures grow over data privacy.
Such information can be be leveraged as evidence that an entity isn't compliant with corporate or regulatory privacy policies.
Just this month Facebook agreed to a $550 million settlement over Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) violations and Google was served a similar class action lawsuit over alleged violations of the Illinois law.
However, Georgetown University Law Center professor Anupam Chander noted that figuring out what data is used in a machine learning data set is likely used for "constrained circumstances" to ensure a company's data isn't being used without its permission, not to provide transparency to data subjects.
Chander cited the recent news of facial recognition app Clearview scraping billions of images from Facebook, YouTube and Venmo for its law enforcement clientele as usage companies would want to prevent.
"You see the Clearview data set and Facebook has objected to its use of its data and so this is another way to demonstrate that Clearview or some third-party vendor used Facebook's images that has been manipulated to make these types of results."
While data tracking methods may help companies follow their data's usage, Chander said Facebook's method may not be helpful for spotting biased data.
"You need to be able to change the underlining data [in order to identify it] without changing the outcome, that's the promise of [Facebook's] paper. … It may not be so easy to change the underlining data without affecting the outcome in substantive ways when it comes to decisions about credit or employment," he said.
Still, as companies tangle with understanding how their data is being used and potential public backlash, Riesen noted that providing transparency into data sets may potentially leak software insights to competitors.
"This could expose information to a competitor about your proprietary machine learning and AI algorithms that you intended to be a competitive advantage or trade secret. This could lead to competitors studying how your algorithms are processing certain data," he said.
However, only the data sets used for the algorithm could be exposed, and not the processes. What's more, when weighing regulatory compliance and public relations, some companies may prefer to make their data sets more traceable when faced with varying privacy regulations, Riesen said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1Decision of the Day: Judge Reduces $287M Jury Verdict Against Harley-Davidson in Wrongful Death Suit
- 2Kirkland to Covington: 2024's International Chart Toppers and Award Winners
- 3Decision of the Day: Judge Denies Summary Judgment Motions in Suit by Runner Injured in Brooklyn Bridge Park
- 4KISS, Profit Motive and Foreign Currency Contracts
- 512 Days of … Web Analytics
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250