Advertisement

Ethical Implications of ICT Implants

  • Mireille Hildebrandt
  • Bernhard Anrig
Chapter
Part of the Information Technology and Law Series book series (ITLS, volume 23)

Abstract

This chapter focuses on a variety of ethical implications of ICT implants. We will explain how different ethical implications arise from different types of implants, depending on the context in which they are used. After a first assessment of what is at stake, we will briefly discuss the Opinion 20 of the European Group on Ethics of Science and New Technologies as published in 2005. We will extend the scope of discussion by tracing the ethical implications for democracy and the Rule of Law, considering the use of implants for the repair as well as the enhancement of human capabilities. Finally, we will refer to a set of EU research projects that investigate the relevant ethical implications.

Keywords

Deep Brain Stimulation Human Dignity Cochlear Implant Virtue Ethic Ethical Implication 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Agre PE, Rotenberg M (2001) Technology an privacy: the new landscape. MIT Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  2. Ayres I (2007) Super crunchers: why thinking-by-numbers is the new way to be smart. Bantam Books, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Berleur J, Brunnstein K (eds) (1996) Ethics of computing—codes, spaces for discussion and law. Chapman & Hall, LondonGoogle Scholar
  4. Bynum T (2001) Computer ethics: basic concepts and historical overview. In: Edward Zalta N (ed) The Standford encyclopaedia of philosophy. http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2001/entries/ethics-computer/
  5. Bynum T (2006) Flourishing ethics. Ethics Inf Technol 8(4)Google Scholar
  6. Capurro R, Tamburrini G, Weber J (eds) (2008) D5—Ethical issues in Brain Computer Interface Technologies. Ethicbots Consortium 2008. http://ethicbots.na.infn.it/restricted/doc/D5.pdf
  7. Cvrček D, Matyáš V (eds) (2007) D13.1: Identity and impact of privacy enhancing technologies. FIDIS (Future of Identity in the Information Society) Project, 2007. http://www.fidis.net/
  8. Fawcett E (1994) The Toronto Resolution. Account Res 3:69–72Google Scholar
  9. Ferrari A, Coenen Ch, Grunwald A, Sauter A (2010) Animal Enhancement—Neue technische Möglichkeiten und ethische Fragen. Eidgenössische Ethikkommission für die Biotechnologie im Ausserhumanbereich EKAH. http://www.ekah.admin.ch/fileadmin/ekah-dateien/dokumentation/publikationen/EKAH_Animal_Enhancement_Inh_web_V19822.pdf
  10. Fischer-Hübner S, Hedbom H (eds) (2007) D12.3: A holistic privacy framework for RFID applications. FIDIS (Future of Identity in the Information Society) Project, 2007. http://www.fidis.net/
  11. Garreau J (2005) Radical evolution. The promise and peril of enhancing our minds, our bodies—and what it means to be human. Doubleday, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  12. Gasson MN, Hutt BD, Goodhew I, Kyberd P, Warwick K (2005) Invasive neural prosthesis for neural signal detection and nerve stimulation. Int J Adapt Control Signal Process 19(5):365–375Google Scholar
  13. Halperin D, Heydt-Benjamin TS, Fu K, Kohno T, Maisel WH (2008) Security and privacy for implantable medical devices. IEEE Pervasive Comput Special Issue Implant Electron 7(1):30–39Google Scholar
  14. Hansson SO (2005) Implant ethics. J Med Ethics 31:519–525CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hildebrandt M (2009a) Who is profiling who: invisible visibility. In: Gutwirth S, Poullet Y, De Hert P, Nouwt S, de Terwangne C (eds) Reinventing data protection? Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  16. Hildebrandt M (ed) (2009b) D7.12: Behavioural biometric profiling and transparency tools. FIDIS (Future of Identity in the Information Society) Project, 2009. http://www.fidis.net/
  17. Hildebrandt M, Gutwirth S (eds) (2008) Profiling the European citizen. Cross-disciplinary perspectives. Springer, DordrechtGoogle Scholar
  18. Hildebrandt M, Koops BJ (eds) (2007) D7.9: A vision of ambient law. FIDIS (Future of Identity in the Information Society) Project, 2007. http://www.fidis.net/
  19. Hildebrandt M, Koops B-J (2010) The challenges of Ambient Law and legal protection in the profiling era. Mod Law Rev 73(3):428–460CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Hildebrandt M, Meints M (eds) (2006) D7.7: RFID, Profiling and ambient intelligence. FIDIS (Future of Identity in the Information Society) Project, 2006. http://www.fidis.net/
  21. Jaquet-Chiffelle D-O (2006) D2.13: Virtual persons and identities. FIDIS (Future of Identity in the Information Society) Project, 2006. http://www.fidis.net/
  22. Koops BJ, Jaquet-Chiffelle D-O (eds) (2008) D17.2: New (Id)entities and the law: perspectives on legal personhood for non-humans. FIDIS (Future of Identity in the Information Society) Project, 2008. http://www.fidis.net/
  23. Kumpošt M, Matyáš V, Berthold S (eds) (2007) D13.6: Privacy modelling and identity. FIDIS (Future of Identity in the Information Society) Project, 2007. http://www.fidis.net/
  24. Moor JH (2005) Why we need better ethics for emerging technologies. Ethics Inf Technol 7:111–119CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Müller G, Wohlgemuth S (eds) (2007) D14.2: Study on privacy in business processes by identity management. FIDIS (Future of Identity in the Information Society) Project, 2007. http://www.fidis.net/
  26. Nissenbaum H (2004) Privacy as contextual integrity. Wash Law J 79:101–140Google Scholar
  27. Perakslis C, Wolk R (2006) Social acceptance of RFID as a biometric security method. IEEE Technol Soc Mag 25(3):34–42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Rader M (ed) (2007) Evaluation Report, NETICA deliverable. Deliverable D.3.2. http://moriarty.tech.dmu.ac.uk:8080/pebble/repository/files/deliverables/D%203%202%20final.pdf
  29. Rodotà S, Capurro R (eds) (2005) Ethical aspects of ICT implants in the human body. Opinion of the European Group on ethics in science and new technologies to the European Commission, 16th March 2005Google Scholar
  30. Rotter P, Daskala B, Compañó R (2008) RFID implants: opportunities and challenges for identifying people. IEEE Technol Soc Mag Google Scholar
  31. Sotto LJ (2005) An RFID code of conduct. RFID J. http://www.rfidjournal.com/article/view/1624/
  32. Sprokkereef A, Koops B-J (2009) D3.16: Biometrics: PET or PIT? FIDIS (Future of Identity in the Information Society) Project, 2009. http://www.fidis.net/
  33. UK RFID Council (2006) A UK code of practice for the use of radio frequency identification (RFID) in retail outlets, release 1.0Google Scholar
  34. Venkatasubramanian K, Gupta S (2007) Security for pervasive healthcare. In: Xiao Y (ed) Security in distributed, grid, mobile, and pervasive computing. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 349–366Google Scholar
  35. Want R (2008) The Bionic Man. IEEE Pervasive Comput 8:2–4Google Scholar
  36. Warwick K (2003) Cyborg morals, cyborg values, cyborg ethics. Ethics Inf Technol 5:131–137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Weber K (2006) The next step: privacy invasions by biometrics and ICT implants. ACM Ubiquity 7(45):1–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wood DM (ed) (2006) A report on the surveillance society—for the information commissioner by the surveillance studies network, 2006. http://www.privacyconference2006.co.uk/index.asp?PageID=10

Copyright information

© T.M.C. ASSER PRESS, The Hague, The Netherlands, and the author(s) 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Smart Environments, Data Protection and the Rule of LawRadboud University NijmegenNijmegenThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of JurisprudenceErasmus School of LawRotterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Law Science Technology and SocietyVrije Universiteit BrusselsBrusselsBelgium
  4. 4.Division of Computer Science, RISIS Research Institute for Security in the Information SocietyBern University of Applied SciencesBiel/BienneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations