Chilean Supreme Court ruling on the protection of brain activity: neurorights, personal data protection, and neurodata - PMC
Skip to main content
Official websites use .gov
.gov website belongs to an official<br>government organization in the United States.
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock (
Lock
Locked padlock icon
) or https:// means you've safely<br>connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive<br>information only on official, secure websites.
Search PMC Full-Text Archive
Search in PMC
Journal List
User Guide
PERMALINK
Copy
As a library, NLM provides access to scientific literature. Inclusion in an NLM database does not imply endorsement of, or agreement with,<br>the contents by NLM or the National Institutes of Health.
Learn more:<br>PMC Disclaimer
PMC Copyright Notice
Front Psychol<br>. 2024 Feb 27;15:1330439. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1330439
Chilean Supreme Court ruling on the protection of brain activity: neurorights, personal data protection, and neurodata
María Isabel Cornejo-Plaza<br>María Isabel Cornejo-Plaza
1Instituto de Investigaciones en Derecho, Universidad Autónoma de Chile, Santiago, Chile
Find articles by María Isabel Cornejo-Plaza
1,*, Roberto Cippitani<br>Roberto Cippitani
2Department of the Constitutional Law, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia, Madrid, Spain
3Instituto Nacional de Estudios de Derecho Penal, Mexico City, Mexico
4Institute of Applied Physics, Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Florence, Italy
5Department of Law, Università degli Studi di Perugia, Perugia, Italy
Find articles by Roberto Cippitani
2,3,4,5,*, Vincenzo Pasquino<br>Vincenzo Pasquino
5Department of Law, Università degli Studi di Perugia, Perugia, Italy
Find articles by Vincenzo Pasquino
5,*
Author information
Article notes
Copyright and License information
1Instituto de Investigaciones en Derecho, Universidad Autónoma de Chile, Santiago, Chile
2Department of the Constitutional Law, Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia, Madrid, Spain
3Instituto Nacional de Estudios de Derecho Penal, Mexico City, Mexico
4Institute of Applied Physics, Consiglio Nazionale delle Ricerche, Florence, Italy
5Department of Law, Università degli Studi di Perugia, Perugia, Italy
Edited by: Eric García-López, Instituto Nacional de Ciencias Penales, Mexico
Reviewed by: Roberto Andorno, University of Zurich, Switzerland
Jose Angel Marinaro, National University of La Matanza, Argentina
✉*Correspondence: María Isabel Cornejo-Plaza, isabel.cornejo@uautonoma.cl
*Roberto Cippitani, roberto.cippitani@unipg.it
*Vincenzo Pasquino, vincenzo.pas@live.com
Received 2023 Oct 30; Accepted 2024 Feb 13; Collection date 2024.
Copyright © 2024 Cornejo-Plaza, Cippitani and Pasquino.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
PMC Copyright notice
PMCID: PMC10929545 PMID: 38476399
Abstract
This paper discusses a landmark ruling by the Chilean Supreme Court of August 9, 2023 dealing with the right to mental privacy, originated with an action for constitutional protection filed on behalf of Guido Girardi Lavin against Emotiv Inc., a North American company based in San Francisco, California that is commercializing the device “Insight.” This wireless device functions as a headset with sensors that collect information about the brain’s electrical activity (i.e., neurodata). The discussion revolves around whether neurodata can be considered personal data and whether they could be classified into a special category. The application of the present legislation on data (the most obsolete, such as the Chilean law, and the most recent EU law) does not seem adequate to protect neurodata. The use of neurodata raises ethical and legal concerns that are not fully addressed by current regulations on personal data protection. Despite not being necessarily considered personal data, neurodata represent the most intimate aspects of human personality and should be protected in light of potential new risks. The unique characteristics of neurodata, including their interpretive nature and potential for revealing thoughts and intentions, pose challenges for regulation. Current data protection laws do not differentiate between different types of data based on their informational content, which is relevant for protecting individual rights. The development of new technologies involving neurodata requires particular attention and careful consideration to prevent possible harm to human dignity. The regulation of neurodata must account for their specific characteristics and the potential risks they pose to privacy, confidentiality, and...