Please note that the disputation will be streamed.
Follow the trial lecture and disputation by zoom here
Trial lecture - time and place
Adjudication committee
- Professor Vibeke Blaker Strand (leader)
- Professor Emily Weitzenböck (1. opponent)
- Professor Woodrow Hartzog (2. opponent)
Chair of defence
Acting vice dean Eirik Østerud
Supervisors
- Professor Lee A. Bygrave
- Postdoktor Trude Myklebust
- Professor Jim Tørressen
Summary
The topic of this thesis is how EU privacy legislation applies to the use of smart robots in human interaction. Smart robots are physical and mobile robots that use artificial intelligence (AI) to navigate their environments, perform tasks and to communicate effectively. AI enables them to adapt their interaction and behaviour to humans. As these robots become more common, they gain access to both public and private spaces, raising various privacy concerns.
Robots in society
While we may think of robots mainly as science fiction, robots are gradually introduced in everyday life. Consumer robots such as robotic vacuum cleaners and lawn mowers are already widespread. Robots are developed to supplement or replace human labour. This includes robots used for deliveries, cleaning, medical assistance and social purposes. In health and home care, they are seen as solutions to address the challenges posed by the aging population and workforce shortages.
EU law on privacy
It is well known that robots pose privacy risks as they can interfere with both our physical and informational privacy, by intruding into our private spaces and by collecting and using was amounts of personal and non-personal data. In the use of robots, privacy must be understood broadly to include physical, psychological and informational privacy as well as safety and cybersecurity.
This thesis argues that current EU legislation does not properly address the privacy issues that arise from our interaction with robots. EU legislation does not specifically define robots; rather, it focuses on their hardware components and software. This means that it is necessary to apply several pieces of legislation to identify robots and to address the physical and informational privacy aspects of robotics. The result is legislation which is fragmented and complex.
Existing laws such as the General Product Safety Regulation, Machinery Regulation, AI Act, and GDPR address some relevant issues, but they do not directly tackle the unique privacy challenges introduced by robots. Consequently, certain privacy concerns remain unregulated, such as manipulation and deception, emotional attachment between humans and robots, and related power dynamics.
Conclusion
The thesis stresses that while robots provide numerous benefits, there is a need for specific legislation to secure privacy as a fundamental right in human–robot interaction.
Research project
This study is part of the VIROS project (Vulnerability in the Robot Society) <https://www.jus.uio.no/ifp/english/research/projects/nrccl/viros/>, which explores the challenges of regulating robots from both legal and technical perspectives.