Free Blog

As neurotechnology advances, courts face a new legal frontier: can brain data be used as evidence? This article explores how neural evidence challenges the distinction between physical and testimonial evidence, examining its implications under the European Convention on Human Rights. It argues that while neurotechnology offers significant medical benefits, stronger legal safeguards are needed to protect mental privacy and the right against self-incrimination.

The proposed Digital Omnibus Regulation could weaken protections for neurodata in the EU. By narrowing the GDPR definition of health data to information that “directly” reveals health status, many forms of brain-related data may fall outside enhanced safeguards. While global bodies like UNESCO call for stronger protections, the EU proposal risks creating regulatory gaps for consumer neurotechnologies and undermining Europe’s leadership in digital rights and privacy.

AI deception in neurotech? Alignment faking raises ethical risks as AI integrates with the brain. Can we trust it? 🤖🧠 #NeuroAI