KİŞİSEL VERİLERİN KORUNMASINDA HUKUKUN SINIRLARI

Duygu HATİPOĞLU AYDIN (Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Hukuk Fakültesi, Hukuk Felsefesi ve Sosyolojisi Anabilim Dalı, Ankara, Türkiye)
İZMİR BAROSU DERGİSİ
21 11
Yıl: 2023 Cilt: 88 Sayı: 2 Sayfa Aralığı: 141 - 189 Metin Dili: Türkçe İndeks Tarihi: 03-09-2023

KİŞİSEL VERİLERİN KORUNMASINDA HUKUKUN SINIRLARI

Öz:
Kişisel verilerin korunması mevzuatı, uluslararası, bölgesel, ulusal düzeyde hukuksal düzenlemeler, idari kararlar ve çeşitli yaptırımlarla korunmanın çerçevesini çizmektedir. Çalışmanın amacı, kişisel verilerin korunmasında hukuktan kaynaklanan sınırlar hakkında sosyo-hukuki bir değerlendirme sunmaktır. Hukuk içi kısıtlamalar, siber alanda hiper düzenleme eğiliminin yarattığı çelişkiler, yargı yetkisi kapsamı hakkındaki ihtilaflar, kişisel verilerin korunmasını işlevsizleştiren düzenleme eksiklikleridir. Korumanın bireye indirgenmiş ve rızaya sıkışmış olması ve mahremiyet öz yönetiminin etkisizliği uygulamadan kaynaklanan kısıtlamalardır. Hukuk ve teknoloji ilişkisi, sermaye lehine hareket eğilimi ve kişisel verilerle güvenlik amacıyla veri toplama ilişkisi hukukun yapısal özelliklerinden kaynaklanan sınırlılıkları oluşturmaktadır. Sosyal kısıtlamalar, bireylerin mahremiyete verdikleri anlamlardaki değişim ve gözetimin sıradanlaşmasında izlenebilir.
Anahtar Kelime: Kişisel verilerin korunması GDPR mahremiyet hukuku gözetim hukuksal korumanın sınırları.

THE LIMITS OF THE LAW IN PERSONAL DATA PROTECTION

Öz:
The legislation on the protection of personal data draws the framework with international, regional, and national legal regulations, decisions of data protection authorities, and various sanctions. The study aims to present a socio- legal review of some limitations of the protection of personal data law. Besides the values and legislation, some structural and social factors affect the protection. One is the internal limitations of law as hyper-regulation tendency in cyberspace, jurisdiction disputes, and legal gaps that make the protection dysfunctional, besides the law practice that reduces the privacy protection to the individual and stuck to consent and the ineffectiveness of privacy self-management. The relationship between technology and law, the growing influence of companies on the law, and contradictions between privacy and surveillance arise from structural features of the law. Social limits are the change in people’s privacy meanings and the law’s contribution to the normalization of surveillance.
Anahtar Kelime: Protection of personal data GDPR privacy law surveillan- ce the limits of law’s protection.

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • “The BE DPA to restore order to the online advertising industry: IAB Europe held responsible for a mechanism that infringes the GDPR | Autorité de protection des données<br>Gegevensbeschermingsauto riteit”, Şubat 2022. https://www.dataprotectionauthority.be/citizen/ iab-europe-held-responsible-for-a-mechanism-that-infringes-the-gdpr. (E.T. 25.04.2023) Acquisti, Alessandro, Laura Brandimarte, ve George Loewens- tein. “Privacy and Human Behavior in the Age of Information”. Science 347, sy 6221 (2015): 509-14. Acquisti, Alessandro, ve Jens Grossklags. “Privacy Attitudes and Privacy Behavior”. Içinde Economics of Information Security, edi - tör L. Jean Camp ve Stephen Lewis, 165-78. Advances in Information Security. Boston, MA: Springer US, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1007/1- 4020-8090-5_13.
  • Allen, Anita. Unpopular Privacy: What Must We Hide? Ox- ford University Press, 2011. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:o so/9780195141375.001.0001.
  • Andrew, Jane, ve Max Baker. “The General Data Protection Regulation in the Age of Surveillance Capitalism”. Journal of Business Ethics 168, sy 3 (2021): 565-78. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-019- 04239-z.
  • Aydın, Mustafa Berkay. “Dijital Sosyoloji Üzerine Notlar”. İçinde Dijital Sosyoloji Çalışmaları, editör Aslıhan Zinderen, 1-18. Ankara: No- bel Bilimsel Eserler, 2021.
  • Barth, Susanne, ve Menno D. T. de Jong. “The Privacy Paradox – Investigating Discrepancies between Expressed Privacy Concerns and Actual Online Behavior – A Systematic Literature Review”. Telematics and Informatics 34, sy 7 (2017): 1038-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. tele.2017.04.013.
  • Baruh, Lemi, ve Mihaela Popescu. “Big data analytics and the li- mits of privacy self-management”. New Media & Society 19, sy 4 (2017): 579-96.
  • Bellaby, Ross W. “Going Dark: Anonymising Technology in Cyberspace”. Ethics and Information Technology 20 (2018): 189-204.
  • Benjamin, Garfield. “Privacy Norms and Resistances Between the Performative, the Habitual and the Periperformative”. Social Epistemo- logy Review and Reply Collective 11, sy 1 (2022): 7-13.
  • Birch, Kean, D Cochrane, ve Callum Ward. “Data as asset? The measurement, governance, and valuation of digital personal data by Big Tech”. Big Data & Society 8, sy 1 (16 Mayıs 2021): 1-15. https://doi. org/10.1177/20539517211017308. Bygrave, Lee. “Privacy Protection in a Global Context- A Compa- rative Overview.” Scandinavian Studies in Law, 2004, 319-48.
  • Cate, Fred H. “The Changing Face of Privacy Protection in the European Union and the United States”. Indiana Law Review 33, sy 1 (1999): 173-232.
  • Christl, Wolfie. “Corporate Surveillance in Everyday Life: How Companies Collect, Combine, Analyze, Trade, and Use Personal Data on Billions”. Vienna: Cracked Labs, 2017.
  • ———. “Digital Profiling in the Online Gambling Industry. A re- port on marketing and risk surveillance by the UK gambling firm Sky Betting and Gaming, TransUnion, Adobe, Google, Facebook, Micro- soft and other data companies”. Vienna-Essex: Cracked Labs- CleanUp Gambling, 2022.
  • Cofone, Ignacio. “Nothing to Hide, but Something to Lose”. Uni- versity of Toronto Law Journal 70 (2019): 1-41.
  • Cohen, Julie E. Between Truth and Power: The Legal Constructions of Informational Capitalism. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2019.
  • ———. “The Regulatory State in the Information Age”. Theore- tical Inquiries in Law 17, sy 2 (27 Temmuz 2016). https://www7.tau. ac.il/ojs/index.php/til/article/view/1425.
  • ———. “What Privacy is for”. Harvard Law Review 126, sy 7 (2013): 1904-33.
  • Courmont, Antonie. “Le plaignant type ? Un homme, diplômé et cadre | LINC”. linc.cnil.fr, Şubat 2023. https://linc.cnil.fr/fr/le- plaignant-type-un-homme-diplome-et-cadre. (E.T. 28.04.2023)
  • De Hert, Paul, ve Auke Willems. “Dealing with overlapping juris- dictions and requests for mutual legal assistance, while respecting indi- vidual rights. What can data protection law learn from cooperation in criminal justice matters?” İçinde Enforcing privacy: lessons from current implementations and perspectives for the future, editör Paul De Hert, Da- riusz Kloza, ve Pawel Makowski, 49-76. Wydawnictwo Sejmowe, 2015.
  • Deakin, Simon, David Gindis, Geoffrey Hodgson, Kainan Hu- ang, ve Katharina Pistor. “Legal Institutionalism: Capitalism and the Constitutive Role of Law”. Journal of Comparative Economics 45 (2015): 188.
  • Etzioni, Amitai. Privacy in a Cyber Age. New York: Palgrave Mac- millan, 2015.
  • Ford, Richard T. “Law’s Territory (A History of Jurisdiction)”. Stan- ford Law School 97 (1999): 843-930.
  • Franz, Anjuli, ve Alexander Benlian. “Exploring Interdependent Privacy – Empirical Insights into Users’ Protection of Others’ Privacy on Online Platforms”. Electronic Markets 32, sy 4 (01 Aralık 2022): 2293-2309. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-022-00566-8.
  • Friedland, Steven I. “Drinking from the Fire Hose: How Massive Self-Surveillance from the Internet of Things Is Changing the Face of Privacy”. West Virginia Law Review 119, sy 3 (2017): 891-914.
  • Fuchs, Christian. “Towards an alternative concept of privacy”. Journal of Information, Communication and Ethics in Society 9, sy 4 (01 Ocak 2011): 220-37. https://doi.org/10.1108/14779961111191039.
  • Hanff, Alexander. “The problem with Consent Management Plat- forms is they are unlawful by design”. linkedin.com (blog), Aralık 2021. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/problem-consent-management- platforms-unlawful-design-alexander/. (E.T. 05.05.2023).
  • Hartzog, Woodrow. “Facial Recognition Is the Perfect Tool for Oppression”. Medium (blog), 02 Ağustos 2018. https://medium. com/s/story/facial-recognition-is-the-perfect-tool-for-oppression- bc2a08f0fe66. (E.T. 04.05.2023).
  • Hartzog, Woodrow, ve Neil Richards. “Privacy’s Constitutional Moment and the Limits of Data Protection”. Boston College Law Review 61, sy 5 (2020): 1687-1762.
  • Hartzog, Woodrow, Evan Selinger, ve Johanna Gunawan. “Pri- vacy Nicks: How the Law Normalizes Surveillance”. Washington Uni- versity Law Review 101 (2023): 1-77.
  • Hatıpoğlu Aydın, Duygu. Siber Alan ve Hukuk. İstanbul: On İki Levha Yayıncılık, 2022.
  • Humerick, Matthew. “The Tortoise and the Hare of International Data Privacy Law: Can the United States Catch Up to Rising Global Standards?” Catholic University Journal of Law and Technology 27, sy 1 (2018): 77-125.
  • Işıktaç, Yasemin, ve Sevtap Metin. Hukuk Metodolojisi. İstanbul: Filiz Kitabevi, 2019.
  • Kohl, Uta. “Jurisdiction in Network Society”. İçinde Research Hand- book on International Law and Cyberspace, editör Nicholas Tsagourias ve Russell Buchan, 69-96. UK: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2021.
  • Kokolakis, Spyros. “Privacy Attitudes and Privacy Behaviour: A Review of Current Research on the Privacy Paradox Phenomenon”. Computers & Security 64 (2017): 122-34.
  • Kröger, Jacob Leon, Milagros Miceli, ve Florian Müller. “How Data Can Be Used Against People: A Classification of Personal Data Misuses”. SSRN Scholarly Paper. Rochester, NY: Social Science Rese- arch Network, 30 Aralık 2021. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3887097.
  • Leith, Philip. “The socio-legal context of privacy”. International Journal of Law in Context 2, sy 2 (2006): 105-36.
  • Lessig, Lawrence. “Code Is Law”. Harvard Magazine, 01 Ocak 2000. https://www.harvardmagazine.com/2000/01/code-is-law- html. (E.T. 06.03.2023).
  • ———. “The Constitution of Code: Limitations on Choice-Based Critiques of Cyberspace Regulation”. CommLaw Conspectus: Journal of Communications Law and Technology Policy (1993-2015) 5, sy 2 (1997): 181-92.
  • Lyon, David. Elektronik Göz: Gözetim Toplumunun Yükselişi. Çevi- ren Dilek Hattatoğlu. İstanbul: Sarmal Yayınevi, 1997.
  • ———. Gözetlenen Toplum- Günlük Hayatı Kontrol Etmek. Çevi- ren Gözde Soykan. İstanbul: Kalkedon Yayınları, 2006.
  • ———. “Surveillance, Snowden, and Big Data: Capacities, Con- sequences, Critique”. Big Data & Society 1, sy 2 (01 Temmuz 2014): 2053951714541861. https://doi.org/10.1177/2053951714541861.
  • Mann, Monique, ve Tobias Matzner. “Challenging Algorith- mic Profiling: The Limits of Data Protection and Anti-Discrimina- tion in Responding to Emergent Discrimination”. Big Data & Soci- ety 6, sy 2 (01 Temmuz 2019): 2053951719895805. https://doi. org/10.1177/2053951719895805.
  • Matte, Celestin, Nataliia Bielova, ve Cristiana Santos. “Do Co- okie Banners Respect my Choice? : Measuring Legal Compliance of Banners from IAB Europe’s Transparency and Consent Framework”. İçinde 2020 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy (SP), 791-809, 2020.
  • McGillivray, Kevin, ed. “Data Privacy and Data Protection Issues in Cloud Computing”. İçinde Government Cloud Procure- ment: Contracts, Data Protection, and the Quest for Compliance, 91- 156. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021. https://doi. org/10.1017/9781108942485.006.
  • Orito, Yohko, ve Kiyoshi Murata. “Privacy Protection in Japan: Cultural Influence on the Universal Value”. Linköping University, Swe- den, 2005. https://rcvest.southernct.edu/ethicomp2005-linkaping- sweden/.
  • Pagallo, Ugo. “The Legal Challenges of Big Data”: European Data Protection Law Review 3, sy 1 (2017): 36-46. https://doi.org/10.21552/ edpl/2017/1/7.
  • Pasquale, Frank. The Black Box Society: The Secret Algorithms That Control Money and Information. Reprint edition. Cambridge, Massachu- setts London, England: Harvard University Press, 2016.
  • Politou, Eugenia, Efthimios Alepis, Maria Virvou, ve Constan- tinos Patsakis. “Privacy and Personal Data Protection”. Içinde Privacy and Data Protection Challenges in the Distributed Era, editör Eugenia Po- litou, Efthimios Alepis, Maria Virvou, ve Constantinos Patsakis, 7-12. Learning and Analytics in Intelligent Systems. Cham: Springer Interna- tional Publishing, 2022.
  • Popescul, Daniela, ve Laura-Diana Genete. “Data Security in Smart Cities: Challenges and Solutions”. Informatica Economică 20, sy 1 (2016): 29-38.
  • Reidenberg, Joel. “Technology and Internet Jurisdiction”. Univer- sity of Pennsylvania Law Review 153 (2005): 1951-74.
  • Richards, Neil M. “Four Privacy Myth”. İçinde A World Witho- ut Privacy: What Law Can and Should Do?, editör Austin Sarat, 33-82. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2015.
  • Rubinstein, Ariel. “‘Economics and Psychology’? The Case of Hyperbolic Discounting*”. International Economic Review 44, sy 4 (2003): 1207-16.
  • Satariano, Adam. “ChatGPT Is Banned in Italy Over Privacy Con- cerns”. The New York Times, 31 Mart 2023, blm. Technology. https:// www.nytimes.com/2023/03/31/technology/chatgpt-italy-ban.html. (E.T. 29.04.2023).
  • Schaub, Florian, Rebecca Balebako, Adam L. Durity, ve Lorrie Faith Cranor. “A Design Space for Effective Privacy Notices”. İçinde The Cambridge Handbook of Consumer Privacy, editör Evan Selinger, Jules Polonetsky, ve Omer Tene, 365-93. Cambridge Law Handbo-oks. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018. https://doi. org/10.1017/9781316831960.021.
  • Skatova, Anya, Rebecca McDonald, Sinong Ma, ve Carsten Maple. “Unpacking privacy: Valuation of personal data protection”. PloS one 18 (03 Mayıs 2023): 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal. pone.0284581.
  • Solove, Daniel J. “‘I’ve Got Nothing to Hide’ and Other Misun- derstandings of Privacy”. San Diego Law Review 44 (2007): 745-72.
  • ———. Nothing to Hide: The False Tradeoff between Privacy and Security. Illustrated edition. New Haven London: Yale University Press, 2013.
  • ———. “Privacy Self-Management and the Consent Dilemma”. Harvard Law Review 126 (2013): 1880-1904.
  • ———. “The Limitations of Privacy Rights”. Notre Dame Law Re- view 98, sy 3 (2023): 975-1036.
  • Svantesson, Dan Jerker B. “Are we Stuck in an Era of Jurisdic- tional Hyper-regulation”. İçinde 50 Years of Law and IT, editör Peter Wahlgren, 143-58. Scandinavian Studies in Law. Stockholm Institute for Scandinavian Law, 2018.
  • ———. Solving the Internet Jurisdiction Puzzle. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2017.
  • Turgut Bilgiç, Ezgi. “Kamusal Alanda İdarenin Video Gözetimi- nin Kişisel Verilerin Korunması Hukuku Bağlamında Değerlendiril- mesi”. Yüksek Lisans, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Kamu Hukuku Anabilim Dalı, 2023.
  • Van Dijk, Jan. Ağ Toplumu. İstanbul: Kafka Yayınları, 2018.
  • Waldman, Ari Ezra. “How Big Tech Turns Privacy Laws Into Privacy Theater”. Slate, 02 Aralık 2021. https://slate.com/techno- logy/2021/12/facebook-twitter-big-tech-privacy-sham.html. (E.T. 05.04.2023).
  • ———. Industry Unbound: The Inside Story of Privacy, Data, and Corporate Power. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2021.
  • ———. “Privacy, Practice, and Performance”. SSRN Scholarly Pa- per. Rochester, NY: Social Science Research Network, 01 Şubat 2021. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3784667.
  • Ward, Alexis. “The Oldest Trick in the Facebook: Would the Ge- neral Data Protection Regulation Have Stopped the Cambridge Analy- tica Scandal?” Trinity College Law Review 25 (2022): 221-42. Zuboff, Shoshana. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. New York: PublicAffairs, 2019.
APA Hatıpoğlu Aydın D (2023). KİŞİSEL VERİLERİN KORUNMASINDA HUKUKUN SINIRLARI. , 141 - 189.
Chicago Hatıpoğlu Aydın Duygu KİŞİSEL VERİLERİN KORUNMASINDA HUKUKUN SINIRLARI. (2023): 141 - 189.
MLA Hatıpoğlu Aydın Duygu KİŞİSEL VERİLERİN KORUNMASINDA HUKUKUN SINIRLARI. , 2023, ss.141 - 189.
AMA Hatıpoğlu Aydın D KİŞİSEL VERİLERİN KORUNMASINDA HUKUKUN SINIRLARI. . 2023; 141 - 189.
Vancouver Hatıpoğlu Aydın D KİŞİSEL VERİLERİN KORUNMASINDA HUKUKUN SINIRLARI. . 2023; 141 - 189.
IEEE Hatıpoğlu Aydın D "KİŞİSEL VERİLERİN KORUNMASINDA HUKUKUN SINIRLARI." , ss.141 - 189, 2023.
ISNAD Hatıpoğlu Aydın, Duygu. "KİŞİSEL VERİLERİN KORUNMASINDA HUKUKUN SINIRLARI". (2023), 141-189.
APA Hatıpoğlu Aydın D (2023). KİŞİSEL VERİLERİN KORUNMASINDA HUKUKUN SINIRLARI. İZMİR BAROSU DERGİSİ, 88(2), 141 - 189.
Chicago Hatıpoğlu Aydın Duygu KİŞİSEL VERİLERİN KORUNMASINDA HUKUKUN SINIRLARI. İZMİR BAROSU DERGİSİ 88, no.2 (2023): 141 - 189.
MLA Hatıpoğlu Aydın Duygu KİŞİSEL VERİLERİN KORUNMASINDA HUKUKUN SINIRLARI. İZMİR BAROSU DERGİSİ, vol.88, no.2, 2023, ss.141 - 189.
AMA Hatıpoğlu Aydın D KİŞİSEL VERİLERİN KORUNMASINDA HUKUKUN SINIRLARI. İZMİR BAROSU DERGİSİ. 2023; 88(2): 141 - 189.
Vancouver Hatıpoğlu Aydın D KİŞİSEL VERİLERİN KORUNMASINDA HUKUKUN SINIRLARI. İZMİR BAROSU DERGİSİ. 2023; 88(2): 141 - 189.
IEEE Hatıpoğlu Aydın D "KİŞİSEL VERİLERİN KORUNMASINDA HUKUKUN SINIRLARI." İZMİR BAROSU DERGİSİ, 88, ss.141 - 189, 2023.
ISNAD Hatıpoğlu Aydın, Duygu. "KİŞİSEL VERİLERİN KORUNMASINDA HUKUKUN SINIRLARI". İZMİR BAROSU DERGİSİ 88/2 (2023), 141-189.
Sayfa Oluşturulma Tarihi
02-05-2024 5:15

İLETİŞİM

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Dizin

Yüzüncüyıl, İşçi Blokları Mahallesi

Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu Caddesi No:51/C

06530 Çankaya / ANKARA +90 (312) 298 92 00

trdizin@tubitak.gov.tr

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © Tüm Hakları Saklıdır. Gizlilik Politikası Kullanım Şartları