Source author record

Frederik Zuiderveen Borgesius

Frederik Zuiderveen Borgesius appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record

Catalog footprint

What is connected

5works
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

5 published item(s)

preprint2026arXiv

Filtering for Copyright Enforcement in Europe after the Sabam cases

Sabam, a Belgian collective rights management organisation, wanted an internet access provider and a social network site to install a filter system to enforce copyrights. In two recent judgments, the Court of Justice of the European Union decided that the social network site and the internet access provider cannot be required to install the filter system that Sabam asked for. Are these judgments good news for fundamental rights? This article argues that little is won for privacy and freedom of information.

preprint2025arXiv

Behavioral Targeting, a European Legal Perspective

Behavioral targeting, or online profiling, is a hotly debated topic. Much of the collection of personal information on the Internet is related to behavioral targeting, although research suggests that most people don't want to receive behaviorally targeted advertising. The World Wide Web Consortium is discussing a Do Not Track standard, and regulators worldwide are struggling to come up with answers. This article discusses European law and recent policy developments on behavioral targeting.

preprint2025arXiv

Discrimination and AI in insurance: what do people find fair? Results from a survey

Two modern trends in insurance are data-intensive underwriting and behavior-based insurance. Data-intensive underwriting means that insurers analyze more data for estimating the claim cost of a consumer and for determining the premium based on that estimation. Insurers also offer behavior-based insurance. For example, some car insurers use artificial intelligence (AI) to follow the driving behavior of an individual consumer in real-time and decide whether to offer that consumer a discount. In this paper, we report on a survey of the Dutch population (N=999) in which we asked people's opinions about examples of data-intensive underwriting and behavior-based insurance. The main results include: (i) If survey respondents find an insurance practice unfair, they also find the practice unacceptable. (ii) Respondents find almost all modern insurance practices that we described unfair. (iii) Respondents find practices for which they can influence the premium fairer. (iv) If respondents find a certain consumer characteristic illogical for basing the premium on, then respondents find using the characteristic unfair. (v) Respondents find it unfair if an insurer offers an insurance product only to a specific group. (vi) Respondents find it unfair if an insurance practice leads to the poor paying more. We also reflect on the policy implications of the findings.

preprint2025arXiv

Segmentação Comportamental, Do Not Track e o desenvolvimento jurídico europeu e holandês

This paper discusses legal developments in Europe and the Netherlands. Recent decisions show that European data protection law, or privacy law, applies to behavioral targeting in most cases. Dutch law explicitly presumes that data protection law applies to behavioral targeting. This means that companies have to comply with data protection law's fair information principles. For example, companies must refrain from secret or excessive data collection. Perhaps the principles could provide inspiration for future W3C projects. Could technology design foster fair information processing?

preprint2022arXiv

Demystifying the Draft EU Artificial Intelligence Act

In April 2021, the European Commission proposed a Regulation on Artificial Intelligence, known as the AI Act. We present an overview of the Act and analyse its implications, drawing on scholarship ranging from the study of contemporary AI practices to the structure of EU product safety regimes over the last four decades. Aspects of the AI Act, such as different rules for different risk-levels of AI, make sense. But we also find that some provisions of the Draft AI Act have surprising legal implications, whilst others may be largely ineffective at achieving their stated goals. Several overarching aspects, including the enforcement regime and the risks of maximum harmonisation pre-empting legitimate national AI policy, engender significant concern. These issues should be addressed as a priority in the legislative process.