Advertisement

GConsent - A Consent Ontology Based on the GDPR

  • Harshvardhan J. PanditEmail author
  • Christophe Debruyne
  • Declan O’Sullivan
  • Dave Lewis
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11503)

Abstract

Consent is an important legal basis for the processing of personal data under the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which is the current European data protection law. GPDR provides constraints and obligations on the validity of consent, and provides data subjects with the right to withdraw their consent at any time. Determining and demonstrating compliance to these obligations require information on how the consent was obtained, used, and changed over time. Existing work demonstrates feasibility of semantic web technologies in modelling information and determining compliance for GDPR. Although these address consent, they currently do not model all the information associated with it. In this paper, we address this by first presenting our analysis of information associated with consent under the GDPR. We then present GConsent, an OWL2-DL ontology for representation of consent and its associated information such as provenance. The paper presents the methodology used in the creation and validation of the ontology as well as an example use-case demonstrating its applicability. The ontology and this paper can be accessed online at https://w3id.org/GConsent.

Keywords

Consent GDPR Regulatory compliance OWL2-DL ontology 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This paper is supported by the ADAPT Centre for Digital Content Technology, which is funded under the SFI Research Centres Programme (Grant 13/RC/2106) and is co-funded under the European Regional Development Fund.

The authors wish to thank the members of Data Protection Vocabularies and Controls Community Group (DPVCG) for their inputs in the discussion of consent and its related research. The authors also wish to thank Pat McBennett for their help in this work.

References

  1. 1.
    Bartolini, C., Muthuri, R.: Reconciling data protection rights and obligations: an ontology of the forthcoming EU regulation. In: Workshop on Language and Semantic Technology for Legal Domain, p. 8 (2015)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Berrueta, D., Phipps, J., Miles, A., Baker, T., Swick, R.: Best practice recipes for publishing RDF vocabularies. Working draft, W3C (2008)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cox, S., Little, C.: Time ontology in OWL. World Wide Web Consortium (2017). https://www.w3.org/TR/owl-time
  4. 4.
    Falco, R., Gangemi, A., Peroni, S., Shotton, D., Vitali, F.: Modelling OWL ontologies with Graffoo. In: Presutti, V., Blomqvist, E., Troncy, R., Sack, H., Papadakis, I., Tordai, A. (eds.) ESWC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8798, pp. 320–325. Springer, Cham (2014).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11955-7_42CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fatema, K., Hadziselimovic, E., Pandit, H.J., Debruyne, C., Lewis, D., O’Sullivan, D.: Compliance through informed consent: Semantic based consent permission and data management model. In: Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Society, Privacy and the Semantic Web - Policy and Technology (PrivOn2017) (PrivOn) (2017). http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1951/#paper-05
  6. 6.
    Garijo, D.: WIDOCO: a wizard for documenting ontologies. In: d’Amato, C., et al. (eds.) ISWC 2017. LNCS, vol. 10588, pp. 94–102. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-68204-4_9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Gurk, S.M., Abela, C., Debattista, J.: Towards ontology quality assessment. In: Joint Proceedings of the MEPDaW, p. 12 (2017)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kirrane, S., et al.: A scalable consent, transparency and compliance architecture. In: Gangemi, A., et al. (eds.) ESWC 2018. LNCS, vol. 11155, pp. 131–136. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98192-5_25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lebo, T., et al.: PROV-O: the PROV ontology (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lizar, M., Turner, D.: Consent receipt specification (2017). https://docs.kantarainitiative.org/cis/consent-receipt-specification-v1-1-0.pdf
  11. 11.
    Mittal, S., Sharma, P.P.: The role of consent in legitimising the processing of personal data under the current EU data protection framework. Asian J. Comput. Sci. Inf. Technol. 7, 76–78 (2017). https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=2975277Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Noy, N.F., McGuinness, D.L., et al.: Ontology development 101: a guide to creating your first ontology. Stanford Knowledge Systems Laboratory Technical report KSL-01-05 and \(\ldots \) (2001)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Palmirani, M., Martoni, M., Rossi, A., Bartolini, C., Robaldo, L.: PrOnto: privacy ontology for legal reasoning. In: Kő, A., Francesconi, E. (eds.) EGOVIS 2018. LNCS, vol. 11032, pp. 139–152. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-98349-3_11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pandit, H.J., Fatema, K., O’Sullivan, D., Lewis, D.: GDPRtEXT - GDPR as a linked data resource. In: Gangemi, A., et al. (eds.) ESWC 2018. LNCS, vol. 10843, pp. 481–495. Springer, Cham (2018).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-93417-4_31. https://doi.org/10/c3n4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pandit, H.J., Lewis, D.: Modelling provenance for GDPR compliance using linked open data vocabularies. In: Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on Society, Privacy and the Semantic Web - Policy and Technology (PrivOn2017) (PrivOn) (2017). http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-1951/#paper-06
  16. 16.
    Pandit, H.J., O’Sullivan, D., Lewis, D.: Queryable provenance metadata for GDPR compliance. Procedia Comput. Sci. 137, 262–268 (2018). https://doi.org/10/gfdc6r10/gfdc6r. Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Semantic Systems 10th - 13th of September 2018 Vienna, Austria
  17. 17.
    Party, A.W.: Guidelines on consent under regulation 2016/679 (wp259rev.01) (2018). https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/article29/item-detail.cfm?item_id=623051
  18. 18.
    Poveda-Villalón, M., Suárez-Figueroa, M.C., Gómez-Pérez, A.: Validating ontologies with OOPS! In: ten Teije, A., et al. (eds.) EKAW 2012. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 7603, pp. 267–281. Springer, Heidelberg (2012).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33876-2_24. https://doi.org/10/gfkzwf
  19. 19.
    Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European parliament and of the council of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data, and repealing directive 95/46/EC (general data protection regulation) (2016). http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=OJ:L:2016:119:TOC
  20. 20.
    Tikkinen-Piri, C., Rohunen, A., Markkula, J.: EU general data protection regulation: changes and implications for personal data collecting companies. Comput. Law Secur. Rev. 34(1), 134–153 (2018). https://doi.org/10/gc484mCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter's Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Authors and Affiliations

  • Harshvardhan J. Pandit
    • 1
    Email author
  • Christophe Debruyne
    • 1
  • Declan O’Sullivan
    • 1
  • Dave Lewis
    • 1
  1. 1.ADAPT CentreTrinity College DublinDublinIreland

Personalised recommendations