header-logo header-logo

Neurotechnology & the law

07 June 2024 / Harry Lambert
Issue: 8074 / Categories: Features , Profession , Technology , Artificial intelligence , Privacy
printer mail-detail
176249
In the first of a series of articles on the interplay between neurotechnology & different areas of law, Harry Lambert brings us up to speed on neurotech capabilities
  • Focuses on ‘neurorights’ from a legal perspective, including how they might apply to different areas of practice, and how other jurisdictions are seeking to protect them.

I want you to consider the list below. Each item is a potential application of monitoring, harvesting and analysing brain wave data from electroencephalograms (EEGs). But which of these neurotech capabilities do you think are: (a) possible in the near future; (b) possible in the long term; or (c) impossible?

In ascending order of radicality and/or dystopian-ness (if that is a word) here is the list:

(1) predicting who will suffer from degenerative diseases;

(2) monitoring levels of fatigue;

(3) checking that someone is listening to you/concentrating;

(4) direct brain-to-brain communication;

(5) ascertaining a subject’s political leanings, religious beliefs or amorous feelings;

(6) implanting dreams about products;

(7) scanning a suspect’s memory to check

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

CBI South-East Council—Mike Wilson

Blake Morgan managing partner appointed chair of CBI South-East Council

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Birketts—Phillippa O’Neill

Commercial dispute resolution team welcomes partner in Cambridge

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Charles Russell Speechlys—Matthew Griffin

Firm strengthens international funds capability with senior hire

NEWS
The proposed £11bn redress scheme following the Supreme Court’s motor finance rulings is analysed in this week’s NLJ by Fred Philpott of Gough Square Chambers
In this week's issue, Stephen Gold, NLJ columnist and former district judge, surveys another eclectic fortnight in procedure. With humour and humanity, he reminds readers that beneath the procedural dust, the law still changes lives
Generative AI isn’t the villain of the courtroom—it’s the misunderstanding of it that’s dangerous, argues Dr Alan Ma of Birmingham City University and the Birmingham Law Society in this week's NLJ
James Naylor of Naylor Solicitors dissects the government’s plan to outlaw upward-only rent review (UORR) clauses in new commercial leases under Schedule 31 of the English Devolution and Community Empowerment Bill, in this week's NLJ. The reform, he explains, marks a seismic shift in landlord-tenant power dynamics: rents will no longer rise inexorably, and tenants gain statutory caps and procedural rights
Writing in NLJ this week, James Harrison and Jenna Coad of Penningtons Manches Cooper chart the Privy Council’s demolition of the long-standing ‘shareholder rule’ in Jardine Strategic v Oasis Investments
back-to-top-scroll