Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Google's DeepMind and UK Hospitals Made Illegal Deal For Health Data, Says Watchdog (theverge.com)

Posted by msmash on from the tussle-continues dept.

A deal between UK hospitals and Google's AI subsidiary DeepMind "failed to comply with data protection law," according to the UK's data watchdog. From a report: The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) made its ruling today after a year-long investigation into the agreement, which saw DeepMind process 1.6 million patient records belonging to UK citizens for the Royal Free Trust -- a group of three London hospitals. The deal was originally struck in 2015, and has since been superseded by a new agreement. At the time, DeepMind and the Royal Free said the data was being shared to develop an app named Streams, which would alert doctors if patients were at risk from a condition called acute kidney injury. An investigation by the New Scientist revealed that the terms of the agreement were more broad than hand been originally implied. DeepMind has since made new deals to deploy Streams in other UK hospitals.

31 comments

  1. Be afraid... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Funny

    Patient presents with abdominal cramping and diarrhea
    RECOMMEND TERMINATION
    Patient presents with intense headache and light sensitivity
    RECOMMEND TERMINATION
    Patient presents with pain in should when arm is extended fully horizontally, claims has fallen from ladder
    RECOMMEND TERMINATION

    1. Re:Be afraid... by squiggleslash · · Score: 0

      Wait, where did you get the latest draft of the AHCA?

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
  2. in the usa under the GOP system the AI blacklist by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 0

    in the usa under the GOP system the AI will blacklist you force you to go the high risk pool.

  3. Watson by ls671 · · Score: 1

    Now, all is missing is Watson joining the dance.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

    --
    Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
    1. Re:Watson by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Watson is a marketing campaign. Google DeepMind and OpenAI are the leaders of the industry.

      http://fortune.com/2017/06/28/ibm-watson-ai-healthcare/
      http://www.rogerschank.com/fraudulent-claims-made-by-IBM-about-Watson-and-AI

    2. Re:Watson by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now, all is missing is Watson joining the happy dance.

      T, FTFY.

  4. All your data are belong to us! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All these data protection laws are just standing in the way of progress. Google and Zuckerbook are going to get all your data sooner or later anyway, so might as well just give it up and hope they do something useful with it.

  5. The same lesson learned by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 4, Insightful

    And the same lesson is learned over and over again: Google got away with it. What are laws worth if the big privacy criminals have no reason whatsoever to follow them?

    --
    Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
    1. Re: The same lesson learned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Laws are for smallfolk.

    2. Re:The same lesson learned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What makes you think Google got away with this? The watchdog's assessment that the deal was in violation came today. They haven't yet been charged or assessed a penalty. This just opens the door.

    3. Re:The same lesson learned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Privacy is like virginity - once violated it can't be got back.

      Google 'got away with it' because they have collected they never should have had access to and nothing on this earth can make them forget everything they illegally learned from violating patient privacy.

      Much like there's no way Google can ever make Uber forget everything they learned from stealing car automation trade secrets.

    4. Re:The same lesson learned by swillden · · Score: 3, Informative

      And the same lesson is learned over and over again: Google got away with it.

      To be clear, this was DeepMind, which is owned by Google, not Google. From the article:

      The contract was always clear that no private data would ever be shared with DeepMind’s parent company Google, which bought the firm in 2014.

      Also, it's really Royal Free Trust which is at fault. The core problem here was that patients weren't made aware that their data would be used for this particular purpose, and it was the hospital group who had contact with the patients and access to their data, not DeepMind. Indeed, the ICO's primary immediate action here is to ask the hospital group "to sign a new agreement committing it to act in accordance with the law and commission an audit of the 2015 trial".

      While I think DeepMind should also exercise due diligence and take care that its partners aren't breaking the law, the real responsibility here lies with the organization that has the patient data, the hospitals. If DeepMind had violated the terms of the agreement and used the data for purposes other than it told Royal Free Trust, and gotten away with it, then you'd have had grounds for your complaint. As it is, if you want to sharpen your pitchforks, it's the hospitals you should go after, since DeepMind did nothing other than what the hospitals agreed to let it do. And it's also worth noting that no one here is claiming that there was any harm to patients, just not enough care to follow the disclosure requirements.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    5. Re:The same lesson learned by swillden · · Score: 1

      What makes you think Google got away with this? The watchdog's assessment that the deal was in violation came today. They haven't yet been charged or assessed a penalty.

      It appears to me from the article that the penalty has been assessed... to the Royal Free Trust, the hospital group who had the data and the legal obligation to protect it from disclosure without patient approval. The ICO has asked hospital group to "to sign a new agreement committing it to act in accordance with the law and commission an audit of the 2015 trial."

      There doesn't appear to be any allegation that DeepMind did anything other than what it was authorized to do by the hospital group who provided the data, so it doesn't look like DeepMind has any culpability. The agreement between DeepMind and Royal Free Trust didn't meet the requirements of the law, so the ICO has asked Royal Free Trust to commit to being more careful with how it shares patient data in the future.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    6. Re:The same lesson learned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's funny that they don't have contract templates for legal contracts per market with different legislations. Maybe the DeepMind's own products could provide assistance.

    7. Re:The same lesson learned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There doesn't appear to be any allegation that DeepMind did anything other than what it was authorized to do by the hospital group who provided the data

      Which is fucking absurd, isn't it? If I hand you over some highly private data and say, "Sure, mate, do what you want with it!" then this shouldn't magically absolve you from the consequences of anything you do with it. Any business in the UK (no exceptions!) is required to understand data protection laws, esp. related to consent to process data. The consent comes from the data subjects, never from a third party (exceptions excepted, e.g. police/court systems). Clearly Google did not check for consent, because there is no evidence that consent was provided by the data subjects. Google should be culpable, civilly at least, and criminally with of course the potential defence that it was given falsified proof of consent.

    8. Re:The same lesson learned by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As it is, if you want to sharpen your pitchforks, it's the hospitals you should go after, since DeepMind did nothing other than what the hospitals agreed to let it do.

      DeepMind becomes the holder of the personal information when the information touches their systems. They then have responsibilities that they can't neglect or contractually agree away. Of course, the hospital have its responsibility as well and perhaps there was inadequate reporting to the data protection authorities on the scope of the information provided. The article really doesn't say much on what the issue was.

  6. Re: Fuck Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am the good guy - said the devil...

  7. SEE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I was right about death panels.
    --
    Sarha Pallin

  8. Anyone wanna make bets? by ausekilis · · Score: 2

    I give it 6 months until those same folks start getting ads for medications of deepmind-guessed ailments.

    1. Re:Anyone wanna make bets? by grep+-v+'.*'+* · · Score: 1

      Ailments like paranoia, because you feel someone is watching you?

      Between Google, the NSA, and your nosy next door neighbor, there IS someone watching you, probably right now. And heck, staying home with the windows closed doesn't do any good either.

      "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you."

      But the good news is that Amazon Dash Button is now linked with your pharmacy* so sedatives are now just a physical click away. Delivered by drones. In an hour. Straight to your cell phones' location.

      * That means Amazon also bought your pharmacy when they gobbled up Whole Paycheck^W Foods. Forget that old original grumpy, nosy, and smelly pharmacist; stop by and chat with our new friendly virtual personality -- now with a face! Or even better, just talk to yourself; Alexa's always listening anyway.
      -----

      No, I'm not at all paranoid. Why are you looking at me like that??

      --
      If the universe is someone's simulation -- does that mean the stars are just stuck pixels?
    2. Re:Anyone wanna make bets? by swillden · · Score: 1

      I give it 6 months until those same folks start getting ads for medications of deepmind-guessed ailments.

      DeepMind doesn't do advertising, and the contract never allowed any sharing of patient data with Google.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  9. What ever happened to ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... do no evil?

  10. Results? by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    What were the outcomes? Were any kidneys saved?

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    1. Re: Results? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, but Google's DeepMind was able to determine a strong correlation between millennials and gender reassignment surgery.

  11. Re: Fuck Google by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Which one killed more people in the Bible, God or the Devil? Check that out and then tell me who is the good guy

  12. Evil Google getting away with it again by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Perhaps a meaningful fine this time? And one that does more than make lawyers rich.

  13. I think I'm okay with this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...screw "two wrongs" logic, Google had a noble intention.

    I mean, if you were on the end of a phone call that went "Good news, we found out you have a rare kidney problem thanks to clever AI. You can be treated. But we looked at your medical records without asking." Who in their right mind is going to complain about their breach of privacy?

    1. Re:I think I'm okay with this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FUCK YOU.

    2. Re: I think I'm okay with this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NO U