مسئولیت‌پذیری و حفاظت از داده‌ها در پرتو سیستم‌های توصیه‌گر هوش مصنوعی

نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری حقوق خصوصی، واحد رشت، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی، رشت، ایران

2 دانشیار گروه حقوق خصوصی، دانشکدۀ ادبیات و علوم انسانی، دانشگاه ایلام

چکیده

چکیده
در عصر حاضر، سیستم‌های توصیه‌گر هوش مصنوعی به‌عنوان ابزارهای کلیدی در تجارت الکترونیک، ارائه محتوای دیجیتال و پلتفرم‌های رسانه‌های اجتماعی شناخته می‌شوند. این سیستم‌ها، با تحلیل رفتار کاربران و پردازش داده‌های شخصی، پیشنهادهای سفارشی ارائه می‌دهند که هم تجربه کاربری را بهبود می‌بخشد و هم سودآوری سازمان‌ها را افزایش می‌دهد. با این حال، به‌کارگیری گسترده هوش مصنوعی در فرآیند توصیه‌گری، چالش‌های حقوقی و اخلاقی زیادی ایجاد می‌کند که ضرورت توجه به مسئولیت‌پذیری و رعایت مقررات حفاظت داده‌ها، به‌ویژه مقررات عمومی حفاظت از داده‌های اتحادیه اروپا را برجسته می‌سازد. ازجمله این چالش‌ها، اصل تبعیض الگوریتمی است که بر لزوم پیشگیری از تصمیم‌های ناعادلانه و تبعیض‌آمیز در سیستم‌های خودکار تأکید دارد. این پژوهش با روش توصیفی-تحلیلی، پیامدهای جمع‌آوری و تحلیل داده‌های کاربران، ایجاد پروفایل‌های رفتاری و هدف‌گیری دقیق پیشنهادها را مورد بررسی قرار می‌دهد و چالش‌هایی نظیر نقض حریم خصوصی و شفافیت ناکافی در تصمیم‌های خودکار را تحلیل می‌کند. هدف مقاله، ارائه راهکارهای قانونی و راهبردهای مسئولیت‌پذیر برای ارتقای شفافیت، عدالت و رعایت حقوق کاربران در سیستم‌های توصیه‌گر است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

موضوعات


عنوان مقاله [English]

Accountability and General Data Protection in the Light of Artificial Intelligence-Based Recommender Systems

نویسندگان [English]

  • maryam bahrekazemi 1
  • parviz bagheri 2
1 Ph.D. Candidate of private Law, Islamic Azad University, Rasht.Iran
2 Associate Prof Faculty of Law, ilam University, Ilam, Iran
چکیده [English]

Introduction
In recent decades, the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI), particularly in the fields of big data analytics and machine learning, has led to the widespread adoption of recommender systems. The primary purpose of these systems is to analyze user behavior and preferences in order to provide personalized suggestions that enhance user experience and improve the efficiency and profitability of organizations. However, the extensive deployment of AI-based recommender systems has also given rise to a series of complex legal and ethical challenges. Among the most critical issues are the violation of user privacy through the uncontrolled collection and processing of personal data, algorithmic discrimination resulting from biased datasets, the opacity of automated decision-making processes, and the absence of a clear framework for accountability among developers, platform operators, and users. The primary aim of this research is to conduct a




Accountability and General Data Protection the Light                          Maryam Bahrekazemi
 




comprehensive analysis of the legal and ethical implications associated with the use of recommender systems and to propose legal and managerial strategies for promoting transparency, fairness, and accountability within these systems. The study seeks to strike a balance between technological innovation and the protection of fundamental human rights by integrating legal safeguards with ethical and organizational principles.
 
Methods
This study adopts a descriptive–analytical methodology. Data and materials were collected from a combination of academic research, industry reports, legal documents, and international ethical guidelines related to AI. In the first stage, the processes of data collection, storage, and analysis in recommender systems were examined to reveal how behavioral data are transformed into user profiles and used in automated decision-making. The second stage involves a document-based analysis of key legal instruments such as the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) of the European Union, the Personal Data Protection Act of Iran, and international ethical frameworks including the OECD Principles on Artificial Intelligence and the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of AI. Furthermore, the study explores standards for explainable algorithms (Explainable AI), mechanisms for assessing algorithmic bias, and organizational accountability models. Special attention has been devoted to identifying key legal challenges—namely, the violation of privacy, algorithmic discrimination, lack of transparency in deep-learning models, and the absence of binding legal frameworks defining civil or criminal liability in cases of automated decision-making.
 
Results and Discussion
The findings indicate that although recommender systems significantly enhance user experience and organizational efficiency, they simultaneously pose serious threats to individual rights and social justice. One of the main findings concerns the massive dependence of these systems on data collection, often conducted without the user's informed consent, thereby violating the principle of autonomy and data self-determination. Moreover, the complexity of machine-learning algorithms often makes their decision-making processes opaque and incomprehensible, conflicting with the principle of transparency. Another key finding reveals that recommender systems can perpetuate or even amplify algorithmic discrimination. Certain groups of users may be systematically deprived of access to specific services or content based on demographic or behavioral factors, resulting in unfair treatment and social inequality. Such outcomes not only undermine distributive justice but also erode public trust in AI-driven technologies. From a legal perspective, the lack of coherent and enforceable regulations concerning the liability of organizations for harms caused by recommender systems represents a major challenge.




Volume 18, Issue 3, Autumn 2026
 




From a managerial standpoint, the study demonstrates that developing transparent legal frameworks, designing explainable and accountable algorithms, strengthening independent oversight mechanisms, and fostering a culture of organizational responsibility can substantially mitigate these risks. Training employees on AI ethics and implementing internal data protection policies are also identified as essential steps toward responsible system design. The results further highlight that the success of recommender systems does not depend solely on algorithmic precision or data analysis capability; rather, it is fundamentally linked to respect for user rights, structural transparency, and the ethical and legal accountability of organizations.
 
Conclusion
The study concludes that sustainable and trustworthy utilization of recommender systems requires the integration of legal, ethical, and managerial frameworks. Effective data protection laws, transparent algorithmic standards, continuous organizational education, and independent supervisory mechanisms are essential to ensure an optimal user experience, promote social justice, and reduce legal risks. Only through such a comprehensive and multi-dimensional approach can a balance between technological progress and human rights protection be maintained. Strengthening accountability and transparency mechanisms not only prevents recommender systems from becoming tools of discrimination or privacy violation but also enables them to serve as reliable, ethical, and socially beneficial instruments in the digital age. Ultimately, fostering user trust and ensuring algorithmic fairness will transform recommender systems into sustainable assets that contribute both to economic efficiency and to the promotion of human dignity in the digital ecosystem.

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Recommender systems
  • Artificial intelligence
  • Organizational accountability
  • Algorithmic transparency
  • Privacy
  • Data protection law
منابع
احمدوند، محمد و جهانشاهی، مجید. (۱۴۰۲). تحلیل تطبیقی چارچوب‌های حقوقی حمایت از داده‌ها در ایران و اروپا. فصلنامه حقوق فناوری اطلاعات، 6(2)، 115–132.
پارسا، ناهید. (۱۴۰۳). ناکارآمدی قوانین بیمه‌ای موجود در حوادث ناشی از استقلال هوش مصنوعی (مطالعه موردی خودروهای تمام‌ خودران). فصلنامه مطالعات حقوقی، ۱۶ (۴)، ۷۵–۱۰۸.
رباطی انارکی، مهدی و ریاحی، نیلوفر. (۱۴۰۲). یک روش تکاملی برای بهبود انتخاب الگوریتم در سیستم‌های پیشنهاددهی مبتنی بر فیلترینگ مشارکتی. فصلنامه پردازش سیگنال و داده، 20(1)، 59–78.
رئوف‌میر، فاطمه و دادخواه، چنگیز. (۱۴۰۲). سامانه پیشنهادی مبتنی بر زمان و اعتماد با استفاده از تشخیص اجتماع در گراف. فصلنامه فناوری اطلاعات و هوش مصنوعی، 46(12)، 327–360.
علائی، صابر و حسین زاده، جواد. (۱۴۰۱). واکاوی استقلال الگوریتم‌های جعبه سیاه در قراردادهای الگوریتمی و پیامدهای حقوقی آن. فصلنامه مطالعات حقوقی، ۱۴ (۱)، ۲۵۱–۲۷۸.
کینگستون، جان کوین کریستی. (۱۴۰۲). هوش مصنوعی و مسئولیت حقوقی (ترجمه سارا صلحچی و کامران بیگلربیگی). نشریه تمدن حقوقی، 18، ویژه‌نامه هوش مصنوعی.
یزدان‌پناهی، بهنام و مسلم‌نژاد، احمد. (۱۳۹۵). کاربرد سیستم‌های پیشنهاددهنده در تجارت الکترونیک. در مجموعه مقالات پنجمین کنفرانس بین‌المللی مهندسی کامپیوتر، برق و الکترونیک، (45–50).
 
References
Aggarwal, C. C. (2016). Recommender systems: The textbook. Springer.
Ahmadvand, M., & Jahanshahi, M. (2023). A Comparative Analysis of Legal Frameworks for Data Protection in Iran and Europe. Journal of Information Technology Law, 6(2), 115–132. [in Persian]
Alai, S., & Hosseinzadeh, J. (2022). An analysis of the independence of black-box algorithms in algorithmic contracts and their legal implications. Journal of Legal Studies, 14(1), 251–278. [in Persian]
Beil, D, et al. (2019). Fairness and bias in recommender systems. ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency, 4.
Bernal, (2014). Data gathering, surveillance and human rights: Recasting the debate. Journal of Cyber Policy, 1(2), 13–29.
European Commission. (2020c). White Paper on Artificial Intelligence: A European approach to excellence and trust. Publications Office of the European Union.
European Commission. (2021). Proposal for a Regulation laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence. https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/proposal-regulation-laying-down-harmonised-rules-artificial-intelligence
European Parliament. (2020). Ethical implications of AI: Discrimination and bias. EU Publications.
European Parliament. (2020). Regulation on the use of artificial intelligence in the EU. Official Journal of the European Union.
European Parliament. (2025). EU AI Act: First regulation on artificial intelligence. https://www.europarl.europa.eu/topics/en/article/20230601STO93804/eu-ai-act-first-regulation-on-artificial-intelligence
Exabeam. (2025). The intersection of GDPR and AI and 6 compliance best practices. https://www.exabeam.com/explainers/gdpr-compliance/the-intersection-of-gdpr-and-ai-and-6-compliance-best-practices/
Floridi, L, et al. (2018). AI4People—An ethical framework for a good AI society: Opportunities, risks, principles, and recommendations. Minds and Machines, 28(4), 689–707.
Guszcza, J., Mahoney, S., & Laskowski, N. (2020). Designing AI responsibly: Principles and practices for ethical implementation. Journal of Business Ethics, 167(1), 180–195.
Herlocker, J. L., Konstan, J. A., Terveen, L. G., & Riedl, J. T. (2004). Evaluating collaborative filtering recommender systems. ACM Transactions on Information Systems, 22(1), 5–53.
Jannach, D., Zanker, M., Felfernig, A., & Friedrich, G. (2010). Recommender systems: An introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Kingston, J. K. C. (2023). Artificial Intelligence and Legal Responsibility (S. Solhchi & K. Biglarbeigi, Trans.). Legal Civilization, (18), Special Issue on Artificial Intelligence. [in Persian]
Lops, de Gemmis, M., & Semeraro, G. (2011). Content-based recommender systems: State of the art and trends. In F. Ricci, L. Rokach, B. Shapira, & B. Kantor (Eds.), Recommender systems handbook (73–105). Springer.
Magrani, F., Dignum, V., & van de Poel, I. (2019). Value-sensitive design and artificial intelligence: Principles and practices. AI & Society, 34(1), 128–235
Magrani, M. (2014). Information filtering and recommender systems. Academic Press.
Milano, S., et al. (2019). Ethical challenges in recommender systems. Journal of AI Ethics, 3(1), 5-15.
Milano, S., Mittelstadt, B., & Floridi, L. (2019). Reassessing the GDPR’s impact on automated decision-making. Ethics and Information Technology, 21(3), 15–21.
Monteiro, J. (2018). Understanding the right to explanation in data protection law. Privacy & Data Protection Journal, 10(1), 12–13.
Mulholland, & Frajhof, J. (2019). Privacy and discrimination risks in profiling. Information Systems Frontiers, 21(2), 269–280.
Nadee, K. (2016). Data preprocessing for recommender systems: A comprehensive survey. International Journal of Computer Applications, 975(16), 16–23.
Parsa, N. (2025). Inefficiency of existing insurance regulations in accidents arising from the autonomy of artificial intelligence (A case study of fully autonomous vehicles). Journal of Legal Studies, 16(4), 75–108. [in Persian]
Privacy International. (2018). Surveillance and the right to privacy. Privacy International Report.
Raza, S., et al. (2024). A comprehensive review of recommender systems: Transitioning from theory to practice. arXiv preprint, arXiv:2407.13699. https://arxiv.org/html/2407.13699v1
Reinhold, J., & Müller, O. (2021). The EU AI Act and high-risk AI systems compliance. Springer.
Rezaei-Mehr, F., & Dadkhah, C. (2023). A Time- and Trust-Based Recommender System Using Graph-Based Community Detection. Information Technology and Artificial Intelligence, 12(46), 327–360. [in Persian]
Robati Anarki, M, & Riahi, N. (2023). An Evolutionary Method for Improving Algorithm Selection in Collaborative Filtering Recommender Systems. Signal and Data Processing, 20(1), 59–78. Khajeh Nasir al-Din Toosi Research Institute for Advanced Technologies. [in Persian]
Sharma, A., Cosley, D., & Lam, S. K. (2021). The role of explainability in trust and user engagement with recommender systems. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems, 11(2), 67–89.
Silva, S. (2020). Behavioral analytics and fairness in automated decision-making. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 28(2), 208–215.
Souza, L., Reis, J., & Silva (2021). User rights and the challenges of algorithmic transparency. Journal of Information Rights, 5(4), 470–485.
Tejeda-Lorente, Á, et al. (2018). Transparency in recommender systems. ACM RecSys Workshop on Algorithm Transparency and Accountability.
Van Ooijen, C., & Vrabec, K. (2018). Strengthening data subject rights under the GDPR. International Data Privacy Law, 8(2), 89–102.
WP29 (Article 29 Working Party). (2014). Guidelines on transparency under the GDPR. European Commission.
WP29 (Article 29 Working Party). (2017). Guidelines on automated individual decision-making and profiling. European Commission.
WP29 (Article 29 Working Party). (2018). Guidelines on automated individual decision-making and profiling for the purposes of Regulation 2016/679. European Data Protection Board.
Yazdanpanahi, B., & Mosallinejad, A. (2016). Application of Recommender Systems in E-Commerce. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Computer, Electrical and Electronics Engineering (pp. 45–50). [in Persian]
Zhang, S., Yao, L., Sun, A., & Tay, Y. (2020). Deep learning-based recommender system: A survey and new perspectives. ACM Computing Surveys, 52(1), 217–221.