Civil liability of digital platforms for algorithmic transparency in the silicon society

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.23925/ddem.v.1.n.16.72513

Keywords:

Digital platforms, Algorithmic transparency, Silicon Society, Responsibility, Accountability

Abstract

Digital platforms have become central elements of contemporary life, exerting a profound influence on various aspects of society, including the way we consume information, make financial decisions, and participate in political processes. The opacity of algorithmic systems poses significant challenges for public and regulatory understanding of how automated decisions are made, which criteria are used, and what impacts these decisions may have on individuals and groups. The lack of transparency can lead to the perpetuation of discriminatory biases, the manipulation of information, and difficulties in holding platforms accountable when their algorithms produce harmful outcomes. In this context, this article adopts a bibliographic review as its methodology, based on the analysis of scholarly literature, scientific articles, institutional reports, and national and international regulatory frameworks, in order to investigate the responsibility of digital platforms to ensure greater algorithmic transparency, examining both the challenges faced and the emerging practices adopted by companies and regulators to mitigate associated risks.

Author Biography

André Faustino, Faculdades Metropolitanas Unidas - FMU, São Paulo, SP

Professor and Lawyer. Post-doctoral degree in Philosophy from the Federal University of Santa Catarina. PhD in Law from FADISP. Master's degree in Law in the Information Society. Bachelor's degree in Law from FMU - 2007, Specialist in Real Estate Law from FMU - 2007, Bachelor's degree in Music from FAMOSP - 2010. Specialist in Civil Law from FMU - 2015. Professor of Law at the Metropolitan United Faculties (FMU). Author of the books: “Fake News: Freedom of Expression on Social Networks in the Information Society” and “Silicon Society: Artificial Intelligence and the Protection of Privacy”. Conducts research in the area of ​​Philosophy of Technology and Artificial Intelligence.

References

ANANNY, Mike; CRAWFORD, Kate. Seeing without knowing: Limitations of the transparency ideal and its application to algorithmic accountability. New Media & Society, v. 20, n. 3, p. 973–989, 2018.

BINNS, Reuben. Algorithmic accountability and public reason. Philosophy & Technology, v. 31, n. 4, p. 543–556, 2018.

BRASIL. Lei nº 12.965, de 23 de abril de 2014. Estabelece princípios, garantias, direitos e deveres para o uso da Internet no Brasil. Disponível em: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2011-2014/2014/lei/l12965.htm. Acesso em: 11 jul. 2025.

BRASIL. Lei nº 13.709, de 14 de agosto de 2018. Dispõe sobre a proteção de dados pessoais e altera a Lei nº 12.965, de 23 de abril de 2014 (Marco Civil da Internet). Disponível em: https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/_ato2015-2018/2018/lei/l13709.htm. Acesso em: 11 jul. 2025.

BRASIL. Supremo Tribunal Federal. Recurso Extraordinário (RE) 1.057.258/MG. Disponível em: https://portal.stf.jus.br/processos/detalhe.asp?incidente=5217273. Acesso em: 11 jul. 2025.

BRKAN, Maja. Do algorithms rule the world? Algorithmic decision-making and data protection in the framework of the GDPR and beyond. International Journal of Law and Information Technology, v. 27, n. 2, p. 91–121, 2019.

BURRELL, Jenna. How the machine ‘thinks’: Understanding opacity in machine learning algorithms. Big Data & Society, v. 3, n. 1, p. 1–12, 2016.

CRAWFORD, Kate; SCHULTZ, Jason. Big data and due process: Toward a framework to redress predictive privacy harms. BCL Rev., v. 55, p. 93, 2014.

CRUZ, Jefferson de Oliveira; CARVALHO, João Marcos de Oliveira; FERREIRA, Rafael Freire. A tecnologia legal baseada em inteligência artificial na tomada de decisão jurídica frente ao projeto de lei 21/2020. Diálogos & Ciência, v. 3, n. 2, p. 101-118, 2024.

DIAKOPOULOS, Nicholas. Accountability in algorithmic decision-making. Communications of the ACM, v. 59, n. 2, p. 56–62, 2016.

DONEDA, Danilo. Da privacidade à proteção de dados pessoais. Rio de Janeiro: Renovar, 2006.

EUBANKS, Virgínia. Automating inequality: How high-tech tools profile, police, and punish the poor. New York: St. Martin's Press, 2018.

FAUSTINO, André. Sociedade do silício: inteligência artificial e a proteção da intimidade. São Paulo: Editora Lura, 2023.

GILLESPIE, Tarleton. Custodians of the internet: Platforms, content moderation, and the hidden decisions that shape social media. Yale University Press, 2018.

GOODMAN, Bryce; FLAXMAN, Seth. European Union regulations on algorithmic decision- making and a "right to explanation". AI Magazine, v. 38, n. 3, p. 50–57, 2017.

MITTELSTADT, Brent Daniel. et al. The ethics of algorithms: Mapping the debate. Big Data & Society, v. 3, n. 2, p. 1–21, 2016.

O’NEIL, Cathy. Weapons of math destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy. New York: Crown Publishing, 2016.

PASQUALE, Frank. The black box society: The secret algorithms that control money and information. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2015.

SILVEIRA, Ana Cristina de Melo et al. Proteção de dados pessoais na sociedade da informação: entre dados e danos. Editora Foco, 2020.

TUFEKCI, Zeynep. Twitter and tear gas: The power and fragility of networked protest. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2017.

YEUNG, Karen. Algorithmic regulation: A critical interrogation. Regulation & Governance, v. 12, n. 4, p. 505–523, 2018.

ZUBOFF, Shoshana. The age of surveillance capitalism: The fight for a human future at the new frontier of power. New York: PublicAffairs, 2019.

Published

2026-04-08

How to Cite

Faustino, A. (2026). Civil liability of digital platforms for algorithmic transparency in the silicon society. Democratic Rights & Modern State, 1(16), 22–39. https://doi.org/10.23925/ddem.v.1.n.16.72513