Course pre-requisite(s): background in law, philosophy, neuroscience, technology studies or related areas.

Course Overview

This intensive two-week course explores the emerging field of AI-neurotechnologies and the protection of the mind in the digital age. By addressing both regional and international perspectives, the course provides students with a critical understanding of
how AI-neurotechnologies intersect with human rights, consumer law, bioethics, and global governance. Special attention will be given to pioneering developments in Chile, Brazil, the European Union, and the United States, as well as international frameworks proposed by UNESCO, the Council of Europe, and the OECD. Through comparative analysis, case studies, and interactive workshops, students will develop the ability to assess regulatory approaches, identify legal gaps, and propose normative solutions for safeguarding cognitive liberty, mental integrity, decisional autonomy and other neurorights.

Learning Outcomes

By the end of this course, students should be able to:
i. identify and explain the core concepts of neurodata, mental privacy, and neurorights;
ii. critically analyze national legal frameworks (e.g., Chilean constitutional amendment, GDPR, LGPD, U.S. constitutional debates) considering neurotechnological challenges;
iii. evaluate international regulatory initiatives and soft-law instruments addressing mental protection;
iv. compare strengths and weaknesses of different governance models;
v. formulate legal and ethical arguments concerning liability, consumer protection, and human rights in the context of neurotechnologies;
vi. propose innovative regulatory solutions to address gaps in the protection of the mind at national and global levels.

Course Content

The course will cover the following topics:
i. Introduction to Neurodata and Neurorights – definitions, scope, risks, and ethical challenges;
ii. National Perspectives – Chile (constitutional neuro-rights), Brazil (LGPD and digital consumer law), EU (GDPR, AI Act), U.S. debates;
iii. Global Frameworks – UNESCO ethics recommendations, Council of Europe conventions, OECD principles, and IEEE standards;
iv. Liability and Governance – civil liability for neurotechnology harms, consumer protection, mental integrity, and decisional autonomy;
v. Future Challenges – neuro-enhancement, neuro-marketing, neuro-surveillance, and the balance between innovation and fundamental rights.
What the course is not about: the course will not provide medical or technical training in neuroscience or neuroengineering. Its focus is on legal, ethical, and policy dimensions of AI-neurotechnologies in the consumer market.

Instructional Method

The course combines lectures, interactive seminars, and small-group workshops. Instructional methods include:
i. Lectures introducing theoretical frameworks and comparative perspectives.
ii. Case study analysis of jurisprudence and legislative initiatives.
iii. Seminars with group discussions on ethical and regulatory dilemmas.
iv. Workshops simulating policymaking and drafting legal proposals.

Required Course Materials

Core Readings
• Selected academic articles and book chapters;
• Key documents: UNESCO Ethics of Neurotechnology Report, OECD AI Principles, Chilean constitutional text on neurorights, Brazilian Bill 4/25, EU AI Act excerpts, MIND Act, and relevant case law.
Recommended Readings
• Baselga-Garriga, C., Rodriguez, P., & Yuste, R. (2022). Neuro rights: A human rights solution to ethical issues of neurotechnologies. In Protecting the mind: Challenges in law, neuroprotection, and neurorights (pp. 157–161). Cham: Springer International Publishing.
• Bublitz, J. C. (2022). Novel neurorights: From nonsense to substance. Neuroethics, 15(1), 7.
• Doneda, D., & Mucelin, G. Cognitive liberty and digital consumer law (forthcoming).
• Hertz, N. (2023). Neurorights – Do we need new human rights? A reconsideration of the right to freedom of thought. Neuroethics, 16(1), 5.
• Ienca, M. (2021). On neurorights. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 15, 701258.
• Ienca, M., & Andorno, R. Towards new human rights in the age of neuroscience and neurotechnology.
• International Bioethics Committee. (2022). Ethical issues of neurotechnology: Report, adopted in December 2021. UNESCO. https://doi.org/10.54678/QNKB6229
• Ligthart, S., Ienca, M., Meynen, G., Molnar-Gabor, F., Andorno, R., Bublitz, C.,... & Kellmeyer, P. (2023). Minding rights: Mapping ethical and legal foundations of ‘neurorights’. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics, 32(4), 461–481.
• Martins, G. M., Mucelin, G., & d’Aquino, L. S. (2024). Inteligência artificial e pensamento como bem juridicamente tutelável: Neurodireito fundamental à liberdade cognitiva. Revista Luso-Brasileira de Direito do Consumo, 1(1).
• Mucelin, G., & Scalzilli, R. (2024). Neurodireitos e ultravulnerabilidade. Revista de Direito do Consumidor, 33(153), 225–256. Revista dos Tribunais.
• OECD. (2025, July). Neurotechnology toolkit: To support policymakers in implementing the OECD Recommendation on Responsible Innovation in Neurotechnology. OECD. https://www.oecd.org/sti/emerging-tech/neurotechtoolkit.pdf
• Yuste, R. et al. Four ethical priorities for neurotechnologies and AI.
• Yuste, R., Genser, J., & Herrmann, S. (2021). It’s time for neuro-rights. Horizons, 18, 154–164.
Classroom requirements: the course space must be equipped with multimedia resources to support slides, films, group discussions, and other interactive activities.

Assessment

Student performance will be evaluated based on:
i. Participation and engagement (20%) – active involvement in seminars and workshops.
ii. Case study analysis (30%) – oral presentations analyzing legal frameworks or selected cases.
iii. Final policy proposal (50%) – a 3,000–3,500 words essay or policy brief addressing a key issue in neurorights and AI neurotechnologies (in groups).
The purpose of evaluation is both formative and summative: to provide continuous feedback, guide student learning, and ensure fair grading aligned with course outcomes