SciTransfer
Organization

NOMOTIKA SRL

Italian legal-tech SME specialising in ICT law, privacy-by-design, and digital rights governance for IoT, AI, and eHealth systems.

Legal technology consultancydigitalITSMENo active H2020 projectsThin data (2/5)
H2020 projects
2
As coordinator
0
Total EC funding
Unique partners
35
What they do

Their core work

NOMOTIKA SRL is a small Italian legal-technology consultancy based in Rivoli that specialises in the legal and regulatory dimensions of digital technologies — particularly ICT law, privacy regulation, and the rights frameworks governing connected and data-driven systems. Their work sits at the intersection of law and computer science: they contribute legal expertise to interdisciplinary research consortia studying how existing and emerging legislation applies to IoT ecosystems, eHealth platforms, algorithmic decision-making, and digital commerce. Rather than building technology themselves, they provide the legal intelligence that helps research teams and technology developers understand compliance, rights, and governance obligations. Their participation in MSCA doctoral training networks suggests they also engage in knowledge transfer and training alongside applied research.

Core expertise

What they specialise in

ICT law and digital regulationprimary
2 projects

Both MIREL and LAST-JD-RIoE centre on legal frameworks for digital systems — the former on computational legal reasoning, the latter on rights in the Internet of Everything.

Privacy-by-design and data protectionprimary
1 project

LAST-JD-RIoE explicitly lists privacy-by-design and human rights of the internet as core keywords, indicating substantive legal expertise in data protection architecture.

Legal informatics and legal text miningsecondary
1 project

MIREL (2016–2019) focused specifically on mining and reasoning with legal texts, positioning NOMOTIKA at the boundary of computational linguistics and law.

Bioethics and eHealth lawemerging
1 project

LAST-JD-RIoE keywords include bioethics and eHealth alongside IoT law, suggesting growing engagement with healthcare data regulation and medical ethics.

IPR, eCommerce, and eGovernment lawsecondary
1 project

LAST-JD-RIoE covers IPR in IoE, eCommerce, and eGovernment, reflecting a broad applied digital law practice beyond pure academic research.

Evolution & trajectory

How they've shifted over time

Early focus
Legal text mining and reasoning
Recent focus
IoT law and digital rights

NOMOTIKA's first H2020 engagement (MIREL, 2016–2019) was methodological — focused on the computational challenge of automatically processing and reasoning over legal texts, a field at the boundary of NLP and legal theory. Their second project (LAST-JD-RIoE, 2019–2023) marks a clear pivot from method to substance: the keywords shift entirely toward the legal rights, ethical norms, and regulatory questions raised by IoT, big data, and AI-driven platforms. This trajectory suggests the organisation moved from building tools for legal analysis toward applying legal expertise to the governance challenges that emerged as IoT and algorithmic systems became mainstream regulatory concerns.

NOMOTIKA is moving from computational legal informatics toward substantive digital rights law — making them an increasingly relevant partner for any consortium dealing with AI regulation, IoT governance, GDPR compliance, or the ethical dimensions of data-intensive systems.

Collaboration profile

How they like to work

Role: specialist_contributorReach: European16 countries collaborated

NOMOTIKA has never held a coordinator role — they consistently join as participant or partner, acting as a specialist contributor within larger research consortia. Their presence in MSCA schemes (RISE and ITN) indicates comfort operating inside complex, multi-country networks built around researcher mobility and training rather than technology development. With 35 unique partners from just 2 projects, they are plugged into dense consortium structures, suggesting they are valued as a niche legal expert that broader tech-led teams bring in to cover regulatory and rights dimensions.

NOMOTIKA has engaged with 35 unique consortium partners across 16 countries through just two projects — an unusually high density that reflects the large, internationally distributed nature of MSCA doctoral networks. Their network is European in composition, consistent with the MSCA programme's focus on intra-EU and associated-country researcher mobility.

Why partner with them

What sets them apart

NOMOTIKA occupies a rare niche as a private Italian SME bringing ICT law and digital rights expertise into academic MSCA research consortia — a role typically filled by universities or public research institutes. Their value to consortium builders is precisely that they are a practitioner organisation: they translate legal compliance and regulatory risk into terms that technology developers and scientists can act on. For any project touching IoT data governance, AI accountability, eHealth regulation, or cross-border digital rights under EU law, they offer the private-sector legal perspective that purely academic partners cannot.

Notable projects

Highlights from their portfolio

  • LAST-JD-RIoE
    A Marie Skłodowska-Curie doctoral training network on the legal rights of the Internet of Everything — one of the few MSCA projects explicitly integrating law, bioethics, and IoT governance into a joint doctorate programme.
  • MIREL
    An early and specialised project on automated mining and reasoning over legal texts, placing NOMOTIKA at the frontier of computational legal informatics before the field became mainstream.
Cross-sector capabilities
health (eHealth law and medical data regulation)government and public administration (eGovernment and digital public services law)AI and algorithmic systems (predictive algorithm governance and accountability)
Analysis note: Profile is based on only 2 projects with no EC funding figures and no website for supplementary context. The keyword set is exclusively from the second project; MIREL carries no tagged keywords, limiting early-period analysis. The legal-technology specialisation is consistent and credible, but depth of expertise claims should be treated as indicative rather than definitive.