Search results

[…] Cir. 2010), aff’d sub nom. United States v. Jones, 132 S. Ct. 945 (2012). 37. Jones, 132 S. Ct. at 956 (Sotomayor, J., concurring). 38. Id. at 957. 39. Id. at 964 (Alito, J., concurring). SLOBOGIN FINALIZED 3 (DO NOT DELETE ) 12/19/2012 6:26 PM 2012] MAKING THE MOST OF JONES 9 2. If […]

Schwartz_EU-US Privacy Collision

[…] the one hand, it produced great fortunes and technological innovation that made what had been impossible commonplace. These new innovations included factories, steam engines, railroads, cars, airplanes, cheap textiles, and shaped the modern world into a form that we (or at least our parents) could recognize. But on the other hand, the industrial revolution […]

[…] 154 (citing the example of Google voluntarily providing data to the NSA). 438 . See id. at 161 –62 (noting that the government sought user information from airlines after the September 11th attacks and from hotels and car rental agenc ies in 2003 to thwart terrorist threats against Las Vegas). 86 70 WASH. & […]

[…] such$ as$ IP$ addresses$ and$ the$ to/from$information$of$e`mail$addresses$is$not$protected$by$the$Fourth$Amendment).$139$See( generally$Orin$ S.$ Kerr,$The( Fourth( Amendment( and( New( Technologies:(Constitutional( Myths( and( the( Case( for( Caution,$ 102$ Mich.$ L.$ Rev.$ 801,$ 805,$ 857`87$(2004).$140$480$U.S.$340$(1987).$141$See(id.$at$343.$142$See(id.$at$355.$ 31$$evidence$ must$ rely$ on$ the$ Fourth$ Amendment.$ $ But$Krull$complicates$efforts$ to$ clarify$ Fourth$ Amendment$ law$ through$ suppression$ motions$by$ allowing$ courts$ to$ deny$ motions$ to$ suppress$ under$ the$ […]

[…] people’s behavior in a predictable way without forbidding any options or significantly changing their economic incentives. To count as a nudge, the intervention must be easy and cheap to avoid. Nudges are not mandates.” Id. 07 – Hartzog Article.docx (Do Not Delete) 6/17/2013 1:55 PM 412 W ASHINGTON LAW REVIEW eople believe defaults convey […]

[…] corporate privacy practices. 222 These concurrent developments brought business uses of consumer information under increased scrutiny, and, importantly, re -oriented the inquiry around questions of fairness and alignment with consumers’ expectations. This evolving understanding of privacy contrasts starkly with the static procedural requirements mandated by sectoral privacy statutes. 223 Furthermore, it reflects the normative […]

[…] (arguing that liberalism could exclude some conduct on grounds that it permanently destroyed the capacity for rational autonomy and distinguishing permanently from temporarily destroying such capacities). 856 857 HeinOnline — 64 Ala. L. Rev. 857 2012-2013 Alabama Law Review duty to P. But to say that P has a duty to P is also […]

[…] to the revolution caused by the Ford Model T, Johns Hopkins’ Sean Fahey declared that Big Data was important because it had “democratized” data. Today, thanks to cheap storage, excess computational power, and open source initiatives, enterprises of any scale can work with large amounts of data, eliminating the specialized equipment and significant capital […]

[…] an$ advisory$ board$ comprised$ of$ leaders$ from$industry,$academia,$law$and$advocacy$groups.$!! !!!!!!Overextended:! Jurisdiction! and! Applicable! Law! under! the!EU! General! Data! Protection!Regulation!!The! proposed! EU!General!Data! Protection!Regulation!(“GDPR”)1!re9defines!EU! privacy!jurisdiction!and! applicable! law.!Article! 3(1)! of! the! GDPR,!which! deals! with! the! authority! to!regulate! a! controller! or! processor! located!within! the! European! Union!and!addresses!locally9based!actors,!is!uncontroversial!in!its!assertion!of!authority.!The!introduction!of!a!new!”one9stop9shop”! concept,! with! a! primary! regulator,!to!augment! this! “country! of! origin”9based!approach!should!help!provide!legal!certainty!for!organizations!operating!in!Europe.!!!Article! 3(2)! of! the! GDPR! extends! […]