Study of Fundamental Rights Limitations for Online Enforcement through Self-Regulation

The use of self-regulatory or privatized enforcement measures in the online environment can give rise to various legal issues that affect the fundamental rights of internet users. First, privatized enforcement by internet services, without state involvement, can interfere with the effective exercise of fundamental rights by internet users. Such interference may, on occasion, be disproportionate, but there are legal complexities involved in determining the precise circumstances in which this is the case. This is because, for instance, the private entities can themselves claim protection under the fundamental rights framework (e.g. the protection of property and the freedom to conduct business). Second, the role of public authorities in the development of self-regulation in view of certain public policy objectives can become problematic, but has to be carefully assessed. The fundamental rights framework puts limitations on government regulation that interferes with fundamental rights. Essentially, such limitations involve the (negative) obligation for States not to interfere with fundamental rights. Interferences have to be prescribed by law, pursue a legitimate aim and be necessary in a democratic society. At the same time, however, States are also under the (positive) obligation to take active measures in order to ensure the effective exercise of fundamental rights. In other words, States must do more than simply refrain from interference. These positive obligations are of specific interest in the context of private ordering impact on fundamental rights, but tend to be abstract and hard to operationalize in specific legal constellations. This study’s central research question is: What legal limitations follow from the fundamental rights framework for self-regulation and privatized enforcement online? It examines the circumstances in which State responsibility can be engaged as a result of selfregulation or privatized enforcement online. Part I of the study provides an overview and analysis of the relevant elements in the European and international fundamental rights framework that place limitations on privatized enforcement. Part II gives an assessment of specific instances of self-regulation or other instances of privatized enforcement in light of these elements

A framework based on Gaussian mixture models and Kalman filters for the segmentation and tracking of anomalous events in shipboard video

Anomalous indications in monitoring equipment on board U.S. Navy vessels must be handled in a timely manner to prevent catastrophic system failure. The development of sensor data analysis techniques to assist a ship\u27s crew in monitoring machinery and summon required ship-to-shore assistance is of considerable benefit to the Navy. In addition, the Navy has a large interest in the development of distance support technology in its ongoing efforts to reduce manning on ships. In this thesis, algorithms have been developed for the detection of anomalous events that can be identified from the analysis of monochromatic stationary ship surveillance video streams. The specific anomalies that we have focused on are the presence and growth of smoke and fire events inside the frames of the video stream. The algorithm consists of the following steps. First, a foreground segmentation algorithm based on adaptive Gaussian mixture models is employed to detect the presence of motion in a scene. The algorithm is adapted to emphasize gray-level characteristics related to smoke and fire events in the frame. Next, shape discriminant features in the foreground are enhanced using morphological operations. Following this step, the anomalous indication is tracked between frames using Kalman filtering. Finally, gray level shape and motion features corresponding to the anomaly are subjected to principal component analysis and classified using a multilayer perceptron neural network. The algorithm is exercised on 68 video streams that include the presence of anomalous events (such as fire and smoke) and benign/nuisance events (such as humans walking the field of view). Initial results show that the algorithm is successful in detecting anomalies in video streams, and is suitable for application in shipboard environments

State of the art 2015: a literature review of social media intelligence capabilities for counter-terrorism

Overview This paper is a review of how information and insight can be drawn from open social media sources. It focuses on the specific research techniques that have emerged, the capabilities they provide, the possible insights they offer, and the ethical and legal questions they raise. These techniques are considered relevant and valuable in so far as they can help to maintain public safety by preventing terrorism, preparing for it, protecting the public from it and pursuing its perpetrators. The report also considers how far this can be achieved against the backdrop of radically changing technology and public attitudes towards surveillance. This is an updated version of a 2013 report paper on the same subject, State of the Art. Since 2013, there have been significant changes in social media, how it is used by terrorist groups, and the methods being developed to make sense of it.  The paper is structured as follows: Part 1 is an overview of social media use, focused on how it is used by groups of interest to those involved in counter-terrorism. This includes new sections on trends of social media platforms; and a new section on Islamic State (IS). Part 2 provides an introduction to the key approaches of social media intelligence (henceforth ‘SOCMINT’) for counter-terrorism. Part 3 sets out a series of SOCMINT techniques. For each technique a series of capabilities and insights are considered, the validity and reliability of the method is considered, and how they might be applied to counter-terrorism work explored. Part 4 outlines a number of important legal, ethical and practical considerations when undertaking SOCMINT work

The CLEAR 2007 Evaluation

Abstract. This paper is a summary of the 2007 CLEAR Evaluation on the Classification of Events, Activities, and Relationships which took place in early 2007 and culminated with a two-day workshop held in May 2007. CLEAR is an international effort to evaluate systems for the perception of people, their activities, and interactions. In its second year, CLEAR has developed a following from the computer vision and speech communities, spawning a more multimodal perspective of research eval-uation. This paper describes the evaluation tasks, including metrics and databases used, and discusses the results achieved. The CLEAR 2007 tasks comprise person, face, and vehicle tracking, head pose estimation, as well as acoustic scene analysis. These include subtasks performed in the visual, acoustic and audio-visual domains for meeting room and surveillance data.

Surveillance Technologies and Constitutional Law

This review focuses on government use of technology to observe, collect, or record potential criminal activity in real-time, as contrasted with “transaction surveillance” that involves government efforts to access already-existing records and exploit Big Data, topics that have been the focus of previous reviews (Brayne 2018, Ridgeway 2018). Even so limited, surveillance technologies come in many guises, including closed-circuit television, automated license plate and facial readers, aerial cameras, and GPS tracking. Also classifiable as surveillance technology are devices such as thermal and electromagnetic imagers that can “see” through walls and clothing. Finally, surveillance includes wiretapping and other forms of communication interception. The following discussion briefly examines the limited evidence we have about the prevalence and effectiveness of these technologies and then describes the law governing surveillance, focusing principally on constitutional doctrine, and how it might-—and might not-—limit use of these technologies in the future

Illusion of Justice: Human Rights Abuses in US Terrorism Prosecutions

Terrorism entails horrifying acts, often resulting in terrible losses of human life. Governments have a duty under international human rights law to take reasonable measures to protect people within their jurisdictions from acts of violence. When crimes are committed, governments also have a duty to carry out impartial investigations, to identify those responsible, and to prosecute suspects before independent courts. These obligations require ensuring fairness and due process in investigations and prosecutions, as well as humane treatment of those in custody