Going Rogue: Mobile Research Applications and the Right to Privacy

This Article investigates whether nonsectoral state laws may serve as a viable source of privacy and security standards for mobile health research participants and other health data subjects until new federal laws are created or enforced. In particular, this Article (1) catalogues and analyzes the nonsectoral data privacy, security, and breach notification statutes of all fifty states and the District of Columbia; (2) applies these statutes to mobile-app-mediated health research conducted by independent scientists, citizen scientists, and patient researchers; and (3) proposes substantive amendments to state law that could help protect the privacy and security of all health data subjects, including mobile-app-mediated health research participants

Assisted reproductive technology in the USA: is more regulation needed?

The regulation of assisted reproductive technologies is a contested area. Some jurisdictions, such as the UK and a number of Australian states, have comprehensive regulation of most aspects of assisted reproductive technologies; others, such as the USA, have taken a more piecemeal approach and rely on professional guidelines and the general regulation of medical practice to govern this area. It will be argued that such a laissez-faire approach is inadequate for regulating the complex area of assisted reproductive technologies. Two key examples, reducing multiple births and registers of donors and offspring, will be considered to illustrate the effects of the regulatory structure of assisted reproductive technologies in the USA on practice. It will be concluded that the regulatory structure in the USA fails to provide an adequate mechanism for ensuring the ethical and safe conduct of ART services, and that more comprehensive regulation is required

Deceptive Practices 2.0: Legal and Policy Responses

Reviews recent online misinformation campaigns and "cyberfraud" to suppress voting and skew elections, mainly in minority communities. Examines whether federal and state laws can sufficiently deter and punish perpetrators. Makes policy recommendations

Anonymity In Cyberspace: Judicial and Legislative Regulations

Historically, the scope of constitutional protections for fundamental rights has evolved to keep pace with new social norms and new technology. Internet speech is on the rise. The First Amendment protects an individual’s right to speak anonymously, but to what extent does it protect a right to anonymous online speech? This question is difficult because the government must balance the fundamental nature of speech rights with the potential dangers associated with anonymous online speech, including defamation, invasion of privacy, and intentional infliction of emotional distress. While lower courts have held that there is a right to anonymous online speech, they have not yet adopted a common standard. Meanwhile, to simplify the confusion and protect the rights of those who are injured by anonymous online speech, state legislatures are seeking to restrict some or all anonymous online-speech rights. This Note explores the history of speech regulation, with a special focus on the history of anonymous online speech, and the justifications for protecting speech rights. It then discusses the judicial standards under which courts require disclosure of anonymous speakers and the current legislative proposals to restrict speech rights. Next, this Note suggests that legislatures should not restrict speech rights, and should instead expand the remedies available to those injured by harmful speech. This Note also suggests that courts should adopt a summary judgment standard that requires plaintiffs to provide evidence demonstrating that the anonymous speaker has committed a tort before requiring the speaker to disclose his or her identity

Catalyzing Privacy Law

The United States famously lacks a comprehensive federal data privacy law. In the past year, however, over half the states have proposed broad privacy bills or have established task forces to propose possible privacy legislation. Meanwhile, congressional committees are holding hearings on multiple privacy bills. What is catalyzing this legislative momentum? Some believe that Europe’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), which came into force in 2018, is the driving factor. But with the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) which took effect in January 2020, California has emerged as an alternate contender in the race to set the new standard for privacy.Our close comparison of the GDPR and California’s privacy law reveals that the California law is not GDPR-lite: it retains a fundamentally American approach to information privacy. Reviewing the literature on regulatory competition, we argue that California, not Brussels, is catalyzing privacy law across the United States. And what is happening is not a simple story of powerful state actors. It is more accurately characterized as the result of individual networked norm entrepreneurs, influenced and even empowered by data globalization. Our study helps explain the puzzle of why Europe’s data privacy approach failed to spur US legislation for over two decades. Finally, our study answers critical questions of practical interest to individuals—who will protect my privacy?—and to businesses—whose rules should I follow

Success of Implementation of Computer Crime Act (UU Ite No.11 2008) (a Case Study in the Higher Education Institution in Indonesia)

Computer crime rate grow rapidly along with the development of the digital world that has touched almost all aspects of human life. Institutions of higher education cannot be separated from the problem of computer crime activities. The paper analyses the implementation of Indonesia Computer Crime Act (UU ITE NO.11 2008) in the Higher Education Institution in Indonesia. It aims to investigate the level of computer crimes that occurred in the higher education institution environment and the act (UU ITE 11, 2008) successfully applied to prevent the crime that would arise. In this research, the analysis using Descriptive Statistics, Binary logistic regression. This paper also describes the success implementation of the Information System Security Policy (ISSP) as a computer crime prevention policy in higher education institution in Indonesia. In factor of act, clarity of objectives and purpose of the UU ITE 11, 2008 was low, the communication and socialization activities are still low to the society especially to the higher education institution, moreover the control process has been running on UU ITE 11, 2008, but at a low level