TLPC student attorneys and Colorado Law 2Ls Kristine Roach, Trey Reed, and Jay Gurney recently finalized a white paper on municipal drone policy. The paper outlines some of the many drone applications for hobbyists, businesses, researchers and governments, while considering disruption and intrusion concerns.
Given these competing concerns and interests, the paper outlines different approaches to municipal drone policies and regulations, including the prospect of federal preemption. The paper also analyzes 4th Amendment limitations on municipal drone surveillance and open records requirements implicated by municipal drone use. While the analysis is most pertinent to Boulder, the drone policy considerations are intended to be applicable to municipalities across the United States.
Our thanks to Prof. Deborah Cantrell, Prof. Ann England, Prof. Margot Kaminski, Tom Carr, Boulder City Attorney, Julia Richman, Boulder Chief Information and Analytics Officer, and Cory Dixon, IRISS Chief Technologist for their help in the development of this paper.
(by Jay Gurney, Colorado Law 2L)
“She sees you when you’re sleeping
She knows when you’re awake . . .”
Smart Home devices like Amazon’s Alexa or Google Home are increasingly prevalent in American homes. Users prime the device by uttering a trigger word, in Amazon’s case, “Alexa.” Upon activation Alexa lights up, listens to, records, and responds to user’s requests.
These devices are often asked to stream music, sync to other “smart home” devices or answer questions varying from “What is the weather?” to “What is the net worth of Cardi B?” After processing a user’s Spotify request, for example, Alexa’s light turns off—signaling it is not recording—while the music continues.
As with other technological products, the data gathered from smart home requests can be provided to third parties such as advertisers. It can also be used to tailor and improve user experiences. Furthermore, the data acts as inputs for complex artificial intelligence and machine learning algorithms, creating “smarter” products.
Continue reading “Last Week 69: The Privacy Bargain”
(by Emily Caditz, Colorado Law 2L)
Last month, the world tuned into the XXIII Olympic Winter Games held in Pyeongchang, South Korea. The Olympics is one of the world’s most celebrated sports competitions and gives viewers from all around the world the opportunity to watch the most talented athletes from their home country compete head-to-head against athletes from other participating nations.
Generally, the public has watched television, listened to the radio, or read the newspaper to keep up with Olympic coverage. In Pyeongchang, however, Intel partnered with the Olympic Broadcasting Services to provide Olympic viewers with a different Olympic viewing experience: virtual reality (“VR”). Continue reading “Last Week in Tech Policy #68B: The Olympics in Virtual Reality”
(by Kristine Roach, Colorado Law 2L)
The right to erasure, colloquially known as the right be forgotten, has been adopted by the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). It gives individuals the right to have their personal data erased:
- Where the personal data is no longer necessary in relation to the purpose for which it was originally collected/processed.
- When the individual withdraws consent.
- When the individual objects to the processing and there is no overriding legitimate interest for continuing the processing.
- The personal data was unlawfully processed (i.e. otherwise in breach of the GDPR).
- The personal data has to be erased in order to comply with a legal obligation.
- The personal data is processed in relation to the offer of information society services to a child.
However, the right is not absolute and the requestee can refuse to erase data of the requestor for the following reasons:
- to exercise the right of freedom of expression and information;
- to comply with a legal obligation for the performance of a public interest task or exercise of official authority.
- for public health purposes in the public interest;
- archiving purposes in the public interest, scientific research historical research or statistical purposes; or
- the exercise or defense of legal claims.
Continue reading “Last Week in Tech Policy #68A: Who Needs the Right to be Forgotten?”
(by Galen Pospisil, Colorado Law 2L)
For most of the 20th Century, a single company provided telecommunications services in the United States. Under the slogan “one policy, one system, universal service,” AT&T provided local and long distance telephone service at uniform prices to almost every home and business in America.
Today, hundreds of companies provide telecommunications services under individual pricing policies. And yet, the goal of universal service remains. Policymakers face the challenge of ensuring that all Americans have access to telecommunications services without the intricate system of regulated rates that the Bell System relied upon.
Continue reading “Last Week in Tech Policy #67: One Policy, Universal Service?”
Today the TLPC filed three reply comments to the U.S. Copyright Office as part of the seventh triennial Section 1201 proceeding. Under Section 1201 of the DMCA, parties may petition the Copyright Office every three years to create or modify exemptions when the DMCA adversely affects noninfringing activities. Opponents filed public comments in February responding to the initial long form comments filed in December.
Continue reading “TLPC Files Three DMCA Reply Comments for Disability Services, Multimedia E-Books, and Security Research”
Mergers are often met with skepticism, as intuitively there are less players in the game after the transaction is complete. Due to the large infrastructure costs and high value of network effects, mergers play a significant role in the telecommunications industry. Pooling resources together can create efficiencies, but there is a fear of harmful effects on consumers- whether by an increase in price or a decline in product quality.
Mergers can be broken up into two categories, vertical and horizontal. A vertical merger occurs between two companies that operate at separate steps of production, typically where transactions costs have driven integration. In horizontal mergers, parties operate in the same market and the combination will eliminate a competitor.
Continue reading “Last Week in Tech Policy #66: The Fate of Vertical Mergers”
(by Angel Antkers & Susan Miller, Colorado Law 2Ls—cross-posted from the Authors Alliance blog)
The fair use doctrine allows the unlicensed, unpermissioned use of a copyrighted work in certain situations. It functions, in part, to safeguard First Amendment interests in freedom of speech. But as the world moves toward more digital authorship and online content, fair use is encountering various obstacles.
Continue reading “Fair Use and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act”
(by John Schoppert, Colorado Law 3L)
On Friday, February 16th, Special Counsel Robert Mueller announced the indictment of 13 Russian nationals on charges of conspiracy to defraud the United States. The announcement serves as the latest development in Mueller’s investigation into potential collusion between the Kremlin and the Trump campaign during the 2016 presidential election. More concretely, it provides further evidence that Russian operatives played a critical role in disrupting the 2016 election atop near-unanimous consensus among American intelligence agencies.
The indictments track the work of a so-called “troll factory” located in St. Petersburg, which designed and deployed divisive content over social media platforms to encourage collaboration within extreme groups online. More specifically, Russian operatives stole the identities of American citizens, posed as political activists, created posts affiliated with extreme ideologies and paid individuals to locally organize protests and rallies. While many debate over whether the Russians pushed for any one candidate over the other—as opposed to creating chaos more generally—based on internal documents, it appears that disruptive efforts were aimed at supporting the campaigns of Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders, and undermining that of Hillary Clinton.
Continue reading “Last Week in Tech Policy #65: Fake News, Real Concerns”
(by Casey Warsh, Colorado Law 2L)
Human beings are unique compared to all other species. We learn, communicate, and navigate the earth in ways that are distinct from most other living things. What distinguishes human beings from other species is our DNA, a complex set of instructions that dictates the way our cells, tissue, muscle, and bone come together to create our human form. Despite its complex make up, the mystery behind the double helix is almost a notion of the past.
DNA testing is now accessible to the masses through providers like Helix, 23andMe, and AncestryDNA. Of course, DNA testing has its place when performed by doctors for medical purposes, but should we be engaging in genetic testing from the comfort of our own living rooms? Consumers have responded with a resounding yes. 1.5 million people on Black Friday alone shipped off DNA samples to AncestryDNA for testing.
Continue reading “Last Week in Tech Policy #64: A Glimpse Into Your Future and Your Past: The Implications of At Home Genetic Testing”