Law Commons^™

Supervision Of Artificial Intelligence In The Eu And The Protection Of Privacy, Johanna Chamberlain, Jane Reichel

FIU Law Review

No abstract provided.

The Need For Curtains Of The Soul: Privacy Versus Transparency In The Instrumented World Of Algorithmic Artificial Intelligence, Michael Martin Losavio

FIU Law Review

We approach a privacy singularity in pervasive data collection and inference that may reveal all about our lives. While privacy might not yet be dead, we struggle to maintain its shield for personal autonomy. Part of this contemporary challenge comes from the massive data sets generated every day everywhere. And then the powerful analytics that reveal all. This is further challenged by efforts at data transparency that may reveal too much of one’s life. Preservation of privacy, if we deem it important enough to preserve, must have a robust set of technical and legislative implementations on collection, storage, transmission and …

Evolving Privacy Protections For Emerging Machine Learning Data Under Carpenter V. United States, Emily Nicolella

FIU Law Review

The Fourth Amendment’s third-party doctrine eliminates an individual’s reasonable expectation of privacy in information they willingly turn over to third parties. Government scrutiny of this information is not considered a search under the Fourth Amendment and is therefore not given constitutional protections. In the 2018 case Carpenter v. United States, the Supreme Court created an exception to the third-party doctrine. In Carpenter, a case involving the warrantless use of cell site location information (CSLI) in a criminal investigation, the Court held that individuals do have a reasonable expectation of privacy regarding CSLI. According to Chief Justice Roberts, despite the necessary …

The Development Of Digital Mass Surveillance In Norway: The Emergence Of A Surveillance State?, Iris Nguyên Duy

FIU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Calculated Privacy: Tech Meets Law & Law Meets Tech, Tobias J. Oechtering, Sara Saeidian, Cecilia Magnusson Sjöberg

FIU Law Review

No abstract provided.

America’S Fraught Relationship With Privacy, Russell L. Weaver

FIU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Put More Women In Charge And Other Leadership Lessons From Covid-19, Peter H. Huang

FIU Law Review

No abstract provided.

From “He Said, She Said” To “He Said, She-And-Her Iphone-Said”: Florida’S All-Party Consent Requirement Needs An Update, Sarah Morgado

FIU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Private Rights For The Public Good?, J. Janewa Oseitutu

Faculty Publications

The counterfeit medicines discussion is an example of how the use of a turbid rationale for greater intellectual property protections serves sophisticated private interests while potentially harming the public interest. The risk of harm created by counterfeit medicines provides a compelling counter-narrative to the access to medicines critique of intellectual property rights.

Intellectual property advocates and the pharmaceutical industry have portrayed poor global enforcement of intellectual property rights as contributing to the proliferation of dangerous counterfeit medications. Yet, the deliberate linkage in the literature between weak intellectual property rights and the harms caused by counterfeit medicines provides a justification for …

C.S.I. Bulls#!T: The National Academy Of Sciences, Melendedez-Diaz V. Massachusetts, And Future Challenges To Forensic Science And Forensic Evidence,, Joelle A. Moreno

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

It’S Just A Shot Away: Mmr Vaccines And Autism And The End Of The Daubertista Revolution, Joelle A. Moreno

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

The Future Of Neuroimaged Lie Detection And The Law, Joelle A. Moreno

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Toxic Torts, Autism, And Bad Science: Why The Courts May Be Our Best Defense Against Scientific Relativism, Joelle A. Moreno

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Einstein On The Bench?: Exposing What Judges Do Not Know About Science And Using Child Abuse Cases To Improve How Courts Evaluate Scientific Evidence, Joelle A. Moreno

Faculty Publications

It has been a decade since the Supreme Court made judges the arbiters of scientific validity through Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Although this decision was intended to improve how courts use science, recent empirical evidence reveals that judges continue to struggle with scientific evidence and that Daubert has failed to yield accurate or consistent decisions. This also means that judges have received little useful guidance from ten years of academic literature expounding on the science-law chasm.

If the academic discourse is not helpful, it may be because non-scientists too often try to tame science by treating it as …

A Symposium Précis, Thomas E. Baker

Faculty Publications

This article is an introduction to and overview of the Drake University Law School symposium The Constitution and the Internet, held in February of 2001. It highlights important issues including the Constitution and the Internet, civil liberty and the application of a 200 year old document to the modern age of rapidly changing technology.

A Roundtable Discussion With Lawrence Lessig, David G. Post & Jeffrey Rosen, Thomas E. Baker

Faculty Publications

This article is a transcript of a discussion between Lawrence Lessig, David G. Post and Jeffrey Rosen on a variety of issues surrounding law, technology and the Internet. The moderator was Thomas E. Baker and the discussion was part of a Drake University Law School symposium in February of 2001.

Beyond The Polemic Against Junk Science: Navigating The Oceans That Divide Science And Law With Justice Breyer At The Helm, Joelle A. Moreno

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Two Degrees Of Speech Protection: Free Speech Through The Prism Of Agricultural Disparagement Laws, Howard M. Wasserman

Faculty Publications

In the wake of a 1989 national television broadcast reporting the alleged cancer risk of a chemical applied to apples on trees, many states passed agricultural product disparagement (APD) statutes. These statutes grant civil causes of action to the growers and sellers of perishable food products, against anyone who speaks negatively or disparagingly, without basis in scientific evidence, about the product's safety. In this Article, Howard M Wasserman explores the interplay between the APD statutes and the First Amendment. First, Mr. Wasserman discusses the three categories of restrictions on the freedom of speech, focusing primarily on private civil tort actions …

Killing Daddy: Developing A Self-Defense Strategy For The Abused Child, Joelle A. Moreno

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.