Privacy Law Commons^™

Texas’ War On Social Media: Censorship Or False Flag, Leni Morales

DePaul Journal of Art, Technology & Intellectual Property Law

No abstract provided.

Content Moderation As Surveillance, Hannah Bloch-Wehba

Faculty Scholarship

Technology platforms are the new governments, and content moderation is the new law, or so goes a common refrain. As platforms increasingly turn toward new, automated mechanisms of enforcing their rules, the apparent power of the private sector seems only to grow. Yet beneath the surface lies a web of complex relationships between public and private authorities that call into question whether platforms truly possess such unilateral power. Law enforcement and police are exerting influence over platform content rules, giving governments a louder voice in supposedly “private” decisions. At the same time, law enforcement avails itself of the affordances of …

Comic Books, The First Amendment, And The “Best Test” For Right Of Publicity Issues, Rachel Silverstein

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

No Exit: Ten Years Of "Privacy Vs. Speech" Post-Sorrell, G. S. Hans

Vanderbilt Law School Faculty Publications

A decade has passed since the U.S. Supreme Court held in Sorrell vs. IMS Health that a Vermont privacy law violated the First Amendment. Somewhat surprisingly, the debate about the intersection between privacy laws and free speech protections has not progressed much in the intervening years. If anything, the concerns that some privacy advocates had following Sorrell-that the First Amendment could be used as a tool to overturn privacy regulations-have extended to other areas of economic regulation. As a public interest attorney working on technology law and policy, I entered into practice not long after Sorrell was decided, when it …

The First Amendment And The Right(S) Of Publicity, Jennifer E. Rothman, Robert C. Post

All Faculty Scholarship

The right of publicity protects persons against unauthorized uses of their identity, most typically their names, images, or voices. The right is in obvious tension with freedom of speech. Yet courts seeking to reconcile the right with the First Amendment have to date produced only a notoriously confused muddle of inconsistent constitutional doctrine. In this Article, we suggest a way out of the maze. We propose a relatively straightforward framework for analyzing how the right of publicity should be squared with First Amendment principles.

At the root of contemporary constitutional confusion lies a failure to articulate the precise state interests …

Automation In Moderation, Hannah Bloch-Wehba

Faculty Scholarship

This Article assesses recent efforts to encourage online platforms to use automated means to prevent the dissemination of unlawful online content before it is ever seen or distributed. As lawmakers in Europe and around the world closely scrutinize platforms’ “content moderation” practices, automation and artificial intelligence appear increasingly attractive options for ridding the Internet of many kinds of harmful online content, including defamation, copyright infringement, and terrorist speech. Proponents of these initiatives suggest that requiring platforms to screen user content using automation will promote healthier online discourse and will aid efforts to limit Big Tech’s power.

In fact, however, the …

Clear As Mud: Constitutional Concerns With Clear Affirmative Consent, C. Ashley Saferight

Cleveland State Law Review

Rape and sexual assault laws and policies have shifted significantly in recent years, including the introduction of affirmative consent. Unfortunately, both proponents and critics tend to confuse the issues and falsely equate affirmative consent as a substantive social standard versus a procedural standard for adjudication and punishment. Although affirmative consent generally does not represent a significant change in consent law in the United States, statutes and policies requiring a further requirement that affirmative consent be clear and unambiguous (“clear affirmative consent”) are problematic and raise constitutional concerns. When clear affirmative consent policies are used as an adjudicative standard, they increase …

Harmonizing The Tension Between The First Amendment And Publicity Rights And Finding The Right Balance: Discerning How Much Freedom Is Warranted And What Needs Protection, William Buchsbaum

The University of Cincinnati Intellectual Property and Computer Law Journal

This paper examines the tension between the First Amendment and Publicity Rights considering why and how friction is emerging, the legal underpinnings and theories behind the development of publicity rights and how to reconcile this with values raised in support of the First Amendment. This collision course of rights occurs where property interests have vested in human identity itself which brings us face to face with the outer limits of free speech and expression under the First Amendment and evens tests the notion of how we define speech. The paper takes a dive into some of the currently arising issues …

Robotic Speakers And Human Listeners, Helen Norton

Publications

In their new book, Robotica, Ron Collins and David Skover assert that we protect speech not so much because of its value to speakers but instead because of its affirmative value to listeners. If we assume that the First Amendment is largely, if not entirely, about serving listeners’ interests—in other words, that it’s listeners all the way down—what would a listener-centered approach to robotic speech require? This short symposium essay briefly discusses the complicated and sometimes even dark side of robotic speech from a listener-centered perspective.

Disentangling The Right Of Publicity, Eric E. Johnson

Northwestern University Law Review

Despite the increasing importance attached to the right of publicity, its doctrinal scope has yet to be clearly articulated. The right of publicity supposedly allows a cause of action for the commercial exploitation of a person’s name, voice, or image. The inconvenient reality, however, is that only a tiny fraction of such instances are truly actionable. This Article tackles the mismatch between the blackletter doctrine and the shape of the case law, and it aims to elucidate, in straightforward terms, what the right of publicity actually is.

This Article explains how, in the absence of a clear enunciation of its …

Privacy And The Right To Record, Margot E. Kaminski

Publications

Many U.S. laws protect privacy by governing recording. Recently, however, courts have recognized a First Amendment “right to record.” This Article addresses how courts should handle privacy laws in light of the developing First Amendment right to record.

The privacy harms addressed by recording laws are situated harms. Recording changes the way people behave in physical spaces by altering the nature of those spaces. Thus, recording laws can be placed within a long line of First Amendment case law that recognizes a valid government interest in managing the qualities of rivalrous physical space, so as not to allow one person’s …

Testimony On Unmanned Aircraft Systems Rules And Regulations, Stephen E. Henderson

Stephen E Henderson

The Right To Be Forgotten: Comparing U.S. And European Approaches, Samuel W. Royston

St. Mary's Law Journal

This Article compares the European and United States stances regarding the right to be forgotten. Within that context, this Article explores the implications of technological advances on constitutional rights, specifically the intersection of the right to free speech and the right to privacy, commonly referred to as the "right to be forgotten" paradox. In the United States, the trend is to favor free speech, while Europe places an emphasis on human rights. Each approach is analyzed based on supporting case law. The consequences of each approach on society, both long- and short-term, are also discussed. This Article argues that a …

Book Review. Balancing Privacy And Free Speech: Unwanted Attention In The Age Of Social Media By Mark Tunick, Kimberly Mattioli

Articles by Maurer Faculty

No abstract provided.

Regulating Drones Under The First And Fourth Amendments, Stephen E. Henderson, Joseph Thai, Marc Jonathan Blitz, James Grimsley

Stephen E Henderson

The FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 requires the Federal Aviation Administration to integrate unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), or drones, into the national airspace system by September of this year. Yet perhaps because of their chilling accuracy in targeted killings abroad, perhaps because of an increasing consciousness of diminishing privacy more generally, and perhaps simply because of a fear of the unknown, divergent UAV-restrictive legislation has been proposed in Congress and enacted in a number of states. Ultimately, given UAV utility and cost effectiveness over a vast range of tasks, widespread commercial use seems certain. So it is imperative …

Cohen V. Google, Inc., Eirik Cheverud

NYLS Law Review

No abstract provided.

Liberating Copyright: Thinking Beyond Free Speech, Jennifer E. Rothman

All Faculty Scholarship

Scholars have often turned to the First Amendment to limit the scope of ever-expanding copyright law. This approach has mostly failed to convince courts that independent review is merited and has offered little to individuals engaged in personal rather than political or cultural expression. In this Article, I consider the value of an alternative paradigm using the lens of substantive due process and liberty to evaluate users’ rights. A liberty-based approach uses this other developed body of constitutional law to demarcate justifiable personal, identity-based uses of copyrighted works. Uses that are essential for mental integrity, intimacy promotion, communication, or religious …

Cybercrimes Vs. Cyberliberties, Nadine Strossen

Articles & Chapters

Cybercrimes vs. Cyberliberties, Chapter 8 in Internet Policy and Economics: Challenges and Perspectives 2nd ed. at 110-127 ( W.H. Lehr & L.M. Pupillo, eds. Springer, 2009).

Freedom Of Speech And Press

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Recent Cases, Robert L. Teicher, Timothy C. Maguire

Vanderbilt Law Review

In the 1930 decision of State ex rel. LaFollette v. Kohler, the Wisconsin Supreme Court rejected the earliest free speech challenge to a candidate expenditure limitation. The court held that the state's interest in protecting the integrity of its electoral process outweighed the individual's right of communicating with the public without governmental infringement." The court's identification of the communicative effect of campaign spending anticipated the United States Supreme Court's ruling in Stromberg v. California" that communicative conduct was entitled to protection from government infringement. The Court, however, hampered the effectuation of this protection by failing to define conclusively the point …