Science and Technology Law Commons^™

A Nono From Coco: The Contentious Relationship Between Luxury Brands And Resale, Caylee Phillips

SMU Science and Technology Law Review

No abstract provided.

Front Matter

SMU Science and Technology Law Review

No abstract provided.

A Trend You Can't Ignore: Social Media As Government Records And Its Impact On The Interpretation Of The Law, Jessica De Perio Wittman

Faculty Articles and Papers

There has been a sharp increase in official communications from government agencies and elected officials that occur initially, primarily, and even solely, on social media. The Federal Records Act (FRA), Presidential Records Act (PRA) and the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) govern the retention, access, preservation and disclosure of records produced by the federal government. Recent litigation has highlighted why courts, attorneys, and other legal researchers must consider social media as a primary source of government information, particularly when records may become inaccessible once a social media post is modified or deleted, or when technology becomes obsolete. Additionally, as social …

Just Plain Dumb?: How Digital Contact Tracing Apps Could’Ve Worked Better (And Why They Never Got The Chance), Brian E. Ray

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

This essay describes how the privacy debate that emerged over digital contact tracing and Google’s and Apple’s decisions to strictly limit apps permitted to use their platforms resulted in undercutting their potential usefulness as a tool to combat the pandemic while still failing to engender trust in these tools as intended.

From Automation To Autonomy: Legal And Ethical Responsibility Gaps In Artificial Intelligence Innovation, David Nersessian, Ruben Mancha

Michigan Technology Law Review

The increasing prominence of artificial intelligence (AI) systems in daily life and the evolving capacity of these systems to process data and act without human input raise important legal and ethical concerns. This article identifies three primary AI actors in the value chain (innovators, providers, and users) and three primary types of AI (automation, augmentation, and autonomy). It then considers responsibility in AI innovation from two perspectives: (i) strict liability claims arising out of the development, commercialization, and use of products with built-in AI capabilities (designated herein as “AI artifacts”); and (ii) an original research study on the ethical practices …

A Tale Of Two Interoperabilities; Or, How Google V. Oracle Could Become Social Media Legislation, Charles Duan

Cardozo Law Review de•novo

The Supreme Court's recent decision in Google v. Oracle shares a perhaps unexpected connection with recent legislative proposals to enhance social media competition. At first glance they are seemingly unrelated: the former deals with copyright protection in certain portions of software code, while the latter relates to interconnection between dominant online platforms and their competitors. Yet they are closely intertwined, such that a competitive platform environment cannot be fully achieved without addressing lingering questions in Google. As a result, lawmakers ought to be motivated to address software copyrights and related matters as part of their efforts to improve competition among …

Uncertain Risk, Science Experiments, And The Courts, Eric E. Johnson

Faculty Articles

Legal scholarship has looked at problems of uncertainty--"unknown unknowns"--in a variety of contexts, from financial regulation to national security. This Article, however, focuses on uncertain risk in what may be its most challenging arena: experimental scientific research. Notably, this context imposes a key conceptual hurdle. In other arenas, law and regulation can work to lessen uncertainty. But with science-experiment risk, uncertainty cannot be sidestepped, since going beyond the current state of human knowledge is the whole point of experimental research. Moreover, science-experiment risk involves the highest possible stakes, since future experiments could plausibly lead to global catastrophe, even human extinction. …

Ai, Consumer Credit, And Discrimination: A Comparative Look At Canada And The United States, Stephanie Ben-Ishai, Mandy Bedford

Articles & Book Chapters

No abstract provided.

Beware Of Giant Tech Companies Bearing Jurisprudential Gifts, Kiel Brennan-Marquez

Faculty Articles and Papers

Responding to Rebecca Wexler, Privacy as Privilege: The Stored Communications Act and Internet Evidence, 134 HARV. L. REV. 2721 (2021).

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents and Special Thanks.

Saving Face; The Unconstitutional Use Of Facial Recognition On Undocumented Immigrants And Solutions In Ip, Audrey Knutson

IP Theory

No abstract provided.

Association For Molecular Pathology V. Myriad Genetics: A Critical Reassessment, Jorge L. Contreras

Michigan Technology Law Review

The Supreme Court’s 2013 decision in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics is an essential piece of the Court’s recent quartet of patent eligibility decisions, which also includes Bilski v. Kappos, Mayo v. Prometheus, and Alice v. CLS Bank. Each of these decisions has significantly shaped the contours of patent eligibility under Section 101 of the Patent Act in ways that have been both applauded and criticized. The Myriad case, however, was significant beyond its impact on Section 101 jurisprudence. It was seen, and litigated, as a case impacting patient rights, access to healthcare, scientific freedom, …

The Need For A System View To Regulate Artificial Intelligence/Machine Learning-Based Software As Medical Devices, Sara Gerke, Boris Babic, Theodoros Evgeniou, I. Glenn Cohen

Faculty Scholarly Works

Artificial intelligence (AI) and Machine learning (ML) systems in medicine are poised to significantly improve health care, for example, by offering earlier diagnoses of diseases or recommending optimally individualized treatment plans. However, the emergence of AI/ML in medicine also creates challenges, which regulators must pay attention to. Which medical AI/ML-based products should be reviewed by regulators? What evidence should be required to permit marketing for AI/ML-based software as a medical device (SaMD)? How can we ensure the safety and effectiveness of AI/ML-based SaMD that may change over time as they are applied to new data? The U.S. Food and Drug …

Forensic Evidence In Arizona: Reforms For Victims And Defendants, Valena Beety

Articles by Maurer Faculty

Arizona is nationally recognized as a leader in forensic science. Our state court judges serve on the Legal Resource Committee for the National Institute of Science and Technology (NIST) and provide guidance to NIST’s Organization of Scientific Area Committees for Forensic Science. Our Phoenix lab analysts and lab directors have national reputations. And Arizona State University’s Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law has been home to many leading academics in the field of forensics and the law, among them Michael Saks, David Kaye, and Jay Koehler. We have a robust forensic science community in Arizona and in Phoenix in particular. …

Designing Children: Tort Liability For Medical Providers In The Era Of Crispr/Cas-9 Geneticc Editing, Sarah Roa

Mitchell Hamline Law Review

No abstract provided.

Medical Device Artificial Intelligence: The New Tort Frontier, Charlotte A. Tschider

Faculty Publications & Other Works

The medical device industry and new technology start-ups have dramatically increased investment in artificial intelligence (AI) applications, including diagnostic tools and AI-enabled devices. These technologies have been positioned to reduce climbing health costs while simultaneously improving health outcomes. Technologies like AI-enabled surgical robots, AI-enabled insulin pumps, and cancer detection applications hold tremendous promise, yet without appropriate oversight, they will likely pose major safety issues. While preventative safety measures may reduce risk to patients using these technologies, effective regulatory-tort regimes also permit recovery when preventative solutions are insufficient.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the administrative agency responsible for overseeing the …

The Evolution And Jurisprudence Of The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court And Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court Of Review, Laura K. Donohue

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The past eight years have witnessed an explosion in the number of publicly-available opinions and orders issued by the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court and Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review. From only six opinions in the public domain 1978–2012, by early 2021, eighty-eight opinions had been released. The sharp departure is even more pronounced in relation to orders: from only one order declassified during 1978–2012, since 2013, 288 have been formally released. These documents highlight how the courts’s roles have evolved since 2004 and reveal four key areas that dominate the courts’ jurisprudence: its position as a specialized, Article III …

Unifying Antitrust Enforcement For The Digital Age, John O. Mcginnis, Linda Sun

Washington and Lee Law Review

As the digital revolution continues to transform competition among businesses, U.S. antitrust enforcement has struggled to remain effective. The U.S. has long depended on a system of dual antitrust enforcement through both the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ). Modern technology has greatly exacerbated existing structural deficiencies of the two-headed approach, at times resulting in deadlock. The two agencies approach new antitrust issues generated by computational technologies differently and fight over who should lead key investigations, leading to economic uncertainty in the most important business sectors. These enforcement disagreements can also hobble the government’s response to …

Table Of Contents, Seattle University Law Review

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

Tracing The Invisible: Information Fiduciaries And The Pandemic, Anne L. Washington, Lauren Rhue

American University Law Review

Predictive data technology designed to contain the COVID-19 pandemic was not as successful as promised. Data-centric solutions to providing testing and tracing did little to limit the virus’s spread in part because they served only the most visible parts of society. This Article argues for more robust solutions to protect individuals’ privacy—whether those individuals are currently visible or invisible to pandemic technology—if pandemic technology is to provide the universal coverage necessary for a public health emergency, such as the COVID- 19 pandemic. First, we contend that current pandemic data technology operates under rigid technical and social assumptions that thwart participation …