Jennifer Granick is the Director of Civil Liberties at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society. Jennifer returns to Stanford after working with the internet boutique firm of Zwillgen PLLC. Before that, she was the Civil Liberties Director at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. Jennifer practices, speaks and writes about computer crime and security, electronic surveillance, consumer privacy, data protection, copyright, trademark and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. From 2001 to 2007, Jennifer was Executive Director of CIS and taught Cyberlaw, Computer Crime Law, Internet intermediary liability, and Internet law and policy. Before teaching at Stanford, Jennifer spent almost a decade practicing criminal defense law in California. She was selected by Information Security magazine in 2003 as one of 20 "Women of Vision" in the computer security field. She earned her law degree from University of California, Hastings College of the Law and her undergraduate degree from the New College of the University of South Florida.
High Res Photo of Jennifer Granick
Law professor and cybercrime expert Orin Kerr published a proposal to amend the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA) to address the overcriminalization that he has been at the forefront of identifying and combatting. His current proposal, which very simply but comprehensively addresses a number of problems with the CFAA, is here.
By focusing purely on whether the service operator implements technological access barriers, the proposal risks a similar problem to the one that the current statute has, giving server owners plenary authority to criminalize the way members of the public interact with information made available online, but through “technological access barriers” rather than merely terms of service and employee agreements. Read more » about Thoughts on Orin Kerr's CFAA Reform Proposals: A Great Second Step
Yesterday, Representative Zoe Lofgren introduced on Reddit a bill to improve the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act in the wake of Aaron Swartz's suicide during the pendency of his prosecution for violating various provisions of that law and of the Wire Fraud Act. I've attached Read more » about Thoughts on Zoe Lofgren's CFAA Bill: A Great First Step
Law Professor and Computer Fraud and Abuse Act expert Orin Kerr wrote today in his usual thorough and well-informed fashion about the legal claims in Aaron Swartz's case. While his analysis of the law is, as usual, spot on, I nevertheless disagree with its treatment of Aaron's case as routine and, by implication, unremarkable. I am in the process of explaining why , but want to address here a few of Orin's arguments. Read more » about With the CFAA, Law and Justice Are Not The Same: A Response to Orin Kerr
Over the weekend, I learned that Aaron Swartz had taken his own life. I cried, and am still crying, for him, his family, for the close friends who loved him, and for our community. We lost a rare and special person, one who did so much in his short life to make the world a better place. Any do-gooder, including myself, could be proud were we to accomplish as much. We don't know what else he would have acheived were he to have lived. But I admit that I also cried for myself, because I felt guilty that I didn't do more to help Aaron in his criminal case. This post is about part of that challenge, the challenge to improve computer crime laws, and the criminal justice system more generally. Hopefully in the end, there'll be something that I, and you, can do about it. Read more » about Towards Learning from Losing Aaron Swartz
After the Estate of James Joyce refused to allow a scholar to quote Joyce in her book, we successfully defended her right under the fair use doctrine to use the quotes she needed to illustrate her scholarship. After we prevailed in the case, the Estate paid $240,000 of our client’s legal fees. Read more » about Shloss v. Estate of Joyce
In this case, two archives challenged statutes that extended copyright terms unconditionally—the Copyright Renewal Act and the Copyright Term Extension Act (CTEA)—as unconstitutional under Copyright Clause and the First Amendment. Read more » about Kahle v. Gonzales
Ongoing revelations show that significant NSA surveillance activities take place outside of either Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) or congressional oversight, even though these policies directly impact Americans’ privacy. These activities should, at the very least, be subject to congressional review, since American interests are being adversely impacted by them. Read more » about We All Go Down Together: NSA Programs Overseas Violate Americans’ Privacy, Yet Escape FISC, Congressional Oversight
A new bipartisan bill co-sponsored by two of the most vocal critics of the NSA does not go far enough to protect the average non-U.S. person from indiscriminate surveillance. Without these protections, America’s Internet companies and our long term political interests in spreading democracy and the rule of law will suffer. Read more » about Reforming FISA: A Critical Look at the Wyden/Udall Proposal and Foreign Surveillance
This post is one in a series of posts from Just Security‘s Jennifer Granick and Guest Author Orin Kerr debating the constitutionality of the NSA’s telephony metadata program. Read more » about Debate (Round 2): Metadata and the Fourth Amendment
""The fact they decided to say something is important. If they're serious about it, they can make a difference," said Jennifer Stisa Granick, director of civil liberties at Stanford's Center for Internet and Society, who noted that tech companies played a significant role in fighting a controversial online piracy bill last year." Read more » about Google, Apple, Facebook and Yahoo join call to rein in government surveillance programs
""It's awesome," Jennifer Granick, the director of civil liberties at Stanford Law School, told Ars. "On whether the Fourth Amendment applies, it follows the [Supreme Court] case of Jones, as it must. But there were all kinds of side issues which the judge correctly decided. For example, he had to decide if the Fourth Amendment meant a warrant was required for this tracking, and he said it did. There is no car exception to the warrant requirement. In short, he ensured that the Jones opinion means something in the Third Circuit."" Read more » about Appellate court: Nope, feds can’t just GPS track your car without a warrant
"The ruling in Smith has been widely and justly condemned—and as Jennifer Granick has ably argued here, is of dubious relevance to NSA’s bulk collection program anyway. " Read more » about Are Internet Backbone Pen Registers Constitutional?
"On July 30, 2013, I had the pleasure of having dinner with General Keith Alexander, Director of the National Security Agency. Just a few weeks earlier, NYU Law Professor Christopher Sprigman and I had called the NSA’s activities “criminal” in the digital pages of the New York Times, so I thought it was particularly gracious of him to sit with me." Read more » about My Dinner With NSA Director Keith Alexander
"JENNIFER GRANICK: Nothing in Smith versus Maryland authorizes mass surveillance, and the information that was collected in Smith versus Maryland is a much narrower category than the information that the government's currently getting." Read more » about NSA Phone Records Revive Debate Over Supreme Court Case
RSVP for the event here: https://www.facebook.com/events/520390394700141/
Come out to rally for your privacy and learn about surveillance from a distinguished group of speakers this Sunday afternoon at Embarcadero Plaza! Read more » about Rally for Privacy Awareness - "1984" on 8/4 - Restore the Fourth SF
This Conference is cordially hosted by Stanford Law School and Peking University, and is sponsored by Tencent, China’s largest Internet company and one of the largest worldwide, and Microsoft, the largest software maker in the world. The main organizers include the China Guiding Cases Project, the Stanford Program in Law, Science, & Technology, the China Law and Policy Association, and the Stanford Law School Programs. Read more » about 2013 Stanford University-Peking University Internet Law and Public Policy Conference
Three dimensional printing turns bits into atoms. The technology is simply amazing. These machines draw on programming, art and engineering to enable people to design and build intricate, beautiful, functional jewelry, machine parts, toys and even shoes. In the commercial sector, 3D printing can revolutionize supply chains as well. As the public interest group Public Knowledge wrote once, "It will be awesome if they don't screw it up." Read more » about 3D Printing: Is the Law Ready for the Future?
Three dimensional printing turns bits into atoms. The technology is simply amazing. These machines draw on programming, art and engineering to enable people to design and build intricate, beautiful, functional jewelry, machine parts, toys and even shoes. In the commercial sector, 3D printing can revolutionize supply chains as well. As the public interest group Public Knowledge wrote once, "It will be awesome if they don't screw it up."
Read more » about 3D Printing: Is the Law Ready for the Future?
Jennifer Granick appears at 46:44.
Ask Americans what the Constitution’s most important feature is, and most will say it’s the guarantees of liberty enshrined in the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments of the Constitution.
Americans are fiercely proud of their freedoms but they continue to argue about what those basic rights are and how they can be sustained in a changing world. Are our rights unchangeable, or should they evolve over time? What is the proper role for the courts in interpreting rights? Read more » about Constitution USA with Peter Sagal - Episode II - It’s A Free Country
Have you ever borrowed a smartphone without asking? Modified a URL? Scraped a website? Called an undocumented API? Congratulations: you might have violated federal law! A 1986 statute, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), provides both civil and criminal remedies for mere "unauthorized" access to a computer. Read more » about Innovation or Exploitation (Video)
Have you ever borrowed a smartphone without asking? Modified a URL? Scraped a website? Called an undocumented API? Congratulations: you might have violated federal law! A 1986 statute, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA), provides both civil and criminal remedies for mere "unauthorized" access to a computer. Read more » about Innovation or Exploitation? (Audio)