The Center for Internet and Society at Stanford Law School is a leader in the study of the law and policy around the Internet and other emerging technologies.
In this part 2, I describe a quantum principle – the familiar “uncertainty principle” – and how it applies to privacy law and policy considerations. In particular, I observe that the process of managing data respectfully creates something of a quantum paradox. The paradox is a form of an “uncertainty” principle, whereby to better afford privacy for certain data, one in fact needs to know additional information about the data subject
A Dutch Court today ruled that Facebook has a duty to identify a person who has uploaded a revenge porn video on its social network. In this case, the video displays a woman, Chantal, performing oral sex on her now ex-boyfriend. A fake account bearing Chantal’s name was created and used to share the private video with her friends and others. Chantal’s ex-boyfriend, who recorded the video, has always denied uploading the video.
A few days ago, the Commission nationale de l'informatique et des libertés (CNiL), the French data protection authority, ordered Google to apply the right to be forgotten (RTBF) on all domain names of Google's search engine, including the .com domain.
Today, the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) delivered a long-awaited decision in Delphi AS v. Estonia.
In two years, section 702 of the FISA Amendments Act will expire. It is essential the public to have confidence that any reforms to section 702 will actually address problems with PRISM and Upstream surveillance. To get that confidence, we have to know a lot more about how the intelligence community is using section 702. That understanding requires more investigation.
Policymakers around the world are showing renewed interest in the rules that govern Internet information flow across national borders.