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.
By Riana Pfefferkorn on January 8, 2018 at 12:36 pm
My article Everything Radiates: Does the Fourth Amendment Regulate Side-Channel Cryptanalysis?, 49 Conn. L. Rev. 1393 (2017), has recently been published by the Connecticut Law Review. You can download it from SSRN here. I contributed this piece as part of my participation in the law review's 2017 Symposium last January.
By Daphne Keller on January 3, 2018 at 10:02 am
Today, someone asked me about the Internet and human well-being over the next decade. The question was a healthy provocation to look at the big picture. I chose “more helped than harmed” from the very short list of radio-button responses. Here’s my elaboration:
By Riana Pfefferkorn on December 18, 2017 at 3:44 am
The following are my opening remarks for the encryption panel during the IGF 2017 main session, "Local interventions, global impacts: How can international, multistakeholder cooperation address Internet disruptions, encryption, and data flows?"
By Miquel Peguera on December 17, 2017 at 4:37 am
In a recent ruling, the Spanish Audiencia Nacional – the high court that referred the Google Spain case to the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) – has somehow expressed opposition against imposing global delisting obligations on search engines.
By Barbara van Schewick on December 14, 2017 at 10:15 am
Today the FCC Commissioners voted 3-2 to eliminate longstanding net neutrality protections, reclassify internet service providers as ‘information services’ under Title I of the Communications Act, and ban states from enacting their own net neutrality protections.
Here is my statement:
"Today’s FCC vote eliminates all net neutrality protections without a replacement.
By Brett Frischmann on December 11, 2017 at 2:05 pm
This piece is co-written by Brett Frischmann and Evan Selinger*.
Network neutrality prevents broadband Internet service providers from micromanaging our lives online. Constraining the networks this way enables and even empowers Internet users to be active and productive human beings rather than passive consumers. Unfortunately, the network neutrality debate is so polarized that neither side sees the full picture.
By Adam Hersh on December 11, 2017 at 6:00 am
It’s no secret that local news outlets are struggling in the internet age. But it’s also beyond doubt that local news makes communities more connected, informed, and civically engaged.
By Ryan E. Long on December 5, 2017 at 2:36 pm
When FCC Chairman Ajit Pai announced last week that he would eliminate the "fair play" rules known as Net neutrality, he took a step that some economists and technologists worry will eventually lead to the monopolization of Internet services in America. What, if any, impact would the elimination of Net neutrality rules have on consumer privacy? The answer, in short, is that consumers would simply be forced to pay more for it.
By Albert Gidari on November 30, 2017 at 4:36 pm
An enormous amount of attention has been paid to the oral argument before the Supreme Court in Carpenter v. United States. The transcript provides tantalizing tea leaves as to whether the Court will find a protectable right to privacy in a cell phone subscriber’s location and many pundits seem to think the day went to Carpenter while I haven’t heard anyone touting a government homerun.
By Annemarie Bridy on November 26, 2017 at 5:34 pm
(NB: This headline does not obey Betteridge’s Law.)
Hollywood studios, led by Universal, have sued TickBox TV in federal district court in California, bringing their campaign against set-top box (STB) piracy stateside after a big win earlier this year in the EU. Last spring, the Dutch film and recording industry trade association BREIN prevailed in copyright litigation against the distributor of a STB called the Filmspeler. The CJEU held that the Filmspeler’s distributor, Wullems, directly infringed the plaintiffs’ copyrights—specifically, their right of communication to the public—by selling STBs loaded with software add-ons that provided easy access to infringing programming online. (I blogged about the Filmspeler case here.)
