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.
Submission to Australia's Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS) regarding its review of the Assistance and Access Act that had passed into law in early December 2018.
[The below text is a short memo I presented for a workshop on a left-liberal financial foreign policy for the US last week.]
[UPDATED] A special unit within the Federal Bureau of Investigation that handles war crimes may be shut down imminently, according to officials familiar with the administration’s decision-making process. The FBI’s International Human Rights Unit takes the lead on investigating individuals within the United States who have been accused of committing international crimes, including war crimes, torture, genocide, female genital mutilation, and the recruitment of child soldiers.
The comedian Will Rogers famously joked: “I am not a member of any organized political party. I am a Democrat.” Until relatively recently, neither Republicans nor Democrats were particularly organized. Instead, they were loose coalitions of politicians with very different ideologies. Sam Rosenfeld is an assistant professor at Colgate University.
This essay closely examines the effect on free-expression rights when platforms such as Facebook or YouTube silence their users’ speech. The first part describes the often messy blend of government and private power behind many content removals, and discusses how the combination undermines users’ rights to challenge state action. The second part explores the legal minefield for users—or potentially, legislators—claiming a right to speak on major platforms.
No one was surprised that British Prime Minister Theresa May’s proposed Brexit deal was rejected Tuesday by the House of Commons. What was surprising was that the vote was 432 to 202. Normally, such a humiliating defeat would lead to the resignation of the prime minister. That is highly unlikely to happen: May will continue as prime minister, while Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn’s motion of no confidence is unlikely to succeed. However, it’s hard to see an alternative deal that would pass muster with both the House of Commons and the European Union.
Technology companies have been pummeled by revelations about how poorly they protecttheir customers’ personal information, including an in-depth New York Times report detailing the ability of smartphone apps to track users’ locations.
At first glance, the problems of homeland security and cybersecurity may seem an odd fit for the Center for Gaming Research and the Special Collections and Archives at UNLV’s Lied Library, but in some important ways it actually fits quite well.
The annals of science fiction are full of visions of the future. Some are techno-utopian like “Star Trek” in which humanity has joined together in peace to explore the cosmos. Others are dystopian, like the World State in “Brave New World.” But many of these stories share one thing in common – they envision a time in which humanity has moved past narrow ideas of tribe and nationalism. That assumption might be wrong.
Since the dawn of the Internet, American regulators and companies have pursued two goals to protect our privacy: that people should be in control of their data and that companies should be transparent about what they do with our data. We can see these goals detailed in the privacy policies and terms of service that we “agree” to as well as companies’ increasingly complicated systems of privacy dashboards, permissions and sharing controls.