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.
The following is the executive summary of an analysis I wrote looking at two bills in the House, both of which purport to restore the net neutrality protections in the 2015 Open Internet Order. Only one actually does so. The full six-page analysis can be downloaded here. (.pdf)
In collaboration with CIS Visiting Research Scholar Jana Gooth, we have (belatedly) submitted comments to the California Attorney General's office regarding California's Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA). This was a cooperative exercise between an information scientist (me) and a German lawyer (Jana), and we were able to work in many valuable insights from Jana's experience working on the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) for the European Parliment.
On Wednesday, Senators Wyden (D-OR) and Cotton (R-AR) introduced a bipartisan bill that, if passed, will enhance the Senate Sergeant at Arm's ability to defend Senators and their staff from cyber threats.
The EU’s proposed Terrorist Content Regulation gives national authorities sweeping new powers over comments, videos, and other content that people share using Internet platforms. Among other things, authorities – who may be police, not courts – can require platforms of all sizes to take content down within one hour. The Regulation also requires even small platforms to build upload filters and attempt to proactively weed out prohibited material.
Q: What do you do when you see a little button on a webpage or app screen that says I agree?
A: Click the button.
The familiar and incredibly simple click-to-agree mechanism is ubiquitous. We encounter it throughout our digital lives. It is nothing less than the “legal backbone” of the internet, app stores, e-commerce and so much more.
Yet electronic contracting and the illusion of consent-by-clicking are a sham.
The new EU Audiovisual Media Services Directive (AVMSD) has been officially adopted and published. it is now time for member States to start the process of incorporating its provisions into their respective legal and institutional frameworks.
You are CEO of Google. When you wake up tomorrow morning, your general counsel calls you: "we've been sued in the E.U. for copyright infringement! The claim: our search results for Le Parisien and dozens of other newspapers used more than one word and/or beyond a 'short extract.'" Your response: "is this April Fools’ day?"
The present submission has the object of providing comments and recommendations regarding a very specific provision included in the document mentioned in the title, that is the specific proposed duty for intermediaries to:
“deploy technology based automated tools or appropriate mechanisms, with appropriate controls, for proactively identifying and removing or disabling public access to unlawful information or content.”