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.
CIS in the news.
"In a new paper, Riana Pfefferkorn at Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society (CIS) analyzes the cybersecurity risks of this practice for all internet users — not just law enforcement’s few targeted suspects. (The ACLU’s Jennifer Granick, formerly with CIS, contributed to the report.)
"Most such litigation settles fairly quickly due to cost pressures, rather than the merit of the allegations, said Daniel Nazer, senior staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit that defends “civil liberties in the digital world.”
Even the simplest patent lawsuit is rarely litigated through trial for less than $1 million, while bigger cases commonly cost more than $10 million, Nazer said.
"Notably, Riana Pfefferkorn, cryptography fellow at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society, and University of Melbourne researchers Dr Vanessa Teague and Dr
"It will set governments’ expectations about how they can use their leverage over internet platforms to effectively enforce their own laws globally,” said Daphne Keller, who studies platforms’ legal responsibilities at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society and previously was Google’s associate general counsel."
"“Governor Brown has a long history of vetoing legislation that you might think he'd totally support, including bills that exercise state power as a way to get back at the Trump administration,” said Ryan Singel, a former journalist and fellow at the Stanford Law School's Center for Internet and Society."
"And it is this that so frustrates law enforcement officials. "If the UK has complaints, it is with the US Department of Justice for failing to adequately staff and promptly process the requests," says Albert Gidari, the director of privacy at the Stanford Law School. In short: it isn't completely the fault of tech companies – Apple's encryption fight with the FBI in 2016 showed they are willing in some cases to stand up for the privacy rights of users."
""I think they both risk becoming a punching bag by Congress and losing control of the narrative," said Jen King, director of Consumer Privacy at Stanford Law School's Center for Internet and Society. "If Larry Page or whomever doesn't show up to defend Google as not being evil, they cede ground to their detractors.""
"“I certainly see this banding together as a way for the U.S. government to try to exert more gravitas in the U.S. debate,” said Riana Pfefferkorn, cryptography fellow at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society.
“Many of the tech companies that are in the Five Eyes' sights are U.S.-based, and it naturally exerts more pressure on those companies to have five countries (most of which presumably provide significant user bases for those companies), not just the U.S., band together to press them on encryption,” she told me in an email."
Bruce Schneier’s new book, “Click Here to Kill Everybody,” explains the security risks of a new world of household devices connected to the Internet. I asked him what the risks are, why they are so serious and what their consequences are for politics.
HF: Technology has created a hyper-connected world. How does this lead to vulnerabilities?
"Elizabeth Joh, University of California, Davis:
What are the circumstances in which a Supreme Court precedent should be overturned?
How necessary is the exclusionary rule to protect Fourth Amendment rights?
How would you describe the judicial approach the Court has used to interpret the Eleventh Amendment in favor of state sovereign immunity and against recognizing protecting rights in various circumstances?
"“It just shows how much education users need to do when they switch around between half a dozen apps, trying to figure out how each one works,” says Riana Pfefferkorn, a cryptography fellow at the Stanford Center for Internet and Society. “It would be great if we had a default encryption that any service would use so you wouldn’t have to be such a detective on your own behalf.”"
""Today was a landmark in the fight to preserve a free and open internet," supporter Barbara van Schewick, the director of Stanford Law School's Center for Internet and Society, said in a statement."
""A lot of it has to do with public faith," said Jen King, director of Consumer Privacy at Stanford Law School's Center for Internet and Society. "Who can people hold accountable for protecting them? Who's going to get [tech leaders] in trouble if they get something wrong?""
"“The laws are strict,” Dr. Jennifer King from Stanford Law School’s Center for Internet and Society told Gizmodo. “But if you’re doing kind of a one-off or a credit-like system that doesn’t offer actual credit, it might be possible that [tech companies] could use that information.”"
""Today was a landmark in the fight to preserve a free and open Internet," Stanford law professor Barbara van Schewick wrote. "SB 822 brings back net neutrality to California and restores the important protections that the FCC voted to eliminate last December."
"Stanford Center for Internet and Society director Barbara van Schewick said in a statement that "SB 822 sets the standard for other states to follow. SB 822 is the only state-level bill that truly restores all the 2015 net neutrality protections. That's what makes it so special. Most state-level bills have just copied the text of the FCC's 2015 net neutrality rules, leaving out critical protections.
"Omer Tene, veep of the International Association of Privacy Professionals and a member of Privacy Shield's arbitration panel, noted that the complaints procedure has a clear escalation process.
"To the best of my knowledge, there hasn't been a single such case [referred from the European DPAs to the FTC], so before pointing fingers at the FTC for lack of enforcement, it's worth asking whether there have been any complaints," he said."
"“Users are calling on online platforms to provide a moral code,” says Daphne Keller, director of the intermediary liability project at Stanford’s Center for Internet and Society. “But we’ll never agree on what should come down. Whatever the rules, they’ll fail.” Humans and technical filters alike, according to Keller, will continue to make “grievous errors.”"
"The Recorder affiliate Legaltech News recently caught up with one of the forefront experts in both DMCA and automated notice sending, Annemarie Bridy, a University of Idaho College of Law professor who also works with Stanford’s Center for Internet and Society. LTN picked her brain about out of control bots, DMCA takedowns’ potential threat to freedom of speech and more. The conversation has been condensed for clarity.
"“Momentum is starting to build rapidly for states to start negotiating a new ban treaty and determine what is necessary to retain human control over weapons systems and the use of force,” said Peter Asaro, vice chair of the International Committee for Robots Arms Control, which is a member of the campaign’s steering committee. “Requests for more time to further explore this challenge may seem valid but increasingly sound like excuses aimed at delaying the inevitable regulation that’s coming.”"