By: Geoffrey Wills Introduction: Images of Knight Rider, Herbie the Love Bug, or HAL from 2001: A Space Odyssey might be the first thing people think of when discussing artificial intelligence and self-driving vehicles, but that is quickly changing. While a self-driving car used to be just a pipe dream, an ever-increasing number of car manufacturers are taking off with the concept, but technology still needs to be developed and perfected before autonomous vehicles can be mass produced and used for daily use. Currently, fully autonomous vehicles have traveled safely at speeds up to 31 miles per hour. Car manufacturers including General Motors, Audi, Nissan, and BMW all expect fully autonomous, driverless cars to be in dealership showrooms by 2020. As curiosity and demand for these vehicles increase, the need for understanding how the law applies to them also increases. This leads to an important question that could have major implications for the future: what if police departments use this technology to patrol the streets and keep cities safe? This note will analyze and attempt to answer these questions, and will also discuss the technological history of autonomous vehicles, as well as the evolution of applicable law that will dictate the use of these â€œdriverlessâ€ cars. This essay will be broken down into several parts. Part I will give a brief rundown of how autonomous vehicle technology works. Part II will discuss the legality of vehicle automation and the technologies inside the car, including how many of these technologies not only currently exist, but are legally permissible for crime prevention and surveillance purposes. Part II will also look at social acceptability of autonomous vehicles patrolling the streets and enforcing laws. Finally, Part III considers how autonomous vehicles will have the capability to take subjectivity, discretion, and potential prejudice out of patrolling and traffic stops, as well as increasing officer safety and efficiency.
By: Matthew Knopf Introduction:Â On December 9, 2013, the British Newspaper The Guardian published documents fromÂ the National Security Administration (â€œNSA documentsâ€) provided by the whistleblower EdwardÂ Snowden. These documents revealed that surveillance agencies of the United States and UnitedÂ Kingdom governments were conducting intelligence operations in a search for terrorists inside ofÂ massive multiplayer online (â€œMMOâ€) video games such as World of Warcraft and Second Life.Â The documents contained a memo and a series of essays that detailed the ways in which videoÂ games, even those video games that do not directly connect to the Internet, could be used asÂ recruitment and communication tools for terrorists. However, these operations have broughtÂ about privacy concerns for some who worry that their government could or would listen to theirÂ conversations as they are playing these videos games. It is not clear how the governmentÂ collected or accessed the data or communication from these video games. It is likely thatÂ government agents created their own profiles and avatars in these games to access the virtualÂ worlds. Additionally, privacy concerns have not be assuaged by the fact that there is noÂ indication from the documents that any of the intelligence operations led to the foiling of anyÂ terrorist plots or to the arrest of any criminal. The National Security Administration (â€œNSAâ€)Â and the federal government may have free reign to spy on foreign peoples and foreignÂ governments, but under the U.S. Constitution it does not have the legal authority to spy onÂ American citizens without a warrant. Online video games have players who live across the globe and within the United States.Â Many of the computer servers on which the video games operate and communicate are inside ofÂ the United States. Since the intelligence collecting process has not been revealed, it is unclear ifÂ the NSA or other federal agencies have been accessing the data and the monitoringÂ communications of innocent Americans whose identity and nationality may have been concealedÂ behind their virtual avatar. The debate over the expectation of privacy concerning different types of Internet communication is growing, especially concerning social media. Violations ofÂ privacy could hinder player anonymity, which is a key component of certain types of onlineÂ gaming that encourages escapism. On the other hand, ending anonymity could encourage fairerÂ and more civil discourse in the virtual gaming worlds. The revelations of these documents hasÂ led to the question of whether there are any expectations of privacy for video game players andÂ the communications between players which occur within those video games.
By: Michael L. Smith Introduction: On May 1, 2013, the first firearm that had ever been produced with a 3D printer was successfully fired. Several weeks later, an engineer in Wisconsin used his own (relatively) cheap personal 3D printer to make a firearm that successfully fired nine shots. These two developments generated national media attention and prompted calls for restrictions on 3D printed firearms. But critics responded by arguing that restricting 3D printed firearms would violate the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The issue of the Second Amendment implications of 3D printed firearms combines an emerging and evolving area of the law with an even more cutting-edge area of technology. The Second Amendment as an individual right is a recent development: before the Supreme Courtâ€™s 2008 decision, District of Columbia v. Heller, it was far from clear whether the Second Amendment protected an individual right. In the wake of the Courtâ€™s decision in Heller, and its incorporation of Second Amendment rights to the states in McDonald v. City of Chicago, there has been an explosion in scholarly coverage of the Second Amendment as commentators attempt to draw out the implications and limits of the individual right to bear arms. 3D printing is an even more recent development â€“ and courts and commentators are just beginning to address issues that this technology will raise.
By: Matthew Funk Introduction:Â In 1517, Martin Luther put into motion events that would uproot the hegemony of the Catholic Church in Western religion. His Ninety-Five Theses would be the basis for an enormous upheaval of the sacred status quo, and challenge centuries of religious ordering. His â€œprotestâ€ of the practices of the Catholic Church would be disseminated with the power of the printing press, the pinnacle of information technology at the time, and lead to a great fork in the history of Christianity. Protestantism, with unique movements springing up throughout Europe, would ultimately separate from the oversight of the Catholic Church and create a new religious paradigm. No different in principle, but perhaps in scale, has been the upheaval caused by the confessions of former National Security Agency contractor Edward Snowden. His â€œleak of [National Security] [A]gency documents has set off a . . . debate over the proper limits of government surveillance.â€ These leaks have â€œopened an unprecedented window on the details of surveillance by the NSA, including its compilation of logs of virtually all telephone companies in the United States and its collection of e-mails of foreigners from the major American Internet companies.â€ This, in turn, has rippled into raucous calls for a new Reformationâ€”one of Internet, not religious, sovereignty and sensibilities. Such calls implicate the principles undergirding the purposes, governance, and even geography of the Internet. And while the calls may not lead to a catastrophic schism on the scale of Christianityâ€™s division in the 16th century, they are certainly loud enough not only to question policy choices regarding the defining information technology of the new millennium thus far, but also to challenge the traditional dynamics of sovereignty-retention in the face of a global online commons.
Reviewed by: Jenna Furman Since the 1980s, MRI scanners have been used in medicine to help diagnose various conditions, many of which are found in the brain. The use of such scanners has led to advances in understanding the human mind, both its structure and functions. Such advances have led to greater knowledge of neurological diseases and conditions. This subset of the MRIâ€™s imagining technology is typically referred to as â€œneuroimaging.â€ However, recently many academics and doctors have questioned whether MRI technology could be used to one day â€œread the mindsâ€ of those studied. The use of MRI technology in this way raises not only legal issues regarding the right to privacy of the participant but also ethical issues, such as whether it would be appropriate to use this advanced technology to detect cognitive awareness of a person in a vegetative state. This book compiles essays from psychiatrists, neuroscientists, ethicists, anthropologists, philosophizers, and lawyers which address the legal and ethical issues, along with the scientific benefits and social concerns, raised by the possible future use of MRI-imaging technology to â€œread mindsâ€ of patients. This book review will outline certain arguments addressed in these various essays which provide insight into these legal and ethical issues regarding the use of neuroimaging to â€œread minds.â€
By: James Zino The way in which Americans communicate has changed rapidly over the past decade, and the cellular phone has been at the forefront of this revolution, reaching levels of market maturation faster than any mainstream technology since the television. What started as a tool to place calls while on the go has evolved into a device with the processing power of a small computer, where millions of people call, text, tweet, video chat, and stream hours of content every day right from the palm of their hands. While there is no doubt that consumer technology has made incredible strides since the first iPhone ushered in a new product market in 2007 with estimated opening day sales of up to 1 million units, what has changed even more is the invisible infrastructure that allows consumers to be wirelessly connected from even the most remote parts of the country. Although most Americans are familiar with the countryâ€™s â€œBig Fourâ€ national cellular providers, (Verizon Wireless, AT&T, Sprint, and T-Mobile), what actually enables these companies to provide wireless internet and cellular service is less well-known. This capability comes from certain bands of the electromagnetic spectrum, which have become an increasingly indispensable commodity for network providers as demand for cellular service surges. Control and licensing of radio spectrum is controlled by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA). While the NTIA handles the use of spectrum for federal government purposes, the FCC administersÂ spectrum regulation and licensing for all other uses, including state, local, and commercial functions.
By:Â YooNa Lim Discrimination by lawyers against individuals who are deaf and hard of hearing is not a rare occurrence. Many lawyers decline to represent deaf and hard of hearing individuals as clients, despite the protection of federal and state laws to prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability. Hearing impairments cover a significant range â€“ from those who may not even be aware they have difficulty hearing to those who are deaf and use sign language. Statistics suggest that approximately more than 37 million people, or 16 percent of the population of age above 18, of the United States, report having some degree of difficulty hearing. Despite the large population of the deaf and hard of hearing community, many attorneys fail to recognize their legal obligation to accommodate individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing. Many private attorneys are unfamiliar with their obligations under the ADA or others are unwilling to incur the costs to provide the necessary communication access services. Consequently, it has become difficult for many deaf and hard of hearing individuals to retain attorneys for common legal counseling that are widely provided, such as criminal law proceedings, family law issues, probate, and employment law matters. Even when a deaf or hard of hearing individual successfully meets an attorney, without effective communication, the attorney cannot provide proper representation, unfulfilling their professional responsibilities.Â Because of the communication barrier, the client may not understand the nature of their legal issue.
By: Sachpreet Bains Introduction: Letâ€™s start with a simple question. How much are you willing to spend on a pair of shoes? Write three zeros on a piece of paper. Now, place a five in front of the three zeros. Next, place a comma after the five. Lastly, place a dollar sign at the very beginning. You have now written down the â€œsmallâ€ amount of â€œ$5,000.â€ It is very hard to justify spending $5,000 on a pair of stylish shoes. In my twenty-six years, the most I have ever spent on a pair of shoes is about $200.00. The French luxury brand, Christian Louboutin, is most renowned and notorious for the high-end shoes it produces for both genders. The brand caters to the wealthy population throughout the world, as its luxury line of shoes can be sold in retail stores for up to $6,000 a pair.1 Known for its red lacquered sole, Louboutin successfully applied for a trademark in 2008. This trademark dealt strictly with how red paint was used on the sole of the shoe. When Yves St. Laurent (which has now changed its name to Saint Laurent Paris) made high-heeled shoes incorporating red soles in its 2009 collection, Louboutin sued for trademark infringement and unfair competition under the Lanham Act.2 This note focuses primarily on the District Court and Second Circuit Court of Appeals decision and the difficulties of trademarking a single color in todayâ€™s legal world, along with the road to Louboutin successfully being able to retain his trademark for the red lacquered soles of his shoes.