CPSC 185: Control, Privacy and Technology
Brad Rosen (brad.rosen@yale.edu)
Spring 2020
TAs: Cole Rianda, Erica Chae
F, 3:30-5:30, WLH [TBD]
Course Readings: Please Skim The Syllabi from 2019, 2018, 2017,2016, 2015, 2014, 2013, etc.
(1) Crazy Laws & Prosecutorial Discretion
- Inmates of Attica Correctional Facility v Rockerfeller, 477 F2d 375 (2d Cir. 1973):http://cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/F2/477/375/1514/
- Lon Fuller, The Case of The Speluncean Explorers
- Miller v. Skumanick, Order [Order] (Optional: Skim Complaint [Complaint])
- Miller v. Skumanick, 3rd Cir. Appeal Pages: 4-11, Skim 14-21, 22-35.
- United States v. Dougherty 473 F.2d 1113 (D.C. Cir. 1974) condensed opinion
- United States v. Krzyske, 857 F.2d 1089 (6th Cir. 1988) and United States v. Krzyske, 836 F.2d 1013 (6th Cir. 1988) (read sections on jury nullification)
- Tang, Xiyin: The Perverse Logic of Teen Sexting Prosecutions (And How To Stop It)
[N.B. The Fuller Article and the Inmates of Attica case serve as a framework for a number of the issues we will discuss in the class].
2) Search, Seizure, and “Reasonable Expectations”
- Katz v. U.S., 389 U.S. 347 (1967):
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0389_0347_ZO.html
Harlan’s Concurrence: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0389_0347_ZC1.html - California v. Greenwood, 486 U.S. 35 (1988), including Brennan’s Dissent: http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/486/35/case.html
- Kyllo v. U.S., 533 U.S. 27 (2001): http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-8508.ZO.html
- Florida v. Riley, 488 U.S. 445 (1989): https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/488/445/case.html
- Re-read: California v. Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207 (1986): https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/476/207/ (this is from 183)
- Time Magazine, Antonin Scalia, Civil Libertarian: http://content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,130509,00.html
- U.S. v. Camacho, 368 F3d 1182 (9th Cir. 2004): http://openjurist.org/368/f3d/1182/united-states-v-camacho
- Forbes, Scanner Vans Allow Drive By Snooping, http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0927/technology-x-rays-homeland-security-aclu-drive-by-snooping.html
- Andy Greenberg, Full-Body Scan Technology Deployed in Street-Roving Vans,http://blogs.forbes.com/andygreenberg/2010/08/24/full-body-scan-technology-deployed-in-street-roving-vans/
- Raw Story, Naked-image full-body scanners to be taken out of U.S. airports, http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/18/naked-image-full-body-scanners-to-be-taken-out-of-u-s-airports/
- Washington Post, How My Shirt Flummoxed the TSA, http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/travel/how-my-shirt-flummoxed-the-tsa/2011/09/19/gIQA2PZwqK_story.html
- Gonzalez v Schenectady, 2d Cir (Slip. Op. 2013)
(3) Search and Seizure, 2.0
- U.S. v. Knotts, 460 U.S. 276 (1983) (Read the Case Syllabus Only): http://supreme.justia.com/us/460/276/case.html (Optional Skim Case)
Use of GPS / Phones
- U.S. v. Garcia, 474 F3d 994 (7th Cir. 2007): http://openjurist.org/474/f3d/994/united-states-v-garcia
- People v. Weaver, 2009 N.Y. Slip Op. 03762: [pdf] (read pp. 1-28 and fn 1 on p. 29 — n.b. page numbers are of the pdf, as each opinion has its own page numbers)
- Delaware v. Holden [PDF] (read pp. 1-7, 9-17)
- U.S. v. Pineda Moreno, 9th Cir. Opinion: http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1497005.html AND Dissent from Denial of en banc:http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/08/12/08-30385.pdf
- U.S. v. Jones (2012) (read all opinions): http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-1259.pdf
- https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/10/third-circuit-agrees-eff-warrant-required-track-car-gps
- http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/07/again-federal-court-finds-cops-dont-need-a-warrant-for-cellphone-location-data/
- https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/11/bipartisanship-supreme-court/547124/
- Carpenter v. US (2018), https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/17pdf/16-402_h315.pdf (read/skim as you deem appropriate/interesting)
- Maryland v. Andrews, http://www.mdcourts.gov/opinions/cosa/2016/1496s15.pdf(skim)
- Optional: Application for Historical Cell Site Data [PDF] (read pp. 1-4, 15 – 35, skim pp. 5-14 [Conclusions of Fact])
- Optional: Read Case Syllabus Only from U.S. v. Karo, 486 U.S. 705 (1984), http://supreme.justia.com/us/468/705/case.html
Perp walks
- A brief history of perp walks: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2011/05/a_brief_history_of_perp_walks.html
- Lauro v. Charles, 219 F.3d 202 (2d Cir. 2000): https://law.resource.org/pub/us/case/reporter/F3/219/219.F3d.202.99-7239.1999.html
- Caldarola 343 F.3d 570 (2d Cir. 2003): http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-2nd-circuit/1371024.html
- Mugged by a Mug Shot Online
(4) Right Against Self Incrimination
- U.S. v. Cohen, 388 F2d 464 (9th Cir. 1967): http://openjurist.org/388/f2d/464/united-states-v-cohen
- U.S. v. Boucher, 2007 WL 4246473 (D. Vt. Nov. 29 2007): read the Magistrate Order first, then the Appeal
- Bronston v. U.S., 409 U.S. 352 (1973): http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=409&invol=352
- Brogan v. U.S., 522 U.S. 398 (1998): (note that the Souter and Stevens opinions are extremely short)
- Scalia’s Opinion: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-1579.ZO.html
- Souter’s Concurrence: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-1579.ZC.html
- Ginsburg’s Concurrence: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-1579.ZC1.html
- Stevens’s Dissent: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-1579.ZD.html
- FROM HERE DOWN: You can skim more than read unless otherwise noted.
- Andrew J. Ungberg, Protecting Privacy Through a Responsible Decryption Policy: SKIM [PDF] [This is now VERY long in the tooth — I want you to see how much things have changed.]
- Techdirt: Massachusetts Ignores 5th Amendment; Says Defendant Can Be Forced To Decrypt His Computer
- Techdirt: Another Court Says Compelled Disclosure Doesn’t Violate 5th
- EFF’s Know Your Rights: https://www.eff.org/issues/know-your-rights
- Apple’s Fingerprint ID May Mean You Can’t ‘Take the Fifth’ http://www.wired.com/opinion/2013/09/the-unexpected-result-of-fingerprint-authentication-that-you-cant-take-the-fifth/
- Forcing Suspects to Reveal Phone Passwords Is Unconstitutional – http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/09/forcing-suspects-to-reveal-phone-passwords-is-unconstitutional-court-says/ (also skim the linked court opinion in SEC v. Huang)
- Fifth Amendment Limits on Forced Decryption
- Compelled Decryption and the Privilege Against Self-Incrimination [READ MORE THAN SKIM]
- Minnesota Court on the Fifth Amendment (skim linked TouchID post)
- Murphy v. Waterfront Comm’n of N.Y. Harbor, 378 U.S. 52 (1964) (Sub-Optional – We were going to have you read this, but we decided it was way too boring. Here’s the link in case you’re interested, but we won’t even call it “optional.”): http://openjurist.org/378/us/52/murphy-v-waterfront-commission-of-new-york-harbor
(5) Laptops, Documents & TXT MSGS (oh mai!)
- U.S. v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27 (2000): http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-166.ZO.html
- Thomas’s Concurrence: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-166.ZC.html
- Arizona v. Hicks, 480 US 321 (1987): https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/480/321/case.html
Search by government employer (will be more on private employers next week)
- Ontario v. Quon, US Supreme Court
- Optional/Skim: Quon v. Arch Wireless, 529 F.3d. 892 (9th Cir. 2008) Ninth Circuit: Opinion; Ikuta’s Dissent; Wardlaw’s Concurrence
Searches at the border
- U.S. v. Arnold, 523 F.3d 941 (9th Cir. 2008): district court opinion; Ninth Circuit opinion
- US v. Jae Shik Kim: district court opinion
- United States v. Cotterman: Ninth circuit en banc
- Techdirt, Think Tank Says DHS Should Stop Border Laptop Searches (also skim full report here)
- Kashmir Hill, The Price to Cross the Border
- https://www.aclu.org/news/aclu-eff-sue-over-warrantless-phone-and-laptop-searches-us-border
- http://www.zdnet.com/article/warrantless-phone-laptop-searches-at-the-us-border-hit-record-levels/
- https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/us-customs-agents-are-searching-more-cellphones–including-those-belonging-to-americans/2018/01/05/0a236202-f247-11e7-b3bf-ab90a706e175_story.html
Cell phone searches
- Ars, Police Seizure of Text Messages Violated 4th Amendment
- People v. Diaz, California Supreme Court
- State v. Smith, Ohio Supreme Court
- United States v. Garvey, US Virgin Islands
- United States v. Flores-Lopez, 7th Cir
- Riley v. California Sup Ct.
- Where Police Can & Can’t Snoop Through Your Phone
6) Emails, Passwords and Consent
Follow up from last week: Skim Alasaad
- UNITED STATES v. GALPIN
- Kashmir Hill, The Geek Squad Becomes the Porn Squad
- Thompson v. Ross, W.D. Pa.
- U.S. v. Warshak, (6th Cir. 2010), Slip Opinon, (skim 4-13, read p14-29, p. 94-98)
- Romano v. Steelcase [PDF]
- Jennings v. Holly , SC Supreme Court
- Forman v. Henkin, NYCA
- ABC News, Man Faces Five Years in Prison for Snooping Through Wife’s Emails (Update: CBS Detroit, Final Charges Dropped in Husband-Wife Hacking Case)
- Kashmir Hill, Aussie Teen Proves a Lover’s Revenge Is Best Served Digitally
- Judge dismisses case against Brooklyn man who shared nude photos of girlfriend on his Twitter account (full opinion: http://www.courts.state.ny.us/reporter/3dseries/2014/2014_50193.htm)
- Reddit Bans Nude Photos Posted Without Consent
Email in the workplace
- Stengart v. Loving Care, 990 A.2d 650 (2010), http://caselaw.findlaw.com/nj-supreme-court/1522648.html
- A Company Computer and Questions About E-Mail Privacy (N.Y. Times, June 27, 2008): http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/27/technology/27mail.html?_r=2&adxnnl=1&oref=slogin&ref=business&adxnnlx=1214862365-v6tJmItYLdKLKVEcpU7/bQ
- Rebels in Black Robes Recoil at Surveillance of Computers (N.Y. Times, Aug. 8, 2001):http://www.nytimes.com/2001/08/08/national/08COUR.html?
- Smyth v. Pillsbury Co., 914 F. Supp. 97 (E.D. Pa. 1996): http://www.loundy.com/CASES/Smyth_v_Pillsbury.html (Skim)
- United States v. Hamilton (4th Circuit 2012)
- California Judge Confirms Police Officers’ Rights Were Violated By Hidden Locker Room Camera (ACLU.org, Apr. 4, 2006): http://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/california-judge-confirms-police-officers-rights-were-violated-hidden-locker-
- Venkat Balasubramani, Ex-Employees Awarded $4,000 for Email Snooping by Employer
7) Recordings
Recording police officers
- ACLU v. Alvarez
- Sharp v. Baltimore
- Justice Dept. defends public’s constitutional ‘right to record’ cops
- DOJ letter
- Cops Roll Out Citizen Video Order
- Yes, You Have A Right to Record The Police
- The Danger In Recording A Cop
- What To Say When The Police Tell You To Stop Filming Them
- Police Must Respect Citizen’s Right To Record Them
- Federal Judge: Recording Cops Isn’t Necessarily Protected By 1st Amendment
- Fields v. Philadelphia (read it now before it gets overturned)
- Fields v. Philadelphia (3rd Circuit… overturned 😀 )
- A Major Victory For the Right to Record Police
- Verkada (Watch this video)
- Martin & Pérez v. Gross (skim)
Secretly recording sex
- NY v. Piznarski (Read up to page 12, skim the rest)
- Charges target sex taping in dorm
- Desfeux granted special probation
Other recording
- Caro v. Weintraub
- Dillon v. Seattle Deposition Reporters
- ABC wins appeal over hidden camera investigation of medical lab (Optional: opinion)
- What you need to know when recording your enemies
- This Call May Be Recorded For Quality Assurance Purposes (spend 10 minutes researching “Kearney v. Salomon Smith Barney — review whatever resources you deem readable and send me the links along with your reading response).
8) If you’re not paying for it…(and then what do they do with it?)
- (skim) WSJ Privacy Coverage: One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, Seven, Eight
- Terms and Conditions: A movie about privacy policies you’ll actually want to watch [watch some time at your discretion]
A. Social Media and employment (NOTE HOW OLD THESE READINGS ARE)
- Keeping a Closer Eye on Employees’ Social Networking (NYTimes.com, Mar. 26, 2010):http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/03/26/keeping-a-closer-eye-on-workers-social-networking/?scp=1&sq=facebook%20employers&st=cse.
- OPTIONAL – For a 2009 study on the rate at which employers search for applicants’ profiles, see the following CareerBuilder.com report, published Aug. 19, 2009:http://www.careerbuilder.com/share/aboutus/pressreleasesdetail.aspx?id=pr519&sd=8/19/2009&ed=12/31/2009&siteid=cbpr&sc_cmp1=cb_pr519_&cbRecursionCnt=2&cbsid=f430eced50a44966a0c38ab247728f26-323142413-RF-4
- The Atlantic, Should Employers Be Allowed to Ask For Your Facebook Password?
- GigaOm, What happens when social surveillance goes mainstream? http://gigaom.com/2012/04/02/what-happens-when-social-surveillance-goes-mainstream/
B. Social media, police, passwords, and courts
- Reuters, In US Courts, Facebook Posts Become Less Private
- Ehling-v.-Monmouth-Ocean-Hospital-SCA [repeat from 183]
- Forbes, Judge Orders Divorcing Couple to Swap Facebook Passwords
- When Tweets Can Make You a Jailbird
- Criminal Selfies: One, Two, Three
- The Federal Crime Nobody Talks About In Making A Murderer
C. Data Privacy and Marketing
- Facebook is Marketing Your Brand Preferences (With Your Permission) (N.Y. Times, Nov. 7, 2007):http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/07/technology/07adco.html
- Facebook to Shut Down Ad Program
- Facebook Test-Drives Real Time Ad Targeting, http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2382544,00.asp
- Kash Hill, How Target Figured Out a Teen Girl Was Pregnant Before Her Father Did, http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/02/16/how-target-figured-out-a-teen-girl-was-pregnant-before-her-father-did/
- Kash Hill, When An App Tells Companies You’re Pregnant But Not That You’ve Miscarried, http://fusion.net/story/345471/what-to-expect-app-privacy-problems/
- Kash Hill, Facebook and your friends. One. Two.
- Vibrator Spies On You.
- Amazon Wants to Ship Your Package Before You Buy It
- Time, Private Eyes – Retailers watching our every move, http://business.time.com/2012/09/18/private-eyes-are-retailers-watching-our-every-move/
9) Data Aggregation, Brokers, and BreachesA. Aggregation Effect
- How Privacy Vanishes Online (N.Y. Times, Mar. 17, 2010):http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/17/technology/17privacy.html
- Cookies, Web Bugs, and In re Doubleclick Inc. Privacy Litigation, 154 F. Supp. 2d 497 (S.D.N.Y. 2001) (from Information Privacy Law 808-10 (Daniel J. Solove & Paul M. Schwartz eds., 2009)) (read the entire attached PDF)
- Apple Sets May 1 Deadline to Cut off UDID
- Fingerprinting and Beyond
- Law Students Teach Scalia About Privacy and the Web (N.Y. Times, May 18, 2009): http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/18/technology/internet/18link.html
- A Face Is Exposed for AOL Searcher No. 4417749 (N.Y. Times, Aug. 9, 2006):http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/09/technology/09aol.html?pagewanted=1
- AOL search data release reveals a great deal (USAToday.com, Aug. 17, 2006):http://www.usatoday.com/tech/columnist/andrewkantor/2006-08-17-aol-data_x.htm
- Google Thinks I’m a Middle-Aged Man. What About You? (Mashable.com, Jan. 25, 2012): http://mashable.com/2012/01/25/google-cookies/
- Facebook Graph – Privacy Control You Still Don’t Have https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/01/facebook-graph-search-privacy-control-you-still-dont-have
- Facebook Users Want More Privacy, Nudged Towards Less, Study Finds (Also finds Water, Wet. Pope, Catholic)
- Explore: http://actualfacebookgraphsearches.tumblr.com/
- Teens, Social Media, and Privacy http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/05/21/teens-social-media-and-privacy/
- “Critics of Privacy.” Solove and Schwartz, Information Privacy Law (4th), pp. 62-69. (excerpt)
B. Data Brokers
- The Data Brokers: Selling your personal information
- Joshua L. Simmons, Buying You – The Government’s Use of Fourth-Parties to Launder Data About “The People”: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1475524
- Escaping the Scrapers, WSJ, http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2010/10/11/escaping-the-scrapers/
- Lawsuits Challenge US Online Data Brokers (Reuters Legal, Feb. 24, 2011):http://www.reu dters.com/assets/print?aid=USN2427826420110224
- Spokeo and Privacy Harms
- Data Broker Defendants Settle…. (Skim Complaint)
C. Data Breaches
- Private Information Stolen from Nationwide Consumer Database (ConsumerAffairs.com, Feb. 16, 2005): http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/choicepoint.html
- ChoicePoint Details Data Breach Lessons
- ChoicePoint-FBI Deal Raises New Privacy Questions
- The Target Data Breach is Becoming a Nightmare
- Calif. attorney general: Time to crack down on companies that don’t encrypt
- Post Spokeo Standing
- Standing Issues In Data Breach Litigation
(10) Theories of Privacy Rights: Penumbras and Unintended Consequences :
- Samuel D. Warren & Louis D. Brandeis, The Right to Privacy, 4 Harv. L. Rev. 5 (1890). (attached as PDF)
- Griswold v. Connecticut, 381 U.S. 479 (1965): Douglas’s opinion for the Court:http://www4.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0381_0479_ZO.html; Black’s dissent (first three paragraphs only): http://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/381/479#writing-USSC_CR_0381_0479_ZD
- Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) (Blackmun’s opinion – only preamble (the paragraphs preceding section I) and section VIII):http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0410_0113_ZO.html
- Randall P. Bezanson, The Right to Privacy Revisited: Privacy, News, and Social Change 1890-1990, 80 Cal. L. Rev. 5 (1992) [only pages 1137-1150] (attached as PDF)
- Robert C. Post, The Social Foundations of Privacy: Community and Self in the Common Law Tort, 77 Cal. L. Rev. 5 (1989) [only pages 969-978] (attached as PDF)
- Catsouras v. Dept. of Cal. Hwy. Patrol, 181 Cal. App. 4th 856 (2010) [only pages 10-18] (attached as PDF)
- ABCNews, Families Struggle to Delete Loved One’s Online Presence After Death, http://abcnews.go.com/US/families-struggle-delete-loved-online-presence-death/story?id=15108300#.T4yn4qtQ4iE
- Justia, Facebook’s “If I Die” App Should Remind Us That We Each Need a Digital Death Plan, http://verdict.justia.com/2012/01/17/facebooks-if-i-die-app-should-remind-us-that-we-each-need-a-digital-death-plan
- Facebook Now Lets You Choose Who Controls Your Account After You Die, http://www.theverge.com/2015/2/12/8025117/facebook-account-after-death
- ….but people aren’t using it: http://www.forbes.com/sites/ellenhuet/2015/04/21/digital-asset-legacy-poll/
- Lifehacker, What Should I Do About My Virtual Life After Death, http://lifehacker.com/5617683/what-should-i-do-about-my-virtual-life-after-death
- Facebook Memorial Sites Taking Hold, http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-501366_162-6172718.html
- Google Inactive Account Manager, http://techcrunch.com/2013/04/11/googles-afterlife/
- What Inactive Account Manager means for your will, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/9997105/Google-RIP-What-Inactive-Account-Manager-means-for-your-will.html
- National archives v. Favish, 541 U.S. 157 (2004) (Opinion by Kennedy):http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-954.ZO.html
- Marsh v. San Diego http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2012/05/30/11-55395.pdf
- Chanko v. American Broadcasting Corp
- Rodriguez v Fox
- Kiel Brennan Marquez, “A modest defense of mind-reading” http://yjolt.org/modest-defense-mind-reading
- Refresh Lon Fuller, The Case of The Speluncean Explorers: TheCaseOfTheSpelunceanExplorers