2014 Syllabus

CPSC 185: Control, Privacy and Technology
Brad Rosen (brad.rosen@yale.edu)

TAs:  Julia Knight (julia.knight@yale.edu) & Harrison Korn (harrison.korn@yale.edu)
F, 3:30-5:30, WLH 204

Course Readings:  Please Skim The Syllabi from  2013, 2012, 2011 and 2010.

(1) Crazy Laws & Prosecutorial Discretion (Jan. 24 – Intro & Overview)

  1. 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/
  2. Lon Fuller, The Case of The Speluncean Explorers: http://www.nullapoena.de/stud/explorers.html
  3. Miller v. Skumanick,  Order  [Order] (Optional: Skim Complaint [Complaint])
  4. Miller v. Skumanick,  3rd Cir. Appeal Pages: 4-11, Skim 14-21, 22-35.
  5. United States v. Dougherty 473 F.2d 1113 (D.C. Cir. 1974) condensed opinion
  6. 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)
  7. 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” (Jan. 31)

  1. 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
  2. California v. Greenwood, 486 U.S. 35 (1988), including Brennan’s Dissent:
http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/486/35/case.html
  3. Kyllo v. U.S., 533 U.S. 27 (2001): http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-8508.ZO.html
  4. Time Magazine, Antonin Scalia, Civil Libertarian:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,130509,00.html
  5. U.S. v. Camacho, 368 F3d 1182 (9th Cir. 2004): http://openjurist.org/368/f3d/1182/united-states-v-camacho
  6. Forbes, Scanner Vans Allow Drive By Snooping, http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2010/0927/technology-x-rays-homeland-security-aclu-drive-by-snooping.html
  7. 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/
  8. Opening Brief For Petitioners, EPIC v. Napolitano, http://epic.org/EPIC_Body_Scanner_OB.pdf (pp. 1-19, 31-33)[OPTIONAL]
  9. Complaint, Ventura v. Napolitano, http://static.infowars.com/2011/01/i/general/Ventura_lawsuit.pdf (skim)[OPTIONAL]
  10. 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/
  11. 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
  12. Gonzalez v Schenectady, 2d Cir (Slip. Op. 2013)

 

(3) Search and Seizure, 2.0 (Feb. 7)

  1. 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

  1. U.S. v. Garcia, 474 F3d 994 (7th Cir. 2007): http://openjurist.org/474/f3d/994/united-states-v-garcia
  2. 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)
  3. Delaware v. Holden [PDF] (read pp. 1-7, 9-17)
  4. 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
  5. U.S. v. Jones (2012) (read all opinions): http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/10-1259.pdf
  6. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2013/10/third-circuit-agrees-eff-warrant-required-track-car-gps
  7. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2013/07/again-federal-court-finds-cops-dont-need-a-warrant-for-cellphone-location-data/
  8. Optional: Application for Historical Cell Site Data [PDF] (read pp. 1-4, 15 – 35, skim pp. 5-14 [Conclusions of Fact])
  9. 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

  1. Chris Rovzar’s Article: http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2011/05/a_brief_history_of_perp_walks.html
  2. 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
  3. Caldarola 343 F.3d 570 (2d Cir. 2003): http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-2nd-circuit/1371024.html
  4. Mugged by a Mug Shot Online

 

(4) Right Against Self Incrimination (Feb. 14)

  1. U.S. v. Cohen, 388 F2d 464 (9th Cir. 1967): http://openjurist.org/388/f2d/464/united-states-v-cohen
  2. U.S. v. Boucher, 2007 WL 4246473 (D. Vt. Nov. 29 2007): read the Magistrate Order first, then the Appeal
  3. Bronston v. U.S., 409 U.S. 352 (1973): http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=409&invol=352
  4. Brogan v. U.S., 522 U.S. 398 (1998): (note that the Souter and Stevens opinions are extremely short)
    1. Scalia’s Opinion: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-1579.ZO.html
    2. Souter’s Concurrence: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-1579.ZC.html
    3. Ginsburg’s Concurrence: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-1579.ZC1.html
    4. Stevens’s Dissent: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/96-1579.ZD.html
  5. Andrew J. Ungberg,  Protecting Privacy Through a Responsible Decryption Policy: SKIM [PDF]
  6. 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/
  7. 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!) (Feb. 21)

  1. U.S. v. Hubbell, 530 U.S. 27 (2000): http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-166.ZO.html
  2. Thomas’s Concurrence: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/99-166.ZC.html

Search by government employer (will be more on private employers next week)

  1. Ontario v. Quon, US Supreme Court
  2. 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

  1. U.S. v. Arnold, 523 F.3d 941 (9th Cir. 2008): district court opinion; Ninth Circuit opinion
  2. Techdirt, Think Tank Says DHS Should Stop Border Laptop Searches (also skim full report here)
  3. Kashmir Hill, The Price to Cross the Border

Cell phone searches

  1. Ars, Police Seizure of Text Messages Violated 4th Amendment
  2. People v. Diaz, California Supreme Court
  3. State v. Smith, Ohio Supreme Court
  4. United States v. Garvey, US Virgin Islands
  5. United States v. Flores-Lopez, 7th Cir
  6. Riley v. California
    1. Petition for cert
    2. Brief amici curiae of Center for Democracy & Technology and Electronic Frontier Foundation
    3. Optional: Brief amicus curiae of National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers
    4. Optional: Brief amicus curiae of Constitutional Accountability Center
    5. Optional: Brief of respondent California in opposition
  7. Skim: United States v. Wurie Petition for a writ of certiorari
  8. Where Police Can & Can’t Snoop Through Your Phone

 

(6) Emails, Passwords and Consent (Feb. 28)

  1. UNITED STATES v. GALPIN
  2. Kashmir Hill, The Geek Squad Becomes the Porn Squad
  3. Thompson v. Ross, W.D. Pa.
  4. U.S. v. Warshak, (6th Cir. 2010), Slip Opinon, (skim 4-13, read p14-29, p. 94-98)
  5. In Re Application of the United States of America for an Order Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §2703(d) —EFF Amicus Brief
  6. Romano v. Steelcase [PDF]
  7. Jennings v. Holly , SC Supreme Court
  8. Cnet, DOJ Abandons Warrantless Attempt to Read Yahoo Email
  9. Who Has Your Back 2013
  10. 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)
  11. Kashmir Hill, Aussie Teen Proves a Lover’s Revenge Is Best Served Digitally
  12. 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)

Email in the workplace

  1. Stengart v. Loving Care, 990 A.2d 650 (2010), https://www.courtlistener.com/nj/8AYZ/stengart-v-loving-care-agency/
  2. 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
  3. 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?
  4. Smyth v. Pillsbury Co., 914 F. Supp. 97 (E.D. Pa. 1996): http://www.loundy.com/CASES/Smyth_v_Pillsbury.html (Skim)
  5. United States v. Hamilton (4th Circuit 2012)
  6. 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-
  7. Venkat Balasubramani, Ex-Employees Awarded $4,000 for Email Snooping by Employer

 

(7) Right to Record and Wiretapping (March 7)

Recording police officers

  1. ACLU v. Alvarez
  2. Sharp v. Baltimore
  3. Justice Dept. defends public’s constitutional ‘right to record’ cops 
  4. DOJ letter
  5. Cops Roll Out Citizen Video Order

Secretly recording sex

  1. NY v. Piznarski  (Read up to page 12, skim the rest)
  2. Charges target sex taping in dorm
  3. Desfeux granted special probation 

Other recording

  1. Caro v. Weintraub 
  2. Dillon v. Seattle Deposition Reporters 
  3. ABC wins appeal over hidden camera investigation of medical lab (Optional: opinion)

Government wiretapping

  1. In re National Security Agency Telecommunications Records Litigation, No. 06-1791 (N.D.C.A. June 3, 2009) (Only Pages 2-6): http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/att/orderhepting6309_0.pdf
  2. FBI pushes for surveillance backdoors in Web 2.0 tools
  3. http://www.fbi.gov/news/testimony/going-dark-lawful-electronic-surveillance-in-the-face-of-new-technologies
  4. N.S.A. Said to Search Content of Messages to and From U.S.
  5. US v. Muhtorov
  6. NSA infiltrates links to Yahoo, Google data centers worldwide, Snowden documents say
  7. Here’s how phone metadata can reveal your affairs, abortions, and other secrets
  8. British Spies Said to Intercept Yahoo Webcam Images

 

(8) Data Brokers and Data Breaches (March 28)

  1. The Data Brokers: Selling your personal information
  2. 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
  3. EPIC, Choicepoint Home (browse/skim): http://epic.org/privacy/choicepoint/
  4. EPIC, FTC Letter – Request for investigation into data broker products for compliance with the Fair Credit Reporting Act:http://epic.org/privacy/choicepoint/fcraltr12.16.04.html
  5. Escaping the Scrapers, WSJ, http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2010/10/11/escaping-the-scrapers/
  6. Press Release, Leahy Renews Push For Data Privacy Legislation, http://www.leahy.senate.gov/press/press_releases/release/?id=31e641c0-013e-4abc-8148-2c4f04ac3a86

Spokeo

  1. Lawsuits Challenge US Online Data Brokers (Reuters Legal, Feb. 24, 2011):http://www.reu dters.com/assets/print?aid=USN2427826420110224
  2. Purcell v. Spokeo, Complaint  [PDF] (pp. 1-5)
  3. Court Revives Lawsuit Against Spokeo

Data Breaches

  1. Private Information Stolen from Nationwide Consumer Database (ConsumerAffairs.com, Feb. 16, 2005): http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/choicepoint.html
  2. ChoicePoint Details Data Breach Lessons
  3. ChoicePoint-FBI Deal Raises New Privacy Questions
  4. ChoicePoint to pay $275,000 in latest data breach (CNET.com, Oct. 20, 2009):http://news.cnet.com/8301-27080_3-10379722-245.html
  5. The Target Data Breach is Becoming a Nightmare
  6. Calif. attorney general: Time to crack down on companies that don’t encrypt

 

(9) Aggregation Effect and Critics of Privacy (April 4)

A. Aggregation Effect

  1. How Privacy Vanishes Online (N.Y. Times, Mar. 17, 2010):http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/17/technology/17privacy.html
  2. 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)
  3. Apple Sets May 1 Deadline to Cut off UDID
  4. Fingerprinting and Beyond
  5. 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
  6. CDT Memo on Sorrell v. IMS, http://www.cdt.org/files/pdfs/20110324_SorrellvIMS.pdf
  7. 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
  8. 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
  9. When Anonymous Data Sometimes Isn’t, Wired, (Dec. 13, 2007), http://www.wired.com/politics/security/commentary/securitymatters/2007/12/securitymatters_1213
  10. Google Thinks I’m a Middle-Aged Man. What About You? (Mashable.com, Jan. 25, 2012): http://mashable.com/2012/01/25/google-cookies/
  11. When Worlds Collide…
  12. 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
  13. Facebook Users Want More Privacy, Nudged Towards Less, Study Finds (Also finds Water, Wet. Pope, Catholic)
  14. Explore: http://actualfacebookgraphsearches.tumblr.com/
  15. Teens, Social Media, and Privacy http://www.pewinternet.org/2013/05/21/teens-social-media-and-privacy/

B. Critics of Privacy

  1. “Critics of Privacy.” Solove and Schwartz, Information Privacy Law (4th), pp. 62-69. (PDF will be distributed via email)

 

(10)  If you’re not paying for it…(and then what do they do with it?) (April 11)

  1. (skim) WSJ Privacy Coverage: One, Two, Three, Four, Five, Six, Seven, Eight
  2. Terms and Conditions: A movie about privacy policies you’ll actually want to watch
  3. Judge: Google’s Tracking Not Harmful
  4. Dana Milbank, Washington Post, From Tracking Al-Qaeda to tracking the wayward spouse, http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/from-tracking-al-qaeda-to-tracking-the-wayward-spouse/2012/04/03/gIQAF75ytS_story.html

A. Social Media and employment

  1. 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)
  2. Job Seekers Asked for Facebook Passwords, AP (Mar. 20, 2012), http://finance.yahoo.com/news/job-seekers-getting-asked-facebook-080920368.html
  3. Senator Wants To Make It Illegal For Employers To Ask For Your Facebook Password, Kash Hill/Forbes, (Mar. 22, 2012), http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/03/22/senator-wants-to-make-it-illegal-for-employers-to-ask-for-your-facebook-password/
  4. Facebook Condemns Companies That Demand User Logins, Wired, (Mar. 23, 2012), http://www.wired.com/wiredenterprise/2012/03/facebook-password-employers/
  5. The Atlantic, Should Employers Be Allowed to Ask For Your Facebook Password?
  6. Wait Until The Courts Get Hold Of This Vague, Stupid Facebook Law
  7. Millennial Fired For Tweet
  8. 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, and courts

  1. Reuters, In US Courts, Facebook Posts Become Less Private
  2. Ehling v. Monmouth Ocean
  3. Forbes, Judge Orders Divorcing Couple to Swap Facebook Passwords
  4. When Tweets Can Make You a Jailbird (N.Y. Times, Mar. 16, 2010): http://www.law.com/jsp/lawtechnologynews/PubArticleLTN.jsp?id=1202446309011&slreturn=1&hbxlogin=1
  5. NYPD’s Social Media Unit Will Track Criminals On Facebook, Twitter (HuffPo, Aug. 10, 2011), http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/10/nypd-social-media_n_923208.html
  6. Global Manhunt Will Leverage Social Media To Find Suspects, Cnet, (Mar. 25, 2012), http://news.cnet.com/8301-13772_3-57403976-52/global-manhunt-will-leverage-social-media-to-find-suspects/

C. Data Privacy and Marketing

  1. 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
  2. Facebook to Shut Down Ad Program
  3. Facebook Test-Drives Real Time Ad Targeting, http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2382544,00.asp
  4. 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/
  5. Kash Hill, Don’t Want To Be Targeted by Target?  There’s an Opt Out, http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2012/02/22/dont-want-to-be-targeted-by-target-theres-an-opt-out/
  6. Amazon Wants to Ship Your Package Before You Buy It
  7. Time, Private Eyes – Retailers watching our every move, http://business.time.com/2012/09/18/private-eyes-are-retailers-watching-our-every-move/
  8. Obama Campaign Misjudged Mac Users, http://www.forbes.com/sites/kashmirhill/2013/04/16/obama-campaign-misjudged-mac-users-based-on-orbitzs-experience-says-chief-data-scientist/
  9. Startup Lets Users Track Who Tracks them, http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/16/palo-alto-start-up-lets-users-track-who-tracks-them/

 

(11) Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur) (Apr. 18)

A. EPIC / Facebook

  1. Facebook Settles FTC Charges That It Deceived Consumers By Failing To Keep Privacy Promises, http://www.ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2011/11/facebook-settles-ftc-charges-it-deceived-consumers-failing-keep

  2. (Skim) Facebook FTC Complaint, http://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/cases/2011/11/111129facebookcmpt.pdf and Consent Order http://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/cases/2012/08/120810facebookdo.pdf

  3. EPIC – Public Opinion on Privacy http://epic.org/privacy/survey/  (skim)

  4. EPIC – Facebook Privacy http://epic.org/privacy/facebook/ (skim)

  5. Written Congressional Testimony of Marc Rotenberg, July 28, 2010, http://epic.org/privacy/socialnet/EPIC_Testimony_House_Jud_7_10.pdf

B. FTC / Mobile

  1. http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/opinion-la/la-ol-ftc-rules-for-twitter-20130312,0,1847653.story

  2. http://www.politico.com/story/2013/03/privacy-issues-at-top-of-edith-ramirezs-federal-trade-commissione-agenda-88663.html

  3. (skim) http://www.ftc.gov/os/2012/12/121210mobilekidsappreport.pdf (don’t skim the  methodology portions)

  4. (skim) http://www.ftc.gov/speeches/rosch/120914TheMentorGroupBostonParisFrance.pdf

  5. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/02/technology/ftc-suggests-do-not-track-feature-for-mobile-software-and-apps.html?_r=0

  6. http://articles.latimes.com/2013/feb/01/business/la-fi-tn-ftc-mobile-privacy-consumers-report-20130201

  7. http://thehill.com/blogs/hillicon-valley/technology/287089-new-ftc-chief-vows-to-continue-push-for-online-privacy

  8. FTC, Protecting Consumer Privacy in an Era of Rapid Change, http://www.ftc.gov/os/2012/03/120326privacyreport.pdf

C. Governance Regimes (Skim all)

  1. Privacy Governance by Contract, by Self-Regulation, by Property, and by Statute (excerpts from Information Privacy Law 808-10 (Daniel J. Solove & Paul M. Schwartz eds., 2009)) (read the attached PDF)

  2. California OAG – Privacy Principles http://ag.ca.gov/cms_attachments/press/pdfs/n2630_signed_agreement.pdf?.

  3. Consumer Data Privacy in a Networked World, http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/privacy-final.pdf

  4. The FTC and the New Common Law of Privacy (download paper) http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2312913

 

 

(12) Theories of Privacy Rights: Penumbras and Unintended Consequences (Apr. 25):

  1. Samuel D. Warren & Louis D. Brandeis, The Right to Privacy, 4 Harv. L. Rev. 5 (1890). (attached as PDF)

  2. 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

  3. 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

  4. 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)

  5. 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)

  6. Catsouras v. Dept. of Cal. Hwy. Patrol, 181 Cal. App. 4th 856 (2010) [only pages 10-18] (attached as PDF)

  7. 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

  8. 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

  9. 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

  10. Facebook Memorial Sites Taking Hold, http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-501366_162-6172718.html

  11. Google Inactive Account Manager, http://techcrunch.com/2013/04/11/googles-afterlife/

  12. 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

  13. National archives v. Favish, 541 U.S. 157 (2004) (Opinion by Kennedy):http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/02-954.ZO.html

  14. Marsh v. San Diego http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2012/05/30/11-55395.pdf

  15. Kiel Brennan Marquez, “A modest defense of mind-reading” http://yjolt.org/modest-defense-mind-reading

  16. Refresh Lon Fuller, The Case of The Speluncean Explorers:http://www.nullapoena.de/stud/explorers.html

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

Gravatar
WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out /  Change )

Cancel

Connecting to %s