Considering the frequency of headlines warning of recent data breaches in American companies, it is critical that company boards become familiar with cyber-risks.
The development of intelligent algorithms has firms concerned about their exposure to antitrust liability in situations where they are passive participants in cartels formed by their intelligent pricing algorithms.
The SUPPORT Act permits and encourages telemedicine programs aimed at combating opioid addition by expanding Medicare coverage to cover telehealth services for substance use disorders.
While many see the benefits of providing tablets in prisons, the race to enter the market combined with a lack of regulation is a recipe for harm to both prisoners and prison administration.
“Computerized calls are the scourge of modern civilization.” This 1991 quote by Senator Fritz Hollings is as relatable today as it was nearly thirty years ago.
Since humans are biased in hiring, making the process more objective and turning it over to machines could be the answer. Unfortunately, Amazon discontinued an experimental tool after discovering that it showed bias against women.
Exploring the need for standardized insurance requirements for UAVs.
Facebook has been sued for keeping discrimination in employment opportunities alive and well.
The mobile application market is flooded with dating apps: Tinder, OkCupid, Coffee Meets Bagel, Hinge, Bumble, and dozens more. They might make love happen, but they also risk more than just a bad date.
China’s new e-commerce law fights counterfeits and rewards incumbents.
Earlier this week, Facebook announced that 50 million user accounts had been compromised in a data breach. This is just the latest episode in a series of high profile and far-reaching data breaches in which consumers’ sensitive personal and financial information has been exposed or stolen.
How much is Darth Vader worth? This question has, in a roundabout way, caused some legislators and regulators to look at how video games make their money. The recently-released video game Star Wars Battlefront II originally had a profit model which locked large portion of the game off behind timed barriers. One estimate, for example, was that it would take roughly 40 hours to unlock the ability to play as Darth Vader. This wait could be drastically reduced by purchasing loot boxes, which had a chance of containing in-game currency. One estimate claimed that, under Battlefront II’s original pricing model, it would take, on average, over 4500 hours to unlock everything. Conversely, the loot box payout structure would have given the same result for roughly $2100. Although, as of this writing, the game’s publisher has scrapped this pricing model after a huge backlash, it brought the issue of loot boxes to the attention of the public and legislators.
Imagine that you are a journalist producing online content for ESPN at ESPN’s headquarters in Bristol, Connecticut. Your editor assigns you to cover the return of the Auburn Tigers to the top echelons of college football and how the Alabama Crimson Tide, one of the perennial powers of the sport, returned to the College Football Playoff under controversial circumstances.
Drone deliveries have already made an appearance in our online shopping experience. For example, Amazon Prime Air made its first delivery in December 2016 and has made even more ambitious journeys in the United Kingdom. Before all of our parcels are delivered that way, however, there are several regulatory hurdles. The Federal Aviation Administration UAS operational rules require a pilot to operate the drone within a visual line of sight and limits flight times to daylight and twilight hours. The FAA offers waivers for operators who could conduct flight safely; this provision is meant to allow commercial enterprises and other organizations to explore ways to make drone flight technology more safe and secure and to shape future regulations as drone use continues to expand.
As we are reminded of on a near-daily basis, the American lifestyle is not environmentally friendly. Not only do we need to stop using SUVs to cart our kids to soccer, we need to find more sustainable food sources. And in true American fashion, Silicon Valley has risen to the occasion and provided some entrepreneurial solutions.
Aspirin. Escalator. Trampoline. Three generic words with seemingly nothing in common. Those words, along with many others, were once legally protected trademarks. When a company’s mark becomes the generic name for its product or service, it can lose its trademark registration which can be extremely damaging to the company. A recent 9th Circuit decision upholding Google’s trademark may help other trademark owner’s avoid suffering a generic fate.
One of the most important privacy cases this decade is currently in front of the Supreme Court: Carpenter v. United States. This decision will define how law enforcement interprets the Fourth Amendment regarding an individual’s cellphone. The decision hinges on whether law enforcement can use “third-party” doctrine dating from the 70s, which states that disclosing information to a third party does away with any expectation of privacy. We’ve already seen this doctrine in action. It allows law enforcement to compel cell-service providers to give historical cell-site records, without a warrant, to track down a serial cell phone thief. If SCOTUS upholds the current doctrine, then police would have free reign to monitor individuals’ cell phone location with little to no oversight.
On February 15, 2017, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a ruling on a patent dispute about a genome-editing technique called CRISPR-Cas9. The Regents of the University of California, University of Vienna, and a scientist named Emmanuelle Charpentier (collectively “UC”) initiated this legal proceeding, called an interference, against the Broad Institute, Inc., Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and President and Fellows of Harvard College (collectively “Broad”). The three-judge panel unanimously sided with Broad concluding, although temporarily, a legal battle closely watched by scientists, legal professionals and the biotechnology industry. On April 12, 2017, UC filed an appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
Last month when Amazon announced its newest offering, Amazon Key, people were skeptical. Responses ranged from confused, to excited, to, naturally, cautious But now that it has officially arrived people are…still skeptical. And not without good reason.
Hashtags are additions to social media posts that contain meta-data. For example, a couple may create a hashtag for their wedding. This allows people using social network websites, like Twitter, to easily upload and find posts and photos about the wedding.
One interesting question is whether hashtags can be trademarks.
Google-owned artificial intelligence company DeepMind recently succeeded at designing a program capable of defeating some of the world’s best players of Chinese strategy game Go. While this may not appear groundbreaking, the real triumph comes from the fact that while the programmers laid the ground rules, it was the program itself, AlphaGo, that taught itself to play.
On January 11, 2017, the term “fake news” entered the mainstream discourse when Donald Trump, during his first press conference as President-elect, refused to take a question from CNN reporter Jim Acosta and told him, “You are fake news.” The source of that outburst can apparently be traced to a 35-page unverified document based primarily on memos complied by a former British intelligence operative that CNN had publicized. President-elect Trump immediately blasted the report through his favorite medium of communication, tweeting, “FAKE NEWS – A TOTAL POLITICAL WITCH HUNT!”
There’s a worrying trend occurring in the world of patents. As Electronic Frontier Foundation’s Daniel Nazer points out, more and more patents are being filed for the application of relatively “fundamental machine-learning techniques” to new areas, such as food consumption.
There is a 3.5 percent chance that lawyers’ jobs will be automated. That statistic seems appealing to those of us in the profession—especially relative to the chances for other “skilled” professions like financial advisers (58 percent of automation) and accountants (94 percent). However, this figure does not stand for the proposition that lawyer’ jobs will remain unchanged as the tendrils of artificial intelligence (AI) wind their way into jobs once thought too complex to be done by machines.
Posts on the MTLR Blog are editorial opinion pieces written by student-editors of the Michigan Technology Law Review. The opinions expressed in these editorial posts are not espoused or endorsed by the University of Michigan or its Law School. To view scholarly Articles and Notes published by the Michigan Technology Law Review, please visit the MTLR home page.