Articles Posted in Government

Published on: | by

Artificial Intelligence (AI) has rapidly evolved in recent years, transforming industries, economies, and daily life. As AI technologies continue to advance, policymakers worldwide are grappling with the challenge of creating regulatory frameworks that balance innovation with ethical considerations, privacy concerns, and potential risks. The state of artificial intelligence laws is a dynamic landscape, with countries striving to strike a delicate balance between fostering AI development and safeguarding the interests of society.

The Global Patchwork of AI Regulation

As of the last available knowledge update in January 2022, there is no universal, comprehensive international framework governing AI. Instead, a patchwork of regulations and guidelines exists, with countries adopting diverse approaches to AI governance. Some countries have embraced detailed regulations, while others are in the early stages of formulating AI policies. Key players in the field include:

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

In a groundbreaking move, the State of California has taken legal action against Meta Platforms, Inc., the parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, for what it alleges is the deliberate and systemic harm caused to young users’ mental health. This lawsuit marks a significant moment in the ongoing debate over the impact of social media platforms on the well-being of their users, particularly young individuals. California’s action raises important questions about the responsibilities of tech giants and the role they play in shaping the emotional and psychological well-being of their users.

The Lawsuit’s Basis

California’s lawsuit alleges that Meta has prioritized profits over the mental health of its users, particularly targeting young users, and knowingly developing and promoting products that are addictive and harmful. The suit is grounded in two primary claims:

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Introduction

Punitive damages are an important aspect of the civil justice system in California, aiming to punish and deter defendants who have engaged in egregious misconduct. These damages go beyond compensating plaintiffs for their losses and are intended to send a strong message against reprehensible behavior. California state and federal courts have their distinct guidelines and principles when it comes to awarding punitive damages. In this article, we will delve into the intricate details of punitive damages in California’s state and federal laws, exploring the statutes, legal standards, and factors considered in their assessment.

Understanding Punitive Damages

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Wire fraud can be considered a white-collar crime. The government usually relies on the wire fraud statute if other types of criminal statutes such as healthcare fraud or bank fraud would not be applicable.

There are several prima facie elements for wire fraud as we have discussed in previous articles. These elements must be satisfied before charging the defendant with the specific crime. These elements include the scheme to defraud, the scheme involving false material representations, the intent to defraud, and wire transmission in interstate or foreign commerce.

Wire fraud can be investigated by law enforcement agencies, including, but not limited to, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, United States Secret Service, or Internal Revenue Service. The United States Secret Service has been involved in financial and cybercrime investigations for a long duration. It also participates in other investigations such as counterfeit and cryptocurrency fraud investigations. These federal government agencies may team up with local or state government agencies if necessary.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The United States Department of Commerce has issued a declaration regarding global cross-border privacy rules. These privacy rules are designed to promote data flows with privacy protections. The participants (which include Canada, Japan, Republic of Korea, Philippines, Singapore, Chinese Taipei, and United States of America) have declared that: (1) the establishment of a Global CBPR Forum to promote interoperability and help bridge different regulatory approaches to data protection and privacy; (2) The objectives of the Global CBPR Forum are to: (a) establish an international certification system based on the APEC Cross Border Privacy Rules and Privacy Recognition for Processors Systems; (b) support the free flow of data and effective data protection and privacy through promotion of the Global CBPR and PRP Systems; (c) provide a forum for information exchange and cooperation on matters related to the Global CBPR and PRP Systems; (d) periodically review data protection and privacy standards of members to ensure Global CBPR and PRP program requirements align with best practices; and (e) promote interoperability with other data protection and privacy frameworks.

The Global CBPR Forum is expected to promote expansion and uptake of the Global CBPR and PRP Systems globally to facilitate data protection and free flow of data. It is expected to disseminate best practices for data protection and privacy and interoperability. In addition, it is expected to pursue interoperability with other data protection and privacy frameworks.

The Global CBPR Forum is supposed to facilitate trade and international data flows. It is created to promote global cooperation and to promote protection of data privacy. The forum plans to establish an international certification system based on the existing APEC Cross-Border Privacy Rules and Privacy Recognition for Processors Systems. Cooperation is intended to be based on the principle of mutual benefit and a commitment to open dialogue and consensus-building, with equal respect for the views of all members. It is supposed to be based on consultation and exchange of views among representatives of members, drawing upon research, analysis and policy ideas contributed by members. It is also intended to be based on the active multi-stakeholder participation in appropriate activities.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Big data rules and regulations should be enhanced and updated by state and federal legislators simply because big data analytics across all industry sectors is important to improve efficiency. In general, big data analytics is used to predict consumer behaviors so they can be targeted by commercial organizations. This information can be gathered when, for example, the consumer visits an e-commerce website and purchases items. Also, information can be obtained when a consumer applies for a loan through a mortgage lender or financial institution.

Information security is important because in most cases the consumer is not aware that his or her information has been shared, transferred, or sold to another company. Again, the information is used to predict a consumer’s future behavior. The third-party that has access to the consumer’s information can use it to predict that person’s financial capabilities.

First, confidentiality of the information, whether it’s at rest, transit, or use, is crucial. Financial institutions have been targeted by hackers for misconfiguring and mismanaging network vulnerabilities over the years. The failure of using preventive measures such as data encryption plays a key role in this discrepancy. It is challenging to protect large amounts of information that’s in use because it depends on shared computing environments – i.e., wide-area-network that can go across cities or countries. Also, big data is processed on a continuous level that requires a tremendous amount of resources.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

The term “big data” is generally used for the collection and analysis of a large amount of electronic data by using special and complex algorithms. The process is to analyze the correlation between large data sets which would not make sense independently. Now, another reason for its expansion is because the cost of storing data has decreased so it has become an easier process.

The problem with big data is that there isn’t a uniform set of rules or regulations that would govern the collection of electronic information. Obviously, the owners of the data sets are usually the consumers who somehow relinquish access to their information. So, privacy and security are major concerns. It’s important to realize that even if metadata (i.e., data about the data) is removed from the information, it can also reveal the user’s identity by looking at the relationship between the pieces of information. Also, it’s important to obtain consent from the users when collecting that information.

The potential privacy concerns have been addressed by using a mechanism called “differential privacy” which is when the data collector makes a promise to the data owner that he or she won’t be affected by giving access to the particular information. It is a type of mathematical guarantee of privacy to the interested party – e.g., the consumer. This type of mechanism has been used by large technology companies and government agencies. Nonetheless, with every new technology or mechanism that has been used by the private or public sector, there have been instances of state or federal litigation. For example, the State of Alabama filed a lawsuit in district court against the United States Census Bureau regarding this new mechanism’s viability. In fact, several years ago, the Obama Administration addressed this issue to minimize the privacy risks. Yet, there are many unanswered questions that should be addressed by lawmakers. For example, what are the potential harms and risks? Is there any kind of uniform law? And if not, should there be state and federal laws focusing on big data? What level of transparency should be required? What type of technological parameters should be implemented? Should we follow other countries’ rules and regulations? In response, the federal government granted an opportunity to the public to disclose their concerns. The government released a Department of Justice 2014 Report as a result of another lawsuit wherein the president was warned about the dangers of law enforcement agency’s predictive analytics. This report was in relation to the general public’s historical data and how a defendant’s actions may impact criminal history.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

In general, there are four categories of identity theft. First, “financial identity theft” takes place when the adverse party uses the victim’s identity to gain access to funds, goods, or services. The adverse party may use the victim’s information to open a bank account, get a debit or credit card, seek a mortgage loan, or purchase a car by obtaining a loan under the victim’s name. Second, “criminal identity theft” takes place when the adverse party acts as the victim to engage in criminal activity. Third, “identity cloning” takes place when the adverse party assumes the victim’s identity in his/her daily life. So, in other words, the adverse party will gain access to the victim’s driver’s license, birth certificate, passport, or other identifying information. Fourth, “business or commercial identity theft” takes place when the adverse party uses another commercial organization’s name to procure credit, money, goods, or services.

Identity theft usually takes place when the adverse party gains access to some type of personal information such as credit card information, social security card, or bank account number. This information can be obtained through clandestine methods such as bribing someone who works at the human resources department. This information can also be obtained by stealing mail such as preapproved credit card forms. The personal information can be obtained by gaining unauthorized access to the victim’s electronic devices – i.e., hacking. Finally, the personal information may be obtained through gaining unauthorized access to a state or federal government agency’s database.

The government prosecutes identity theft and fraud pursuant to state or federal laws. For example, Congress passed the Identity Theft and Assumption Deterrence Act which prohibits “knowingly transferring or using, without lawful authority, a means of identification of another person with the intent to commit, or to aid or abet, any unlawful activity that constitutes a violation of Federal law, or that constitutes a felony under any applicable State or local law.” See 18 U.S.C. § 1028(a)(7). This offense carries a maximum term of 15 years’ imprisonment, a fine, and criminal forfeiture of any personal property used or intended to be used to commit the offense.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

There are no mandatory data retention laws in the United States of America. See https://www.eff.org/issues/mandatory-data-retention; Cf. Anne Cheung & Rolf H. Weber, Internet Governance and the Responsibility of Internet Service Providers, 26 Wis. Int’l L.J. 403 (2008); Christopher Soghoian, An End to Privacy Theater: Exposing and Discouraging Corporate Disclosure of User Data to the Government, 12 Minn. J.L. Sci. & Tech. 191, 209-214 (noting that some ISPs in Sweden have enacted zero data retention policies in response to customer demands, but none of the major American ISPs or telecommunications carriers have made such enactments). There is a probability that service providers will delete the relevant data from their database servers in the near future. So, if the plaintiff or petitioner fails to take timely action, then their database servers may no longer yield the requested basic subscriber information.

In addition, from an international aspect, organizations that are subject to the General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) should know its requirements wherein includes personal data being “kept in a form which permits identification of data subjects for no longer than is necessary for the purposes for which the personal data are processed.” It’s important to note that some states such as California and Virginia have promulgated similar statutes on this topic. The California Privacy Rights Act (“CPRA”) and Virginia’s Consumer Data Protection Act (“CDPA”) have the same or similar provisions in this respect.

The courts have recognized that, absent a court-ordered subpoena, many of ISPs, that qualified as “cable operators” for purposes of state or federal laws (e.g., 47 U.S.C. § 522) were effectively prohibited from disclosing identities of putative defendants to plaintiff. Digital Sin, Inc. v. Does 1-176 (S.D. N.Y. 2012) 279 F.R.D. 229. Thus, Internet service providers should comply with the subpoena pursuant to the rules. Plaintiffs can issue subpoenas to request basic subscriber information from the service provider that yields the identifiable information. Plaintiffs should utilize any and all options to resolve the discovery dispute without judicial intervention. However, if the service provider fails or refuses to comply with the subpoena, then the plaintiff must seek a court order to obtain the necessary information (i.e., basic subscriber information) to identify the anonymous defendants. Our law firm regularly conducts investigations to prove a specific account was used to access our client’s electronic devices, email accounts, or online storage devices.

Continue Reading ›

Published on: | by

Neurolaws and privacy rights are still in the development stages. Neurological advances have allowed scientists to connect electrodes to the brain for analytical procedures. These electrodes can be connected in a non-invasive manner so they can download brain data. Now, this brain data can be analyzed to help patients with brain disorders such as epilepsy, depression, Parkinson’s disease or Alzheimer’s disease. Moreover, a human’s brain data may be analyzed to determine the truth and existence of intent.

Neuroscientists have been able to use advanced non-invasive techniques to observe and analyze cerebral neurochemical changes in the human brain. They have access to several technologies including, PET, SPECT, MRI, fMRI, and EEG. In fact, functional MRI (fMRI) is able to measure the brain’s activities under resting and activated conditions. It can be used to identify, investigate and monitor brain tumors, congenital anatomical abnormalities, trauma, strokes, and chronic nervous system disorders (e.g., multiple sclerosis).

Therefore, there is the potential of abuse when it comes to this new technology and that’s why legal scholars are concerned about privacy rights. Accordingly, needless to say, the right of privacy should be protected according to the state or federal rules, including, but not limited to, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (“HIPAA”) which was passed to address medical privacy concerns.  Scholars have argued that voluntary informed consent must be granted by the individual to use brain information. In other words, this type of confidential medical information cannot be used without the person’s knowledge and permission. The Bill of Rights has granted the right of privacy to citizens under certain terms and conditions. In fact, the Fourth Amendment protects privacy rights against unreasonable searches and seizures by the government. Also, every state has promulgated similar privacy laws which can be more strict than their counterpart federal laws. However, the question is whether our thoughts belong to us.

Continue Reading ›