1
Northern Kentucky Law Review – Law + Informatics Symposium
presented in association with
NKU Chase Law + Informatics Institute
March 1-2, 2012
Griffin HallNorthern Kentucky UniversityHighland Heights, Kentucky
Special thanks to NKU
College of Informatics
for providing
the venue.
Special thanks for the
underwriting consideration
provided by Frost Brown
Todd, LLC.
2
Table of contents
Welcome ..................................................................................................................................... 4
Jon Garon ...................................................................................................................................5
Legal Aspects of Internet Governance: International Cooperation on Cyber-Security ......................................................6
Media, Race, Crime, and Punishment: Reframing Stereotypes in Crime and Human Rights Issues ..............................8
The Right to Know v. The Right to be Forgotten ...................................................... 12
Regulating Human-subjects Research in the Information Age: Data Mining on Social Networking Sites ............................................................................ 14
Privacy and Confidentiality Issues in Historical Health-sciences Collections .....................................................................................17
A Comparative Review of Cyber-Crime Law and Digital and Computational Forensics in Russia, in the United States, and under the Convention on Cybercrime of the Council of Europe ......................................................................................................21
Practical Policies for Bioinformatics Standards ............................................................26
The Preoperational Legal Review of Cyber-weapons and Capabilities ................................................................................................................... 30
Region Codes and Territorial Mess ............................................................................32
Information Technology Act: Implications for Intellectual Freedom in India ......................................................34
Publicity Rights of Celebrities in India .................................................................... 36
Informatics and Securities Regulation: Exploring the Role of Securities Law on the Internet and within Virtual Worlds ................................................................................................ 38
Data mining for Gold: Social Media and Social Capital in a Post-national Network Economy ............................................................................................................. 40
All NKU iTunes videos are available through our library. Click here for access to the library portal. http://deimos.apple.com/WebObjects/Core.woa/Browse/chaselaw.nku.edu. 1502926201.01545036227
4 5Wel
com
eWelcome to the Northern Kentucky University Law Review Symposium archive sponsored in conjunction with the NKU Chase Law & Informatics Institute. This collection of materials from the March 1-2, 2012, event provides a per-manent collection of the exceptional presentations and papers provided by the participants.
Formed in August 2011, the Chase Law & Informatics Institute has partnered with organizations within NKU and in the region to develop a range of pro-grams and content. It has cohosted with NKU Small Business Development Center on trends and strategies for small-business success; with the Cen-ter for Excellence in Advocacy on eDiscovery; and with the NKU Center for Applied Computing for its conference of data security. The institute was an intellectual sponsor of Innovate/Activate 2.0, a conference at UC Berkley Law School held in 2012. The institute will be a cosponsor of the conference on unleashing international creative media at Michigan State University College of Law in November 2012.
This conference would not have been possible without the support of the College of Informatics and the beautiful venue in Griffin Hall. We are also indebted to the underwriting support of the law firm of Frost Brown Todd, LLC, for its leadership gift.
Programs represent only a small part of the institute’s agenda. The Chase Law & Informatics Institute was formed to address the fundamental shifts digital transactions and communications are having on society. Through the law school’s partnership with the College of Informatics, the institute will explore key issues facing business and society – a partnership that is the first of its kind in the nation. The immediate impact is in the offering of a J.D./M.B.I. (Master of Business Informatics) and J.D./M.H.I. (Master of Health Informatics) to augment the J.D./M.B.A. offered by NKU.
Research projects and publications serving an interdisciplinary audience will further the work of the institute and provide both tools for addressing current problems and scholarship for addressing strategic needs. While the legal com-munity will focus on the regulation and utilization of information, the insti-tute will not work in isolation. Through partnerships among disciplines and around the globe, the research agenda can fully explore the creation, acquisi-tion, aggregation, security, manipulation, and exploitation of information in the myriad systems.
Our goal is to provide education on the best practices involving these evolv-ing digital technologies to law students, graduate students, lawyers, business professionals, and civic leaders. Your participation – whether as a speaker or member of the audience – helps us further that goal.
Thank you very much for investing your time with us and helping us see a bit farther into the digital future.
Regards,
Jon M. GaronDirector, NKU Chase Law & Informatics InstituteProfessor of Law, NKU Chase College of Law
Jon M. GaronProfessor of Law, Director of the Chase Law & Informatics Institute
Jon Garon is an attorney and professor of informatics, entertainment, intellectual property, and business law. He has extensive practice experience in the areas of entertainment law (including film, music, theatre, and publishing), data privacy and security, business planning, copyright, trademark, and software licensing.
Garon is the inaugural director of the Law + Informat-ics Institute of the NKU Chase College of Law, which is dedicated to promoting thoughtful public discourse on the regulation and use of information systems. His teach-ing and scholarship often focus on business innovation and the development of best business practices regarding the exploitation and effectiveness of the information and data systems in business, healthcare, media, entertain-ment, and the public sector.
Garon has written numerous books and articles, including the Independent Filmmaker’s Law and Business Guide to Fi-nancing, Shooting, and Distributing Independent and Digital Films (A Cappella Books, 2d ed. 2009); Own It – The Law and Business Guide to Launching a New Business Through Innovation, Exclusivity, and Relevance (Carolina Academic Press 2007); and Entertainment Law and Practice (Carolina Academic Press 2005) (supplement 2010).
Immediately prior to joining Chase, Garon served as dean and professor of law at Hamline University School of Law in St. Paul. He was professor of law 2003-11, dean of the law school 2003-08 and interim dean of the Graduate School of Management in 2005-06. Before Hamline, Garon taught entertainment law and copyright at Franklin Pierce Law Center in Concord, N.H., and Western State University College of Law in Orange County, Calif.
V
76
Legal Aspects of Internet Governance: International Cooperation on Cyber-Security
The nature and situs of the Internet governance agenda has shifted since the founding of the U.N.’s Internet Governance Forum. Originally, the debates over IG issues involved largely technical issues and focused on certain institutions and devel-opmental questions. The debates were often characterized by a kind of artificial “silo” approach that did not fully recognize the connections among the issues. Now, IG issues have moved up and to the center of international and foreign policy, featuring on the agenda, for example, of the G8/G20, and bilateral posi-tions taken by governments. IG issues and their interrelation-ships are now better understood, and the emotional tempera-ture has dropped as to those earlier issues.
The IGF multi-stakeholder process has demonstrated that there is no central “top-down” governance of the Internet. The shift from the focus on “institutions” can now be characterized by recognition of crosscutting themes, or “domains.” These do-mains can be envisioned as domain of global intergovernmental action; domain of nongovernmental organizations; human rights domain; IP domain; privacy and data protection domain; information security domain; telecommunications policy domain; military domain; and jurisdiction domain.
While attempts to “define” domains are inherently artificial, they are potentially helpful in organizing an analysis. Cur-rently, the principal drivers of the debates seem to focus on the domains of human rights and information security. Within these domains there is lack of basic consensus as to what the terms even mean and the fundamental analytical and interpre-tive approaches that should be taken to help resolve the lack of consensus. The paper explores these issues and offers suggestions for more productive approaches.
In addition, the concept of “multi-stakeholderism,” embraced by the IGF, threatens formerly tightly bounded concepts of the traditional Westphalian nation-state in the area of international policy development. While sea-changes have been witnessed in the area of IG, old fissures remain concerning the benefits of governmental control vs. multi-stakeholderism.
Presented by
DavidSatola
David SatolaLead Counsel, Finance, Private Sector Development and Infrastructure, Legal Vice Presidency, The World Bank
David Satola is lead counsel in The World Bank legal department where he has global responsibility for legal aspects of reforms in information and communications technologies, including telecommunications, the Internet and eCommerce. His work focuses on legal aspects of the enabling environment for ICT infrastructure and ser-vices, Internet governance, new technologies, competition regulation involving ICTs, critical infrastructure/network security and alternative dispute resolution.
His project work at the bank spans more than 85 coun-tries. He was seconded from the bank to the UN’s Work-ing Group on Internet Governance and acts as the bank’s observer to ICANN’s Government Advisory Committee, the Multi-stakeholder Advisory Group of the UN’s Internet Governance Forum secretariat, and UNCITRAL’s Working Group on eCommerce. He is the co-chair of the Internet Governance Task Force of the Cyberlaw Committee of the Business Law Section of the American Bar Association.
He received his B.A. and M.A. from The Johns Hopkins University and his J.D. from University of Wisconsin. He also studied at London School of Economics and The Hague Academy of International Law. Prior to joining the bank, Satola was in-house counsel for a major global telecommunications company responsible for invest-ments in Latin America and Europe, was in private legal practice in both North America and Europe principally advising on telecommunications joint ventures, and was the legal advisor to a human rights NGO. He has pub-lished articles, chapters, and books on legal aspects of ICT reforms.
Video Links
Internet Governance 1 .1 .1
Internet Governance 1.1 .2
Internet Governance 1.1 .3
Internet Governance 1.1 .4
Internet Governance 1.1 .5
Internet Governance 1.1 .6
V
98
Media, Race, Crime, and Punishment: Reframing Stereotypes in Crime and Human Rights Issues
The recent decision by the Georgia State Board of Pardons to execute Troy Anthony Davis for the murder of police officer Mark McPhail raises a number of legal, social, and media issues that coalesce around questions of racial justice and reconciliation.
The legal issues raised by the decision range from the un-equal application of the death penalty to tensions between the rule of law and the rule of justice, between execution and fairness. The social issues cover terrains as diverse as the efficacy of new and traditional media coverage and advocacy and all democratic possibilities of social informatics; and they raise fundamental questions about the value and validity of rational discourse in the justice system when race is a central issue. In this essay we will bring an interdisciplinary lens to the procedural, philosophical, and pragmatic tensions raised by the trial, media coverage, and eventual execution of Troy Anthony Davis.
We seek to illuminate the ways in which legal, social, and moral attitudes and institutions remain tainted by the media’s hidden racialized communication. Drawing upon critical theo-ries of law, media, and race, we will challenge two prevailing social mythologies, one traditional and the other emergent: that an adversarial and retributive legal system can achieve racial justice, and that the decentralization of communication brought about by Internet technologies can contribute to the creation and cultivation of a more democratic public sphere. Central to our analysis is a critique of assumptions that ra-tional-critical discourse can cultivate and sustain systems of social and legal relations that serve the public good.
Instead, we argue that the legal and high-tech communication structures in question remain wedded to what Charles Mills describes as a “racial contract,” an empirical set of social relations that expose law as a system of privilege that protects the interests of the stronger and undermines genuine demo-cratic inclusion, social equality, and racial reconciliation.
Presented by
Rachel Lyon, David Harris, and Marcus McPhail
Professor, Chair of the Department of Communication, NKU College of Informatics
Rachel Lyon serves as the chair of the Department of Communication for NKU’s College of Informatics. An Emmy© Award-winning documentary filmmaker, she has produced 65 feature films, movies for television, feature documentaries, and limited series. Her work often focuses on critical global issues, human rights, civil equality, art and archeology, lifestyle, and history.
After breaking into the industry with the acclaimed film Tell Me a Riddle, directed by Oscar winner Lee Grant, Lyon served as senior producer for the United Nations Founda-tion’s Better World Fund, producing more than 35 documen-taries filmed on five continents. She has now produced more than 65 hours of documentary features for PBS, NBC, CNN, National Geographic and the History Channel, among others.
Lyon’s work includes her National Emmy© Award-winning Men Who Molest for FRONTLINE; exposing the black-market trade of selling plutonium in The Terror Trade for CNN; revealing the devastating plight of Tibetan emigrants in Shadow over Tibet; and disclosing the startling effects of fundamentalism in The Glory and the Power. Her most recent duo, Race to Execution and Juror Number Six were broadcast on PBS’ Independent Lens and supported by the National Black Programming Consortium.
Lyon has served in academic positions in media arts at SMU, Queens College/CUNY, and Bentley University, and she has spoken at universities around the globe, including Harvard, London School of Economics, and Cinémathèque Françoise. She has raised more than $25 million for mov-ies, documentaries, websites, companion books, outreach campaigns, and museum exhibitions that surround her projects. Her breakthrough work on exposing the ‘crime-media business’ has evolved to a partnership including 10 universities, culminating in a major symposium on media and human rights in America.
Rachel Lyon
Video Links
Digital Divisions 1 . 2 .1
Digital Divisions 1 . 2 . 5
Digital Divisions 1 . 2 . 6
Digital Divisions 1 . 2 .7
Digital Divisions 1 . 2 . 8
V
1110
Dr. Mark Lawrence McPhailDean, College of Arts and Communication, University of Wisconsin-Whitewater
Dr. Mark Lawrence McPhail is dean of the College of Arts and Com-munication at University of Wisconsin-Whitewater. He has held ad-ministrative and instructional appointments at Southern Methodist University, Miami University of Ohio, University of Utah, Wayne State University, University of Michigan, and Emerson College, and he served as the Van Zelst lecturer in communication at Northwestern University. McPhail began his career in communication at Emerson College, where he graduated magna cum laude, earning a degree and teaching certificate in secondary education, and serving as the senior speaker for his graduating class. After graduating from Em-erson College, he went on to receive a Master of Arts in performance studies from Northwestern University and a Doctor of Philosophy in rhetoric and public address from University of Massachusetts.
Since 1983, McPhail has presented numerous papers at national and regional conferences and has published scholarly essays in state, regional, national, and international books and journals. He is the author of Zen in the Art of Rhetoric: An Inquiry into Coherence, published by the State University of New York Press, and The Rheto-ric of Racism Revisited: Reparations or Separation? published by Rowman and Littlefield. His scholarship has been published in The Quarterly Journal of Speech, Critical Studies in Mass Communi-cation, Howard Journal of Communications, Rhetoric and Public Affairs, Qualitative Inquiry, and Rhetoric Review; his creative work has appeared in The Dark Horse magazine and American Literary Review; and he has exhibited his photography at the Ce-rulean Gallery and the African American Museum in Dallas, Texas, and the Crossman Gallery in Whitewater, Wis. His research interests include rhetorical theory and epistemology, language and race rela-tions, and visual rhetoric and photography. He is included in Who’s Who in American Colleges and Universities and Who’s Who among America’s Teachers and has received a number of awards includ-ing the Albert J. Colton Memorial Research Fellowship, University of Utah’s Tanner Humanities Fellowship, the National Communication Association’s Karl Wallace Memorial Award, and Southern Method-ist University’s Honoring Our Professor’s Excellence Award. In 2006, he served as an expert witness for the United Nations International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda in Arusha, Tanzania.
David J. HarrisProfessor, Cambridge College, and Managing Director of the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice at Harvard Law School
David Harris is the managing director of the Charles Hamilton Houston Institute for Race and Justice at Harvard Law School. Prior to assuming this position, he served as founding executive director of the Fair Housing Center of Greater Boston, where he was ac-tively involved in the movement for regional equity. He previously served as a fair housing investigator with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Develop-ment, before which he was a civil rights analyst with the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, both in Wash-ington, D.C., and the New England regional office. He holds a Ph.D. in sociology from Harvard University and a B.A. from Georgetown University, and he is an adjunct faculty member of Cambridge College. David serves on the boards of several nonprofit organizations and is the past president of the board of directors of the Massachusetts Foundation for the Humanities. He chairs the Massachusetts Advisory Committee to the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights and the Medford Human Rights Commission.
Video Links
Digital Divisions 1 . 2 .1
Digital Divisions 1 . 2 . 2
Digital Divisions 1 . 2 . 6
Digital Divisions 1 . 2 .7
Digital Divisions 1 . 2 . 8
Video Links
Digital Divisions 1 . 2 . 3
Digital Divisions 1 . 2 . 4
Digital Divisions 1 . 2 . 6
Digital Divisions 1 . 2 .7
Digital Divisions 1 . 2 . 8
V
1312
Dr. Jasmine McNealyAssistant Professor, Communication Department, S.I. Newhouse School of Communication at Syracuse University
The Right to Know v. The Right to be Forgotten
In October 2010 the European Commission began circulating a draft strategy aimed at improving data protection. The pro-posal noted that changes in technology necessitated a revamped strategy and improvement to the E.U. Data Protection Directive. The draft includes strategies for standardizing privacy notices, strengthening consent rules, and creating new rules for what constitutes sensitive data. Also included in the draft proposal was the creation of a “right to be forgotten.” This right to be forgotten would give individuals the right to not have their data retained and expressly deleted when the data is no longer needed for a legitimate purpose.
Such a right is not unfamiliar to all of the countries in the E.U.; some have used privacy-related legislation to allow an individual to stop unwanted publicity about them. In 2009, for instance, a German man sent Wikipedia a cease and desist letter claiming that the online encyclopedia must remove information about him. The man, Wolfgang Werlé, who was tried and convicted of killing his former associate, Walter Sedlmayr, used a German law quite like American common law misappropriation, which protects an individual’s name and likeness from unwarranted publicity. In early 2010, France also began considering a “right to forget,” which would allow an individual to demand that online organi-zations delete information about them.
Although E.U. members hail the creation of this right to be forgotten as improving individual privacy rights, such a right creates a problem for American online news organizations. Not only does such law come into direct conflict with protec-tions found in the First Amendment, but it also conflicts with traditional privacy jurisprudence, which states that information made public cannot become private again. At the same time, Americans seem to be attempting to assert a right to be forgot-ten. For instance, a man threatened to sue a college newspaper that had articles reporting on the misdeeds of his son in its on-line archives. What is shocking is that a court in the U.S. might entertain such a claim.
This presentation analyzes the conflict that recognizing a right to be forgotten online would have with American jurisprudence regarding the role of the online press as a watchdog for the public as well as with traditional U.S. privacy policy.
Presented by
Dr. Jasmine McNealy
Jasmine McNealy is an assistant professor in the Communica-tion Department of the S.I. Newhouse School of Communication at Syracuse University, where she teaches both graduate- and undergraduate-level classes in communication law. Her research focuses on media law, including the areas of privacy, new media, anonymity, intellectual property, and telecommunications.
Prior to joining the faculty at Newhouse, McNealy taught at the Manship School of Mass Communication and the Paul M. Hebert Law Center at Louisiana State University. She has also taught classes at University of Florida.
McNealy earned her law degree and Ph.D. at University of Flor-ida, during which she served as research editor for University of Florida Journal of Law and Public Policy and executive research editor for Entertainment Law Review. She was also a member of the Journal of Law Technology and Policy. McNealy earned her undergraduate degree in journalism and Afro-American studies from University of Wisconsin.
McNealy is an active participant in the Association for Educa-tion in Journalism and Mass Communication, in which she is a member of the law, newspaper and online media, and mass communication in society divisions. She was named one of the inaugural AEJMC scholars for 2009-10.
McNealy has been published in both law and communication journals such as Communication Law and Policy and Media Law and Ethics.
Video Links
Right to Be Forgotten 1 . 3 .1
Right to Be Forgotten 1 . 3 . 2
Informatics Implications 1 .3.7
V
1514
Regulating Human-subjectsResearch in the InformationAge: Data Mining on Social Networking Sites
In the 1970s, the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare promulgated the first regulations governing research with human subjects. Currently, the Department of Health and Human Services regulates both biomedical and behavioral research with human subjects through 45 C.F.R. § 46, but these regulations have not been revised to address the advances in technology that have changed the ways in which human-subjects research is conducted in the 21st century. One of these advances includes re-searchers’ use of the Internet for various research pur-poses, including recruiting subjects for their studies as well as mining data on social networking sites. The issue of data mining on social networking sites for research purposes is becoming more important as researchers in a number of academic fields are collecting research data in this manner. The question of whether such research involves “human subjects” as the term is defined in 45 C.F.R. § 46 is important because the answer dictates whether or not such research is subject to federal regulation and oversight.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office for Human Research Protections has previously acknowledged an increased use of the Internet for re-search purposes, but it has not published any guidance about how the office understands the issue (nor have any applicable specific regulations been promulgated). Such guidance, and particularly guidance that addresses the use of social networking sites for research purposes, is becoming increasingly more important as researchers are expanding beyond just Facebook and MySpace to re-cruit research participants and collect data. Furthermore, new social networking sites such as PatientsLikeMe.com are changing the ways in which both behavioral and biomedical researchers recruit and interact with study participants.
This presentation identifies three key research activities that any new guidance that the OHRP publishes about Internet research should address: (1) the use of the Internet (including social networking sites) to recruit subjects; (2) the use of the Internet to collect personal
Presented by
Lauren Solberg
information via direct interaction with site users; and (3) the collection of personal information from the Internet for research purposes without direct interaction with the owner of the information, i.e. data mining. It further ex-plores recent case law that says that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy with respect to information posted on social networking sites and discusses the history of privacy in the federal regulations governing research with human subjects. This article concludes that in light of the changes in online social networking, as well as the consideration that the Department of Health and Human Services is giving to revising 45 C.F.R. §46, guidance – or even new regulations – should be drafted that address these key research activities. It furthermore suggests language that would inform researchers and research institutions whether each of these key research activities is subject to the regulations governing research with human subjects.
16
Privacy and Confidentiality Issues in Historical Health-sciences Collections
Special-collections professionals in institutions with health-sciences history collections must preserve and provide access to the historical record while respecting the confidences of those whose lives are reflected in the records. The requirements of the Health Insurance Por-tability and Accountability Act of 1996 have made these two duties more difficult because the act’s privacy rule places no time limit on the bounds of confidentiality or privacy for the records it covers. The rationale that con-cerns about hereditary diseases and genetic risks might continue after the subjects’ deaths. This creates signifi-cant concerns and challenges for special-collections librarians and archivists and for historical researchers who work with material subject to HIPAA’s requirements. In the past, archivists and special-collections librarians have often used professional judgments and general rules of thumb, such as “grandfather” thresholds, for controlling access to sensitive material; however, if infor-mation is subject to the privacy rule, these thresholds are no longer adequate.
Changing societal mores around privacy and the stric-tures of evolving privacy laws make privacy and confiden-tiality issues for historical health-sciences collections an ongoing challenge even when HIPAA does not apply. The trend toward providing even greater access to historical collections through digitization likewise increases the risk and privacy dilemmas for the custodians of these collections.
In many institutions, HIPAA privacy officers have a lim-ited understanding of the value of historical material in the health sciences and how it is used by different audiences. To solve this knowledge gap, the proposed article will provide an overview of the practices and use of historical material in the health sciences for cultural understanding and scholarship in a variety of disciplines. These collections may include older healthcare provider records, personal papers of physicians, photographs, and a variety of artifacts. The article will then discuss HIPAA requirements in the context of health-sciences history collections and provide insight on the best practices to meet these requirements. Finally, there will be a discus-
Presented by
AnneGillilandand Judith Wiener
Assistant Vice President of Human-subjects Protection and Research Integrity, Meharry Medical College
Lauren Solberg is the assistant vice president of human-subjects protection and research integrity at Meharry Medical College, where she is responsible for overseeing activities related to the conduct of research with hu-man subjects; providing advice on ethics to researchers, IRB members, and institutional officials; and overseeing general and research-specific ethics education of re-searchers at the institution. Solberg previously worked at University of Massachusetts Boston, where she supervised the ethical review and regulatory compliance of research with human subjects and managed the operations of the Institutional Review Board as well as other compliance committees. She was also responsible for the ongoing education of faculty, graduate students, and undergradu-ate students on issues related to human-subjects research, the responsible conduct of research, and general research ethics. Solberg has also worked for the Office for the Protection of Research Subjects at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, where she was involved in the day-to-day opera-tions of the Institutional Review Board. Solberg earned a Doctor of Jurisprudence from Vanderbilt University, a Master of Theological Studies from Harvard University, and a Bachelor of Arts in English and religion from Uni-versity of Florida. She has published a number of articles on issues related to health law and policy, the most recent of which was published in University of Illinois Journal of Law, Technology and Policy, titled “Data Mining on Face-book: A Free Space for Researchers or an IRB Nightmare?”
Lauren Solberg
Video Links
Regulating Human Subjects 1 .3.3
Regulating Human Subjects 1 .3.4
Informatics Implications 1 .3.7
17
V
19
sion of other privacy and confidentiality laws and their relevance to historical health-sciences collections. The authors will pay special attention to the role of digitization of these collections and how exposure to the Internet can complicate these materials’ privacy problems.
Many kinds of institutions, including universities, hospitals, libraries, and other cultural institutions, hold historical health-sciences records. This article will be of interest to those who are in charge of privacy issues for institutions that must deal with the special requirements of these unique materials and provide solutions to meet the challenges they present.
Professor, Head of the Health Sciences Copyright Management Office at The Ohio State University
Anne Gilliland, J.D., M.S.L.I.S., is the head of the Health Sciences Copyright Management Office at The Ohio State University. Her office supports the faculty, staff, and students of OSU’s Health Sciences Center for Global Health by providing education and guidance on the application of copyright law and related legal issues to facilitate education, research, and patient-care services. Before coming to OSU, she spent 15 years as an assis-tant director for OhioLINK, the state’s virtual library program for college and university libraries. She earned an M.S. in library science from University of Tennessee and a J.D. from Capital University. She is the vice chair/chair-elect of the American Library Association Office for Information Technology Policy’s Copyright Advisory Subcommittee. Current research issues include privacy issues in medical special collections and assessment of copyright information needs in higher education.
Anne T. Gilliland
Video Links
Privacy Health Sciences 1 .3 .5
Privacy Health Sciences 1 .3 .6
Informatics Implications 1 .3.7
20
Assistant Professor, Assistant Director for Collections and Outreach at The Ohio State University Health Sciences Library
Judith Wiener, M.A., M.L.I.S., is an assistant professor and the assistant director for collections and outreach at The Ohio State University Health Sciences Library. One of her main responsibilities is serving as the head cura-tor of the organization’s Medical Heritage Center, which is the special-collections unit of the department. She earned a B.A. in history at Wheeling Jesuit University, n M.A. in history with a concentration in public history at Wright State University, and an M.L.I.S. from Kent State University. She is currently the immediate past co-chair for the Science, Technology, and Healthcare Roundtable of the Society of American Archivists, the vice president of the Society of Ohio Archivists, and the president of the Ohio Academy of Medical History. Her current research interests include special-collections administrative issues, particularly in relation to health-sciences archival institutions, and central Ohio health-sciences history.
Judith A. Wiener A Comparative Review of Cyber-Crime Law and Digital and Computational Forensics in Russia, in the United States, and under the Convention on Cybercrime of the Council of Europe
This presentation will examine cybercrime law in the Russian Federation and the United States of America in comparison to the Council of Europe’s Convention on Cybercrime. In this presentation both substantive and procedural laws and the possible impact of digital and computational forensics in the transnational environment will be addressed.
Presented by
Michael Losavio, Deborah G . Keeling,Svetlana Polyakova, Evelina Frolovich, Galina Borisevich, Natalya Chernyadyeva, Pavel Pastukhov, and Olga Dobrovlyanina
Video Links
Informatics Implications 1 .3.7
21
V
2322
Professor, University of Louisville
Attorney Michael Losavio is an instructor in computer law and criminal justice at University of Louisville. He has served as Jefferson Circuit Court clerk and managed judicial education for the Kentucky Court of Justice. His most recent publication is the book Information Crisis from Chelsea House Publishing. It is a discussion of reliability issues with online information.
Michael LosavioAssociate Professor, Department of English Language and Intercultural Communication, Perm State University
An associate professor at the Department of English Lan-guage and Intercultural Communication at Perm State University, Svetlana Polyakova has worked at PSU since 1992. She teaches legal English to the students of law, stu-dents of international law, and postgraduates at the Faculty of Law. Polyakova has been a coordinator for international programs and events at the Faculty of Law and director of TOLES (international legal exams) Center at PSU since 2008. She has been developing relationships among the Faculty of Law, PSU, and the Department of Justice Admin-istration at University of Louisville and has published on international professional communication, legal English, teaching extensive reading, legal linguistics, applying internet technologies in education, and others. Polyakova completed her Ph.D. coursework in linguistics.
Svetlana Polyakova
Professor, Chair of the Department of Justice Administration of University of Louisville
Dr. Deborah Keeling is professor and chair of the Depart-ment of Justice Administration of University of Louisville. She serves on the local advisory board for the KRCFL and on the National Advisory Board for the FBI’s Regional Computer Forensics Laboratory program. She has extensive experience on democratic police training and development in Central Europe, having worked with the U.S. State Department on democratic police training in Hungary, Romania, and Slovakia. She has served as a member of the University Working Group for the Overseas Security Advisory Council of the U.S. State Department.
Dr. Deborah Keeling
Video Links
Comparative Review of Cyber Crime Law 1 .4 .1Comparative Review of Cyber Crime Law 1 .4 .2
Video Links
Comparative Review of Cyber Crime Law 1 .4 .3
V
2524
Professor of Law, Department of Civil Law and Civil Litigation, Faculty of Law, Perm State University
A professor of law at the Department of Civil Law and Civil Litigation of Perm State University, Evelina Frolovich grad-uated from PSU and has worked at the Faculty of Law since 1991. Frolovich gives courses on civil law, civil litigation, civil arbitration, remedies, application of digital evidence in trial, and advocacy in court procedures. Frolovich is actively involved in developing international links with other schools of law. She participated in many international conferences on law in Russia, Finland, and the U.S. She has been developing relationships among the Faculty of Law, PSU, and the Department of Justice Administration at University of Louisville. Frolovich coordinates the Olympiads in Social Studies for high school students in the Perm Krai.
Evelina M. Frolovich Assistant Professor of Criminal Process and Criminalistics,
Perm State National Research University
In 1991, Pavel Pastukhov graduated from the Faculty of Law of Perm State University. From 1991 to 1993 he worked as an investigator in the investigations division of the district department of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Perm town. Since October 1993, he worked in a teaching position at the Department of Criminal Law Institute. In October 1998, he received a degree of candidate of legal sciences. In 2001, he was chair of the Criminalistics Law Institute of the Russian Ministry of internal affairs. He retired from service in internal affairs with the rank of colonel of the militia in October 2011. Today he works as assistant professor and chair of the criminal process and Perm State National Research University and teaches criminalistics, investigation of cybercrime, and crime in the sphere of high technology.
Pavel Pastukhov
26
Practical Policies for Bioinformatics Standards
Standards are ubiquitous in today’s technology-driven marketplace. Some standards mandate minimum re-quirements for product safety; others seek to reduce environmental impact, while others specify minimum levels of information that must be provided to consum-ers. “Interoperability standards,” which dominate the information, computing, and telecommunications sec-tor, specify the manner in which products and services offered by different vendors interact with one another. A number of these standards, including Wi-Fi, USB, CD, DVD, PDF and HTML, have become household terms, and thousands of others ensure that a vast array of products and services connect and communicate seam-lessly in a manner that is largely invisible to the con-sumer. Such standards are developed by a wide range of organizations, from governmental agencies to in-dustry consortia to multinational treaty organizations. Some standards are adopted into local, state, or feder-al legislation and attain the force of law; others remain voluntary yet are adopted by entire industries.
Standardization in the ICT sector, however, has not come without a substantial cost. Over the past two decades, the ICT industry has been plagued by lawsuits brought by participants in the standards-development process as well as by government regulators and af-fected third parties. Two types of claims generally arise in standards-related litigation: claims that the stan-dards process has been abused to exclude competitors from the market (“process-abuse” claims) and claims that a participant in the standards-development pro-cess has improperly asserted its patents against an implementer of the standard (“patent hold-up” claims). Standards-development organizations in the ICT sec-tor have responded to such claims by promulgating rules and policies of increasing sophistication, both to specify procedures designed to avoid abusive activity by participants and to accommodate the requirements of participants who control significant patent assets.
Presented by
Jorge Contreras
In recent years, the field of bioinformatics has seen a surge of interest in the development of interoper-ability and compatibility standards. These range from standards for data exchange and controlled vocabular-ies (ontologies) to minimum experimental information and data analytics. A variety of organizations are in-volved in these standards-development activities, from large, established standards bodies such as the Insti-tute for Electrical and Electronics Engineers and the Worldwide Web Consortium to bioinformatics industry associations such as the Asia-Pacific Bioinformatics Network and the European Bioinformatics Institute to small, narrowly focused efforts such as the Proteomics Standards Initiative and the Functional Genomics Data Society.
To date, the bioinformatics field has been blissfully free of the standards litigation that has plagued the ICT industry. But with the increasing adoption of standards by bioinformatics researchers and vendors, the issues faced by ICT standards groups will become increas-ingly relevant. We conducted an industry-wide study of bioinformatics standards-development activities and reviewed the policies and procedures adopted by each such standards-development organization. Based on the results of our study, we conclude that the majority of bioinformatics standards-development organizations are ill equipped to address or deter process abuse and patent holdup. In many cases, these organizations either lack written policies entirely or adopt vague, as-pirational statements regarding a desire that materials produced be “open” and publicly available. This infor-mal and minimalist approach not only invites abuse and opportunistic behavior but also leaves aggrieved participants with little legal recourse after abusive be-havior has occurred.
Accordingly, we recommend that bioinformatics stan-dards-development organizations carefully review their existing policies and procedures. To the extent that they do not address a number of key points regarding process openness and intellectual property, we recom-mend that these policies and procedures be revised. In
V
2928
order to assist organizations with this exercise, we of-fer a straightforward policy template that can be adapt-ed to the specific needs and requirements of individual bioinformatics standards organizations. It is our hope that these modest prophylactic measures will enable the bioinformatics community to avoid the massively disruptive and costly standards-related litigation that has affected the ICT sector.
Visiting Associate Professor, American University’s Washington College of Law
Jorge Contreras is a visiting associate professor at Ameri-can University’s Washington College of Law in Washington, D.C. previously, he served as a senior lecturer in law and acting director of the intellectual property program at Washington University in St. Louis. His research focuses on the effects of intellectual property structures on the dissemination of scientific and technological innovation and information.
Contreras serves as co-chair of the American Bar Associa-tion Section of Science and Technology Law Committee on Technical Standardization and co-chair of the National Conference of Lawyers and Scientists. He holds additional leadership positions with ASTM International, Smart Grid Interoperability Panel, American Intellectual Property Law Association, and other organizations. He recently completed a four-year term on the Council of the National Human Genome Research Institute at National Institutes of Health. Contreras is the editor of the Technical Standards Patent Policy Manual (ABA Publishing: Chicago, 2007) and has published numerous articles and book chapters relat-ing to the legal issues surrounding intellectual property, scientific research, and standards development. Contreras recently completed an empirical research study supported by the National Institute of Standards and Technology regarding the effect of certain policy choices on the efficiency of standards-development processes.
Prior to joining Washington University, Contreras was a partner at the international law firm of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr LLP, where he advised organiza-tions on intellectual property, technology transfer, and standards-related issues. He is a graduate of Harvard Law School (J.D.) and Rice University (B.A., B.S.E.E.).
Jorge L. Contreras
Video Links
Bioinformatics Standards 1.5.1
Bioinformatics Standards 1.5.2
V
3130
The Preoperational Legal Review of Cyber-weapons and Capabilities
While the concept of cyber-warfare has been around for quite some time, these ideas have become more concrete with the revelation that a new U.S. policy would consider a cyber-attack as an attack in the traditional sense and one that could be responded to with physical force. While this policy is not surprising, it does highlight the changing face of the use of force between nations. Specifically, as cyberspace is an accept-ed “space” or “domain” for military action, how should the law of armed conflict apply?
One of the primary steps in this complex problem is determining exactly what constitutes a “cyber-weapon.” To this end the U.S. Air Force has published Air Force Instruction 51-402: Legal Reviews of Weapons and Cyber Capabilities, which requires that new weapons and cyber-capabilities be given a legal review before they become operational in accordance with international norms. While this shows that the U.S. is willing to play by its own rules (i.e. it will consider its use of these capabilities as a use of force as well), it also opens up numer-ous questions about the content of any such legal review, especially in light of the quickly changing technology that underlies such capabilities.
This presentation will articulate the major issues that will be involved in such a review. Using the Air Force instruction as a starting point, the presentation will examine the definitions of a weapon under international law and the standards that apply to such reviews of weapons. It will then seek to examine the targeting functions of such weapons and how those functions affect the legality of these capabilities. This analysis will serve to highlight the definitional issues that attach to cyber-weapons, and it will attempt to further the debate on how militaries are coping with the tensions caused by the interaction of this highly valuable technology with both domestic national security law and the law of armed conflict.
Presented by
P. J. Blount
Professor, Research Counsel, and Instructor of Law, the National Center for Remote Sensing, Air, and Space Law at University of Mississippi School of Law
P. J. Blount is research counsel and instructor of law at the National Center for Remote Sensing, Air, and Space Law at University of Mississippi School of Law. His research focuses on legal issues of space security, international peace and security, international telecom-munications, and cyberspace. He teaches space security law and international telecommunications law.
Blount is a member of the State Bar of Georgia, the International Institute of Space Law, and the American Bar Association’s Forum on Air and Space Law. He is an active member of the space-law community and has lectured worldwide on space security issues. He is a staff editor of the Journal of Space Law and writes for the Res Communis Blog, which covers the legal issues involved with aerospace and cyber-activities.
Blount earned his B.A. and A.B.J. from University of Georgia, his J.D. from University of Mississippi, and his LL.M. from King’s College London.
P. J. Blount
Video Links
Pre-Operational Legal Review of Cyber Weapons 1.5.4
V
3332
Region Codes and Territorial Mess
This presentation criticizes the introduction of region codes. Using DVD region codes as an illustration, the article explains why these codes do not provide effective protection against cross-border infringement. It further outlines the various unintended consequences the codes have created, which range from inconvenience to intrusion on cultural rights. The presentation concludes with some thoughts on the extension of region codes to other areas, such as cloud computing.
Presented by
Peter K.Yu
Professor, Kern Family Chair in Intellectual Property Law, Founding Director of the Intellectual Property Law Center at Drake University Law School
Peter Yu holds the Kern family chair in intellectual prop-erty law and is the founding director of the Intellectual Property Law Center at Drake University Law School. He is also a Wenlan scholar chair professor at Zhong-nan University of Economics and Law in Wuhan, China. Before joining Drake University, he founded the nation-ally renowned intellectual property and communications law program at Michigan State University, where he held faculty appointments in law, communication arts and sci-ences, and Asian studies.
Born and raised in Hong Kong, Yu is a leading expert in international intellectual property and communications law. He also writes and lectures extensively on international trade, international and comparative law, and the transi-tion of the legal systems in China and Hong Kong. A prolific scholar and an award-winning teacher, he is the author or editor of five books and more than 80 law review articles and book chapters. He serves as the general editor of The WIPO Journal and editor of two book series.
Yu has spoken at events organized by the World Intellectual Property Organization; the International Telecommunica-tion Union; the U.N. Conference on Trade and Development; the U.N. Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO); the Chinese, U.S., and E.U. governments; and at leading research institutions from around the world. His lectures and presentations have spanned 25 coun-tries on all continents except Antarctica. He is a frequent commentator in the national and international media. His publications, which have appeared in Chinese and English and been translated into Arabic, French, Japanese, Persian, Portuguese, and Spanish, are available on his website at www.peteryu.com.
Peter K. Yu
Video Links
Region Codes and Territorial Mess 1.5.5Region Codes and Territorial Mess 1.5.6
V
3534
Information Technology Act: Implications for Intellectual Freedom in India
India is one of the largest democracies in the world with a booming IT industry. IT services, including development, R&D, testing, and maintenance, are regularly outsourced to India by institutions from both the U.S. and the E.U. To engender trust and thus commerce, legislation in India must provide adequate protection that meets the privacy and security requirements of these countries. At the same time, legislation is needed to protect India’s own cyber-infrastruc-ture and to meet the challenges of law enforcement in the digital age.
To address these concerns, the government of India passed the Information Technology Act in 2000. This act has been amended twice, in 2006 and 2008. In its limited lifetime this law has raised several controversial points and has frequently been criticized for impinging on privacy. Here we examine this law and its historical development. We also explore its implication for intellectual freedom in India and its application in a cultural context where privacy law has historically been nonexistent. In particular we concentrate on sections 67, 69, 80, and 77, which have been the most controversial. Finally, we contrast the legislation with simi-lar laws in the E.U. and U.S.
Presented by
Vaibhav Garg
Ph.D. student, School of Informatics and Computing, Indiana University
Vaibhav Garg is a second-year Ph.D. student at the School of Informatics and Computing at Indiana University Bloom-ington. His research investigates the cross-section of se-curity and human behavior. It combines elements of social psychology, behavioral economics, and risk communica-tion as they relate to security and privacy. He is also inter-ested in risk perception, information ethics, eGovernance, eHealth, and policy.
Garg graduated from Purdue University with a master’s degree in information security. His master’s thesis explored security and privacy risks in Telemedicine and Telecare. He earned his undergraduate degree in information and communication technology from DA-IICT. His research involved protocol analysis of wireless protocols for both authentication and key exchange.
Since fall 2009, he has served as the representative for SOIC in the Graduate and Professional Student’s Organization at IUB. He was awarded a scholarship to attend the 2010 iGov Research Institute.
Vaibhav Garg
Video Links
Intellectual Freedom in India 1.6.1
Intellectual Freedom in India 1.6.2
V
3736
Publicity Rights of Celebrities in India
The right of publicity in India has evolved from the right of privacy and inheres in an individual or in any indicia of an individual’s personality like his name, personality trait, sig-nature, voice, etc. A person may acquire the right of publicity by virtue of his association with an event, sport, movie, and so on. The right of publicity in India is based in common law, and there is no statute governing the same.
Though the basic philosophy of publicity rights and the test to assess their misappropriation has been laid down by a few judgments, the scope of the rights and the extent of their enforceability are still ambiguous. The uncertainty is even heightened when it comes to use of personality of a celeb-rity online. In this backdrop, this article delves into public-ity rights in India and predicts the application of the same in online environments such as video games, virtual worlds, and so on.
The presentation will end with a note on the publicity provi-sions in the proposed privacy bill and will propose a model of publicity suited for India in the light of experiences in the U.S. and Europe.
Presented by
Dr. Kalyan C. Kankanala
Dr. Kalyan C. KankanalaFounder of Brain League IP Services, India
Dr. Kalyan Kankanala is the founder of Brain League IP Services and is a leading IP professional in India. Kankanala works closely with technology-driven companies on IP protec-tion, strategic IP analysis, IP audits, management of IP, alliances, and licensing. He is a visiting faculty member at the National Law School of India University, Bangalore, and Indian Institute of Management, Bangalore. Kankanala has published four books, the latest titled Indian Patent Law and Practice published by Oxford University Press. He also has numerous publications in his name.
Kankanala is an alumnus of both Franklin Pierce Law Center at University of New Hampshire and National Law School of India University, Bangalore. He is also a registered patent and trade-mark agent in India.
Video Links
Publicity Rights of Celebrities in India 1 .6.3
Publicity Rights of Celebrities in India 1 .6.4
V
3938
Informatics and Securities Regulation: Exploring the Role of Securities Law on the Internet and within Virtual Worlds
The advent of the Internet has given birth to worlds that transcend traditional “brick and mortar” reality and exist only in cyberspace. These virtual worlds present new opportu-nities for study and research because of their similarities and dissimilarities with the real world. The nascent institutions of these virtual worlds offer unique opportunities for regu-lators to understand the development of political, financial, and other sorts of institutions and to experiment with how to regulate them.
This presentation will explore how information impacting securities transactions should be regulated on the Internet and within virtual worlds. Myriad regulatory options will be explored, and an argument will be made that the best solution to regulating securities markets in virtual worlds is to create a transnational entity to promulgate and enforce a harmo-nized and centralized system of securities regulation. This approach offers the best solution to securities regulation in virtual worlds because of the global presence of the Internet. In addition, this approach offers an opportunity to experiment with globalized securities regulation, an idea with which many nations have flirted but have refused to undertake.
Presented by
EricChaffee
Associate Professor, Chair of the Project for Law and Business Ethics at University of Dayton School of Law
Eric Chaffee is an associate professor and chair of the Project for Law and Business Ethics at University of Dayton School of Law. He is an expert in the areas of business law, criminal law, nonprofit organizations, and securities regulation.
Chaffee’s scholarship currently focuses on financial regulatory reform with an emphasis on international regulation and regulation of the Internet. In addition, he has previously published articles in the areas of federal securities regulation, business ethics, constitutional law, and Native American law.
Chaffee is regularly invited to speak at symposia, conferences, workshops, and other events in the U.S. and abroad. His recent speaking invitations include law review symposia at American University Washington College of Law, The Ohio State University College of Law, and Washington and Lee University School of Law. He has also spoken at a variety of other prestigious institutions, including Harvard Law School, Georgetown University Law Center, and Brown University. His recent speaking engage-ments include such locations as Athens, Greece; Leipzig, Germany; Prague, Czech Republic; and Ottawa, Canada.
Prior to coming to UD’s School of Law, Chaffee was an attorney with Jones Day, where he handled civil and criminal matters and gained practical experience in numerous areas of law. His clients included LTV Steel, Procter & Gamble, Sherwin-Williams, Textron, and Yahoo. He was also active in Jones Day’s pro bono and community-service efforts.
He received his law degree from University of Pennsylvania Law School and his undergraduate degree from The Ohio State University.
Eric Chaffee
Video Links
Informatics and Securities Regulation 1.7.1
Informatics and Securities Regulation 1.7.2
V
4140
Data Mining for Gold: Social Media and Social Capital in a Post-national Network Economy
Tools of social media are becoming the most prevalent venues for online content sharing and creation worldwide. The manner in which the online social interaction of indi-viduals and groups is targeted through marketing based on Internet behavioral tracking, and use of the resulting data that is mined through tracking, ultimately can affect the way diverse groups of people perceive and interact with each other. Behavioral tracking online also has economic rami-fications based on the end-use of mined data. As the enor-mous financial incentives to gain control of the globalized Internet society and its goldmine of data become obvious, the attempts at regulation and laws that control the environ-ment become at the same time critical and overwhelming.
The consequences of online regulations on the long-term well-being of the world economy are potentially endless. I will examine the small portion of the socio-legal signifi-cance of online member communities in the global market that relates to social and economic capital created by online networking and associated data mining. I also will briefly discuss a few trends of the developing laws of the Internet society in today’s globalized environment.
Presented by
Susan Stephan
Professor, Of Counsel to the Minneapolis Law Firm of Kretsch & Gust PLLC
Susan Stephan serves as Of Counsel to the Minneapolis law firm of Kretsch & Gust PLLC. She focuses her practice on legal challenges involving intellectual property, eCommerce and the Internet, and general corporate legal matters on behalf of individual and business clients.
Susan is a past chair of the Minnesota State Bar Association’s Art and Entertainment Section, and she is a member of the MSBA’s Antitrust Section and Computer and Technology Section as well as the American Bar Association’s Antitrust Section, Business Law Section, and Cyberspace Law Committee. She currently serves as secretary to the Richard T. Oakes Inn of Court and the Street Legal Motorcycle Club, and she has taught as an adjunct faculty member at Hamline University School of Law since 2001 in the areas of antitrust, intellectual property, pretrial skills, and law and economics.
Susan graduated from Hamline University School of Law in 1992. She received her bachelor’s degree from Northwestern University and a Master of Arts from New York University.
Susan H. Stephan
Video Links
Datamining for Gold 1.7.3
Datamining for Gold 1.7.4
Datamining for Gold 1.7.5
