Panel 1: Rachel Abdo, Jaywon Choi, Christina Fahey, Emily Jensen, Chelsea Lim, Joo Hyun Park, Ryan Purdy, Kaila Solomon, Leila Witcher

Panel 2: Shira Bergman, Deane Ciampa, Lindsey Fuchs, Kayla Joyce, Catalina Morales, Jordan Phelan, Mehnaz Qureshi, Kingsley Stewart, Hanna Zaretsky

Panel 3: Xinni Cai, Fathia Dawodu, Susie Han, Will Lanier, Dat Nguyen, Gideon Pollack, Madeline Ritter, Grace Sullivan

Panel 4: Katherine Chaffer, Luis Del Rosario, Halley Herbst, Morgan LaPeter, Azat Orazgulyyev, Cameron Porter, Sanna Shenoy, Katherine Szabo

Class 1 (Jan 24): Introduction & Theories of Privacy (PDF)

The Problem of Clearview AI

Reading:

Jon Porter, Vermont Attorney General is Suing Clearview AI Over its Controversial Facial Recognition App, The Verge (link to the complaint embedded in the article, optional to skim)

ACLU v. Clearview (complaint) (optional to skim ... complaints are long, but gotta get used to that!)

Johana Bhuiyan, Clearview AI Uses Your Online Photos to Instantly ID you. That’s a Problem, Lawsuit Says., LA Times

Sidis v. F-R Publishing Corp.

Warren & Brandeis, The Right to Privacy

GUEST LECTURE/DISCUSSION: Neil Richards, Koch Distinguished Professor of Law, Washington University St. Louis School of Law and author of Why Privacy Matters, available where all nerdy books are sold.

Waldman, Privacy As Trust (Chapters 1-2)

State v. Rhodes

Questions while you read:

1. What, if anything, do you find objectionable, problematic, worrisome, or just creepy about Clearview AI? (Don't think about this from a legal standpoint, as you don't know the law just yet. I'm asking for your personal perspective.).

2. What is Brandeis & Warren's central thesis? What is their conception of "privacy"? We are going to spend quite a bit of time discussing this article, so I recommend mapping out their argument in detail.

3. How is intellectual property relevant to the Brandeis/Warren thesis?

Class 3 (Feb 7): Breach of Confidentiality & Anonymity (PDF)

PANEL 2

The Problem of Intimate Partner Violence

Reading:

McCormick v. England

Neil Richards & Dan Solove, Privacy's Other Path (excerpt)

McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission (336-343, 346-352)

Columbia Ins. v. Seescandy.com (excerpt)

Doe v. Cahill (excerpt)

Doe v. Individuals Whose True Names Are Unknown (excerpt)

Technology Facilitated Intimate Partner Violence Reading (This is a link to a series of 9 scholarly publications on tech used in IPV. I recommend reading/skimming a few for our conversation in class. But if you're interested in focusing on this for your papers, you should read them more completely)

Questions while you read:

1. What are the elements of the tort of breach of confidentiality?

2. In what circumstances has it been applied in the past?

3. What are the differences between British and American approaches to the tort?

4. Can you think of other circumstances in which the tort claim can be used?

5. What are the technological tools used in modern IPV?

6. How, if at all, does technology make it more difficult for victim-survivors to seek justice?

7. What, if anything, about the design of the platforms you use everyday make it harder to police, stop, and hold accountable those who engage in IPV and other forms of harassment?

Class 5 (Feb 22, Monday schedule): The Non-Consensual Pornography Problem (PDF)

NO PANELS (in-class activity for all)

GUEST DISCUSSION/LECTURE: Dr. Mary Anne Franks, Professor of Law and Dean's Research Scholar, University of Miami School of Law, Founder and President of the Cyber Civil Rights Initiative, and an all around OUTSTANDING human.

Reading:

Danielle Keats Citron, "Sexual Privacy," Yale Law Journal

Citron & Franks, Criminalizing Revenge Porn

Levendowski, Our Best Weapon Against Revenge Porn: Copyright Law?

NOTE: These are longish law review articles. I recommend reading them somewhere in between skimming and word for word. You should be able to get the gist of the argument, understand the thesis, and how they support their argument.

IN CLASS ACTIVITY: Work on a proposed nonconsensual pornography law and justify your proposal. No need to hand in, but be prepared to discuss.

Class 7 (Mar 7): FTC Enforcement & Privacy Statutes (PDF)

PANEL 1

Reading:

McGeveran Casebook 206 (Notes 3 and 4)

McGeveran Casebook 212 (Note 3)-226 (including In the Matter of Snapchat)

LabMD v. FTC (NOTE: This isn't as long as it seems because it's double spaced and has a ton of footnotes, but focus on 9-29).

Google Consent Decree

HIPAA

COPPA

Gramm-Leach-Bliley

Questions while you read:

1. What is the reach of the FTC's authority to protect consumer privacy?

2. What did Snapchat do wrong, per the FTC's complaint? Do you agree that these are "unfair" or "deceptive" practices?

3. How do FTC enforcement actions generally resolve? Do you agree with this strategic approach?

4. How do the three privacy statutes linked above protect privacy? That is, what are their mechanisms, if any, that actually protect or safeguard individuals' data?

Class 9 (Mar 28): Testimony to Congress Activity

NO PANELS

Reading: None

Class 10 (Apr 4): National Security and the Fourth Amendment (PDF)

PANEL 3

Reading:

Julia Angwin & Jeff Larson, “The NSA Revelations All in One Chart,” ProPublica, June 30, 2014

“National Security Letters in Foreign Intelligence Investigations: Legal Background,” Congressional Research Service via EveryCRSReport.com (Mar. 17, 2006 – July 30, 2015) (read the Summary and the sections on “Exigent Letters,” “Recommendations of the President’s Review Group,” and “USA Freedom Act”) (this is a HUGE site, so only read the above)

Susan Landau & Asaf Lubin, “Examining the Anomalies, Explaining the Value: Should the USA FREEDOM Act’s Metadata Program be Extended?,” 11 Harv. Nat’l Sec. J. 308 (2020) (Read the introduction in detail, get the gist of the article, SKIM the rest)

Laura K. Donohue, “The Dawn of Social Intelligence (SOCINT),” 63 Drake L. Rev. 1061 (2015) (Read the introduction in detail, get the gist of the article, SKIM the rest)

Mark Harris, "How a Secret Google Geofence Warrant Helped Catch the Capitol Riot Mob," Wired.

Questions while you read:

1. What is the relationship between government data collectors and technology companies in informational capitalism?

2. Is government surveillance a necessary byproduct of informational capitalism or is it historically contingent? On what factors is it contingent, if the latter?

3. What justifies mass data collection by the government?

Class 12 (Apr 25): Privacy and Race & Privacy at Work

Panel 1

GUEST LECTURE/DISCUSSION: Hammad Alam, Advancing Justice

Reading:

John Fiske, "Surveilling the City: Whiteness, the Black Man, and Democratic Totalitarianism."

Beverly Gage, "What an Uncensored Letter to MLK Reveals."

McKenzie Funk, "How ICE Finds Its Targets in the Surveillance Age."

Khiara Bridges, "Privacy Rights and Public Families." (pp. 113-121, 129-133)

Jack Moore, "Police Used Smart Street Lights to Surveil Protestors"

Rashida Richardson (video): https://events.technologyreview.com/video/watch/rashida-richardson-policy-approaches-ai-adoption/

Rashida Richarson & Marci Miller, "The Higher Education Industry Is Embracing Predatory and Discriminatory Data Practices"

Karen Levy and Solon Barocas, “Refractive Surveillance: Monitoring Customers to Manage Workers,” International Journal of Communication (if this website is down, feel free to watch this presentation about the work: https://tlc.cis.cornell.edu/2018/09/05/karen-levy-09-04-18/).

Pegah Moradi and Karen Levy, "The Future of Work in the Age of AI: Displacement or Risk-Shifting?", The Oxford Handbook of Ethics and AI

Karen Levy, “The Contexts of Control: Information, Power, and Truck Driving Work,” The Information Society

OPTIONAL Reading:

FBI v. Fazaga, Brief of Civil Rights Organizations

"NO PVE" Letter to Governor Gavin Newsom (CA)

"NO PVE" Letter to the California Legislature

Class 13 (May 2): The Fourth Amendment

Panel 2

Reading:

Florida v. Riley (only the plurality judgment for the Court)

Dow Chemical v. US (majority only)

Kyllo v. US (majority only)

Smith v. Maryland (only the majority opinion)

Carpenter v. US (majority and concurrences)

McGeveran Casebook 28-42 (through Note 2) (Riley v. California)

Tokson & Waldman, Social Norms and the Fourth Amendment (forthcoming Michigan Law Review) (skim) (I would read the intro)

Questions while you read:

1.. What theories of privacy are reflected in the majorities and dissents?

2. How do these cases draw the line between what is public and what is private in the Fourth Amendment context?

3. What is the Third Party Doctrine? What were the rationales for it when the Court created it? Do those rationales still make sense today? Why or why not? Be able to articulate both sides of the argument.

4. How do the cases draw the line between public and private? Are you noticing any patterns?

5. What are the technologies employed in these cases?

6. How are the technologies similar? How are they different?

7. What is the difference between sensory "enhancing" and sensory "creating" technologies?

8. Do you think that the use of technology should make any difference from a Fourth Amendment perspective? Why or why not?