Back to Top

---

Week 3

Tuesday, February 4:  Freedom of Expression (Speech & Conduct)
Guest Lecture: Galen Panger, Ph.D. Candidate, UC Berkeley School of Information

• Read:
  • Ward v. Rock
  • US v. O’Brien
  • Texas v. Johnson

• Consider:
  • What is speech?
  • How does it relate to the concept of information?
  • What is non-expressive conduct?
  • How do computers complicate this?
  • What concepts does the Internet complicate in these cases?

Wednesday, February 5 – 4:10 pm – 5:30 pm (Optional) 
Distinguished Lecture at UC Berkeley School of Information
NSA Spying, Snowden, and Sparking Change
With Cindy Cohn, Electronic Frontier Foundation, and Nicole Ozer, ACLU
210 South Hall

Thursday, February 6:  Freedom of Expression 
Readings are split up according to your last name. If you are on-call, you should read everything.

• Last Names A-L Read:
  • Speech, code and data:
    • Sorrell v. IMS Health Inc., 131 S. Ct. 2653 (Read sections IA, IB, Skip II, Read A1, A2, B1, B2)
    • Neil M. Richards, Why Data Privacy Law is (Mostly) Constitutional, adapted from Intellectual Privacy, Chapter Five, (excerpts)
    • Jane Bambauer, Is Data Speech?, 66 Stan. L. Rev. ____ (forthcoming) (excerpts)

• Last Names M-Z Read:
  • Speech, functionality and algorithms:
    • Universal City Studios, Inc. v. Reimerdes, 111 F. Supp. 2d 294 (2000) (excerpts)
    • Tim Wu, Machine Speech, 161 U. Pa. L. Rev. 1495 (2013) (excerpts)

• Consider:
  • What does it mean to be viewpoint-neutral?
  • How do we think about data? Its creation? Use? Communication?
  • Is data different based on its creation?

Back to Top

---

Week 4

Tuesday, February 11: Freedom of Expression
Guest Lecture: Nicole S. Ozer, Technology and Civil Liberties Policy Director, ACLU of Northern California

• Read:
  • Lloyd v. Tanner 407 U.S. 551 (1972)
  • Robins v. Pruneyard Shopping Center, 23 Cal.3d 899 (1979)
  • Bland v. Roberts, No. 12-1671 (4th Cir. Sept. 18, 2013) (just read pp 36-41).
  • Civic Engagement in the Digital Age – Summary of Findings. Pew Internet Survey. April 2013.
  • The Delete Squad – Google, Twitter, Facebook and the new global battle over the future of free speech by Jeff Rosen, New Republic.
  • Facebook Statement on Controversial, Harmful and Hateful Speech on Facebook
  • Naked Statue Reveals One Thing: Facebook Censorship Needs Better Appeals Process
• Consider:
  • How does physical space relate to expressive freedom?
  • What public spaces exist online?
  • Who owns them?
  • What does this mean for freedom of expression?

Thursday, February 13: Privacy
DOUBLE SESSION (9:30-11am and 12:30-2pm)

Morning Session
Privacy: Concepts, goals and challenges

• Read:
  • Daniel J. Solove, Conceptualizing Privacy, California Law Review, Vol. 90, p. 1087, 2002, pp. 1099-1123
  • Helen Nissenbaum, “A Contextual Approach to Privacy Online,” Daedalus 140 (4), Fall 2011: 32-48.
  • OECD Guidelines on the Protection of Privacy and Transborder Flows of Personal Data (Parts 1-5). If you prefer, you may read the updated guidelines instead (Parts 1-6). 

Afternoon Session
Privacy: Instruments of protection, data protection and information privacy

• Read:
  • Executive Office of the President, Consumer Data Privacy in a Networked World: A Framework for Protecting Privacy and Promoting Innovation in the Global Digital Economy (2012) pp. 5-22 and Appendix A & B

For Both Sessions, Consider:

• How does our current use of technology challenge traditional tools of privacy protection? How does social media affect it? Location-based technology? The Internet of things?

Back to Top

---

Week 5

Tuesday, February 18: Consumer Protection and Privacy
FTC Mobile device workshop

Instructions: Please look at the definitions and discussions of “personal data” in the OECD and WH papers, and compare the OECD guidelines with the Consumer Bill of Rights. Please read either the Google or Facebook complaint etc. not both.

• Read:
  • FTC Policy Statement on Deception [PDF]
  • FTC Policy Statement on Unfairness [PDF]
  • In the Matter of Google. Read the Agreement, Complaint, Exhibits A-D, and Concurring Statement [all links PDF]
  • In re Facebook, Complaint, FTC File No. 092 3184 [PDF]

Thursday, February 20:  No Class (Double 203)

Saturday, February 22: FIRST ASSIGNMENT DUE

Back to Top

---

Week 6

Tuesday, February 25: Privacy — Special Considerations and Hot Topics
Kids and Social Forgiveness

• COPPA (See slides sent via email.)
  
• Privacy Rights for California Minors in the Digital World [22580 – 22582]  ( Chapter 22.1 added by Stats. 2013, Ch. 336, Sec. 1. )
• Jean-Francois Blanchette, Deborah G. Johnson, “Data Retention and the Panoptic Society: The Social Benefits of Forgetfulness” [PDF]
• Foggy thinking about the Right to Oblivion

Thursday, February 27: Privacy — Special Considerations and Hot Topics
Location Information and the Internet of Things

• Nick Doty, Deirdre K. Mulligan and Eric Wilde. (2010). Privacy Issues of the W3C Geolocation API. UC Berkeley: School of Information. Report 2010-038. http://escholarship.org/uc/item/0rp834wf
• In the matter of Goldenshore Technologies http://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/files/documents/cases/131205goldenshorescmpt.pdf
• Scott Austin and Andrew Dowell, ‘Girls Around Me’ Developer Defends App after Foursquare Dismissal, WSJ March 31, 2012 http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2012/03/31/girls-around-me-developer-defends-app-after-foursquare-dismissal/
• John Brownlee, This Creepy App Isn’t Just Stalking Women Without Their Knowledge, It’s a Wake-up Call About Facebook Privacy (Update), Cult of Mac, March 30, 2012 http://www.cultofmac.com/157641/this-creepy-app-isnt-just-stalking-women-without-their-knowledge-its-a-wake-up-call-about-facebook-privacy/
• GAO Report on In-Car Location-Based Services – SKIM, especially look at the charts and graphics. http://www.gao.gov/assets/660/659509.pdf
• Statement of John B. Morris, Jr. General Counsel, and Director of CDT’s Internet Standards, Technology & Policy Project, Center for Democracy & Technology before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee on Commerce, Trade, and Consumer Protection and Subcommittee on Communications, Technology, and the Internet the Privacy Implications of Commercial Location-based Services February 24, 2010 – https://www.cdt.org/files/pdfs/CDT-MorrisLocationTestimony.pdf

Back to Top

---

Week 7

Tuesday, March 4: Copyright
DOUBLE SESSION (9:30-11am and 12:30-2pm)

Morning Session
Copyright Basics

• 17 USC §§ 102, 103, 106 (all links HTML)
• Feist v. Rural, 499 U.S. 340 (1991) [HTML]

Afternoon Session
Fair Use, First Sale, and Personal Use

• 17 USC §§ 107, 117 (definitions of works eligible for copyright; all links HTML)
• Online Policy Group (OPG) v. Diebold 337 F.Supp.2d 1195 (N.D. Cal. 2004) Excerpt. [PDF]
• Perfect 10, Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc. 508 F.3d 1146 (9th Cir. 2007) [PDF] (Read I and III only)
• Mulligan, Han, Burstein, “How DRM Content Systems Disrupt Expectations of Personal Use” [PDF]

Thursday, March 6: Starting-Up
Guest Lecturer: Chris Ridder, Ridder, Costa & Johnstone LLP

• Ownership of Copyright [HTML]
• Definition of  “work made for hire” [HTML]
• Ownership of Patents [HTML]
• Please skim: YCombinator invention assignment agreement [PDF]
• Please skim: An invention disclosure form [PDF]
• Business Insider: “Photos, Texts, And Emails Show The Alleged Betrayal At The Heart Of Snapchat“

---

Week 8

Tuesday, March 11:  No Class (Double 203)

Thursday, March 13: Intermediaries and Liability for Content

• 17 USC § 230 (protection for blocking/screening; link HTML)
• Fair Housing Council of San Fernando Valley, et al. v. Roommates.com LLC  (Majority Opinion Only) [PDF]
• DMCA Safe Harbors 17 USC § 512 skip § 512 e-f, h, j (all links HTML)

Back to Top

---

Week 9

Tuesday, March 18: Technology Design and Liability

• Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417 (1984) Read majority opinion (through line 72) [HTML]
• MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd. 545 U.S. 913 (2005). Read majority opinion (OPTIONAL: read Justice Breyer’s concurring opinion.) [PDF]
• Cartoon Network, LP v. CSC Holdings Inc. 536 F.3d 121 (2d Cir. 2008) [HTML] Read Pages 1-12, Skip I, Read II & III (Pages 21 to the end)

---

Week 10

Spring Break: No Class

Back to Top

---

Week 11

Tuesday, April 1: Information Licensing and Consumer Protection

• Read New America Foundation: “Digital Inclusion and Data Profiling.”
• Browse equalfuture.us.
• Additional reading via email.
• Watch a session of “Big Data: Values and Governance” workshop, then meet with some of your colleagues to discuss the issues raised in the workshop and readings for at least 30 minutes before Thursday’s class.

Thursday, April 3: Contracts and Terms of Service (TOS)

• Pro-CD v. Zeidenberg, 86 F.3d 1447 (1996) [HTML]
• Alan Charles Raul, Edward McNicholas, Colleen Theresa Rutledge, and Adam Rusnak, End of the Notice Paradigm?: FTC’s Proposed Settlement Casts Doubt On the Sufficiency of Disclosures in Privacy Policies and User Agreements, 8 PVLR 1070 (2009) [PDF]

Consider:

• How does the FTC’s use of its deception and unfairness jurisdictions interact with general approaches to contract formation?
• How do you think the court would have approached the issues raised by Frostwire, Google, or Facebook?
• What are the implications of the FTC’s jurisdiction for user interface designers? For lawyers?

---

Week 12

Tuesday, April 8: Liability for Defective Information

• Cardozo v. True, 342 So. 2d 1053 (1977) [PDF]
• Aetna v. Jeppesen, 642 F.2d 339 (1981) [PDF]
• Rosenberg v. Harwood (and Google) (2011) [PDF]

Thursday, April 10: Information Security

• FTC Statement on Data Security [PDF]
• In the Matter of Eli Lilly [PDF]
• In the matter of CardSystems [PDF]
• California Office of Privacy Protection’s Recommended Practices under the Security Breach Notice law: Read pages 5-15 [PDF]

Saturday, April 12: SECOND ASSIGNMENT DUE

---

Week 13

Tuesday, April 15: Trade Secrets

• Wexler v. Greenberg, 399 Pa. 569 (1959) [Google Scholar]
• Whyte v. Schlage, 101 Cal. App. 4th 1443 (2002) [Google Scholar]

Thursday, April 17: Access and Authorization

• United States v. Nosal, 642 F.3d 781 (9th Cir. 2011)
• United States v. Lori Drew: Opinion [PDF]
• U.S. Attorney’s Office, “Alleged Hacker Charged with Stealing Over Four Million Documents from MIT Network.”
• USA v. Aaron Swartz, Superseding Indictment
• Poulsen, Kevon, “This Is the MIT Surveillance Video That Undid Aaron Swartz,” Wired, 2013.

---

Week 14

Tuesday, April 22: Privacy, the Fourth Amendment, and ICT

• Read: U.S. v. Jones, 132 S.Ct. 945 (2012). Read the following excerpts according to your last name: Last names A-I  Opinion (Scalia); Last names J-N  Sotomayor Concurrence; Last names O-Z  Alito Concurrence
• Listen to the oral argument or if you would prefer, read the transcript (I would suggest you listen though)
• Consider:
  • How does the collection of information by the private sector relate to Fourth Amendment protections?
  • How does the Fourth Amendment relate to private property?
  • Think of some technical and business developments that place privacy at risk given the state of the law?
  • Does the current state of 4^th Amendment law make sense to you?

Thursday, April 24

• Read:
  • 18 USC 2702-2703  Refer to definitions from 18 USC 2510 as needed to understand.
  • Theofel v. Farey-Jones, 359 F.3d 1066 (9th Cir. 2003) [Google Scholar]
  • Digital Due Process: About the Issue & Our Principles [links HTML]
  • J. Beckwith Burr Memo
• Consider:
  • Under what standard can the government access your email from your Internet service provider?What if your ISP can access your email for purposes other than storage and processing?
  • Under what standard can the government access search terms you enter?
  • How is a search engine classified under the statute?
  • Under what standard can government access location information held by an electronic communication service provider?

Back to Top

---

Week 15

Tuesday, April 29: Information Licensing and Consumer Protection

• Mortenson v. Timberline, 140 Wn.2d 568 (2000) [PDF]
• Williams v. AOL, 43 U.C.C. Rep. Serv. 2d. 1101 (2001) [PDF]
• NBA v. Motorola, 105 F.3d 841 (1997) (§§ I and II) [HTML]

Thursday, May 1: Digital Inclusion & Data Profiling

• Read: FTC v. Spokeo (2012) – Read Complaint and Consent Decree
• Review (from 4/1): Gangadharan, Seeta, New America Foundation, “Digital Inclusion and Data Profiling” (2012).
• Equal Future (Browse this website if you haven’t yet)

• Back to Top

---

Week 16

Tuesday, May 6: Net Neutrality

• Read:
  • Verizon v. FCC (Read I, III, IV, skip II)
  • “Finding the Best Path Forward to Protect the Open Internet” – Tom Wheeler, FCC Chairman – 29 April 2014
  • “The Buck Stops at the FCC” – Michael Copps, former FCC Commissioner
  • van Schewick: “The FCC Changed Course on Network Neutrality. Here is Why You Should Care.”
  • Timothy B. Lee, “Beyond Net Neutrality: The New Battle for the Future of the Internet.”
• Choose one of the following to read:
  • David Sohn – CDT, The Dangers of “Sponsored Data”, January 8, 2014
  • Jon Brodkin, “Washington’s revolving door: Cellular lobby and FCC have traded leaders.”

Thursday, May 8: Review