From each new Privacy law we see new types of Class Action suits. Were these companies getting bad legal advice?
https://www.pogowasright.org/class-action-lawsuits-filed-under-washington-state-laws/
Class action lawsuits filed under Washington State laws
Two potential class action lawsuits filed under the Washington Privacy Act caught my eye.
Ford Motor Co. Accused of Violating Privacy Law by Storing Drivers Private Conversations and Releasing Them to Cops and a Private Company
Anne Bradley-Smith reports:
Ford Motor Company uses its infotainment system to secretly download and store drivers’ private text conversations, and then turns them over to law enforcement and the private company Berla, a new class action lawsuit alleges.
The lawsuit was filed in Washington on Sept. 10 by lead plaintiffs Mark Jones and Michael McKee, who allege the company violated the Washington Privacy Act. The act, they say in the suit, forbids any entity in the state of Washington from intercepting or pre-recording any private communication without first obtaining consent of all the participants in the communication.
The Ford Illegal Recording Class Action Lawsuit is Jones, et al., v. Ford Motor Company, Case No. 3:21-cv-05666 in the U.S. State of Washington Thurston County Superior Court.
Read more on Top Class Actions, keeping in mind that lawsuits or complaints are just unexamined and unproven claims at this point.
Amazon sued over Sidewalk automatically connecting to networks
Christine Heath reports:
A couple have filed a class action lawsuit against Amazon.
Mary and Matthew Street filed a federal complain t on July 8 in the Western District of Washington against Amazon for violation of the Washington Consumer Protection Act and unjust enrichment.
According to the complaint, Amazon manufactured, marketed, and sold the Echo and Ring devices. Embedded within Sidewalk Devices is a technology that enables those Sidewalk Devices to connect to other Echo and Ring devices nearby through their Bluetooth connections, creating a new, shared network.
Read more on Legal Newsline, keeping in mind that lawsuits or complaints are just unexamined and unproven claims at this point.
Another Oops?
https://www.databreaches.net/ftcs-health-breach-notification-rule-wait-did-you-say-ftcs/
FTC’s Health Breach Notification Rule — Wait, did you say “FTC’s???”
What does it say when a HIPAA lawyer with years of experience says he didn’t know the FTC has a health breach notification rule?
Seen on Jeff Drummond’s blog:
”The U.S. Federal Trade Commission issued a policy statement this week confirming that connected devices and health apps that use or collect consumers’ health information must notify users and others when that data is breached. Failure to comply, the agency said, could result in a penalty of up to $43,792 per violation per day.”
What’s getting the FTC’s attention is the fact that so many health apps and IOT devices collect so much health information, yet those apps and device makers are not HIPAA-covered entities. And those apps and devices are exploding in popularity, usage, and ubiquity. So the FTC is going to start enforcing its 10-year-old (but previously never enforced) data breach notification rule. They issued a statement to that effect here.
Wait, the FTC has a health data breach reporting rule? I never knew that! Anyway, it’s here; I’ll be reading it over the weekend, and will likely report back on the overlap (and lack of overlap) between it and the HIPAA data breach reporting requirements.
The rule went into effect in 2009, so one thing that tells me is that FTC hasn’t done a great job in reminding entities of the rule or enforcing it.
This blogger did try to get the FTC to get involved in a breach notification case but had filed it under Section 5 of the FTC Act as deception and unfairness not to notify patients that their data were up on a dark web torrent site for everyone to grab. The FTC had not done anything in that case.
I look forward to reading Jeff’s commentary.
Fear the FBI for they will find you. How does one make that contact invisible?
Ragnar Locker Ransomware Gang Employs New Tactics: Leaking Data if Victims Contact the FBI
Since it re-emerged as a major threat several years ago, ransomware has become an evolving threat. Ransomware gangs regularly add new tactics and twists to their playbooks to increase pressure on victims. The latest development comes from the Ragnar Locker group, who are now threatening to publish sensitive information if the victim even makes contact with authorities like the FBI.
Not yet in my library. The mouse that roared now has AI weapons.
The Disruptive Impact of Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems Diffusion
Challenging the focus on great powers in the international debate, this book explores how rising middle power states are engaging with emerging major military innovations and analyses how this will affect the stability and security of the Indo Pacific.
Presenting a data-based analysis of how middle power actors in the Indo-Pacific are responding to the emergence of military Artificial Intelligence and Killer Robots, the book asserts that continuing to exclude non-great power actors from our thinking in this field enables the dangerous diffusion of Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems (LAWS) to smaller states and terrorist groups, and demonstrates the disruptive effects of these military innovations on the balance of power in the Indo-Pacific. Offering a detailed analysis of the resource capacities of China, United States, Singapore and Indonesia, it shows how major military innovation acts as a circuit breaker between competitor states disrupting the conventional superiority of the dominant hegemonic state and giving a successful adopter a distinct advantage over their opponent.
This book will appeal to researchers, end-users in the military and law enforcement communities, and policymakers. It will also be a valuable resource for researchers interested in strategic stability for the broader Asia-Pacific and the role of middle power states in hegemonic power transition and conflict.
I think I understand. Can this continue?
The Death of the Data Subject
This paper situates the data privacy debate in the context of what I call the death of the data subject. My central claim is that concept of a rights-bearing data subject is being pulled in two contradictory directions at once, and that simultaneous attention to these is necessary to understand and resist the extractive practices of the data industry. Specifically, it is necessary to treat the problems facing the data subject structurally, rather than by narrowly attempting to vindicate its rights. On the one hand, the data industry argues that subjects of biometric identification lack legal standing to pursue claims in court, and Facebook recently denied that that its facial recognition software recognizes faces. On the other hand, industry takes consent to terms of service and arbitration clauses to create enforceable legal subject positions, while using promises of personalization to create a phenomenological subject that is unaware of the extent to which it is being manipulated. Data subjects thus have no legal existence when it is a matter of corporate liability, but legal accountability when it is a matter of their own liability. Successful reform should address the power asymmetries between individuals and data companies that enable this structural disempowerment.
(Related) Another duality?
http://dspace.lu.lv/dspace/handle/7/56532
Legal challenges of the rapid growth of facial recognition technology
The emergence of new technologies always brings up a lot of ethical and legal questions. The same is true for facial recognition technology, which has raised a lot of concerns for laymen lacking knowledge about the technology and the regulatory side of it. For that reason, the author decided to address these concerns in an attempt to shed light on the topic and raise awareness of the challenges that are yet to be fully figured out. With that in mind, the objective of this thesis was to identify these issues and propose possible solutions to them by creating guidelines for those deploying this technology and those regulating it. While there were some additional issues that the author identified within the research, the author was also able to conclude how these issues should be addressed and hopefully also will be in the near future.
No doubt this debate will continue until an AI is able to make its case in court.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3919588
Artificial Intelligence Systems as Inventors? A Position Statement of 7 September 2021 in View of the Evolving Case-Law Worldwide
On 30 July 2021 the Federal Court of Australia handed down a decision in which it accepted that an artificial intelligence (AI) system called DABUS can be deemed the inventor under Australian patent law. While the decision appears ground-breaking at first sight, it was mostly based on unverified assumptions regarding the technical capabilities of AI systems in general and DABUS in particular. Furthermore, the decision omits important questions regarding the consequences that may follow from attributing inventorship to an entity that lacks legal capacity without undertaking a comprehensive analysis that would justify such attribution. This Position Statement highlights the shortcomings of the decision and points to those factual and legal questions that need to be answered first before recognising AI systems as inventors. While it responds primarily to the decision of the Australian Federal Court, the presented arguments can be of relevance for any jurisdiction dealing with the question of whether an AI system can be deemed an inventor under patent law.
Does this suggest that management might also be changing their views of AI?
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-030-70873-3_20
Tracking Changing Perceptions of Students Through a Cyber Ethics Course on Artificial Intelligence
The advent of technological evolution, particularly in artificial intelligence, has increased the responsibility of academics toward students today. It is important to understand how students view artificial intelligence, its development and use to provide ethical framework to help develop an understanding of standards, codes of conduct, right and wrong.
This study records changing student choices and opinions on artificial intelligence during a capstone ethics course topic taught to tertiary students across 10 years, and how introducing them to moral principles and ethical guidelines changes the way they accept or question artificial intelligence.
It is important to note that the study finds that students’ perceptions and opinions have indeed been changing over the years, with newer generations finding the concept of artificial moral agents as viable, impressive, and exciting. The study also records how students may not grasp the full implications of artificial moral agents and that a stand-alone ethics course that focuses on learning objectives that include ethical theories and framework and runs the due course of a complete semester can help to ensure students are asking the right questions, understanding their legal, social, economic, and moral responsibilities, thus emphasizing the importance of including such topics and subjects to computer and engineering degrees.
Perspective.
https://www.bespacific.com/study-finds-remote-work-is-boosting-productivity/
Study finds remote work is boosting productivity
VentureBeat: “The pandemic is changing tech priorities for many companies, according to a new report from independent research firm Omdia. Enterprises rated cybersecurity and hybrid work as the top initiatives at their organizations, with customer experience, business processes, and better empowering frontline workers following close behind. Omdia’s Future of Work survey, which compiled over 300 responses from executives at large companies, implies that working away from traditional offices will become the new norm. Fifty-eight percent of respondents said they’ll either be primarily home-based or adopt a hybrid work style, while 68% of enterprises believe employee productivity has improved since the move to remote work. The report agrees with the conclusions of a recent Stanford study that found working from home increased productivity among a group of 16,000 workers by 13% over the course of nine months. Attrition rates were also cut by 50%, with employees citing a quieter, more convenient working environment as a major advantage. “The world of work has undergone significant change due to the disruptions brought about by the pandemic,” Omdia principal analyst Adam Holtby said in a press release. “Our research shows that people, process, place, and technology transformation are the foundation upon which successful digital workplace ecosystems are created.”
No comments:
Post a Comment