Can harm be backtracked to a probable cause?
Courts Are Still Willing To Dismiss Data Breach Lawsuits for Lack of Standing
Raika Casey and Alexis Opper of BakerHostetler write:
In data breach litigation, courts generally find plaintiffs have standing such that their complaints may proceed past the pleading stage when it is alleged that sensitive information was impacted and there is an allegation of dark web exposure, misuse or fraud. However, a few courts have recently dismissed proposed data breach class actions despite these factors being alleged.
For example, in Maser v. CommonSpirit Health, a Colorado district court dismissed a proposed data breach class action, finding that the plaintiff failed to allege an injury-in-fact fairly traceable to the data breach despite allegations that she experienced bank fraud and a drop in her credit score. No. 1:23-cv-01073-RM-SBP (D. Colo. Dec. 4, 2024). Because the plaintiff’s bank information was not compromised in the breach and “none of the stolen data fields in and of themselves can enable fraud,” the court held that the alleged harms were not fairly traceable to the breach and, therefore, her other injury allegations were insufficient to support standing.
Read more at Data Counsel.
Read worthy?
https://pogowasright.org/new-book-on-privacy-and-technology/
New Book: ON PRIVACY AND TECHNOLOGY
Law professor and privacy law scholar Dan Solove recently announced the publication of his new book, On Privacy and Technology.
Can privacy law keep up with new digital technologies such as AI?
The book is a short accessible overview of my thinking about privacy for the past 25 years. I tried my best to make it short and engaging – it’s about 130 pages.
And another word to define?
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5170170
Humanist Copyright
This exploration of the role of authorship in copyright law proceeds in three parts: historical, doctrinal, and predictive. First, I will review the development of authorfocused property rights in the pre-copyright regimes of printing privileges and in early Anglo-American copyright law through the 1909 U.S. Copyright Act. Second, I will analyze the extent to which the present U.S. copyright law does (and does not) honor human authorship. Finally, I will consider the potential responses of copyright law to the claims of proprietary rights in AI-generated outputs. I will explain why the humanist orientation of US copyright law validates the position of the Copyright Office and the courts that the output of an AI system will not be a "work of authorship" unless human participation has determinatively caused the creation of the output.
How are we doing?
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5172957
Legitimizing Ai: Ethical Ai in Corporate Ethics Statements
This study examines organizations’ ethics statements on artificial intelligence (AI). Drawing on the legitimacy framework, this study investigates how these statements serve as mechanisms to align organizational AI practices with stakeholder expectations, establish ethical benchmarks, and deploy strategic legitimation cues. Among the Fortune Global 500 and Forbes AI 50 companies, 101 (18.36%) have published corporate AI ethics statements. A quantitative content analysis of these statements reveals that intelligibility, safety, and justice are widely recognized as key ethical AI standards. The statements frequently address customers and employees as primary stakeholders, emphasizing intelligibility and privacy for customers and safety, intelligibility, and accountability for employees. Substantive cues are more prevalent than symbolic cues in legitimizing these ethical AI standards. The findings offer valuable insights for corporate management and communication professionals and a foundational guideline for developing and evaluating corporate AI ethics statements.
No comments:
Post a Comment