DOCSLIB.ORG

Event Program

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

THE EMORY LAW JOURNAL Presents THE 2021 RANDOLPH W. THROWER SYMPOSIUM Privacy in the Digital Age BIG TECH, GOVERNMENT, AND CIVIL LIBERTIES Thursday, February 4, 2021 8:30 a.m. - 4:45 p.m. HELD VIRTUALLY THE 40TH ANNUAL RANDOLPH W. THROWER SYMPOSIUM Privacy in the Digital Age BIG TECH, GOVERNMENT, AND CIVIL LIBERTIES Since 1995, Emory University School of Law and the Emory Law Journal have hosted the Randolph W. Thrower Symposium, part of an endowed lecture series sponsored by Thrower’s family. Randolph Thrower 34C 36L graduated from Emory College and Emory University School of Law and achieved wide acclaim through his active practice of law and devotion to public service. Mr. Thrower passed away in 2014. The 2021 Thrower Symposium will explore various issues surrounding the technology industry today by bringing together a diverse and experienced array of speakers with different perspectives on key topics and solutions. In an era where technology has become ever-present in our lives, we will analyze some of the leading issues facing the technology industry, with a particular focus on Big Tech. The Symposium will tackle complex, controversial, and nuanced issues related to data privacy, the Fourth Amendment, and antitrust. We will explore innovative approaches to tackling these issues, and we will explore how the relationship between technology and the law can and should change. EMORY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW 1 SYMPOSIUM OVERVIEW 8:30 a.m. - 10:00 a.m. PANEL I. Personal Data Protection: How Technology Jeopardizes Privacy 10:30 a.m. - 12:00 p.m. PANEL II. Technology and the Fourth Amendment: Surveillance and • Anita L. Allen, Vice Provost for Faculty, Henry R. Silverman Professor of Law Security in the Digital Age and Professor of Philosophy, University of Pennsylvania • Chaz Arnett, Associate Professor of Law, University of Maryland Carey School • Roy E. Barnes, Former Georgia Governor; Founder, Barnes Law Group of Law • Woodrow Hartzog, Professor of Law and Computer Science, Northwestern • Jamil N. Jaffer, Founder & Executive Director, National Security Institute; University School of Law Director, National Security Law & Policy Program; Assistant Professor, George • Moderator: Morgan Cloud, Charles Howard Candler Professor of Law, Emory Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School University School of Law • Jennifer Lynch, Surveillance Litigation Director, Electronic Frontier Foundation • Moderator: Kay L. Levine, Professor of Law, Emory University School of Law 10:30 a.m. - 11:45 a.m. INTRODUCTION: Mary Anne Bobinski, Dean and Asa Griggs Candler Professor of Law, Emory University School of Law 3:00 p.m. - 4:30 p.m. PANEL III. Antitrust & Big Tech: Consolidation and the Resulting Tension KEYNOTE ADDRESS: Danielle Citron, Jefferson Scholars Foundation Schenck Distinguished Professor in Law, University of Virginia School of Law • Roger P. Alford, Professor of Law, Notre Dame Law School • Babette E. Boliek, Professor of Law, Pepperdine Caruso School of Law • Marina Lao, Board of Visitors Research Scholar and Edward S. Hendrickson 11:45 a.m. - 1:15 p.m. Lunch Break Professor of Law, Seton Hall University School of Law • Moderator: Lawrence A. Reicher, Chief, Office of Decree Enforcement & Compliance (Antitrust Division), United States Department of Justice 2 THE 40TH ANNUAL RANDOLPH W. THROWER SYMPOSIUM SYMPOSIUM OVERVIEW 1:15 p.m. - 2:45 p.m. PANEL II. Technology and the Fourth Amendment: Surveillance and Security in the Digital Age • Chaz Arnett, Associate Professor of Law, University of Maryland Carey School of Law • Jamil N. Jaffer, Founder & Executive Director, National Security Institute; Director, National Security Law & Policy Program; Assistant Professor, George Mason University Antonin Scalia Law School • Jennifer Lynch, Surveillance Litigation Director, Electronic Frontier Foundation • Moderator: Kay L. Levine, Professor of Law, Emory University School of Law 3:00 p.m. - 4:30 p.m. PANEL III. Antitrust & Big Tech: Consolidation and the Resulting Tension • Roger P. Alford, Professor of Law, Notre Dame Law School • Babette E. Boliek, Professor of Law, Pepperdine Caruso School of Law • Marina Lao, Board of Visitors Research Scholar and Edward S. Hendrickson Professor of Law, Seton Hall University School of Law • Moderator: Lawrence A. Reicher, Chief, Office of Decree Enforcement & Compliance (Antitrust Division), United States Department of Justice EMORY UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW 3 SYMPOSIUM KEYNOTE ADDRESS DANIELLE CITRON, Jefferson Scholars Foundation Schenck Distinguished Professor in Law, University of Virginia School of Law Danielle Citron is the Jefferson Scholars Foundation Schenck Distinguished Professor in Law at UVA, where she writes and teaches about privacy, free expression and civil rights. Her scholarship and advocacy have been recognized nationally and internationally. In 2019, Citron was named a MacArthur Fellow based on her work on cyberstalking and intimate privacy. In 2018, she received the UMD Champion of Excellence award and in 2015, the United Kingdom’s Prospect Magazine named her one of the Top 50 World Thinkers and The Daily Record named her one of the Top 50 Most Influential Marylanders. Her book “Hate Crimes in Cyberspace” (Harvard University Press, 2014) was widely praised in published reviews, discussed in blog posts and named one of the 20 Best Moments for Women in 2014 by the editors of Cosmopolitan magazine. She has published more than 40 law review articles, including in the Yale Law Journal, Michigan Law Review (three times), California Law Review (twice), Southern California Law Review, Texas Law Review and many more, which have won professional awards from the International Association of Privacy Professionals as well as from the privacy think tank Future of Privacy. She has written more than 40 opinion pieces for major media outlets, including the New York Times, the Washington Post, the Atlantic, the Guardian, Time and Slate. For the past decade, Citron has worked with lawmakers, law enforcement and tech companies to combat invasions of intimate privacy. In June 2019, she testified before Congress about the national security and privacy risks of deepfakes and have been working with Hill staff on a bill to criminalize digital forgeries. She has been deeply involved in reform efforts around the regulation of online platforms. In October 2019, she testified before Congress about Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. She is currently working with Senate and House staff (both for individual members as well as committees) on proposed Section 230 amendments, and has been working with major tech companies on privacy matters. Since 2011, she has been a member of Facebook’s Non-Consensual Intimate Imagery Task Force and an adviser and a member of Twitter’s Trust and Safety Task Force and as an adviser to the company since 2009. From 2014 to 2016, Citron served as an advisor to then-California Attorney General Kamala Harris and as a member of Harris’ Task Force to Combat Cyber Exploitation and Violence Against Women. In October 2015, Citron, with Harris, spoke at a press conference to discuss her office’s new online resource for law enforcement and individuals whose nude images were disclosed without consent. In 2011, Citron testified about misogynistic cyber hate speech before the Inter-Parliamentary Committee on Anti-Semitism at the House of Commons in the United Kingdom. Citron is the vice president of the Cyber Civil Rights Initiative, a nonprofit devoted to fighting for civil rights and liberties in the digital age that was founded in 2013 and named after her article “Cyber Civil Rights.” She serves on the boards of directors of the Electronic Privacy Information Center and the Future of Privacy, as well as on the Advisory Board of the Anti-Defamation League’s Center on Technology and Society and the Center on Investigative Journalism. In 2020, she received a $75,000 grant from the Knight Foundation to study the salutary impact of intimate privacy laws on victims, a project that she is co-leading with Canadian academic Jonathon Penney. Citron will talk about Privacy’s Promise: Sex, Love and Identity in the Digital Age. 4 THE 40TH ANNUAL RANDOLPH W. THROWER SYMPOSIUM SYMPOSIUM PARTICIPANTS PANEL I: Personal Data Protection: How Technology Jeopardizes Privacy ANITA ALLEN, Vice Provost for Faculty, MORGAN CLOUD, Henry R. Silverman Professor (Moderator) Charles of Law and Professor of Howard Candler Professor Philosophy, University of of Law, Emory University Pennsylvania School of Law Anita L. Allen is an expert on privacy law, the philosophy of privacy, bioethics, and contemporary values and is recognized for scholarship about legal Morgan Cloud is Charles Howard Candler philosophy, women’s rights, and race relations. Professor of Law. He teaches and writes about privacy law, constitutional criminal procedure, white collar crime, criminal law, and constitutional Her books include Privacy Law and Society theory. His numerous scholarly articles have (Thomson/West, 2016), the most comprehensive been published in leading journals, including the textbook on the US law of privacy and data Stanford Law Review, the University of Chicago protection; Unpopular Privacy: What Must We Law Review, the Southern California Law Review, Hide (Oxford, 2011); The New Ethics: A Guided and the UCLA Law Review. Cloud has been a Tour of the 21st Century Moral Landscape distinguished visiting professor at universities in the (Miramax/Hyperion, 2004); Why Privacy Isn’t United States and Europe. In Europe
Recommended publications
  • The History of Redistricting in Georgia

    The History of Redistricting in Georgia

    GEORGIA LAW REVIEW(DO NOT DELETE) 11/6/2018 8:33 PM THE HISTORY OF REDISTRICTING IN GEORGIA Charles S. Bullock III* In his memoirs, Chief Justice Earl Warren singled out the redistricting cases as the most significant decisions of his tenure on the Court.1 A review of the changes redistricting introduced in Georgia supports Warren’s assessment. Not only have the obligations to equalize populations across districts and to do so in a racially fair manner transformed the makeup of the state’s collegial bodies, Georgia has provided the setting for multiple cases that have defined the requirements to be met when designing districts. Other than the very first adjustments that occurred in the 1960s, changes in Georgia plans had to secure approval from the federal government pursuant to the Voting Rights Act. Also, the first four decades of the Redistricting Revolution occurred with a Democratic legislature and governor in place. Not surprisingly, the partisans in control of redistricting sought to protect their own and as that became difficult they employed more extreme measures. When in the minority, Republicans had no chance to enact plans on their own. Beginning in the 1980s and peaking a decade later, Republicans joined forces with black Democrats to devise alternatives to the proposals of white Democrats. The biracial, bipartisan coalition never had sufficient numbers to enact its ideas. After striking out in the legislature, African-Americans appealed to the U.S. Attorney General alleging that the plans enacted were less favorable to black interests than alternatives * Charles S. Bullock, III is a University Professor of Public and International Affairs at the University of Georgia where he holds the Richard B.
  • On a Day I Accepted an Invitation from the Cobb

    On a Day I Accepted an Invitation from the Cobb

    dick yarbrough.com July 26, 2010 AN IN-DEPTH LOOK AT THE RECENT PRIMARY RESULTS, COURTESY OF JUNIOR E. LEE As promised, I have the latest analysis of the recent primary results, courtesy of Junior E. Lee, general manager of the C. Richard Yarbrough Worldwide Media and Pest Control Company, located over a pool room in Greater Garfield. I almost missed my deadline because I couldn’t get Junior to answer the phone. He was shooting pool with the Bodine brothers, Roy and Leroy, and losing badly. Junior hates to lose, particularly to the Bodine brothers. He wasn’t happy to be interrupted but gave me the information and guaranteed its accuracy within plus-or-minus whatever would get me off the telephone. How did John Oxendine blow a big lead in the Republican gubernatorial primary and not even make the runoff? Junior’s analysis is that nobody in the Republican Party likes Oxendine. One insider told him if the Ox had made the runoff, the number of Republicans standing in line to endorse his opponent would have be so long you’d have thought they were buying one of those IPhone contraptions. Eric Johnson didn’t do so well, either. Junior says that is because he is from Savannah. The only politician from Savannah who ever had any statewide political impact was Gen. James Oglethorpe and when he got here there was nothing around but Savannah, so that doesn’t count. In the Democratic primary, former Gov. Roy Barnes got the nomination without a runoff. Junior says that was due to two factors.
  • The Technique , Atlanta , Georgia

    The Technique , Atlanta , Georgia

    Published Weekly by the Students of the Georgia Institute of Technology X-111—Vol. XXXII ATLANTA, GEORGIA, FRIDAY, AUGUST 27, 1948 Number 2 The Surveyor . Next Week's Technique To Be Last of Quarter September '49 Grads Thompson Favored 3-1 The last issue of the Technique for the summer quarter will be published next week, Friday, Get Senior Privileges In Tech Opinion Poll September 3. All officers and or­ ganizations having information If the democratic primary on September 8 should go the way Tech or announcements they desire students who call Georgia home indicate that they will vote, Acting Governor published are reminded of the And Football Tickets Melvin E. Thompson would be a very happy man. For, in a poll concluded deadline, noon Tuesday. by the Surveyor last Tuesday, 74.2% of the boys who hail from the peach Registrar Sets Tuesday, August 31 state favor Thompson. It is to be noticed that two out of every three men at Tech are from Georgia and half of the Georgians call Atlanta home. Thus the results of this poll should not be construed as an indication of how Absentee Vote As Beginning of Reclassification Plan the race will go in September but rather of how Techmen intend to vote in By Dave Crane the primary. Roy Barnes, president of the Student Council, announced that plans Deadline Near have been made for the reclassification of next summer's graduates to pro­ Only Georgians Were Polled Since the current quarter comes to vide them with senior football date ticket privileges this fall.
  • Platform Justice: Content Moderation at an Inflection Point 3

    Platform Justice: Content Moderation at an Inflection Point 3

    A HOOVER INSTITUTION ESSAY ON Platform Justice C ONTENT MODERATION at an INFLECTION POINT DANIELLE CITRON & QUINTA JURECIC Aegis Series Paper No. 1811 In June 2016, Facebook Vice President Andrew Bosworth circulated an internal memorandum describing the company’s mission. “We connect people,” he wrote. “Maybe someone finds love. Maybe [Facebook] even saves the life of someone on the brink of suicide. Maybe it costs a life by exposing someone to bullies. Maybe someone dies in a terrorist attack coordinated on our tools.”1 Bosworth was not speaking metaphorically. The month after he distributed the memo, Facebook was sued by the parents of five victims of terrorist attacks conducted by Hamas, which had made extensive use of the company’s platform to recruit and organize. Days before, the social media platform had inadvertently broadcast a murder over the streaming app Facebook Live. National Security, Technology, and Law and Technology, Security, National Yet the outrage Facebook weathered in the aftermath of this violence was nothing compared to the scathing criticism it endured two years later after Buzzfeed News published Bosworth’s memo. When the memo leaked in March 2018, Facebook was neck-deep in controversies over its influence on the 2016 presidential election, including the use of the platform’s ad-targeting function by Russian trolls to sow political discord and the harvesting of user data under false pretenses by the Trump-affiliated political consultancy Cambridge Analytica.2 Meanwhile, Facebook’s competitors, Twitter and Google, faced mounting criticism over their failure to curb disinformation and abusive content.3 In 2016, Bosworth’s memo might have been an awkward attempt at self-reflection.
  • Yougov 2014 Final Georgia Pre-Election Poll

    Yougov 2014 Final Georgia Pre-Election Poll

    YouGov 2014 Final Georgia Pre-election Poll Sample 1743 Likely Voters Conducted October 25-31, 2014 Margin of Error ±3.2% 1. Are you registered to vote in Georgia? Yes ....................................................................................100% No .......................................................................................0% Notsure .................................................................................0% 2. Which candidate did you vote for in the 2012 Presidential election? Barack Obama (Democrat) . 41% Mitt Romney (Republican) . 49% Other candidate . .1% Ididnotvote .............................................................................9% 3. Which candidate did you vote for in the election for U.S. Senator from Georgia in 2010? Mike Thurmond (Democrat) . .33% Johnny Isakson (Republican) . 46% Other candidate . .2% Voted in a different state . 4% I did not vote . 15% 4. Which candidate did you vote for in the election for Governor of Georgia in 2010? Roy Barnes (Democrat) . .36% Nathan Deal (Republican) . 47% Other candidate . .1% Voted in a different state . 4% I did not vote . 12% 1 YouGov 2014 Final Georgia Pre-election Poll 5. As you may know, there will be an election held in Georgia in about a week. How likely is it that you will vote in the election on November 4, 2014? Definitely will vote . 85% Probably will vote . 15% Maybe will vote . 0% Probably will not vote . 0% Definitely will not vote . 0% Notsure .................................................................................0% 6.
  • Danielle Keats Citron, Professor of Law, Boston University School of Law

    Danielle Keats Citron, Professor of Law, Boston University School of Law

    PREPARED WRITTEN TESTIMONY AND STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD FOR Danielle Keats Citron, Professor of Law, Boston University School of Law HEARING ON “Fostering a Healthier Internet to Protect Consumers” BEFORE THE House Committee on Energy and Commerce October 16, 2019 John D. Dingell Room, 2123, Rayburn House Office Building Washington, D.C. INTRODUCTION Thank you for inviting me to appear before you to testify about corporate responsibility for online activity and fostering a healthy internet to protect consumers. My name is Danielle Keats Citron. I am a Professor of Law at the Boston University School of Law. In addition to my home institution, I am an Affiliate Faculty at the Berkman Klein Center at Harvard Law School, Affiliate Scholar at Stanford Law School’s Center on Internet & Society, Affiliate Fellow at Yale Law School’s Information Society Project, and Tech Fellow at NYU Law’s Policing Project. I am also a 2019 MacArthur Fellow. My scholarship focuses on privacy, free speech, and civil rights. I have published more than 30 articles in major law reviews and more than 25 opinion pieces for major news outlets.1 My book Hate Crimes in Cyberspace tackled the phenomenon of cyber stalking and what law, companies, and society can do about it.2 As a member of the American Law Institute, I serve as an adviser on Restatement (Third) Torts: Defamation and Privacy and the Restatement (Third) Information Privacy Principles Project. In my own writing and with coauthors Benjamin Wittes, Robert Chesney, Quinta Jurecic, and Mary Anne Franks, I have explored the significance of Section 230 to civil rights and civil liberties in a digital age.3 * * * Summary: In the early days of the commercial internet, lawmakers recognized that federal agencies could not possibly tackle all noxious activity online.
  • Memorandum of Law in Support of Changes to Stone Mountain Park

    Memorandum of Law in Support of Changes to Stone Mountain Park

    Memorandum of Law in Support of Changes to Stone Mountain Park To: Whom It May Concern From: Stone Mountain Action Coalition Date: October 15, 2020 During public discourse regarding the legal entanglement between the Confederacy and Stone Mountain Park (the “Park”), some have argued that the Stone Mountain Memorial Association (“SMMA” or the “Board”) is powerless to make changes to the Park, claiming that the Board’s “hands are tied by the law.” To the contrary, the Board has discretion to make changes under current Georgia state law. Indeed, all boards created by law have discretion. Absent discretion, such entities would be powerless to take actions pursuant to their statutory mandates. Here, that discretion is front and center, listed in the code among the three primary purposes of the SMMA: (1) To preserve the natural areas situated within the Stone Mountain Park area; (2) To provide access to Stone Mountain for Georgia's citizens; and (3) To maintain an appropriate and suitable memorial for the Confederacy. See O.C.G.A. § 12-3-192.1 (emphasis added) (the complete “Stone Mountain Memorial Act,” O.C.G.A. § 12-3-190, et seq. is attached as Exhibit “A”). Thus, the General Assembly explicitly granted the Board discretion as to what is an “appropriate and suitable” memorial to the Confederacy. Page 1 of 11 I. THE STONE MOUNTAIN MEMORIAL ASSOCIATION IS PERMITTED UNDER GEORGIA STATE LAW TO MAKE CHANGES TO STONE MOUNTAIN PARK. A. The history of Stone Mountain Park and the SMMA underscores the urgent need to make changes at the Park.
  • Fighting Cybercrime After United States V. Jones David Gray

    Fighting Cybercrime After United States V. Jones David Gray

    Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology Volume 103 | Issue 3 Article 4 Summer 2013 Fighting Cybercrime After United States v. Jones David Gray Danielle Keats Citron Liz Clark Rinehart Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc Part of the Criminal Law Commons Recommended Citation David Gray, Danielle Keats Citron, and Liz Clark Rinehart, Fighting Cybercrime After United States v. Jones, 103 J. Crim. L. & Criminology 745 (2013). https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/jclc/vol103/iss3/4 This Symposium is brought to you for free and open access by Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology by an authorized editor of Northwestern University School of Law Scholarly Commons. 0091-4169/13/10303-0745 THE JOURNAL OF CRIMINAL LAW & CRIMINOLOGY Vol. 103, No. 3 Copyright © 2013 by David Gray, Danielle Keats Citron & Liz Clark Rinehart Printed in U.S.A. FIGHTING CYBERCRIME AFTER UNITED STATES V. JONES DAVID GRAY,* DANIELLE KEATS CITRON** & LIZ CLARK RINEHART*** In a landmark nondecision last term, five Justices of the United States Supreme Court would have held that citizens possess a Fourth Amendment right to expect that certain quantities of information about them will remain private, even if they have no such expectations with respect to any of the information or data constituting that whole. This quantitative approach to evaluating and protecting Fourth Amendment rights is certainly novel and raises serious conceptual, doctrinal, and practical challenges. In other works, we have met these challenges by engaging in a careful analysis of this “mosaic theory” and by proposing that courts focus on the technologies that make collecting and aggregating large quantities of information possible.
  • Spring 2017 Visit The

    Spring 2017 Visit The

    UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA LIBRARIES BEYOND Volume 24 Spring 2017 Visit the CONTACT INFORMATION Libraries' Websites Dr. P. Toby Graham University Librarian and Associate Provost www.libs.uga.edu [email protected] (706) 542-0621 Chantel Dunham Special Collections Library Director of Development www.libs.uga.edu/scl [email protected] (706) 542-0628 Leandra Nessel Hargrett Rare Book and Manuscript Library Development Officer www.libs.uga.edu/hargrett [email protected] (706) 542-3879 HARGRETT RARE BOOK AND MANUSCRIPT LIBRARY Richard B. Russell Library for Political Research and Studies Kat Stein www.libs.uga.edu/russell Director [email protected] (706) 542-5484 Walter J. Brown Media Archive WALTER J. BROWN MEDIA ARCHIVE and Peabody Awards Collection AND PEABODY AWARDS COLLECTION www.libs.uga.edu/media Ruta Abolins Director [email protected] Digital Library of Georgia (706) 542-4757 www.dlg.galileo.usg.edu RICHARD B. RUSSELL LIBRARY FOR POLITICAL RESEARCH AND STUDIES Sheryl B. Vogt Beyond The Pages is published twice annually by the University of Georgia Libraries, with Director support from the Dooley Endowment [email protected] (706) 542-0619 Editor: Leandra Nessel DIGITAL LIBRARY OF GEORGIA Writers: Mazie Bowen, Ashley Callahan, Lauren Cole, Margie Compton, Stephen Corey, Mandy Sheila McAlister Mastrovita, Leandra Nessel, Kathryn Veale, Sheryl Director Vogt, Joan Zitzelman [email protected] (706) 542-5418 Design: Brandon Duncan, Bulldog Print + Design Researchers | (706) 542-7123 Cover Photo: Mining in Georgia, 1879. From the upcoming “Gold-digging in Georgia: America’s Events | (706) 542-6331 First Gold Rush” exhibit in the Hargrett Rare Book and Manuscript Library.
  • Addressing Cyber Harassment: an Overview of Hate Crimes in Cyberspace

    Addressing Cyber Harassment: an Overview of Hate Crimes in Cyberspace

    Journal of Law, Technology & the Internet · Vol. 6 · 2015 ADDRESSING CYBER HARASSMENT: AN OVERVIEW OF HATE CRIMES IN CYBERSPACE Danielle Keats Citron∗ INTRODUCTION It is an auspicious time to discuss cyber harassment and cyber stalking. When I began writing about cyber harassment in 2007, it was dismissed as a part of the bargain of online life. Although the abuse often involved threats, defamation, and privacy invasions, commentators regarded it as “no big deal.”1 Victims were told to stop “whining” because they chose to blog about controversial topics or to share nude images of themselves with confidantes. Victims were advised to toughen up or go offline.2 The choice was theirs—that was the deal. Since 2007, so much has changed. Cyber harassment’s harms are now part of the national conversation. Perceptions and attitudes have changed,3 thanks in no small part to the work of Cyber Civil Rights Initiative4 (CCRI), End Revenge Porn,5 and Without My Consent,6 advocacy groups devoted to educating the public about online harassment and to spearheading reform. ∗ Lois K. Macht Research Professor & Professor of Law, University of Maryland Francis King Carey School of Law, Senior Fellow, Future of Privacy, Affiliate Scholar, Stanford Center on Internet & Society, Affiliate Fellow, Yale Information Society Project. I am grateful to Co-Dean Michael Scharf, Professor Ray Ku, Stephen Congdon, and the staff of Case Western University’s Journal of Law, Technology, and the Internet who kindly hosted me to talk about my book Hate Crimes in Cyberspace as its first inaugural distinguished speaker. This short piece is adapted from my talk.
  • 1 Danielle Keats Citron, Morton & Sophia Macht Professor of Law

    1 Danielle Keats Citron, Morton & Sophia Macht Professor of Law

    PREPARED WRITTEN TESTIMONY AND STATEMENT FOR THE RECORD OF Danielle Keats Citron, Morton & Sophia Macht Professor of Law, University of Maryland Carey School of Law* HEARING ON “The National Security Challenge of Artificial Intelligence, Manipulated Media, and ‘Deep Fakes’” BEFORE THE House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence June 13, 2019 Longworth House Office Building Room 1100 Washington, D.C. * As of July 1, 2019, Citron will join the faculty of Boston University School of Law as a Professor of Law. 1 I. INTRODUCTION Chairman Schiff, Ranking Member, and Committee Members, thank you for inviting me to appear before you to testify about manipulated media generally and “deep fakes” specifically. My name is Danielle Keats Citron. I am the Morton & Sophia Macht Professor of Law at the University of Maryland Carey School of Law where I have taught for fifteen years. On July 1, 2019, I am joining the faculty of Boston University School of Law as a Professor of Law. In addition to my home institutions, I am an Affiliate Scholar at Stanford Law School’s Center on Internet & Society, Affiliate Fellow at Yale Law School’s Information Society Project, and Tech Fellow at NYU Law’s Policing Project. I am a member of the American Law Institute where I have been an adviser to the Restatement Third, Information Privacy Principles Project. I have written extensively about privacy, free speech, and civil rights, publishing more than 30 articles in major law reviews and scores of opinion pieces for major news outlets.1 My book HATE CRIMES IN CYBERSPACE (Harvard University Press 2014) tackled the phenomenon of cyber stalking.
  • Civil Rights Teacher Notes

    Civil Rights Teacher Notes

    One Stop Shop For Educators Arnall was born in Newnan, Georgia and received a law degree from the University of Georgia in 1931. Arnall’s career in politics began with his 1932 election to the Georgia General Assembly. Six years later he was appointed as the nation’s youngest attorney general at 31 years of age. In 1942, he defeated Eugene Talmadge, for governor. Arnall’s victory was largely due to the state’s university system losing its accreditation because of Talmadge’s interference (see Teacher Note SS8H9). As governor, Arnall is credited for restoring accreditation to the state’s institutions of higher learning, abolishing the poll tax, lowering the voting age, and establishing a teacher’s retirement system. However, Arnall lost support based on his support of liberal causes and leaders. One example was his acceptance of the Supreme Courts rulings against the white primary. He also lost popularity when he wrote two books that many southerners felt disparaged the South. Due to Georgia law, Arnall could not run for another term in 1947. He played a key role in the “three governor’s controversy” by refusing to give up the governor’s office until the issue was worked out (see Teacher Note SS8H11). Though a strong candidate for Governor in 1966, Arnall lost to segregationist Lester Maddox. He never ran for office again. After this election, Arnall was a successful business man and lawyer until his death. For more information about Ellis Arnall and his impact on the state see: The New Georgia Encyclopedia: “Ellis Arnall” http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/Article.jsp?id=h-597&hl=y Sample Question for H10a (OAS Database) Sample Question for H10c After World War II in the United States, which of these trends Which Georgia governor receives credit for these accomplishments contributed to the growth of Georgia? • Restoring accreditation to Georgia’s university system A.