Year: 2018 Page 5 of 8

By: Nicole Gram

Since 2005, the United States Supreme Court has sought to eliminate mandatory sentences by court for minors, ruling in 2012 that a life without parole sentence for juveniles is cruel and unusual punishment and, therefore, unconstitutional.[1] In response, several states passed laws providing juveniles with an opportunity for re-sentencing or unanticipated release.[2] This situation created a significant challenge for release programs to prepare inmates for lives outside of prison and reduce the likelihood of them returning, which can be caused by their difficulty readjusting to society.[3] Two companies have created solutions to this dilemma that leverage virtual reality technology. Nsena has been filming 360-degree videos that can transport inmates into a new environment with images they can see and is developing a way to help inmates practice diffusing tension and dealing with conflict.[4] Dr. Raji Wahidy, founder and CEO of Virtual Rehab, believes virtual reality has potential to rehabilitate and educate prisoners, prepare them for a better life outside of prison, reduce the number of repeat offences, and ease the burden on taxpayers.[5]

The Eighth Amendment’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment “guarantees individuals the right not to be subjected to excessive sanctions.”[6]  Several cases of precedent are relevant in this arena. In Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551, 560 (2005), the courts held that the Eighth Amendment bars capital punishment for children and Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010), concluded that the Amendment prohibits a sentence of life without the possibility of parole for a juvenile convicted of a nonhomicide offense.[7] Graham further likened life without parole for juveniles to the death penalty, leading to the requirement for sentencing authorities to consider the characteristics of a defendant and the details of the offense before issuing a death sentence.[8] While Graham’s flat ban on life without parole was for nonhomicide crimes, nothing that Graham said about children is crime-specific.[9] Thus, its reasoning implicates any life without parole sentence for a juvenile.[10] Roper and Graham establish that children are constitutionally different from adults for sentencing purposes due to their “lack of maturity and underdeveloped sense of responsibility; they are more vulnerable or susceptible to negative influences and outside pressures, including peer pressure; and their characters are not as well formed.”[11]

The Supreme Court ruling in 2012 that life sentences for juvenile offenders are unconstitutional presented even more challenges around preparing inmates for release since they may have been imprisoned for decades and missed acquiring necessary life skills while imprisoned as juveniles.[12] According to the Federal Bureau of Justice, more than half of state prisoners return to prison within five years of their release.[13] Citing statistics from the US National Institute of Justice, Dr. Wahidy said that two out of three offenders who leave prison return within three years, and 75 percent return within five years.[14] In light of this data, prison release programs were in desperate need of a creative solution to prepare this large group of inmates, who had likely spent more time in prison than out, to survive and live successfully in the outside world. Virtual reality technology is well known for gaming and entertainment but, in recent years, is being applied to other areas, such as education, and appears to be a potential solution for the training and preparation of inmates.

Nsena, a virtual reality company, has been filming 360-degree videos of places, such as halfway houses, to provide images that inmates will see in the outside world. Nsena is also developing a way to use virtual reality to help inmates reduce stress and deal with conflict appropriately.[15] These videos can transport users into a new environment and allow them to simulate the feelings they will experience.[16] Another company, Virtual Rehab, founded by CEO, Dr. Raji Wahidy, also believes in the potential of virtual reality to educate and prepare prisoners for a better life outside of prison toward the goal of reducing taxpayer burden and minimizing repeat offender rates.[17] Virtual Rehab’s technology allows prisoners to perform practical tasks in computer-generated worlds and uses haptic feedback technology, which provides a sense of touch, to make the experience feel more realistic.[18] Virtual reality technology is also being used as a treatment for mental health issues to help patients change negative or destructive thoughts and behavior.[19]It has been used successfully for reduction of stress, anxiety and phobias.[20] Since fifty six percent of prisoners in state prisons and sixty four percent of inmates in local jails have some form of mental illness, there is real value in using virtual reality for rehabilitation.[21]

As the state with largest number of juvenile inmates sentenced to life without parole, Pennsylvania implemented a number of programs to assist inmates with re-entry into communities, including virtual reality.[22] By early 2017, 105 juvenile inmates had been released after taking tours of their new homes via virtual reality headsets.[23] Also in 2017, Colorado started an early release program for juveniles who have already served twenty years of their sentence.[24] The three-year program requires inmates to use virtual reality to practice skills like doing laundry and grocery shopping.[25] Colorado has designed a catalogue of instructional virtual reality applications that educate users in everything from self-checkout and bagging groceries, using a debit card, to doing laundry and appropriately handling potentially violent confrontations.[26] Dozens of Coloradans now have a chance at release and are getting help via virtual reality to prepare for living on the outside and learning how to cope with situations they will encounter in society.[27]

Despite the measured benefits of virtual reality, some people still have concerns. Individuals focused on the punishment aspects of prison view the access to expensive games and entertainment for inmates as a conflict.  However, this is addressed by managing the use of virtual reality to focus solely on educational and mental health objectives.[28] With more than 650,000 inmates released each year, there is ample opportunity for positive value in leveraging this technology to release productive and law-abiding citizens with a healthy state-of-mind back into society.[29]

 

[1] See Melnick, Kyle, Inmates use VR to Prepare for Life on the Outside, VR Scout (Jan. 2, 2018), https://vrscout.com/news/inmates-vr-prepare-life-on-outside/, For Some Inmates on the Cusp of Freedom Virtual Reality Readies them for Release, CorrectionsOne (Mar. 27, 2018), https://www.correctionsone.com/re-entry-and-recidivism/articles/472767187-For-some-inmates-on-the-cusp-of-freedom-virtual-reality-readies-them-for-release/, Dolven, Taylor & Fidel, Emma, This Prison is Using VR to Teach Inmates how to Live on the Outside, Vice News (Dec. 27, 2017), https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/bjym3w/this-prison-is-using-vr-to-teach-inmates-how-to-live-on-the-outside.

[2] See Kim, Catherine, Introducing Inmates to Real Life via Virtual Reality, U.S. News & World Rep. (Mar. 15, 2018, 3:57 PM), https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/2018-03-15/introducing-inmates-to-real-life-via-virtual-reality and For Some Inmates on the Cusp of Freedom Virtual Reality Readies them for Release, CorrectionsOne (Mar. 27, 2018), https://www.correctionsone.com/re-entry-and-recidivism/articles/472767187-For-some-inmates-on-the-cusp-of-freedom-virtual-reality-readies-them-for-release/.

[3] See Kim, Catherine, Introducing Inmates to Real Life via Virtual Reality, U.S. News & World Rep. (Mar. 15, 2018, 3:57 PM), https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/2018-03-15/introducing-inmates-to-real-life-via-virtual-reality.

[4] See id.

[5] See Bindi, Tas, New York Startup to Use VR Tech to Rehabilitate Prisoners, ZD Net (Nov. 25, 2016), https://www.zdnet.com/article/new-york-startup-to-use-vr-tech-to-rehabilitate-prisoners/.

[6] See Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551, 560 (2005).

[7] See Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551, 560 (2005) and Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010).

[8] See Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010).

[9] See id.

[10] See id.

[11] See Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551, 560 (2005) and Graham v. Florida, 560 U.S. 48 (2010).

[12] See Miller v. Alabama, 567 U.S. 460, 479-80 (2012), Kim, Catherine, Introducing Inmates to Real Life via Virtual Reality, U.S. News & World Rep. (Mar. 15, 2018, 3:57 PM), https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/2018-03-15/introducing-inmates-to-real-life-via-virtual-reality, Melnick, Kyle, Inmates use VR to Prepare for Life on the Outside, VR Scout (Jan. 2, 2018), https://vrscout.com/news/inmates-vr-prepare-life-on-outside/.

[13] See Kim, Catherine, Introducing Inmates to Real Life via Virtual Reality, U.S. News & World Rep. (Mar. 15, 2018, 3:57 PM), https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/2018-03-15/introducing-inmates-to-real-life-via-virtual-reality.

[14] See Bindi, Tas, New York Startup to Use VR Tech to Rehabilitate Prisoners, ZD Net (Nov. 25, 2016), https://www.zdnet.com/article/new-york-startup-to-use-vr-tech-to-rehabilitate-prisoners/.

[15] See Kim, Catherine, Introducing Inmates to Real Life via Virtual Reality, U.S. News & World Rep. (Mar. 15, 2018, 3:57 PM), https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/2018-03-15/introducing-inmates-to-real-life-via-virtual-reality.

[16] See Zoukis, Christopher, Virtual Reality Behind Bars Could Change the Game for Prisoners, Huffington Post (Dec. 6, 2017), https://www.huffingtonpost.com/christopher-zoukis/virtual-reality-behind-ba_b_12791456.html.

[17] See Bindi, Tas, New York Startup to Use VR Tech to Rehabilitate Prisoners, ZD Net (Nov. 25, 2016), https://www.zdnet.com/article/new-york-startup-to-use-vr-tech-to-rehabilitate-prisoners/.

[18] See id.

[19] See Zoukis, Christopher, Virtual Reality Behind Bars Could Change the Game for Prisoners, Huffington Post (Dec. 6, 2017), https://www.huffingtonpost.com/christopher-zoukis/virtual-reality-behind-ba_b_12791456.html.

[20] See id.

[21] See Zoukis, Christopher, Virtual Reality Behind Bars Could Change the Game for Prisoners, Huffington Post (Dec. 6, 2017), https://www.huffingtonpost.com/christopher-zoukis/virtual-reality-behind-ba_b_12791456.html.

[22] Kim, Catherine, Introducing Inmates to Real Life via Virtual Reality, U.S. News & World Rep. (Mar. 15, 2018, 3:57 PM), https://www.usnews.com/news/best-states/articles/2018-03-15/introducing-inmates-to-real-life-via-virtual-reality.

[23] See id.

[24] See Melnick, Kyle, Inmates use VR to Prepare for Life on the Outside, VR Scout (Jan. 2, 2018), https://vrscout.com/news/inmates-vr-prepare-life-on-outside/, For Some Inmates on the Cusp of Freedom Virtual Reality Readies them for Release, CorrectionsOne (Mar. 27, 2018), https://www.correctionsone.com/re-entry-and-recidivism/articles/472767187-For-some-inmates-on-the-cusp-of-freedom-virtual-reality-readies-them-for-release/, Dolven, Taylor & Fidel, Emma, This Prison is Using VR to Teach Inmates how to Live on the Outside, Vice News (Dec. 27, 2017), https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/bjym3w/this-prison-is-using-vr-to-teach-inmates-how-to-live-on-the-outside.

[25] See Dolven, Taylor & Fidel, Emma, This Prison is Using VR to Teach Inmates how to Live on the Outside, Vice News (Dec. 27, 2017), https://news.vice.com/en_us/article/bjym3w/this-prison-is-using-vr-to-teach-inmates-how-to-live-on-the-outside.

[26] See Melnick, Kyle, Inmates use VR to Prepare for Life on the Outside, VR Scout (Jan. 2, 2018), https://vrscout.com/news/inmates-vr-prepare-life-on-outside/.

[27] See For Some Inmates on the Cusp of Freedom Virtual Reality Readies them for Release, CorrectionsOne (Mar. 27, 2018), https://www.correctionsone.com/re-entry-and-recidivism/articles/472767187-For-some-inmates-on-the-cusp-of-freedom-virtual-reality-readies-them-for-release/.

[28] See Zoukis, Christopher, Virtual Reality Behind Bars Could Change the Game for Prisoners, Huffington Post (Dec. 6, 2017), https://www.huffingtonpost.com/christopher-zoukis/virtual-reality-behind-ba_b_12791456.html and Bindi, Tas, New York Startup to Use VR Tech to Rehabilitate Prisoners, ZD Net (Nov. 25, 2016), https://www.zdnet.com/article/new-york-startup-to-use-vr-tech-to-rehabilitate-prisoners/.

[29] See Zoukis, Christopher, Virtual Reality Behind Bars Could Change the Game for Prisoners, Huffington Post (Dec. 6, 2017), https://www.huffingtonpost.com/christopher-zoukis/virtual-reality-behind-ba_b_12791456.html and Melnick, Kyle, Inmates use VR to Prepare for Life on the Outside, VR Scout (Jan. 2, 2018), https://vrscout.com/news/inmates-vr-prepare-life-on-outside/.

Image Source: http://bestvr.tech/virtual-reality-prepares-long-term-prisoners-release/

By: Eli Hill,

In recent years, the board gaming industry has experienced an economic renaissance.  One factor fueling this revival is the crowdsourcing marketspace made available through Kickstarter.[1]  To date, the ‘games’ category has earned the most dollars on the site, outpacing both the design and technology categories.[2]  Within the games category, board games pull in substantially larger earnings than video games.[3]  In just the last year, the public pledged over $135 million towards Kickstarter board game campaigns alone.[4]

For the most popular games on Kickstarter, campaign creators often offer ‘group pledge’ options for their backers.[5]  By purchasing a game in bulk, the backer is able to save significant expense, particularly on shipping.[6]  While this method of purchase is typical for the seasoned retailer, online forums now enable individual hobbyists to pool their funds and benefit from the group pledge savings much more easily.[7]

Board game enthusiasts living outside the western commercial markets often lack access to modern board game retailers.[8]  Because the crowdsourcing campaigns are often run by smaller, less experienced publishers, options for delivery outside the U.S. and U.K. are minimal or otherwise beleaguered by absurdly expensive shipping costs.[9]

To address this obstacle within the Southeast Asian markets, a company named Boarders Tabletop Game Studio (“Boarders”) became the premier distributor of the area for the most highly sought after Kickstarter board games.[10]  Several years ago, Boarders began to coordinate group pledges on behalf of its customer base as a way to increase access to Kickstarter exclusive board games for its isolated clientele.[11]

Backers of all Kickstarter campaigns are used to rolling the dice.[12]  Most understand the projects that their financial pledges go towards may not pan out according to the timeline and quality projections originally advertised.[13]  Kickstarter is not a store and has no obligation to deliver the products funded via its marketplace, but such an obligation does fall on the creators of each campaign.[14]

Regarding those indebted to Boarders group pledges, the majority of customer contributions never went towards any Kickstarter campaign.[15]  Suspicions first arose after publisher shipping information and delivery timelines didn’t align with customer expectation.[16]  Attempts to contact Boarders directly about the problems went unanswered.[17]  Some dedicated hobbyists had put thousands of dollars into the numerous campaigns Boarders claimed to be backing.[18]  Most publishers never received any money from Boarders, and for those few that did, still lost money refunding payments on cargo that Boarders had picked up, but never distributed.[19] Collectively, those harmed are now exploring what legal action may be brought against Boarders.[20]

Undoubtedly, the pairing of the board game industry with Kickstarter crowdsourcing has produced more success stories than scams.[21]  However, as the events in Southeast Asia show, digital crowdsourcing is still hampered by the business limitations in distribution.[22]  Kickstarter may provide a valuable international market for the board game industry, but for the publishers operating with limited market presence, the threat of fraud still looms large.[23]

 

[1] See Charlie Hall, Tabletop Games are Exploding on Kickstarter, Video Games are Flat, Polygon (Jan. 2, 2018, 4:06PM), https://www.polygon.com/2018/1/2/16842204/tabletop-games-are-exploding-on-kickstarter-video-games-are-flat (detailing annual growth of Kickstarter board games).

[2] Kickstarter, https://www.kickstarter.com/help/stats (click on ‘categories’ breakdown from main menu).

[3] See Hall, supra note 1.

[4] See id.

[5] Calvin Wong, Boarders Tabletop Game Studio defrauds thousands in Kickstarter scandal, Board Game Prices (Apr. 10, 2018), https://www.boardgameprices.com/articles/boarders-tabletop-game-studio-defrauds-thousands-in-kickstarter-scandal.

[6] See Jay H. Ganatra, When a Kickstarter Stops: Exploring Failures and Regulatory Frameworks for the Rewards-Based Crowdfunding Industry, 68 Rutgers L. Rev. 1425, 1459 (Spring 2016) (describing the cost savings of a bulk order on Kickstarter).

[7]  See id.

[8] See Wong, supra note 5.

[9] See Ganatra, supra note 6 (referencing the higher international shipping costs).

[10] See Wong, supra note 5.

[11] See id.

[12] See Ganatra, supra note 6 at 1465 (describing investor risk on Kickstarter).

[13] See id.

[14] See Michael M. Epstein & Nazgole Hashemi, Crowdfunding in Wonderland: Issues and Investor Risk in Non-Fraudulent Creative Arts Campaigns Under the Jobs Act, 6 Am. U. Bus. L. Rev. 1, 8 (detailing cases where fraudulent Kickstarter campaigns were obligated to defrauded customers).

[15] See Calvin Wong, Boarders Tabletop Game Studio defrauds thousands in Kickstarter scandal, Board Game Prices (Apr. 10, 2018), https://www.boardgameprices.com/articles/boarders-tabletop-game-studio-defrauds-thousands-in-kickstarter-scandal.

[16] See id.

[17] See id.

[18] See id.

[19] See id.

[20] See Calvin Wong, Boarders Tabletop Game Studio defrauds thousands in Kickstarter scandal, Board Game Prices (Apr. 10, 2018), https://www.boardgameprices.com/articles/boarders-tabletop-game-studio-defrauds-thousands-in-kickstarter-scandal.

[21] See generally, Kickstarter, https://www.kickstarter.com/help/stats (showing the data for successfully funded projects).

[22] See Wong, supra note 19.

[23] See Christopher Moores, Kickstart My Lawsuit: Fraud and Justice in Rewards-Based Crowdfunding, 49 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 383, 390 (Nov. 2015) (describing vulnerabilities to fraud that are exposed by Kickstarter campaigns).

Image Source: http://monopoly.wikia.com/wiki/Go_to_Jail_(card).

By: Lindsey Rhoten,

Elon Musk’s curiosity for dabbling into green technologies beyond Tesla’s electric cars emerges at the most critical moment in time; when the state of Earth’s health and the fate of the human race depends on morphing anthropogenic behavior. The human race desperately needs someone that prioritizes Earth’s integrity to invest the endless hours and the billions of dollars into innovating green alternatives for human mobility and energy consumption. This energy innovation is invaluable in moving away from operating power plants that burn fossil fuels, to a source that does not insulate solar heat in the atmosphere.[1]

Telsa is progressing towards a sustainable lifestyle with Telsa’s new Powerpack and Powerwall batteries that allow private homes, business entities, and utilities to collect sustainable and renewable solar energy to “manage power demand, provide backup power and increase grid resilience.”[2] These two energy storage mechanisms now provide a simple do-it-yourself method to utilizing the output of the renewable energy source.[3] The Powerwall is a rechargeable battery designed to store excess energy from solar panels, or the grid if there are no solar panels, and provide access to the left over energy for residential use upon demand.[4] The Powerpack is similar but adjusted to a larger size for business and utility usage.[5] This enables the commercial or larger entity to disconnect the Powerpack from the main power source and convert into its own independent micro grid source using stored energy.[6]

The United States electricity infrastructure is comprised of legacy grids that serve to generate, transmit, and distribute electricity to consumers.[7] One of the greatest shortcomings of the current energy system is that the grid must balance the energy supply to ensure that the electricity availability is contemporaneously adaptable to the increases in demand.[8] The legacy grid relies on peaking plants to elevate the supply with the demand; however, these plants waste energy if the demand is not present and they also generate more pollution than nonpeak plants.[9]

While decreasing fossil fuel use and slowing the flow of overcrowded grids are logical alternatives for those compelled to clean up the environment and save money on the monthly power bill, utility companies are certainly not the first to lobby support of this technology.[10] When consumers connect these energy storage batteries to their home or business as a power source, they are no longer dependent on the services provided by public utility companies.[11] Consequently, public utility profits decrease and the company may not be able to guarantee the viability of the company.[12]

The Federal Energy Regulation Commission (FERC), with regulation by the state, protects this natural monopoly,[13] which is where one company can provide a cheaper service to the entire market than multiple companies could.[14] Utility companies are trying to charge renewable energy users a higher fee because some users still connect to the grid as a backup emergency source and as a result, utilities want to recoup their fair share of grid infrastructure maintenance costs.[15] However, utilities cannot continue to resist this innovative technology. The industry must evolve alongside the technology and adopt flexible practices, while continuing to provide an equitable and safe product for all consumers, renewable energy users or not.

 

[1] See Union of Concerned Scientists, Is There a Connection Between the Ozone Hole and Global Warming?, https://www.ucsusa.org/global-warming/science-and-impacts/science/ozone-hole-and-gw-faq.html#bf-toc-0 (last visited Apr. 11, 2018) (stating that global warming is largely caused by humans burning fossil fuels, such as oil and coal, which put an excessive amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere. Instead of the solar heat radiating out into space, the carbon dioxide particles act as a blanket to insulate solar heat in the atmosphere).

[2] Chaunceton B. Bird, Growth and Legal Implications of Energy Storage Technologies, Utah L. Rev. OnLaw 33, 41 (2017) (describing the Tesla Powerpack and Powerwall as innovative green technologies for energy storage and consumption).

[3] See id.

[4] See Tesla, Powerwall Overview: What is Powerwall?, https://www.tesla.com/support/energy/learn/powerwall/overview (last visited Apr. 11 2018).

[5] See Tesla, Powerpack: Applications, https://www.tesla.com/powerpack (last visited Apr. 11, 2018).

[6] See id. at Powerpack: Microgrid.

[7] See Lindsay Breslau et al., Batteries Included: Incentivizing Energy Storage, 17 Sustainable Dev. L. & Pol’y 29, pt. I, § A (2017).

[8] See id. at 2.

[9] See id.

[10] See id. at pt. II, § C.

[11] See Bird, supra note 2, at 60.

[12] See id. (stating that if people disconnect from the grid, consumers will not be able to receive the rewards of resource sharing, which would subsequently result in an unequal and expensive electricity system).

[13] See id. at 48-49.

[14] Natural monopoly, Cambridge University Press Dictionary (2018), https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dictionary/english/natural-monopoly.

[15] See Breslau, supra note 7, at pt. II, § C.

Image Source: http://energypost.eu/green-electricity-europe-isnt-green/.

By: Jenna Bouley,

Hair-follicle drug testing is different than other drug tests administered because it analyzes hair for drugs within the hair shaft, rather than bodily fluids normally used for drug testing such as urine or saliva.[1] Hair-follicle drug tests are particularly useful because they can be used to determine if a person has ingested drugs in the past 90 days.[2] Employers find this method useful because hair tests can identify drugs in someone’s system from approximately the last three months whereas urine tests can only detect drugs taken approximately a week prior to testing.[3] The use of hair-follicle drug testing has also become more common in the legal industry particularly when court-ordered drug testing may be required.[4] Some examples of when a hair-follicle drug test may be used for legal purposes include: probation, divorce, and child custody cases.[5]

Although the test is called a hair follicle test, it is not actually the root itself that is tested but the first inch and a half of growth from the base.[6] The test works to detect drugs taken in the last 90 days because when a person ingests a drug, it enters into the bloodstream while the body simultaneously metabolizes the drug, causing those metabolites to circulate through the blood as well.[7] Moreover because a person’s blood nourishes their hair follicles, any ingested drugs and their metabolites are deposited into their hair follicle where they remains until the hair grows out of the follicle.[8]

While on the surface hair-follicle drug testing may seem like a great solution for employers and courts there are some issues with the testing. Two major issues include the fact that someone could be exposed to a drug without having ingested it and therefore test positive as well as the fact that the drugs bond with some hair types better than others, which cause inaccuracies about when a drug might have been taken.[9] Some scientists argue that both external and ingested cocaine binds to melanin in the hair thus someone could potentially test positive for cocaine use simply by being in an environment that has cocaine.[10] Moreover, people with black hair, especially with the subtype eumelanin, tend to bind particularly well with cocaine and amphetamines causing disparities in timing between them and their lighter haired counterparts.[11] Additionally, both the amount of melanin and chemical treatment in someone’s hair can make a difference in how much of a drug the hair can absorb.[12] However, even with these issues employers still seem willing to use this method of drug testing.[13]

One example of how the courts have dealt with the issues presented by hair-follicle drug testing was a Massachusetts case involving Boston police officers who tested positive for cocaine in a hair-follicle test.[14] The court concluded that, although hair-follicle drug tests are reliable enough to “be used as some evidence” of drug use, “the risk of a false positive test was great enough to require additional evidence to terminate an officer for just cause.”[15] In other words, the officers failure to pass the hair-follicle drug testing could not be used to conclusively determine that they had used a controlled substance. As a result of the court’s decision the some of the officers were reinstated.[16] In support of the conclusion that this type of testing may be unreliable, Lewis Maltby, president and founder of the National Workrights Institute commented that “every independent scientific organization that has studied hair testing concluded that it isn’t reliable,” and that “the only scientists that support hair testing have ties to the industry.”[17] Moreover according to Michael Walsh, who designed the federal employee drug-testing regime under President Ronald Reagan, and was the executive director of President George H.W. Bush’s Drug Advisory Council: “the science basically just didn’t support integrating it into the federal program—there are still significant scientific issues, not about whether the technology can detect drugs in hair, but more so about the interpretation of how the drugs got there.”[18] Until a better method is found this issue will continue to present employers with the choice of using the potentially problematic hair-follicle drug testing and risk having a law suit brought or alternatively taking the chance that their employees may have used drugs within the last 90 days.

 

[1] See Hair Drug Test Facts and FAQS, Pyschemedics Corp., https://www.psychemedics.com/hair-drug-testing-facts-faqs/#what-is (last visited Apr. 9. 2018).

[2] See Hair Follicle Drug Test, National Drug Screening, Inc.   https://www.nationaldrugscreening.com/hair-follicle-drug-test.php (last visited Apr. 9. 2018).

[3] See id.

[4] See id.

[5] See id.

[6] See id.

[7] Supra note 2.

[8] See id.

[9]  See Ellen Airhart, The Hairy Problem with Drug Testing, Wired (Apr. 1, 2018, 8:00 AM) https://www.wired.com/story/the-hairy-problem-with-drug-testing/.

[10] See id.

[11] See id.

[12] See id.

[13] See id.

[14] See Hassan Kanu, Hair-Follicle Drug Testing: Lessons for Employers, Bloomberg Law (Oct. 19 2016) https://www.bna.com/hairfollicle-drug-testing-n57982078835/.

[15] Id.

[16] See id.

[17] Id.

[18] Id.

Image Source: https://www.alcopro.com/product/hair-follicle-drug-test/#.

By: Mitch Torrence,

Writing in Packingham v. North Carolina, Justice Kennedy stated, “While in the past there may have been difficulty in identifying important places (in a spatial sense) for the exchange of views, today the answer is clear. It is cyberspace-the ‘vast democratic forums of the Internet’ in general and social media in particular”. [1] Granted, these words were uttered in dicta but they speak to the important principle, today the most important place wherein ideas are exchanged is the internet. That in mind there comes a fun question: Can the President block people from his viewing his Twitter account? Knight First Amendment Institute, et al v. Donald J. Trump, President of The United States, et al. may provide an answer to that very question. [2]

The Plaintiffs in Knight Institute are individuals, all of whom have been blocked from viewing President Trump’s Twitter account.[3] It is their position that this is a violation of their First Amendment rights and that they have a right to view Mr. Trump’s twitter account and he should be compelled to unblock them.[4] They couch this argument in the proposal that Mr. Trump’s Twitter account constitutes a public forum and that Mr. Trump’s blocking of them of them is impermissible viewpoint discrimination.[5] The Government, of course, disagrees.

The Government concedes that Mr. Trump’s Twitter posts constitute official statements from the Office of the President.[6] However, they disagree with the characterization of Twitter as a public forum and contend that forum analysis is not even appropriate in this context.[7] On the latter point the Government that argues that the public forum doctrine ought not be applied mechanically to contexts that are different from streets or parks.[8] Additionally, they make the argument that the Court must analyze what it is the citizen is seeking access to, in this case Mr. Trump’s Twitter account.[9] At this point it is their contention that because no one else can speak on Mr. Trump’s timeline his account cannot be considered to be a public forum. [10]

The case will likely ultimately come down to the above question: what kind of forum is Mr. Trump’s Twitter account? As Eugene Volokh points out there is a dearth of case law on this particular kind of issue.[11] Again as Volokh points out, it seems the most analogous cases come out of the Eastern District of Virginia in Davison v. Plowman and Davison v. Loudon County Board of Supervisors.[12] In those cases the following split manifested: a government agency Facebook page ought to be viewed as a limited-public forum and an individual politician’s page may not have the same constraints put on it.[13]  If the same logic were to be extended to Mr. Trump’s account the Plaintiff’s in Knight Institute may be in for a rude awakening.  However, viewing Mr. Trump’s account as purely personal is problematic.

As the Plaintiff’s point out in Knight Institute, Mr. Trump’s account is not utilized a personal account. The practice of the account is to have it function as a vehicle to put out official statements and various members of his staff have access to the account.[14]  To that end, Mr. Trump announced the transition from H.R. McMaster as National Security Advisor to John Bolton via his Twitter. Mr. Trump uses his account in an official capacity and ought not to be able to exclude people from the discourse because he doesn’t like their jokes.

Justice Kennedy correctly identified the notion that today the most important forum for our discourse is cyberspace. It is not a hot take to suggest that Twitter, Facebook, etc.  have taken the mantle of the public square. Mr. Trump’s page ought to correctly be viewed as being a limited public forum and ought not be able to block Twitter users willy-nilly. This may all turn out to be a moot point as the Judge in the case suggested Mr. Trump simply mute users as opposed to blocking them. [15]Perhaps that will end the issue, but if we should hope for a more concrete solution that answers the important question here.

 

[1] See Packingham v. North Carolina, 137 S.Ct. 1730, 1735 (2017).

[2] See Compl. For Declaratory and Injunctive Relief Knight First Amendment Institute, et al v. Donald J. Trump, President of The United States, et al., 1:17-cv-05205 (S.D.N.Y.).

[3] Id.

[4] Id.

[5] Id.

[6]   See Government’s Response to Letter Re: Government’s Concession, Knight First Amendment Institute, et al v. Donald J. Trump, President of The United States, et al., 1:17-cv-05205 (S.D.N.Y.).

[7] See Mem. Of Law In Support of Mot. For Summ. J., Knight First Amendment Institute, et al v. Donald J. Trump, President of The United States, et al., 1:17-cv-05205 (S.D.N.Y.).

[8] Id.

[9] Id.

[10] Id.

[11] See Euguene Volokh, Is @RealDonaldTrump Violating the First Amendment by Blocking Some Twitter Users?, The Volokh Conspiracy, The Washington Post, Jun. 6, 2017, https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/06/06/is-realdonaldtrump-violating-the-first-amendment-by-blocking-some-twitter-users/?utm_term=.4d98f9871585.

[12] Id.

[13] Compare Davison v. Plowman, 191 F. Supp. 3d 553 (E.D.V.A. 2016); with Davison v. Loudoun Cnty. Bd. of Supervisors, 227 F. Supp. 3d 605 (E.D.V.A. 2017).

[14] See Donald Trump (@realDonaldTrump), Twitter (Mar. 22, 2017, 5:26 pm)  https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/976948306927607810.

[15] See John Herrman, Judge Floats Idea to Settle @realDonaldTrump Twitter Blocking Case, N. Y. Times, Mar. 8, 2018, https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/08/business/trump-twitter-block.html.

Image Source: http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2018/01/banning_trump_from_twitter_would_be_counterproductive.html.

By: James Williams,

Sure, we all know that one friend or group of people who play(ed) League of Legends, World of Warcraft, Call of Duty, or other online games. You probably heard parents or teachers say at some point, “you’ll never go anywhere playing those games all day.” However, for some hardcore gamers over the past decade, that threat has been proven false.

eSports has become a new “real job” prospect for elite gamers.[1] These competitions involve high-earning possibilities[2], and there is even a list of earnings by some of the most successful players.[3] Now, there is even a need for lawyers who specifically represent these gamers in terms of reviewing contracts and meeting other legal needs.[4]

Aside from the amount of money flowing around the competitions being insane, there are several intellectual property issues that arise with the growing popularity of eSports. While it is true that the performance of the gamers is unique to them, they are still using the game, which involves the copyrighted artwork of the publisher, the branding associated with the trademarks, and potentially any patents that are related.[5]

Currently, the various tournament hosts appear to contract around the IP issues with gaming publishers.[6] The game publisher or developers are usually still the copyright holders, so enforcement rests upon their discretion.[7] Advertising creates several opportunities for both the game developers as well as the gamers because both can find benefits from advertising the game and potentially, the gameplay.

Streaming gameplay online through platforms like Twitch and YouTube is also a concern for game developers.[8] The current defense that has been suggested for streamers is fair use[9], but this is not the sturdiest defense. Aside from trying to put game streaming into one of the narrow categories of fair use, four factors also need to be weighed.[10] For competitive players, streaming the video games that they play is equivalent to a job[11], so the use itself may be considered as commercial if they are making money and branding themselves. Some game companies, such as Blizzard, are trying to circumvent this by creating a space where players can stream content as long as those players are not charging money to view their content.[12] While Blizzard is trying to keep the players pushed into the fair use category, grounds for infringement may still exist depending on how the courts define the streaming of game content. This is something that gamers, developers, and the legal community will be watching for the future.

Atlus attempted to enforce its rights by threatening suit for those who streamed its game, Persona 5, after a certain point in the beginning of the game to protect the storyline from being spoiled.[13] However, they received so much criticism from Let’s Players and the gaming community, that they issued an apology and removed the warning.[14] This may be an important reminder that the game developers do own enforcement rights, but they are also subject to the market and the buying public.

Trademark sponsorship is not as much of a concern because this is still a growing field compared with other registered sports marks, like Michael Jordan.[15] Although eSports has made it onto ESPN and other non-streaming services, major players and the games themselves are not widely recognized by the general public, so trademark sponsorship may still be a matter of years away.[16]

Moving forward, we’ll want to keep an eye out for fair use as applied to streaming, copyright licenses, and the possibility of individual or corporate trademark issues within the eSports arena. The world of gaming has officially left the basement and is now walking into the spotlight.

 

[1] See Jas Purewal & Isabel Davies, The eSports Explosion: Legal Challenges & Opportunities, 9 Landslide 2 (2016), https://www.americanbar.org/publications/landslide/2016-17/november-december/the_esports_explosion_legal_challenges_and_opportunities.html. (last visited Apr. 3, 2018).

[2] The International 2017 Dota 2 competition had a prize pool of $24.7 million USD. Largest Overall Prize Pools in eSports, E-Sport Earnings, https://www.esportsearnings.com/tournaments. (last visited Apr. 3, 2018).

[3] The highest overall earning player was Kuro Takhasomi for a Dota 2 competition where he earned $3.6 million USD. Highest Overall Earnings, E-Sport Earnings, https://www.esportsearnings.com/players. (last visited Apr. 3, 2018).

[4] See Esports Law and Agent, Kelly Warner, http://kellywarnerlaw.com/esports-law-contracts-agent/. (last visited Apr. 3, 2018).

[5] Supra note 1.

[6] Id.

[7] Advertising these competitions can also help advertise the games themselves, so some game developers may turn the other cheek when it comes to enforcing their copyright and trademark rights. See Aaron Swerdlow, The emerging legal battle over video game streaming rights, Venturebeat (May 27, 2017 at 6:00 AM) https://venturebeat.com/2017/05/27/the-emerging-legal-battle-over-video-game-streaming-rights/.

[8] Id.

[9] 17 U.S.C. § 107 (“Notwithstanding the provisions of 106 and 106A, the fair use  of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research,  is not an infringement of copyright. […]”).

[10] Id. (“(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational use; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used  in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.”).

[11] Supra note 7.

[12] Id.

[13] Id.

[14] Id.

[15] Supra note 1.

[16] ESPN, http://www.espn.com/esports/. (last visited Apr. 3, 2018).

Image Source: https://www.nasdaq.com/article/the-incredible-rise-of-esports-cm904589.

By: Caroline Grossweiler,

The past few decades have been filled with significant technology advancements. While almost all professions have had to adapt to this technology change, lawyers are experiencing a unique challenge. Lawyers are bound by a duty of competence, which may subject them to additional, more severe pressures to keep up with technological advancements.[1]

The duty of technology competence was first encountered in 2012 when the American Bar Association formally approved a change to the Model Rules of Professional Conduct to require that lawyers have a duty to be competent not only in the law and its practice, but also in technology.[2] However, the Model Rules are a suggested framework for the ethical practice of law; states can choose to adopt or not to adopt these rules.[3]

Whether or not the duty of technology competence has been adopted in a specific state, states generally agree that this duty exists in some form.[4] As of March 2018, 31 states have formally adopted the rule of a lawyer’s duty to be technologically competent.[5] Regardless of formal adoption of the rule, the general concept in support of a duty of technology competence is premised on the belief that “… as technology, the regulatory framework, and privacy laws keep changing, lawyers should keep abreast of these changes.”[6] But, this begs the question: How do we get lawyers to become technologically competent?

One approach, taken only by Florida, is to formally educate lawyers on changing technologies.[7] Florida is one of the 31 states that have adopted the duty of technology competence, but more significantly, became the first state to require technology CLE for lawyers.[8]

Another approach, taken by Illinois and New York, focuses on tools and services that can be given to lawyers in order to answer their specific concerns.[9] “…Illinois focuses … on helping lawyers with their technological needs as they come up.”[10] Illinois does not think CLE requirements for technology are an appropriate response to the concern, and that state bar associations should be able to trust lawyers to take CLEs in areas where they need more education.[11] New York focuses on helping lawyers by giving them the tools they need to be technologically competent; CLE classes are not one of these tools.[12]

In conclusion, while states agree that lawyers should probably be technologically competent, no one really agrees on how to achieve this goal. Within the next decade or so, it would not be surprising to see additional methods other than the ones listed in this article arise out of other states. One of the main concerns the American Bar Association and each state bar association should have when making these judgments is this: How can we set up our profession to comply with the ever-changing technology while not unduly burdening lawyers? With this focus in mind, lawyers will be able to swiftly adapt to technology as it grows.

 

[1] See Model Rules of Prof’l Conduct, r. 1.1 (Am. Bar Ass’n 1983).

[2] See Model Rules of Prof’l Conduct, r. 1.1, cmt. (Am. Bar Ass’n 1983).

[3] See Model Rules of Prof’l Conduct, Preamble and Scope (Am. Bar Ass’n 1983).

[4] See Robert Ambrogi, 31 States Have Adopted Ethical Duty of Technology Competence, LawSites (Mar. 16, 2015), https://www.lawsitesblog.com/2015-01/11-states-have-adopted-ethical-duty-of-technology-competence.html.

[5] See id.

[6] Id.

[7] See generally Robert Ambrogi, Florida Becomes First State to Mandate Tech CLE, LawSites (Oct. 3, 2016), https://www.lawsitesblog.com/2016/10/florida-becomes-first-state-mandate-tech-cle.html (discussing Florida’s use of Continuing Legal Education (“CLE”) to address technology changes).

[8] See id.

[9] See Victor Li, Florida Requires Lawyers to Include Tech in CLE, ABA Journal (Feb. 2017, www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/technology_training_cle/).

[10] Id.

[11] See id.

[12] See id.

Image Source: https://edepoze.com/legal-ethics-duty-technology-competence/.

By: James DeSantis,

Years after the high profile legal battles between the media companies and popular peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharing sites, the specter of widespread copyright infringement continues to haunt the entertainment industry to this day.[1] There are conflicting reports as to whether Internet piracy is still growing or has plateaued with the popularity of legal streaming services like Netflix and Spotify.[2] Regardless of whether there is a national trend suggesting that the worst days of Internet piracy may be over, the entertainment industry still loses billions to illegal streaming services and torrent sites.[3] Fortunately, the recent Federal Communications Commission (FCC) decision to repeal Obama era net neutrality regulations on ISPs may allow for a novel way to combat Internet piracy.[4]

Net neutrality is the principle that ISPs should be governmentally mandated to treat all data on the Internet equally regardless of the type content.[5] Following Comcast’s successful lawsuit against the FCC in 2010, ruling that the FCC did not have ancillary jurisdiction to require ISPs to treat all Internet traffic equally, the FCC voted 3-2 to expand their authority to do just that.[6] However, on December 14, 2017, the FCC, under new administration, voted to end the very regulations that had required ISPs to treat all Internet activity the same. The net neutrality regulations are currently set to officially end on April 23, 2018.[7]

Without the FCC restrictions, ISPs will soon be capable of restricting access to specific websites without fear of governmental interference including sites engaging in copyright infringement.[8] While many free-speech and anti-censorship advocates on both sides of the political spectrum have lamented the end to net neutrality, Alexander Graham Bell, the grandfather of the telecommunications industry, perhaps said it best: that “when one door closes, another opens.” ISPs heavily rely on the entertainment industry to maintain ISP revenue from television programming should use the end of net neutrality to pursue a grand bargain with ISPs. The entertainment therefore has leverage and possibly could induce ISPs to eliminate access to illegal file sharing websites in exchange for the entertainment industry’s agreement to continue allowing ISPs to carry the entertainment industry’s channels on ISP’s television services.

A similar idea is already gaining traction North of the border with a coalition of Canadian ISPs, media content providers, and entertainment industry trade organizations, called FairPlay Canada.[9] The coalition recently filed an application with Canada’s FCC equivalent, the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), asking regulators to create an “Independent Piracy Review Agency” that will identify piracy sites and order ISPs to block their customers access to the offending websites.[10] The idea being that Canada has far more to lose in the way of lost revenue and entertainment sector jobs then it stands to gain by protecting citizens access to pirating websites. FairPlay Canada’s proposal is not unlike recent attempts in the U.S. to pass similar regulations like the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) that Congress has repeatedly failed to pass.[11] The main difference between this novel proposal and FairPlay Canada or SOPA and the reason why there is a greater potential for it to likely succeed, is that under the new FCC regulations no governmental approval is required.

While restricting access to illegal file-sharing websites will not magically put an end to all Internet piracy in the United States, making it more difficult for the casual netizen to obtain illegal copyrighted works will likely dissuade all but the most devoted of infringers. With only the most committed copyright scofflaws engaging in online piracy, the entertainment industry should be more comfortable prosecuting said individuals without fear of public backlash. Though the U.S. government has been of limited help in actively tackling the issue of online piracy, the recent decision for the government to not interfere with ISPs may give the entertainment industry its best chance yet to address the crisis.

 

[1] See A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004 (9^th Cir. 2001); Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc. et. al., v. Grokster, Ltd. et al., 125 S. Ct. 2764; 162 L.Ed. 2d 781 (2005); Arista Records LLC v. Lime Group LLC, 784 F. Supp. 2d 398 (2011).

[2] See Dan Rys, Music Piracy Grew 14.7 Percent in 2017, But Positive Signs Exist, Billboard (March 21, 2018).

[3] See Todd Spangler, Global Piracy in 2017: TV and Illegal Activity Rose, While Film Declined, Variety, March 21, 2018.

[4] Brian Fung, The FCC just voted to repeal its net neutrality rules, in a sweeping act of deregulation, The Washington Post (Dec. 14, 2017).

[5] See Wikipedia, Net neutrality, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality (describing the history of net neutrality in the U.S. and around the world).

[6] Sam Gustin, FCC Passes Compromise Net Neutrality Rules, Wired (Dec. 21, 2010).

[7] Seth Fiegerman, Net Neutrality Rules Will Officially End On April 32, CNN Money (Feb. 22, 2018),  http://money.cnn.com/2018/02/22/technology/fcc-net-neutrality-date/index.html.

[8] Klint Finley, Here’s How the End of Net Neutrality Will Change the Internet, Wired (Nov. 22, 2017).

[9] FairPlay Canada, https://www.fairplaycanada.com.

[10] Jordan Pearson, Canada’s Telecoms and National Media Want the Government to Block Internet Piracy Websites, Motherboard (Jan. 30, 2018).

[11] Stop Online Piracy Act, H.R.3261; House Judiciary Committee (Oct. 26, 2011).

Image Source: http://www.680news.com/2018/01/29/fairplay-crtc-online-theft/.

By: Jon Neri,

Today, Facebook CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, submitted to Republican Senator Charles Grasley’s call for him to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee on April 10.[1] The Committee wants Zuckerberg to answer questions about Facebook’s policies “regarding the protection and monitoring of consumer data.”[2] Such summons follows the discovery that political data firm Cambridge Analytica harvested information on millions of Facebook users which it utilized in relation to its work in the 2016 Presidential election.[3] Considering this is not Facebook’s first misstep when it comes to protecting its users’ private information, one must question what aspects of the company’s structure sustains its bad practices and, conversely, its positive reputation.

The discovery referred to above resulted from an investigation led by the Federal Trade Commission.[4] The FTC acknowledgment of its investigation noted that Facebook had entered into a “consent decree” in 2011.[5] In doing so it promised to reform its misleading privacy policies, as well as specifically protect its users from breaches via third-party apps.[6] Considering the decree was made over seven years ago, it is safe to say Facebook has had a long history, and certainly a reputation with lawmakers, of privacy concerns and miscarriage of private user information.[7] The social media mogul has a practice of “pushing the limits of privacy expectations,” operating under a doctrine that is very much similar to the quip “act without permission and ask for forgiveness later.”[8] The company consistently fails to notify users that information they lend, and commonly believe to be as private, is actually often open to public view during particular circumstances, such as the user accessing a publicly shared app within the Facebook interface.[9] It is not, however, new to having to publicly apologize for breaches in its user data, and is quick to come up with an excuse for the incident and a promise that the issue will be fixed.[10]

In the case of this most recent discovery, Zuckerberg took out full-page ads in several British and American newspapers on Sunday, March 25, to apologize for a “breach of trust” relating to the Cambridge Analytica scandal.[11] “This was a breach of trust, and I’m sorry we didn’t do more at the time,” said Zuckerberg before ensuring that the company was taking steps to make sure such a breach never occurs again.[12] Meanwhile, the CEO has come under harsh criticism for this most recent scandal which sent Facebook’s value plunging by nearly $50 billion last week.[13]

Some speculate that Facebook’s long history of privacy violations, even under its own consent decree to the FTC, is strongly linked to Zuckerberg’s secure position as the company’s CEO and majority shareholder.[14] Facebook is structured according to a two-tier stock option system in which Zuckerberg controls 77% of the company’s class B shares, which carry 10 votes each and easily outweigh the voting-power of the company’s 2.4 billion class A shares.[15] What this means is that Facebook’s CEO owns barely 16% of the company, but controls nearly 60% of the votes, meaning Zuckerberg is essentially not subject to the initiatives of Facebook’s board of directors to any significant extent and can’t be removed from his position as CEO.[16] As could be suspected, investors are now showing concern that the value of their investment could be rapidly deteriorating while they are left with no practical means of weighing in on how the company should address its issues.[17] The current argument circling the tech world is whether Facebook would be better off moving forward without Zuckerberg at the forefront. There is no dispute that the company would not be what it is today without Zuckerberg at its helm, but it can also be argued that many of its scandals could have been avoided, and might still be avoided in the future, if Zuckerberg were to relinquish some of his control.

The practice of companies to have multiple stock classes has traditionally been frowned on by the stock market, in fact the practice was banned by the New York Stock Exchange in 1940, only to reinstate their trade in 1956.[18] More recently, however, the New York Stock Exchange has displayed renewed doubts about the practice.[19] For Facebook, the issue is more pressing than ever before and a question arises as to whether or not publicly-traded companies should be more closely regulated in terms of their structure. For now, public opinion leans towards reserving the privilege of citizens to build our companies according to our own discretion and with fairly minimal government intervention. However, if the capitalist ideals that underline free trade continue to intrude on privacy, we may begin to see more legislature proposing increased regulation of companies that specialize in handling private information.

 

[1] See Kaya Yurieff, These are the Lawmakers Who Want Mark Zuckerberg to Testify, CNN tech (Mar. 26, 2018, 2:06 PM), http://money.cnn.com/2018/03/26/technology/lawmakers-seek-mark-zuckerberg-testimony/index.html.

[2] Id.

[3] See id.

[4] See Michael Hiltzik, Mark Zuckerberg Shows Why Giving Company Founders Total Control Can Be Disastrous, Los Angeles Times (Mar. 26, 2018, 12:35 PM), http://www.latimes.com/business/hiltzik/la-fi-hiltzik-zuckerberg-20180326-story.html.

[5] Id.

[6] See id.

[7] See id.

[8] Id.

[9] See Hiltzik, supra note 4.

[10] See id.

[11] Sheena McKenzie, Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg Says Sorry in Full-Page Newspaper Ads, CNN World (Mar. 25, 2018, 2:17 PM), https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/25/europe/facebook-zuckerberg-cambridge-analytica-sorry-ads-newspapers-intl/index.html.

[12] Id.

[13] See id.

[14] Hiltzik, supra note 4.

[15] Id.

[16] Id.

[17] See id.

[18] See id.

[19] See Hiltzik, supra note 4.

Image Source: https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/27/17168228/mark-zuckerberg-congress-testify-cambridge-analytica.