Cybercrime Review
  • Home
  • Links
  • About Cybercrime
  • About Us
  • Major Issues
    • Authentication
    • Cell Site Location Data
    • Child Pornography
    • Encryption
    • GPS
    • Hacking
    • Identity Theft
    • SCA
    • Wiretapping

Thursday, June 27, 2013

Law journal publishes issue discussing United States v. Jones topics: Privacy, Good Faith, Third Party Doctrine and more

Jeffrey Brown  No comments

The North Carolina Journal of Law & Technology recently published an issue dedicated to the Supreme Court's 2012 decision in United States v. Jones. Be sure to check out these great articles.

  • “Jones”ing for Privacy Mandate, Getting a Technology Fix – Doctrine to Follow - Stephanie K. Pell
  • A Shattered Looking Glass: The Pitfalls and Potential of the Mosaic Theory of Fourth Amendment Privacy - David Gray & Danielle Keats Citron
  • The “Davis” Good Faith Rule and Getting Answers to Questions “Jones” Left Open - Susan Freiwald
  • Protecting Elites: An Alternate Take on How United States v. Jones Fits into the Court’s Technology Jurispurdence - Tamara Rice Lave
  • After United States v. Jones, After the Fourth Amendment Third Party Doctrine - Stephen E. Henderson
  • Much Ado About Mosaics: How Original Principles Apply to Evolving Technology in United States v. Jones - Priscilla J. Smith

Email ThisBlogThis!Share to XShare to Facebook
Newer Post Older Post Home

0 comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)

Follow Us

TwitterRSS Feed

Popular Posts

  • "Egregious spoliation conduct" of plaintiff, who used various pieces of software to scrub his computer, results in claim forfeiture
  • The illegality of striking back against hackers
  • Featured Paper: Domestic Drone Use and the Mosaic Theory
  • Computer forensic delays a growing problem?
  • The End of DarkComet RAT - Part 1: The Introduction

ABOUT US

Jeffrey Brown
- J.D., Univ. of Miss. School of Law
- Former Research Assistant at National Center for Justice and the Rule of Law
- Interned for the Cyberspace Law Project at the National Association of Attorneys General
- Owned and operated web design firm since 2003

Justin P. Webb
- J.D., Marquette Univ. Law School, 2013
- Information Security Officer at Marquette Univ.
- GIAC certifications in penetration testing, computer forensics, incident response, and web defense
- Judicial intern at: Seventh Circuit with the Honorable Diane S. Sykes and Wisconsin Sup. Ct. with Justice Ann Walsh Bradley

Read more about us

Blog Archive

  • ►  2014 (26)
    • ►  June (1)
    • ►  April (11)
    • ►  March (1)
    • ►  February (6)
    • ►  January (7)
  • ▼  2013 (180)
    • ►  December (5)
    • ►  November (17)
    • ►  October (19)
    • ►  September (11)
    • ►  August (15)
    • ►  July (4)
    • ▼  June (8)
      • Law journal publishes issue discussing United Stat...
      • Featured Paper: Adequate Attribution: A Framework ...
      • Massachusetts high court holds passenger has stand...
      • Texas enacts statute preventing law enforcement fr...
      • Watch the Terms and Conditions May Apply documenta...
      • State appellate court rules on Facebook message au...
      • Mississippi Law Journal publishes eight articles o...
      • The Verizon FISA Court Order, the PRISM Program, A...
    • ►  May (16)
    • ►  April (27)
    • ►  March (24)
    • ►  February (15)
    • ►  January (19)
  • ►  2012 (330)
    • ►  December (19)
    • ►  November (20)
    • ►  October (25)
    • ►  September (22)
    • ►  August (26)
    • ►  July (32)
    • ►  June (25)
    • ►  May (31)
    • ►  April (35)
    • ►  March (29)
    • ►  February (35)
    • ►  January (31)
  • ►  2011 (84)
    • ►  December (38)
    • ►  November (23)
    • ►  October (11)
    • ►  September (6)
    • ►  August (6)

Labels

.xxx (1) 1030 (2) 11th Circuit (10) 1st Amendment (3) 1st Circuit (6) 2703(d) Orders (5) 2nd Circuit (10) 3rd Circuit (9) 4th Amendment (4) 4th Circuit (4) 5th Amendment (1) 5th Circuit (13) 6.5 million (1) 6th Circuit (12) 7th Circuit (16) 8th Circuit (5) 9/11 (1) 911 (1) 9th Circuit (12) Aaron Swartz (1) AB462 (1) ACLU (1) active defense (1) administrative search (1) Ahrndt (2) analog (1) Anonymous (7) Asahi (1) authentication (12) author (1) authorization (2) backlog (1) Backtrack (2) bad arguments (2) bank records (1) bitcoins (3) bittorrent (7) Blackhat (1) Blackshades (1) blogs (1) border search (3) botnet (1) breach (7) Brereton (1) BSides (1) cable modem hacking (1) cache (1) CALEA (2) CAPTCHA (1) carding (1) CART (1) Castle Doctrine (1) CCleaner (1) CDA (3) cell phone (11) cell phones (34) cell site location (25) CFAA (41) chatroulette (1) Chelsea Chaney (1) child pornography (160) CISPA (3) Citrin (1) civil liberties (1) cloud computing (3) computer crimes (2) computer forensics (2) Conference (1) Connecticut (1) consent search (4) conspiracy (1) container (1) COPPA (1) copying (1) copyright (2) Cotterman (1) counter-hack (3) counterterrorism (1) Craig Roush (1) Craigslist (3) creation date (1) creative argument award (1) credit card (3) Cringely (1) crypter (4) CSLI (12) cyber attacks (2) cyber civil rights (2) cyber espionage (1) cyberbullying (5) cybercrime (6) cyberlaw (1) cybersecurity (7) cyberstalking (3) cyberwar (1) DarkCoderSc (5) DarkComet (5) DC Circuit (1) DDOS (2) defamation (3) Defcon (1) delay (1) democrats (1) Denial of Service (1) Department of Justice (1) digital (1) disclosure (2) dismissal (1) DMCA (2) domain names (3) drone (2) Dunlop (1) eBlaster (3) economics (1) ECPA (12) EFF (7) electronic discovery (3) email (2) email hacking (1) employee misconduct (3) encryption (21) entrapment (1) ESI (10) espionage (2) ethical hacking (1) evidence (4) Evidence Eliminator (1) executive order (1) EXIF (2) exploit (5) extortion (2) Facebook (29) fail (1) FBI (12) FCC (1) featured paper (4) Fifth Circuit (5) file data (1) file hashing (1) file sharing (1) First Amendment (6) FISA (2) Florida (2) FOIA (1) forefeiture (1) Forensic Tool Kit (1) forensics (5) Fourth Amendment (70) fraud (4) FRE 403 (4) friends (1) FTC (6) FTK (1) ftp (1) FUD (2) gambling (2) Gant (1) Garcetti (1) Georgia (1) german law (1) good faith exception (8) Google (6) GPS (65) GPS Tracking (2) Grokster (2) H.R. 983 (1) hack (4) hack back (2) hacking (29) hacking back (4) Hacktivism (3) hashing (1) HD Moore (1) house bill (1) IAGA (1) ICANN (1) identity theft (8) IEEE (1) impersonation (1) infection (1) information security (7) informational privacy (7) Ingerman Smith (1) international roundup (2) Internet speech (2) interrogation (1) interstate commerce (4) ip address (1) IPv6 (1) IRC (1) ISP (1) john doe (1) Jonathan Ezor (1) Jones (26) jury (1) Karo (1) Katana (1) Katz (2) Katzin (5) Kazaa (1) keylogger (3) KFF (1) Knotts (1) Kyllo (1) Lanham Act (1) Las Vegas (1) law enforcement (1) leak (2) license agreement (1) like (1) LinkedIn (2) locational data (1) Lofgren (1) login (1) LOIC (1) LoJack (1) Mac (1) Mahn (1) malware (3) Mariposa (1) Marquette (2) Maynard (6) metadata (3) Metasploit (2) Metter (1) Mitt Romney (1) mobile (1) morality (1) morphing (1) mosaic theory (4) Myspace (1) narcotics (1) nation state attacks (1) natural law (1) NCMEC (1) negligence (1) NIST (1) Nosal (5) NSA (1) Onion Router (1) online casinos (1) Operation Paw Printing (1) Orbot (1) Orin Kerr (6) p2p (10) packing (2) password (3) passwords (4) PayPal (1) PCI-DSS (1) penetration testing (1) Pew Research (1) phishing (1) photo enhancement (1) plain-view doctrine (2) plaintext (1) postings (1) PricewaterhouseCooper (1) principal (1) privacy (14) private browsing (1) probable cause (19) professional misconduct (1) profile (2) profiling (1) proxy (1) public employee speech (1) pwned (1) qualified immunity (1) ransomware (1) RAT (5) reasonable expectation of privacy (12) reasonable suspicion (1) reddit (1) Reid (1) republicans (1) restitution (18) revenge (1) revenge porn (9) Rigmaiden (1) Runyan (1) Russia (1) Russian (1) Samurai WTF (1) Savader (1) SCA (27) scope of warrant (2) SDM (1) search (11) Section 1983 (1) security posture (1) seizure (6) selective prosecution (1) senate bill (1) September 11 (1) sexting (2) sextortion (1) sexual harassment (1) SHA-1 (1) Silk Road (5) SNS (3) social engineering (3) social media (2) SORNA (1) spam (2) spoliation (1) spyware (9) standing (3) state action (1) Stewart Baker (1) stickcam (1) Stingray (1) Stored Communications Act (3) student speech (1) suppression (3) surveillance (7) Syria (3) tacit consent (1) TCNiSO (1) tech watch (9) terms of use (4) text messages (12) theft (1) tips (1) Tor (8) tower dumps (2) tracking (2) trafficking (1) trojan (2) troll (1) Tumblr (1) Twitter (2) unallocated space (1) unauthorized access (3) unconsitutional (2) Update (1) vagueness (1) VHS tapes (1) VirusTotal (2) VPN (1) warrant (3) warrantless (1) webcam (1) Weindl (2) WEIS (1) wifi (4) wire communication (1) wire fraud (1) wireless networks (6) wiretap (18) Wiretap Act (1) Wisconsin (8) witnesses (2) Wurie (2) Xylibox (1)

 
  • Disclaimer

    Thank you for visiting Cybercrime Review. Please be aware that our authors do not represent clients and do not give legal advice. The information found on this blog is provided for educational and informational purposes only. If you do require legal advice, you should consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction.

    Also, the postings on this site are our own and do not necessarily represent our current or past employers' positions, strategies or opinions.

    We hope that the information you find here is helpful. Please contact us if you find an error in our analysis, have a question or comment, or are just looking for a good old-fashioned argument.
Copyright © 2013 Cybercrime Review
Design by NewWpThemes | Blogger Theme by Lasantha - Premium Blogger Themes | Virtual Desktop