Category: Science & Technology

Something Is Rotten in the State of Healthcare: Accountability, Affordability, and the Court of Public Opinion

Current Volume, Featured Articles, Media & Communications, Recent Publications, Science & Technology Leave a comment

By: Isabelle Breier Many countries worldwide recognize a right to health and provide legal recourse for securing that right. By contrast, for many Americans, there is no legal right or remedy that enables them to access healthcare if they cannot afford it. While there are some statutes and measures in place, such as the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA) and Medicaid, coverage remains piecemeal and access to healthcare is not guaranteed. Conditioning people’s access to healthcare upon their ability to pay violates the foundational bioethical principle of justice. In the United States, individuals and advocates use social media to fill this vacuum, raising awareness and funds through platforms like GoFundMe and X.com (formerly Twitter). In the absence of government-provided healthcare or a right to health, the American public sometimes functions as a healthcare access mechanism via social media. However, this insufficient and inequitable stopgap cannot replace effective governance. The public is filling a vital and unmet need through social media advocacy, but there are many drawbacks to effectively delegating this authority to the public instead of the government, including the public’s capriciousness and lack of legal accountability. The government should take proactive steps to ensure that healthcare

Continue

Gray Advice

Artificial Intelligence, Current Volume, Data Analytics, Featured Articles, Health & Biotechnology, Machine Learning, Recent Publications, Science & Technology Leave a comment

By: Keith Porcaro Debates over economic protectionism or the technology flavor-of-the-month obscure a simple, urgent truth: people are going online to find help that they cannot get from legal and health professionals. They are being let down, by products with festering trust and quality issues, by regulators slow to apply consumer protection standards to harmful offerings, and by professionals loath to acknowledge changes to how help is delivered. The status quo cannot continue. Waves of capital and code are empowering ever more organizations to build digital products that blur the line between self-help and professional advice. For good or ill, “gray advice” is changing how ordinary people get help with legal issues and healthcare issues, and even how they perceive professionals. This Article begins the work of articulating what makes a high-quality digital advice product, and how regulators and professionals can engage with the reality of how people seek and find help today. Download Full Article (PDF) Cite: 25 Duke L. & Tech. Rev. 48

Continue

Decoding Cryptocurrency Taxes: The Challenges for Estate Planners

Cryptocurrency, eCommerce, Science & Technology, Technology and Financial Reporting Leave a comment

By: Max Angel In this article, Angel explores the unique challenges of estate planning with cryptocurrency, which include accurately valuing those assets, preserving their value, and addressing the complex tax implications of transferring cryptocurrency to heirs. Download Full Article (PDF) Cite: 23 Duke L. & Tech. Rev. 137

Continue

Beyond Patents: Incentive Strategies for Ocean Plastic Remediation Technologies

Intellectual Property, Patents & Technology, Science & Technology One comment

By: Jacob Stotser With a garbage truck’s worth of plastic being dumped in the ocean each minute, there is a dire need for effective technological solutions aimed at mitigating the marine plastic pollution problem. However, the reliance of the U.S. patent system on market demand to incentivize this type of innovation has proven insufficient in light of the peculiarities of “green” technologies. To remedy this, this article proposes a multi-faceted incentivization approach that looks beyond the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to stimulate the development of remediation technologies through comprehensive regulatory interventions, the establishment of prize funds and other alternative incentive mechanisms, and targeted reforms to patent procedures. Download Full Article (PDF) Cite: 23 Duke L. & Tech. Rev. 114

Continue

Barcoding Bodies: RFID Technology and the Perils of E-Carceration

Science & Technology One comment

By: Jackson Samples Electronic surveillance now plays a central role in the criminal legal system. Every year, hundreds of thousands of people are tracked by ankle monitors and smartphone technology. And frighteningly, commentators and policymakers have now proposed implanting radio frequency identification (“RFID”) chips into people’s bodies for surveillance purposes. This Note examines the unique risks of these proposals—particularly with respect to people on probation and parole—and argues that RFID implants would constitute a systematic violation of individual privacy and bodily integrity. As a result, they would also violate the Fourth Amendment. Download Full Article (PDF) Cite: 23 Duke L. & Tech. Rev. 89

Continue

The Lack of Responsibility of Higher Education Institutions in Addressing Phishing Emails and Data Breaches

Cybersecurity, Data Governance, Notes, Science & Technology Leave a comment

By: Muxuan (Muriel) Wang Higher education institutions (HEIs) are highly susceptible to cyberattacks, particularly those facilitated through phishing, due to the substantial volume of confidential student and staff data and valuable research information they hold. Despite federal legislations focusing on bolstering cybersecurity for critical institutions handling medical and financial data, HEIs have not received similar attention. This Note examines the minimal obligations imposed on HEIs by existing federal and state statutes concerning data breaches, the absence of requirements for HEIs to educate employees and students about phishing attacks, and potential strategies to improve student protection against data breaches. Download Full Article (PDF) Cite: 23 Duke L. & Tech. Rev. 35

Continue

Next-Generation Data Governance

Data Governance, eCommerce, Science & Technology Leave a comment

By: Kimberly A. Houser & John W. Bagby The proliferation of sensors, electronic payments, click-stream data, location-tracking, biometric feeds, and smart home devices, creates an incredibly profitable market for both personal and non-personal data. It is also leading to an amplification of harm to those from or about whom the data is collected. Because federal law provides inadequate protection for data subjects, there are growing calls for organizations to implement data governance solutions. Unfortunately, in the U.S., the concept of data governance has not progressed beyond the management and monetization of data. Many organizations operate under an outdated paradigm which fails to consider the impact of data use on data subjects due to the proliferation of third-party service providers hawking their “check-the-box” data governance systems. As a result, American companies suffer from a lack of trust and are hindered in their international operations due to the higher data protection requirements of foreign regulators. After discussing the pitfalls of the traditional view of data governance and the limitations of suggested models, we propose a set of ten principles based on the Medical Code of Ethics. This framework, first encompassed in the Hippocratic Oath, has been evolving for over one thousand years

Continue

The GPTJudge: Justice in a Generative AI World

Alternative Intelligence, eDiscovery, Intellectual Property, Science & Technology 2 comments

By: Maura R. Grossman, Paul W. Grimm, Daniel G. Brown, and Molly Xu Generative AI (“GenAI”) systems such as ChatGPT recently have developed to the point where they can produce computer-generated text and images that are difficult to differentiate from human-generated text and images. Similarly, evidentiary materials such as documents, videos, and audio recordings that are AI-generated are becoming increasingly difficult to differentiate from those that are not AI-generated. These technological advancements present significant challenges to parties, their counsel, and the courts in determining whether evidence is authentic or fake. Moreover, the explosive proliferation and use of GenAI applications raises concerns about whether litigation costs will dramatically increase as parties are forced to hire forensic experts to address AI-generated evidence, the ability of juries to discern authentic from fake evidence, and whether GenAI will overwhelm the courts with AI-generated lawsuits, whether vexatious or otherwise. GenAI systems have the potential to challenge existing substantive intellectual property (“IP”) law by producing content that is machine, not human, generated, but that also relies on human-generated content in potentially infringing ways. Finally, GenAI threatens to alter the way in which lawyers litigate and judges decide cases. This article discusses these issues, and offers a

Continue

Forensic Evidence and Rule 3.8: What Does the Use of Bite Mark Evidence Tell Us About Prosecutorial Ethics?

eDiscovery, Science & Technology Leave a comment

By: Brendan Clemente Rule 3.8 of the ABA’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct should include rules that specifically address unethical uses of forensic evidence in criminal prosecutions. Forensic evidence is common in criminal trials. But the traditional rules of ethics do not effectively address the use of forensic evidence. Rule 3.8 should include a rule requiring prompt and full disclosure of information about expert witnesses whom the prosecutor plans to call and all relevant information that the prosecutor knows about a forensic method’s application in the case. Rule 3.8 should also include a requirement that the prosecutor use reasonable diligence to learn about a forensic method and possess a good faith belief that the method’s application in the case will be reliable before introducing the evidence at trial. Download Full Article (PDF) Cite: 22 Duke L. & Tech. Rev. 1

Continue

Causation and Conception in American Inventorship

Alternative Intelligence, Intellectual Property, Patents & Technology, Science & Technology Leave a comment

By: Dan L. Burk Increasing use of machine learning or “artificial intelligence” (AI) software systems in technical innovation has led some to speculate that perhaps machines might be considered inventors under patent law. While U.S. patent doctrine decisively precludes such a bizarre and counterproductive result, the speculation leads to a more fruitful inquiry about the role of causation in the law of inventorship. U.S. law has almost entirely disregarded causation in determining inventorship, with very few exceptions, some of which are surprising. In this essay, I examine those exceptions to inventive causality, the role they play in determining inventorship, and their effect in excluding consideration of mechanical inventors under current law. Download Full Article (PDF) Cite: 20 Duke L. & Tech. Rev. 116

Continue