The dangers of digital things: Self-driving cars steer proposed laws on robotics and automation, ABA Journal, March 2018

Victor Li, ABA Journal; The dangers of digital things: Self-driving cars steer proposed laws on robotics and automation

"Some states are standing in a legal gray area. Pennsylvania, for example, is a training ground for Uber’s collaboration with Carnegie Mellon to deploy autonomous vehicles throughout Pittsburgh. At press time, Pennsylvania did not have a statute that speaks to the legality of driverless cars.

However, Roger Cohen, policy director at the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania Department of Transportation, says the state has long operated under the assumption that autonomous cars are allowed on public roadways—as long as a human driver is at the steering wheel ready to take over. PennDOT has taken the lead in promulgating policies relating to autonomous vehicles with the goal of their formal adoption into law.

“That policy was deemed to be a more effective tool for the public oversight of testing operations because of its ability to be flexible and nimble and rapid in responding to what are fast-moving, unpredictable, hard-to-anticipate new developments,” Cohen says.

As with Michigan, Cohen says time is of the essence, adding that although Pennsylvania’s regulatory structure has an important purpose, it generally takes one to two years to process feedback and review the rules. “That was deemed to be ineffective for emerging technology,” Cohen says.

Instead, PennDOT has been freed up to develop policies while collaborating with a wealth of stakeholders—including academics, sister agencies, lawyers, technology companies and members of the automotive industry. Cohen says bills are pending in both state legislative houses, and he is optimistic that they’ll be passed.

“When it comes to car accidents, we must drive down the death rate toward zero, which is our goal,” Cohen says. “We have a technology that gives us our best chance to do that. I think there are real issues concerning data ownership, data privacy and cybersecurity. But there’s every reason to be optimistic.”"

Surveillance in the Post-Obama Era; New York Times, 10/8/16

Editorial Board, New York Times; Surveillance in the Post-Obama Era:

"One big issue is what to do when a key provision of the law that gives the N.S.A. the authority to collect the electronic communications of foreigners — which inevitably sucks in their correspondence with Americans — expires at the end of 2017. Before reauthorizing that part of the law, Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, the next president and Congress should craft a more narrow authority that ensures that the data of Americans cannot be searched without a warrant.

How best to respond to encryption technology, which is evolving rapidly, will be another major challenge...

The next president needs to take the initiative early on to outline a responsible philosophy and approach toward surveillance and privacy issues. Even if that happens, Congress still needs to be more assertive than in the past in setting clear parameters to ensure that intelligence gathering programs are legally sound and effective. It would be a shame if it took a new whistle-blower to force what should be a continuing, vigorous debate."

The House Votes Unanimously to Strengthen Email Privacy; New York Times, 4/29/16

Editorial Board, New York Times; The House Votes Unanimously to Strengthen Email Privacy:

"In a rare and remarkable display of bipartisanship, the House voted unanimously this week to strengthen a 30-year-old privacy law that governs how and when law enforcement agencies can obtain access to emails, photographs and other documents that people store online. If enacted, the changes will ensure that the law protects digital information as well as it does physical documents.

The bill will require law enforcement agencies to obtain search warrants from judges to gain access to personal messages and files stored on the servers of companies like Google, Yahoo and Dropbox. The legislation would substantially revise a 1986 law, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, that allows agencies to get emails older than 180 days and other digital files by issuing subpoenas to technology companies without going to a judge.

This sensible update reflects how people store information today."