In a recent report published by Havard’s Berkman Center for Internet and Society, a team of experts pointed out that some powerful trends will continue to “facilitate government access” to personal information.
In the News
With the withdrawal of the San Bernardino case, no resolution is possible and it’s going to take time for the government to have such a strong case again, said David O’Brien, a senior researcher with the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University.
“Courts look very unfavorably in circumstances where the government forces a private citizen or an organization perhaps to speak, to say something—especially if it [is] a view that they don’t side with,” said David O’Brien, a senior researcher at Harvard University’s Berkman Center for Internet and Society, in Forbes.
“The goal is to make the documents so modular that much of the text disappears, leaving parties with only specific deal points and clear relationships,” according to Primavera de Filippi, a research fellow at Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard University. “These relationships can be ‘rendered’ at any time into full legal documents, for verification and enforcement.”
They create “points of control” in what used to be largely an “open system”, as Yochai Benkler of Harvard University puts it in a recent article in Daedalus, an American journal.
Sonya Song, who is affiliated with the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard and is a media researcher at Chartbeat, an online analytics company, said newsrooms are more likely to cover countries with tighter connections to their home country.
“The security of a product used by so many people – including and especially Americans – is part of national security,” said Jonathan Zittrain, professor of law and computer science at Harvard Law School. “While it is appropriate for law enforcement, with a warrant, to use a security flaw to gain access to which it is legally entitled, the flaw should be patched as soon as possible for everyone else’s sake.”