LEVERAGING DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY FOR MENTAL HEALTH RELATED ADA COMPLIANCE AND ACCOMMODATION IN THE WORKPLACE

By: Matthew R Lowe *

I. Overview

From its enactment in 1990 to present, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) has undergone significant changes in how it is interpreted and applied.  Of particular note with regards to these changes is the focus on protection for individuals suffering from disabilities that are not just physical in nature.  Now more than ever, with the steady rise of mental health disorders in the U.S., understanding how the ADA might apply to those with mental health disorders is of vital importance.  Equally important is understanding how companies can effectively use technology to get ahead of potential liability in this area and yield additional benefits such as employee attraction, employee retention, decreased employee absenteeism, increased labor productivity, increased savings, and increased overall profits.
Continue reading “LEVERAGING DIGITAL TECHNOLOGY FOR MENTAL HEALTH RELATED ADA COMPLIANCE AND ACCOMMODATION IN THE WORKPLACE”

RESOLVING THE DISCONNECT BETWEEN THE WORDS OF THE STORED COMMUNICATIONS ACT AND THE FOURTH AMENDMENT: A POLICY ARGUMENT

By: Aaron Hsieh

I. Introduction

The Digital Revolution, also referred to as the Third Industrial Revolution, is a period during the latter half of the 20th century characterized by sweeping changes brought about by new digital computing and communication technology.[1]  At the core of the Digital Revolution was the mass production and widespread use of digital technology, including the computer, cellular phone, and most importantly, the Internet.[2]

Continue reading “RESOLVING THE DISCONNECT BETWEEN THE WORDS OF THE STORED COMMUNICATIONS ACT AND THE FOURTH AMENDMENT: A POLICY ARGUMENT”

MICROSOFT AND THE LIKES’ HEADACHE: IN THE WAKE OF THE SURPRISING JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EU IN ITS 5TH ANNIVERSARY

By: Michal Chudzik*

I. Introduction

When the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union pushed through the Directive 2009/24/EC of 23 April 2009 on the Legal Protection of Computer Programs (Directive 2009/24),[1] everybody thought that the real purpose of the Act was the protection of the computer programs, and by implication, protection of the right holders.  Only a few, if anyone, could predict otherwise.  The surprise this time, as many times in the past, came from the chambers—this time mighty Grand Chamber—of the Court of Justice of the European Union (henceforth the “CJEU” or the “Court”), who, among other things, overlooked the rule of primacy of international agreements and managed to define “nothing” as a “copy.” Continue reading “MICROSOFT AND THE LIKES’ HEADACHE: IN THE WAKE OF THE SURPRISING JUDGMENT OF THE COURT OF JUSTICE OF THE EU IN ITS 5TH ANNIVERSARY”