Posted on

Caught Between Old Crimes And New Tech: Anti-Human Trafficking Efforts In The Modern Digital Age

By Jessica Wilkerson 

Introduction 

As society has become increasingly intertwined with and reliant upon the Internet, so have criminal investigations. While this explosion in digital evidence has in many ways been a boon—some commentators speak of a “golden era of surveillance”[1]—the growth and continued evolution of relevant technologies poses significant challenges to the prosecution of criminal acts.

This is especially true in the context of human trafficking investigations, which tend to heavily leverage digital infrastructures like mobile phones and the Internet. This article explores two evolving technologies—device encryption and DNS-over-HTTPS—to provide an explanation of how they work, and the challenges, both practical and legal, that they create for law enforcement efforts to combat human trafficking. In doing so, this article aims to create a deeper understanding of these technologies, dispel myths or confirm theories about their impacts, and explore proposals for ways in which necessary advancements in technology can, should, and must coexist with the needs of law enforcement to prosecute crime.

Continue reading “Caught Between Old Crimes And New Tech: Anti-Human Trafficking Efforts In The Modern Digital Age”

Posted on

Virtually Impossible: The Many Barriers to Multi-Jurisdictional Virtual Legal Practice

By Krystian Seebert 

I. Introduction

Imagine that a client schedules a consultation with his lawyer. After listening to the client’s story, the attorney advises the client, and the two conclude their meeting.  This is a standard consultation, right?  Wrong.  Thanks to the power of modern technology, the client and his lawyer do not have to meet face-to-face.  In fact, the lawyer’s permanent Virtual Legal Office (“VLO”) could be halfway across the country from the client.[1]

If such a meeting really happened, ABA Model Rule 5.5 (the “Rule”) requires that the lawyer be admitted to the bar in the state of his or her office.[2]  Furthermore, other restrictions may require that the lawyer also operate a physical office in the state of his or her virtual practice.[3]

This article reviews how the current rules on the remote practice of law developed, examines the current state of the law governing virtual legal practice, and finally argues that overly-restrictive regulation of VLOs has negative policy implications for the modern world.

Continue reading “Virtually Impossible: The Many Barriers to Multi-Jurisdictional Virtual Legal Practice”

Posted on

The Importance of Language: Autonomous Weapon Systems vs Weapon Systems With Autonomous Functions

By Clea Strydom 

I.  Introduction

States and corporations are utilising Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology to create more ‘intelligent’ weapon systems with autonomous functions. The international community is divided on whether or not this development in technology is positive. There are many who have called for fully autonomous weapon systems to be banned;[1] while others feel that this reaction is going too far and stands in the way of ‘progressive’ development.[2] The prevalent terms used by NGOs, researchers, academics, as well as the States and International Organizations to label weapons that can perform tasks autonomously is Autonomous Weapon Systems (AWS) or Lethal Autonomous Weapon Systems (LAWS).[3] However, there is to date no universally accepted definition for these labels,[4] or any agreement on what constitutes such a weapon. The terms are misleading and ambiguous and often conjure up images of rogue killer robots. This article postulates that in order to have a rational debate about these weapon systems, the AWS and LAWS labels need to be discarded in favour of more accurate descriptors.

Continue reading “The Importance of Language: Autonomous Weapon Systems vs Weapon Systems With Autonomous Functions”