Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Protecting Privacy and Sensitive Data In Era of Neurotechnologies
Scientists have been collecting neural data from the brain for medical reasons for years, with myriad regulatory constraints in place. But in 2024, technologies are moving fast and furiously into the realm of consumer products.
The NeuroRights Foundation (NRF) reported in April that implantable technology can already decode language and emotions from the brain, and wearable devices are not far behind. Consumer product companies — and indeed, employers — already are, or will soon be able to, monitor brain waves through wearable devices such as headphones or through an employee typing without touching a keyboard or mouse. As the NRF report notes, at least 30 so-called neurotechnology products are available for purchase by the public.
While undoubtedly profitable for those companies, as these technologies develop — and especially when neurotechnologies are combined with artificial intelligence (AI) — ethical and privacy concerns are paramount. As noted in Neurotechnology and the Law: Privacy and Security Concerns, SSRN (Aug. 5, 2023): "[W]ith the emergence of neurotechnology, it may now be possible to tap into someone's brain and read [their] thoughts." Moreover, as neurotechnology is predicted to become a significant market with substantial economic benefits — $17.1 billion globally by 2026 — legislators are beginning to take notice.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
"Holy Fair Use, Batman": Copyright, Fair Use and the Dark Knight
The copyright for the original versions of Winnie the Pooh and Mickey Mouse have expired. Now, members of the public can create — and are busy creating — their own works based on these beloved characters. Suppose, though, we want to tell stories using Batman for which the copyright does not expire until 2035. We'll review five hypothetical works inspired by the original Batman comic and analyze them under fair use.