Discussion

101

Instructions: (1) analyze the situation and (2) use analogies and similar cases where possible. You will (1) argue against the case, (2) defense the case and (3) evaluate the arguments and decide the case. Present the forum/group’s proposals and/or conclusions, supported by arguments.

Discussion Questions

1. Encryption keys and the 5th Amendment

A federal judge ruled that the government cannot force a defendant to provide the encryption he or she uses to protect files on a computer. The 5th Amendment specifies that a person cannot be forced to testify against himself, and the judge interpreted turning over the key as such testimony. (The issue is still open; many courts view encryption keys as similar to keys to a safe, which a person may be forced to provide.)

2. Searching laptops at airportsA federal appeals court (9th circuit) ruled that customs agents do not need reasonable suspicion to search or seize a person’s laptop or other electronic devices. The court stated that the defendant did not show how a search of a laptop is different from a search of luggage without probable cause (which the Supreme Court has allowed). (Apr. 2008) Customs officials search laptops and cell phones of business people, potentially exposing confidential business and personal data. See, for example, Ellen Nakashima, “Clarity Sought on Electronic Searches,” Washington Post (

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/06/AR2008020604763.html).

Several organizations are attempting to get the government to release its policy on what files are copied and how long they are kept.

3. Using British libel law against U.S. writers and publishersA U.S. publisher published a book in the U.S. by a U.S. scholar about the funding of terrorism. English residents bought some copies over the Web. A Saudi banker who, according to the book, helped fund Osama bin Laden, brought a libel suit in England against the author and won. Another U.S. publisher canceled another well selling book (also written by an American) on a similar topic out of fear of the same kind of lawsuit. (U.S. courts generally enforce foreign court judgments against U.S. residents.) Thus, because one can order the books on the Web, the relative ease of winning libel suits in England squelched freedom of speech and access to information for people in the U.S. (and elsewhere), where the libel suits would probably fail. A bill in the U.S. Senate would prevent U.S. courts from enforcing such judgments in libel cases where the material would not be libelous under U.S. law. (July 15, 2008. The bill is the Free Speech Protection Act of 2008.)