{"title":"GasFrac: A Cost-Benefit Analysis of Hydraulic Fracturing with Liquified Petroleum Gas Gel","authors":"B. Wilson","doi":"10.5195/TLP.2013.137","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5195/TLP.2013.137","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":185385,"journal":{"name":"Pittsburgh Journal of Technology Law & Policy","volume":"58 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"131142095","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This site is published by the University Library System of the University of Pittsburgh as part of its DScribe Digital Publishing Program and is cosponsored by the University of Pittsburgh Press. Give Me Your Password Because Congress Can Say So: An Analysis of Fifth Amendment Protection Afforded Individuals Regarding Compelled Production of Encrypted Data and Possible Solutions to the Problem of Getting Data from Someone’s Mind
{"title":"Give Me Your PASSWORD because Congress Can Say So: An Analysis of Fifth Amendment Protection Afforded Individuals Regarding Compelled Production of Encrypted Data and Possible Solutions to the Problem of Getting Data from Someone’s Mind","authors":"M. Wachtel","doi":"10.5195/TLP.2013.132","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5195/TLP.2013.132","url":null,"abstract":"This site is published by the University Library System of the University of Pittsburgh as part of its DScribe Digital Publishing Program and is cosponsored by the University of Pittsburgh Press. Give Me Your Password Because Congress Can Say So: An Analysis of Fifth Amendment Protection Afforded Individuals Regarding Compelled Production of Encrypted Data and Possible Solutions to the Problem of Getting Data from Someone’s Mind","PeriodicalId":185385,"journal":{"name":"Pittsburgh Journal of Technology Law & Policy","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128367296","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Introduction: Law, Technology, and Energy in Pittsburgh","authors":"Jeffrey Roberts, Matthew Brouse","doi":"10.5195/TLP.2013.133","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5195/TLP.2013.133","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":185385,"journal":{"name":"Pittsburgh Journal of Technology Law & Policy","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126562303","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Fighting the Good Fight: Why the So-Called “War on Coal” is Beneficial for Pittsburgh’s Future","authors":"James G. Lee","doi":"10.5195/TLP.2013.135","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5195/TLP.2013.135","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":185385,"journal":{"name":"Pittsburgh Journal of Technology Law & Policy","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128886605","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Crossing the Line: Selective Licensing of Liquefied Natural Gas Exportation Facilities is Unconstitutional","authors":"R. Kennedy","doi":"10.5195/TLP.2013.136","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5195/TLP.2013.136","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":185385,"journal":{"name":"Pittsburgh Journal of Technology Law & Policy","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122986166","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
On June 21, 2011, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) charged the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) with a number of NCAA legislation violations, including “not adequately and consistently monitor[ing] social networking activity that visibly illustrated potential amateurism violations within the football program[.]” While the NCAA’s bylaws regarding member institution conduct indirectly impacts social media oversight, the NCAA’s lack of a social media monitoring policy creates uncertainty as to how member institutions should deal with potential violations of a non-existing policy. Coupled with concerns about their public image, tort liability, and their student-athletes’ safety, NCAA member institutions must develop a social media monitoring policy that does not infringe on constitutional free speech rights or more specific social media privacy laws. Ultimately, monitoring publicly available social media might be the safest and the best way to protect the institutions’ interests without violating their student-athletes’ legal rights. Normal 0 false false false EN-US JA X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; font-family:"Cambria","serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}
2011年6月21日，全国大学体育协会(NCAA)指控北卡罗来纳大学教堂山分校(UNC)违反了多项NCAA法规，包括“没有充分和持续地监控社交网络活动，这些活动明显表明了足球项目中潜在的业余违规行为”。“虽然NCAA关于成员机构行为的章程间接影响了社交媒体监督，但NCAA缺乏社交媒体监控政策，这给成员机构应该如何处理潜在的违规行为带来了不确定性。再加上对公众形象、侵权责任和学生运动员安全的担忧，NCAA成员机构必须制定一项不侵犯宪法言论自由权或更具体的社交媒体隐私法的社交媒体监控政策。最终，监控公开可用的社交媒体可能是在不侵犯学生运动员合法权利的情况下保护机构利益的最安全、最好的方法。正常0 false false false EN-US JA X-NONE /*样式定义*/表。mso-style-name:"Table Normal";mso-tstyle-rowband-size: 0;mso-tstyle-colband-size: 0;mso-style-noshow:是的;mso-style-priority: 99;mso-style-parent:“”;mso- font - family:宋体;mso-para-margin: 0;mso-para-margin-bottom: .0001pt;mso-pagination: widow-orphan;字体大小:12.0分;字体类型:“威尔士”、“衬”;mso-ascii-font-family:威尔士;mso-ascii-theme-font: minor-latin;mso-hansi-font-family:威尔士;mso-hansi-theme-font: minor-latin;}
{"title":"Being Social: Why the NCAA Has Forced Universities to Monitor Student-Athletes’ Social Media","authors":"J. Hopkins, K. Hopkins, B. Whelton","doi":"10.5195/TLP.2013.116","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5195/TLP.2013.116","url":null,"abstract":"On June 21, 2011, the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) charged the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill (UNC) with a number of NCAA legislation violations, including “not adequately and consistently monitor[ing] social networking activity that visibly illustrated potential amateurism violations within the football program[.]” While the NCAA’s bylaws regarding member institution conduct indirectly impacts social media oversight, the NCAA’s lack of a social media monitoring policy creates uncertainty as to how member institutions should deal with potential violations of a non-existing policy. Coupled with concerns about their public image, tort liability, and their student-athletes’ safety, NCAA member institutions must develop a social media monitoring policy that does not infringe on constitutional free speech rights or more specific social media privacy laws. Ultimately, monitoring publicly available social media might be the safest and the best way to protect the institutions’ interests without violating their student-athletes’ legal rights. Normal 0 false false false EN-US JA X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ \u0000 table.MsoNormalTable \u0000 {mso-style-name:\"Table Normal\"; \u0000 mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; \u0000 mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; \u0000 mso-style-noshow:yes; \u0000 mso-style-priority:99; \u0000 mso-style-parent:\"\"; \u0000 mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; \u0000 mso-para-margin:0in; \u0000 mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; \u0000 mso-pagination:widow-orphan; \u0000 font-size:12.0pt; \u0000 font-family:\"Cambria\",\"serif\"; \u0000 mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; \u0000 mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; \u0000 mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; \u0000 mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin;}","PeriodicalId":185385,"journal":{"name":"Pittsburgh Journal of Technology Law & Policy","volume":"66 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"124643460","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Masthead & General Information","authors":"J. Jtlp","doi":"10.5195/TLP.2013.125","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5195/TLP.2013.125","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":185385,"journal":{"name":"Pittsburgh Journal of Technology Law & Policy","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"123554854","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Ill Suited to the Digital Age: Fourth Amendment Exceptions and Cell Site Location Information Surveillance","authors":"Michael T.E. Kalis","doi":"10.5195/tlp.2013.120","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5195/tlp.2013.120","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":185385,"journal":{"name":"Pittsburgh Journal of Technology Law & Policy","volume":"35 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125114605","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Normal 0 false false false EN-AU JA X-NONE Normal 0 false false false EN-AU JA X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-ansi-language:EN-AU;} Private international law has developed on the premise of geographically discrete areas that could be effectively governed by nations with clear and delineated boundaries. The nature of internet communications however dissects and transcends national boundaries. In such a landscape of technological evolution, it is necessary to design new technologically-neutral principles for determining internet jurisdiction. While there is widespread agreement on the nature of the challenge posed by internet jurisdiction, there is significant divergence in the solutions proposed. The proposed solutions range from strengthening existing jurisdiction rules, to developing the present jurisdiction rules, to creating a new language of jurisdictional basis for the determination of internet disputes. After a consideration of the merits of the various veins of scholarship on this complex issue, it is recommended that the movement to unification through international convention provides the most effective solution to achieve consistency and certainty in the determination of jurisdiction in internet disputes.
{"title":"The Proper Basis for Exercising Jurisdiction in Internet Disputes: Strengthening State Boundaries or Moving Towards Unification?","authors":"Niloufer Selvadurai","doi":"10.5195/TLP.2013.124","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5195/TLP.2013.124","url":null,"abstract":"Normal 0 false false false EN-AU JA X-NONE Normal 0 false false false EN-AU JA X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ \u0000 table.MsoNormalTable \u0000 {mso-style-name:\"Table Normal\"; \u0000 mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; \u0000 mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; \u0000 mso-style-noshow:yes; \u0000 mso-style-priority:99; \u0000 mso-style-parent:\"\"; \u0000 mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; \u0000 mso-para-margin-top:0in; \u0000 mso-para-margin-right:0in; \u0000 mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; \u0000 mso-para-margin-left:0in; \u0000 line-height:115%; \u0000 mso-pagination:widow-orphan; \u0000 font-size:11.0pt; \u0000 font-family:\"Calibri\",\"sans-serif\"; \u0000 mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; \u0000 mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; \u0000 mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; \u0000 mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; \u0000 mso-ansi-language:EN-AU;} \u0000 Private international law has developed on the premise of geographically discrete areas that could be effectively governed by nations with clear and delineated boundaries. The nature of internet communications however dissects and transcends national boundaries. In such a landscape of technological evolution, it is necessary to design new technologically-neutral principles for determining internet jurisdiction. While there is widespread agreement on the nature of the challenge posed by internet jurisdiction, there is significant divergence in the solutions proposed. The proposed solutions range from strengthening existing jurisdiction rules, to developing the present jurisdiction rules, to creating a new language of jurisdictional basis for the determination of internet disputes. After a consideration of the merits of the various veins of scholarship on this complex issue, it is recommended that the movement to unification through international convention provides the most effective solution to achieve consistency and certainty in the determination of jurisdiction in internet disputes.","PeriodicalId":185385,"journal":{"name":"Pittsburgh Journal of Technology Law & Policy","volume":"46 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128964740","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Smartphone Wars: Emphasizing eBay's First Two Factors in Smartphone Patent Injunctions","authors":"Christianna Edrington","doi":"10.5195/tlp.2013.117","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.5195/tlp.2013.117","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":185385,"journal":{"name":"Pittsburgh Journal of Technology Law & Policy","volume":"11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-05-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128145240","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：