Tackle legal or ethical gaps in positions presented in the posts 1
All Responsive Posts: Address legal or ethical gaps in positions presented in the posts 1) As technology continues to grow and spread, so will cyber security and different assortments of legal issues will come to. Prior to social media and internet, cyber security was really small in how large the area is to day, and prior to computers, none at all. We can see differences now, with Digital Rights Management (DRM) and different cyber security methods in place already to protect digital media and intellectual property. The lesson (Holstein, 2018) for this week brings up several issues and questions, such as accidents involving self-driving cars. Is the manufacturer responsible, the software, the AI? How would insurance play out, or what if a death instead of damage results from this scenario? As we have been discussing cyber security the past few weeks, its important to note these cars should be secure, in that they cannot be hacked else potentially dangerous consequences. The first reading for this week covers data breaches. Legislation has typically been slow to cover torts concerning them, but it looks like it is changing with recent public leaks of different companies and governments. With personal, financial, and security related information being hacked and distributed, there is a major and real concern to take action now. The main hurdle to combat is the potentially risk to freedom of speech (Neiderman, 2018), and that is the information available for public exposure versus privacy data. One step to bridge the gap between this is to label the data. Some data can still be permissive to public exposure, while the rest could be rated as confidential or have some sort of privacy cover, similar to Privacy Act 1974 cover sheets, medical folders being labeled, and secret information secured. This week’s readings also discuss the ethics and laws concerning the insurance versus cybersecurity and data breaches. The ethical thing to do, as is the legal thing in forty-seven states, would be to notify those whose information may be at risk. After that, insurance is the next step. According to the Insurance Service office, a data breach can cost a firm around $200.00 per file breached. (Nojeim, 2018) It is also said notifications cost money, however, simply emailing versus man hours over the phone or mail seems like it could meet the same standard. Back to the insurance cost, many business owners typically turn to general liability or some company policy, but both have not turned out to be fully covered. Like in the legal field, insurance in cyber claims still seems to be slow in catching up with the happenings of the modern world. Although different legal and moral issues arise from advancements in technology, I think we need to embrace it, as technology will eventually come out whether the legal aspect is slow to adapt or change at the same pace. “AI’s capabilities are increasing at a dizzying pace. The legal profession, known for coming late to the technology dance, should step in now to take control of AI’s impact on the profession, rather than looking back in a few years and wondering “what happened?” After all, “[t]he only way to make sense out of change is to plunge into it, move with it, and join the dance.” (Jacobwitz, 2018)
Respond here in at least 250 words:
2) This week we are to look at the legal and ethical concerns related to possible insurance claims. When I first read this week’s forum question, my brain ran straight to auto insurance and self-driving cars. I remember when I was a little kid watching The Jetsons and then again when I got older watching The Fifth Element, both of which had some form of flying and/or self-driving car. I always thought, “wow, we could be flying cars by 2010!” Back then, I never thought of the aspects that goes into something like this, especially legal and ethical issues! One major ethical issue is what is known as the “trolley problem.” Basically, this problem has to deal with a self-driving car getting into an accident. If the car cannot avoid the accident, for whatever reason, it will either A) run into a group of pedestrians crossing the street, B) bypass the crosswalk and drive onto the sidewalk and hit one person, or C) run into a wall and potentially kill the passenger(s) in the vehicle. In any scenario, one or multiple people will be injured or even killed. How does the vehicle choose which path to take? This problem can get even more difficult based off the potential victims: are the potential victims children, adults, senior citizens, a mentally ill or very sick person, or even a gang member, or known terrorist that has killed hundreds. Should one group or person be chosen over the others? The software in the vehicle must be programmed somehow to choose which route. On the other side, if and when a vehicle gets into an avoidable accident, who is to blame (Holstein, Dodig-Crnkovic, & Pelliccione, 2018)? The passenger of the vehicle that is sitting behind the wheel? The manufacturer that built the vehicle? The designer who created the plans of the car? The software programmers who followed the designers plans and actually created the software that was installed in the vehicle and makes the decisions? With this ethical problem then comes the auto-insurance companies. Who should be held accountable for paying for collision and medical damage due to the accident? Does the passenger behind the wheel then get points on their license? If so, how many? All of these scenarios also bring up the legal issues, who can sue whom? Can the victims’ next-of-kin sue the person behind the wheel even though they weren’t actually driving the vehicle? Or should the car manufacturer sue the software programmers? For every question that I can think of, there are probably about 10 more that I have not thought of yet. These types of questions need to be handled and a strict guideline and legal ruleset needs to be developed before self-driving and autonomous cars get more popular. As I mentioned previously, my brain ran straight to auto insurance when thinking of this week’s forum question. What I did not even know existed was cyber liability or crime insurance policies. Zureich & Graebe (2015) explain how legal counsel have both a legal and an ethical obligation to protect their clients information. With cybercrime constantly soaring, criminals are learning about the wealth of knowledge that law firms own with regards to their clients. If a hacker finds the right law firm and the right server with all of the clients information, there are millions of personal identifiable information that could be found and stolen. Do normal business liability insurance plans cover cybercrime, and if they do not, should they? According to Zureich & Graebe (2015), the Insurance Services Office recently revised the general liability coverage stating that it does not cover data breaches, therefore, should lawyers and other businesses be required to purchase cyber liability insurance? With the amount of data breaches happening over these past few years, I believe that any company that has any kind of personal identifiable information should be required to carry some form of cyber liability insurance.
Respond here in at least 250 words:
Forum Rubric (Graduate Level); 100 points total
Beginning
Developing
Accomplished
Exemplary
Substance (Possible 40 points)
25 points: Presentation is unclear; a basic understanding of the topic and issues is not evident; explanation is lacking; segments of the required answer are lacking; sources and supporting facts are not utilized; length requirements may not have been met.
30 points: Student’s initial posting did not meet the length requirement; and/or presentation evidences some confusion concerning topics under discussion; analysis may be lacking and/or elements of the question are not answered; support and references may be lacking.
35 points: Student answered/addressed most aspects of the question/topic posed in the Forum; initial posting met length requirement; a basic understanding of relevant concepts/theories is demonstrated; relevant sources were located; minimal or no facts/examples were used in support of presentation.
40 points: Student answered/addressed all aspects of the topic/question posed in the Forum; initial posting met length requirement; analysis of concepts and theories clearly demonstrates superior knowledge and a clear understanding of the topic; relevant and scholarly resources were located and used appropriately; facts and examples are used in support of presentation.
Collaboration (Possible 30 points)
Zero points: Student filed none of the required replies.
15 points: Student filed only one of the required replies OR filed the required replies but failed to meet length requirements.
25 points: Student filed the minimum number of replies, meeting the length requirements and evidencing an understanding of the issues under discussion and the views of colleagues. Student failed to respond to specific queries posed to him by colleagues or by the Instructor. Student did not take initiative in advancing the discussion throughout the week.
30 points: Student filed at least the number of required replies and they met the length requirement; the replies were substantive, thoughtful responses and contributed to the discussion; student exceeded minimum requirements by answering all queries posed to him by others and remained present and actively engaged in the discussion throughout the week; student led the discussion by raising complex issues, connecting concepts, and illuminating the discussion with examples.
Timeliness (Possible 10 points)
Zero points: Student filed more than two required postings in an untimely manner.
2 points: Student filed two required postings in an untimely manner.
7 points: Student filed one required posting in an untimely manner.
10 points: Student filed all required postings in a timely manner.
Writing (Possible 10 points)
4 points: Writing contains several grammatical, punctuation, and/or spelling errors. Language lacks clarity or includes some use of jargon and /or conversational tone; sentence structure is awkward.
6 points: Student demonstrates consistent and correct use of the rules of grammar usage, punctuation and spelling, with a few errors; there is room for improvement in writing style and organization.
8 points: Student demonstrates consistent and correct use of the rules of grammar usage, punctuation, and spelling. Language is clear and precise throughout all submissions. Sentences display consistently strong, varied structure and organization is excellent.
10 points: Student demonstrates a quality of writing consistent with scholarly works in the relevant discipline; student is facile in the use of subject-matter vocabulary and terminology consistent with the level of instruction; student applies concepts with ease; writing style and organization are designed to successfully convey the message and the related information to the reader with maximum effect.
Citations (Possible 10 points; zero points if citations are missing)
4 points: Citations of reference sources exist; citations apparently correspond to the correct source but do not enable the reader to locate the source. Bluebook format not evident.
6 points: Attempts to cite reference sources are made, but the reader has difficulty finding the sources; attempts to use Bluebook format are evident but poorly executed
8 points: Reference sources are cited as necessary, but some components of the citations are missing and/or Bluebook format is faulty in some respects.
10 points: Reference sources relied on by the student are cited appropriately and accurately. No writing of others is left without quotation and/or attribution, as appropriate. Bluebook format is used correctly and consistently.
