000041992 000__ 02634cam\a22002535i\4500
000041992 001__ 41992
000041992 003__ SzGeWIPO
000041992 005__ 20240708145855.0
000041992 008__ 200622s2018\\\\sz\\\\\\r\\\\\000\0\eng\d
000041992 022__ $$a0736-7694
000041992 040__ $$aSzGeWIPO$$beng$$erda
000041992 041__ $$aeng
000041992 1001_ $$aThorne, Ryan Gregory
000041992 24503 $$aCreating a More Permissive Patentability Standard under Language From the TPP
000041992 264_1 $$a[New York City, New York] :$$bYeshiva University Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law,$$c2018.
000041992 300__ $$a31 pages
000041992 336__ $$atext$$btxt$$2rdacontent
000041992 337__ $$aunmediated$$bn$$2rdamedia
000041992 338__ $$avolume$$bnc$$2rdacarrier
000041992 520__ $$aThis Note  argues  that  the  current  regulatory  scheme  for  privacy inadequately  protects  consumers  in  the  gig  economy.  While  privacy  is considered  a  fundamental  human  right  in  Europe, American  law  has neglected  the  right  to  privacy.  This  has  become  increasingly  important as  digitization  continues  into  the  sharing  economy  system.  This  Note proposes   that   the   federal   government,   through   the   Federal   Trade Commission  (“FTC”),  establish  a  regulatory  framework  that  borrows standards  from  the  Federal  Communications  Commission  (“FCC”)’s 2016  privacy  rulesfor  broadband  Internet  service providers  (“ISPs”), the   California   Online   Privacy   Protection   Act   (“CalOPPA”), and Regulation (EU) 2016/679. This would act as a model scheme for states to  implement  stronger  privacy  standards  for  companies.  For  example, states  could  require  warrants  for  governmental  access  to  data.  This would, in  turn, deter  gig  economy  platforms  from  intruding  upon consumer privacy and keeping data for any purpose except for essential business  use.  Specifically,  Part  I  of  this  Note  begins  by  outlining  the historical  background  of  privacy  law,  with  emphasis  on  technological influence  on  the  law.  Part  II  discusses  the  current  state  of  the  sharing economy’s  self-regulation  regarding  privacy.  Part  III  delves  into issues surrounding  governmental  access  to  data  and  its  circumvention  of Fourth  Amendment  protection,  and  Part  IV  suggests  that  the  United States federal government supplement the current system with a broad, regulatory  framework  akin  to  the  recently  repealed  FCC  privacy  rules. Lastly,  this  Note  in  Part  V  discusses  alternative  solutions,  including congressional and local regulation.
000041992 525__ $$aPublished in : Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law, vol. 36, no. 1 (2018)
000041992 650_0 $$aGlobalization
000041992 650_0 $$aIntellectual property
000041992 650_0 $$aPatent
000041992 650_0 $$aTrade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS)
000041992 85641 $$uhttp://www.cardozoaelj.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/THORNE_NOTE.pdf$$yView this resource
000041992 904__ $$aJournal article
000041992 980__ $$aBIB