Children's Digital Privacy and the Case Against Parental Consent

Children's engagement with the internet has exploded. From education to social media, companies have offered products and services that-far from being mere distractions for children-have increasingly become necessities. These necessities are most keenly felt in the EdTech world. As companies in the United States rely on the verifiable parental consent required by the Children 's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) to collect and use minors' data, reviewing boilerplate waivers of liability and consent forms for children's online activities has thus become part of parenting. This piece argues that under the common law tradition of protecting the best interests of the child, when it comes to protecting children's digital privacy, relying solely on parental consent is insufficient and ill-suited. This work compares parental consent forms for children's online activities to parental waivers for tort liability for physical injuries suffered by children. In the latter, courts have not reached a consensus on whether such contracts are enforceable or altogether void. However, most courts have struck down such waivers as against public policy in commercial settings. By relying on courts ' decisions regarding the role of parents in protecting the best interests of the child when faced with a child's physical injury, this piece argues that public policy should have to force to override parental consent as it pertains to the protection of a minor's digital privacy and their use of EdTech tools. It thus encourages lawmakers at the federal and state levels to move away from a parental consent apparatus and instead put forward new measures for the protection of children's digital privacy. It further illustrates that, despite COPPA, common law privacy torts are not fully preempted. Adopting the approach proposed in this work will also motivate companies to be more vigilant towards handling minors' data to avoid potential lawsuits. It will further encourage a market for competition between socially responsible companies that would prioritize children's privacy over an endless list of corporate interests.

"NEW NORMAL” FOR THE NEW JUDICIARY? INTERSECTIONS BETWEEN ROBINSON CRUSOE AND THE DIFFERENT LITIGANTS IN THE ACCESS TO JUSTICE DURING (AND AFTER) PANDEMIC

This paper searches to confront the main characters of the book Robinson Crusoé, by Daniel Defoe, and the users of the justice system, based on the dilemmas and impositions of the Pandemic of Covid-19, which plagues the whole world. The particularities of the characters Robinson Crusoé and Friday, in view of the need to constantly adapt to new ways of life, were the argument for contextualization, already felt, with the differences between the usual litigants and eventual litigants in the access to justice. The relationship between law and literature, in this case, sought to shed light on aspects related to the need to readjust different litigants for full access to justice, considering the impacts of Pandemic on jurisdictional activity. The scientific method used in the research was the inductive one, by the analysis of the particularities of the characters and the different litigants, as true premises, to determine the different ways of readjusting to the new realities for each one, and what is the impact of these differences on access to justice. So, it was possible to demonstrate that important differences persist between the different litigants in the new jurisdictional reality, urging the adoption of measures that reduce the disparity. © 2022, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. All rights reserved.

ZOOMING OUR WAY OUT OF THE FORUM NON CONVENIENS DOCTRINE

The effects of the pandemic have shed light on the evolution of technology in the legal space, including the use of technology in videoconferencing proceedings and facilitating court procedures. Despite the benefits associated with technology, the rapid adoption of videoconferencing proceedings in courts may have unprecedented impacts on the relevance and practicality of the forum non conveniens doctrine. Additionally, the drastically different approaches that federal courts have taken in response to the disproportionate geographic effects of the pandemic may give way to forum shopping. Plaintiffs may be more incentivized to bring their cases to forums that allow for videoconferencing proceedings as a strategic way to circumvent a defendant's potential forum non conveniens argument in a motion to dismiss. This Note argues that videoconferencing technology allows courts to effectively transcend the restrictions of geography while mitigating arguments about the relative convenience of different forums. Creating more uniform rules for videoconferencing proceedings will ensure easier predictability and uniformity in the forum non conveniens analysis. Specifically, this Note recommends that Congress and the courts mandate standardized technological videoconferencing requirements and adopt the original understanding of the forum non conveniens doctrine for lower courts to more explicitly consider the benefits of technology when making a forum non conveniens determination.

Trends in International Arbitration: The Fallout from COVID-19

[...]of the disruptions caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, global arbitration has adapted to a 'new normal'. Arbitration trends A number of trends are emerging with respect to life sciences disputes that are anticipated to continue for the foreseeable future, including in particular: * A greater number of disputes arising out of global supply chain disruptions, and use of the pandemic as a defence to contractual non-performance * An increase in disputes over earn-out clauses and pre-closing covenants in M&A transactions * A rise in investor-state claims brought by investors against states for breach of international investment protection agreements * More insolvent parties in arbitrations, which pose particular challenges * An increase in third-party funding of significant claims in international arbitration * The continued use of efficient procedures by arbitral tribunals, including paperless proceedings and remote hearings. Earn-out arrangements are usually intended to bridge the gap between diverging valuations of the target company by the buyer and the seller at the time of closing-in addition to the upfront purchase price, the seller of a business receives further payouts if and when the target company achieves certain agreed performance targets over an agreed period of time after closing. [...]the seller trades the certainty of a lower upfront payment for a potential higher pay-out in the future. [...]party funding of claims Third-party funding of significant claims is now a common feature in international arbitration and has become available in jurisdictions that previously were subject to regulatory restrictions.

STRUCTURAL AGREEMENT: THE CASE OF INDIGENOUS HEALTH CARE IN THE STATE OF MATO GROSSO DO SUL OVER THE PANDEMIC

The purpose of this paper is to study the structural agreement called the "term of technical cooperation” signed in august 2020 by the Prosecution Office, by the State Health Department, by the Special Department of Indigenous Health, by the Municipal Health Department of Aquidauana, Miranda and Sidrolândia, by the Western Military Command and by the Federal University of Mato Grosso do Sul. The case study is justified because the "term of technical cooperation” was characterized as a structural agreement, built through consensual and negotiated solutions to remedy the crisis health involving fundamental social rights. By means of the deductive method, a dogmatic and critical research is carried out. The research also carried out the analysis of content and documental data collected from samples. As a result of the case study, it is concluded that the scope of the functions of justice institutions in Brazil should reflect the culture, objectives and values that promote dialogue, participation and the purposes of the structural process, so that they can fulfill their functions in an adequate, timely, efficient and effective way in the implementation of jurisdiction in the course of the structural process, which has as an essential dimension of protection of fundamental social rights. © 2023, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro. All rights reserved.

INDIVIDUAL HOME-WORK ASSIGNMENTS FOR STATE TAXES

The surge in work-from-home arrangements brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic threatens serious disruptions to state tax systems. Billions of dollars are at stake at this pivotal moment as states grapple with where to assign income earned through these remote work arrangements for tax purposes: the worker's home or the employer's location? Some states-intent on modernizing their income tax laws-have assigned such income to the employer's location, but have faced persistent challenges on both constitutional and policy grounds in response. This Article provides a vigorous defense against such challenges. The Supreme Court has long interpreted the Constitution to be deferential to state tax actions;new laws for the age of remote work surely satisfy constitutional demands. Moreover, assigning income from remote work to the employer's location is more equitable than assigning the income to the worker's home, justifying modernization efforts from a policy perspective. The solution to this homework assignment problem is evident: the states must revise their tax laws to face the evolving nature of work.

The Rise of Climate Change Litigation: Is There a (Real) Legal Risk for Eu Banking Sector?

Banks had a crucial role in both major crises that hit the globe in the last fifteen years. While they were held responsible for onset of the global financial crisis in 2007, banks, oppositely, greatly contributed in mitigating the negative effects of recent health crisis caused by COVID-19. The latter calamity showed us that certain natural events can represent significant threat not only to human lives and health but also to financial markets. Apart from pandemic, there is another nature related threat on the financial market horizon - the climate change. Recent actions on EU and international level show that role of the banks in tackling climate change crisis would not be negligible. For decades there were multiple attempts to encourage governments to take bolder measures to combat climate change by signing various international agreements. Nonetheless, only the Paris Agreement, that aims to reduce greenhouse gas emission to achieve a climate neutral world by 2050, proved to be a real game changer. Ever since the Agreement entered into force in 2015, there is a continuous and significant rise in climate change litigations. Such litigations are initiated primarily against governments for not reaching the Paris Agreements goals, but also against private sector - notably the emitters of CO2. However, not only are CO2 emitters held personally responsible for environmental damage in legal proceedings conducted, but also other parties that could influence CO2 emissions. Banks can indirectly influence CO2 emission, for example by providing credit lines to carbon-intensive sectors. However, this indirect influence of banks to climate change is still not specifically recognized and regulated. Analysis of the climate change litigation landmark cases shows that national jurisdictions do not contain the legal basis for climate change responsibility stricto sensu. This legislative shortcoming is, however, overcome by interpreting legal principles and human rights obligations that arise from various international documents. Against this backdrop, it is necessary to ascertain is there a real climate change litigation risk for EU banks? Could banks, as private entities, be held responsible for contribution to climate change by invoking human rights? If the answer is affirmative, what can banks do in order to mitigate this risk? And finally, according to existing legal framework, are Croatian banks exposed to climate change litigation risk?

How the Judiciary Has Driven Systemic Innovation During the Pandemic

In 1998, the Conference of State Court Administrators (COSCA)8 urged member state courts throughout the United States to join a national effort to exchange data and integrate information systems in ways that would improve case management.9 COSCA issued a position paper on information sharing in 2002,10 followed by joint resolutions adopted by the Conference of Chief Justices (CCJ)11 and COSCA that called for public access to electronic court records and removal of Social Security numbers from court records.12 In 2004, COSCA joined with the National Association for Court Management (NACM)13 to issue a policy statement for court acceptance of information technology.14 It established a "nine part agenda" that emphasized serving the court's business needs, stressed the importance of effective implementation, and addressed security and privacy issues.15 A series of incremental resolutions followed over several years, including one from the CCJ entitled "The Emergence of E-Everything. The Landscape of Civil Litigation determined that nonfamily civil litigation in state courts "takes too long and costs too much," which undermined access to justice.18 Court dockets were dominated by "lowervalue contract and small claims" cases that rarely were adjudicated on the merits.19 Courts were using outdated automated case management systems, and they were giving self-represented parties (involved in 76% of cases) and lawyers too much control over the pace of litigation.20 The Landscape of Civil Litigation lamented the decline in funding for court systems and observed that courts were expected to dispense more justice using fewer resources.21 B.The Call to Action in Civil Cases One year later, the NCSC published its influential Call to Action: Achieving Civil Justice for All22 That report built upon the Landscape of Civil Litigation and criticized the "cost, delay, and unpredictability of civil litigation" under existing court processes.23 It recommended that courts update differentiated case management processes to assign cases to three "pathways," which it designated as "Streamlined," "Complex," and "General. "31 States should design courthouses that incorporate emerging changes in technology.32 Six months before the CCJ and COSCA endorsed the Call to Action, the American Bar Association (ABA) House of Delegates approved the ABA Model Regulatory Objectives for the Provision of Legal Services (Model Regulatory Objectives).33 The Model Regulatory Objectives were drafted by the ABA's Commission on the Future of Legal Services not long before it released its innovative and controversial 2016 Report on the Future of Legal Services in the United States 24 The Model Regulatory Objectives provided guidelines for state courts to regulate nontraditional legal services providers, and discouraged blanket exclusions of nonlawyers based on unauthorized practice of law rules.35 The CCJ agreed, and resolved that state courts should consider broadening their regulatory frameworks to nonlawyers who provide legal services.36 Expanding the regulatory framework would give courts greater flexibility to implement the Call to Action21 In 2011, the NCSC advised state courts on how to automate court processes so that information technology could help assign cases to one of the three pathways.38 Pathway assignments should be data-driven and involve less human discretion. The NCSC joined in partnership with the Institute for the Advancement of the American Legal System (IAALS)41 and the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges (NCJFCJ)42 to launch the Family Justice Initiative (FJI).43 The FJI would operate in collaboration with the CCJ and COSCA to build upon the research contained in the Landscape of Civil Litigation and the policy directives in the Call to Action 44 While the FJI was ramping up its operations, the NCSC issued a 2017 white paper that examined existing case management systems in family courts throughout the United States, titled Triage Protocols for Divorce and Child Custody Cases.45 The white paper noted "tension between what should ideally be done, what courts can afford to do, and what litigants want," and that courts may need to "identify[] 'good enough' solutions" that are more feasible due to resource limitations.46 "As long as budget constraints exist, a court that provides more services to one case is essentially reducing services in another case, so some sense of cost/benefit is definitely helpful in making these kinds of service and process tradeoffs. .

Disability in Times of Emergency: Exponential Inequality and the Role of Reasonable Accommodation Duties

This chapter explores whether the 'traditional' reasonable accommodation duty is 'fit for purpose' in times of crisis and whether variations of this duty might be better suited to the task. The reasonable accommodation obligation requires duty-bearers to take disability into account, and to make an adjustment, alteration, or accommodation to their standard practices, policies, and structures in order to meet the needs of a particular disabled individual. One limitation of the 'traditional' reasonable accommodation duty is that it is ex post, in that it is triggered only when an individual indicates that they are facing a barrier. Other types of reasonable accommodation duties adopt a more pro-active or ex ante approach. One example is the anticipatory reasonable adjustment duty in the Equality Act 2010. This requires duty-bearers to consider the foreseeable needs of disabled people in advance of an individual request being made. There is little evidence of Covid-19-related litigation based on the 'traditional' ex post reasonable accommodation duty. In contrast, the ex ante anticipatory reasonable adjustment duty in the Equality Act 2010 has been heavily used during the Covid-19 crisis. The fact that it focuses attention on what duty-bearers should have been doing to avoid creating disadvantage, rather than on simply what they can do to remove it once in place, is perhaps more useful in times of crisis. The chapter nevertheless finds that there is much more that needs to be done to build a legal framework that robustly embeds disability equality. © The several contributors 2022. All rights reserved.

The Rule of Law in a State of Disaster: Evaluating Standards for the Promulgation, Administration and Enforcement of Emergency Regulations in South Africa

This paper applies the rule of law test to emergency regulations adopted to combat a national disaster in South Africa. A declaration of a national state of disaster, such as a pandemic, triggers emergency powers which enable the executive to mitigate the disaster, assist and protect the public, provide relief, and protect property. However, emergency powers provide a pretext for the executive to limit constitutional rights and to curtail the enjoyment of freedoms. These unprecedented powers also pose a risk of arbitrary exercise of public power, which can only be prevented if the promulgation, administration and enforcement of emergency regulations conform to the principles of legality, rationality and proportionality. These principles are understood as tenets of the rule of law in South Africa. They require a strong commitment to respect, protect and promote human rights at a time when they are most vulnerable to violation by the State. Given the role of the judiciary in the maintenance of the rule of law, and the litigation against the emergency regulations adopted in response to the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, this paper also discusses the ensuing case law to illustrate the practical application of the rule of law test to a national disaster.

Taking a shot: Access to justice, judging and ecourt

Access to Justice issues have shown us that our traditional adversarial dispute resolution model is slow, costly, divisive and complex - for both self represented litigants and those with lawyers. Addressing these issues through the provision of information to litigants has not been enough. Family Justice reports speak of the need for "culture change" and judicial leadership in affecting change. Judges have created options to the traditional adversarial model with processes such as Settlement Conferences, Binding Settlement Conferences, Informal Trials and Case Management. COVID19 has "forced" courts to embrace Virtual and telephone proceedings. There are now choices in Court based, Judicially-run dispute resolution processes. Nova Scotia's Supreme Court, Family Division has a process "add" - an eCourt Pilot instituting an electronic, chat-based Court process that gives litigants and Judges a new "choice" of process. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved)

MEDIATION METRICS II: DEALING WITH ERRANT ZOOM STYLES IN VIRTUAL MEDIATION

This is the second in a series that examines emerging issues and opportunities in mediation. The need for social distancing over the past two years spawned a meteoric rise in virtual mediation to the extent that it is now the dominant form of alternative dispute resolution. Despite its efficiency and necessity at times, virtual mediation, now synonymous with Zoom mediation, presents new challenges for mediators. In particular, mediators have lost some control over social dynamics (Zoom dynamics). This paper examines a host of errant Zoom styles among participants that may plague the virtual mediation process. It offers a Personality-Based Model of Errant Zoom Styles as well as coping strategies for dealing with them. The extent to which mediators recognize and respond to these errant Zoom styles impacts the effectiveness of virtual Mediation. Recommendations and an update on mediation settlement rates are also provided.

Viral but Under the Radar: Unmasking the Convergence of Far-Right and Pandemic Articulations on BitChute

The study aims to trace the emerging Canadian online discourse resisting COVID-19 official and public health measures and its relationship to far-right ideologies on the alternative platform of BitChute through the analysis of the top watched videos from eight Canadian channels. Employing articulation theory as an analytical prism, it aims to identify: 1) Which organizational/individual identities are associated with the collected accounts and what is their relationship to the far-right? 2) What are the major themes in the videos? 3) What ideologies are associated with these themes? The analysis reveals six key articulations: pseudo-legal actions and language, political conspiracies, medical and scientific language and expertise, war analogies, activist rhetoric and tactics, and family values. These discursive articulations disclose linkages between concepts that are usually contradictory but are bonded together in the conjecture moment of the pandemic. This convergence points to the sophistication and innovativeness of far-right discourse in responding to COVID-19 and to their continuing invocation of older tropes and metaphors that have characterized their ideologies

Covid-19: Exploring medico-legal perceptions amongst orthopaedic surgeons and lawyers.

INTRODUCTION: British national guidelines and laws published by the British Orthopaedic Association and the new Coronovirus Act 2020 favoured treatment of trauma and orthopaedic conditions with non-operative alternatives.A survey was developed for both lawyers and trauma and orthopaedic clinicians to gauge their perceptions on guidelines related to protection of trauma and orthopaedic staff, and on prosecution with respect to future claims. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Sixteen questions were designed for surgeons and 11 questions for lawyers. The level of experience and career stages were explored in other questions. A Likert scale (0-5) was used to capture these perceptions. RESULTS: Clinicians envisaged themselves being less protected (mean = 2.6), forecasted a rise in negligence claims (mean = 3.4) and perceived little additional beneficial indemnity influence from the NHS (mean = 1.8). Lawyers felt that public perception would have more influence in negligence claim rates (mean = 2.6) and disapproved of complete immunity for clinicians (mean = 0.5). Disparities between different trauma and orthopaedic grades demonstrated sentiments of comfort with redeployment, preparedness in non-orthopaedic training and protection from litigation. DISCUSSION: The results reflected the overall anxiety over litigation reprisal shared amongst trauma and orthopaedic staff. Issues with providing sub-optimal care can worsen this overall fear. Feeling unprotected from litigation reprisal can leave clinicians with an additional sense of emotional and professional burden. Redeployment into unfamiliar environments can leave senior clinicians in limbo in contrast to their juniors. CONCLUSION: Non-surgical options to treat orthopaedic conditions affect both patients and trauma and orthopaedic staff. Feedback from lawyers reassures trauma and orthopaedic clinicians that negligence claims should not rise due to the updated national guidelines.

MSMA Legislative Preview 2022

An MSMA-backed prior authorization bill will be sponsored in 2022 that's similar to a Texas law passed earlier this year. Under the new law, Texas doctors with a 90% approval rate or higher for a particular service are exempted from prior authorization requirements for that service. Marijuana Since legislation that would allow recreational marijuana use in Missouri has traditionally seen little support in the state legislature, an initiative petition has been submitted that would change the current Missouri law via constitutional amendment.

Social Insurance for the Socially Distant: Reforming the Countermeasures Injury Compensation Program

The program is woefully deficient, particularly when compared to its sister federal vaccine injury program, the Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP). [...]other social insurance programs employ successful design principles that are lacking in the CICP. [...]reform efforts are already under consideration.26 Several senators propose to reform the CICP to make its process and compensation scheme more similar to the VICP.27 But developing an effective federal vaccine injury compensation program- designed to address COVID-19 and future pandemic diseases of similar magnitude-will demand more than simply mirroring the VICP. [...]Part III extracts design principles from social insurance programs and applies them to propose reforms to the CICP. [...]it contrasts the two federal vaccine injury compensation programs, explains and evaluates critiques of the CICP, and lays out the need to reform the CICP.

The Role of Forensic Medicine in Responding to Emergencies and New Major Epidemics.

In recent years, human beings are constantly facing the threat of emerging infectious diseases. Forensic technology plays a unique role in responding to the emergencies and new epidemics. In epidemic prevention and control, forensic partitioners can provide important clues for the identification of vector animal species and the traceability of pathogen regions based on non-human DNA testing technology. In epidemic-related judicial practice, forensic partitioners bear more and more evidence responsibilities in dealing with biosafety laws-related issues, such as improper handling of epidemics and vaccine safety issues, which require forensic evidence. In terms of pathogen tracing, forensic physical evidence examinations identify species and individuals through biological materials extracted from the scene of death and autopsy of infectious diseases, are expected to provide informative clues for epidemiological investigations and point out the direction for pathogen tracing. In addition, forensic pathological examination can provide an important pathophysiological basis for determining the cause of death and the mechanism of death through autopsy, also offer necessary scientific evidence for clarifying the epidemiological characteristics of the epidemic and predicting the development trend of the epidemic.

Trends and Developments in Medical Liability Claims in The Netherlands.

Recent data on number of claims, final judgement of claims and their costs are scarce. This study analyzes 15 years of malpractice claims in the Netherlands. All claims filed, and all claims closed by two insurance companies (which insure approximately 95% of all hospitals in the Netherlands) between 2007-2021 are included. Trends in number of claims, medical specialties involved, final judgements and costs from malpractice claims are analyzed, as well as the impact of COVID-19 on malpractice claims. In total, 20,726 claims were filed and 21,826 claims were closed. Since 2013, the number of claims filed decreased. Of all claims filed, 64% were aimed at surgical specialties and 18% at contemplative specialties. Of all claims closed, 24.49% were accepted, 19.26% were settled and 48.94% got rejected. The financial burden of all claims closed quadrupled between 2007 and 2021; this increase was caused by rare cases with excessively high costs. Since the COVID-19 pandemic, we observed a decrease in the number of claims filed, and the number of incidents reported. This study provides valuable insights into trends and developments in the number and costs of liability claims, which is the first step towards improving patient safety and preventing incidents and malpractice claims.