Subscribe: Stanford Technology Law Review
Added By: Feedage Forager Feedage Grade C rated
Language: English
articles  firms  information  law  legal recruiting  major  packet sniffers  paper  pen registers  pen  posted  privacy  statutory  students 
Rate this Feed
Rate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feedRate this feed
Rate this feed 1 starRate this feed 2 starRate this feed 3 starRate this feed 4 starRate this feed 5 star

Comments (0)

Feed Details and Statistics Feed Statistics
Preview: Stanford Technology Law Review

Stanford Technology Law Review

2005 articles

Published: Mon, 02 Jan 2006 12:10:58 EST


Managing Risk to Reputation: The Challenge of the Internet for Legal Recruiting

Mon, 02 Jan 2006 12:10:58 EST

2005 articles
This article argues that corporate law firms do not appreciate the changing world of legal recruiting. The rise of information technology means that law students function as sophisticated consumers of information on law firm life. Given that monetary compensation at major corporate firms is almost identical, students' perception of lifestyle can have a major influence on their valuation of firms. Consequently, firms need to adapt by more carefully managing the type of information that might be accessible to students, and their general reputation within the student community (Posted 09/05).

Almost Private: Pen Registers, Packet Sniffers, and Privacy at the Margin

Mon, 02 Jan 2006 12:10:58 EST

2005 articles
This paper examines the laws that regulate government use of pen registers (devices that record dialed phone numbers) and "packet sniffers" (the Internet counterpart to the pen register, roughly speaking). Following a review of the basic history and development of the statutory and constitutional law governing privacy in communications, the paper takes a closer look at Title III's use of the concept of "contents" as the touchstone of its privacy scheme, and analyzes the difficulties inherent in that scheme. The paper then considers the state of communications privacy law in light of the Fourth Amendment question, arguing that the seminal Smith decision is constitutionally suspect. A set of proposals are ultimately set forth: sharper statutory language, modest increases in substantive statutory privacy rights, and recognition of constitutional privacy protection in "non-content" (Posted 04/05).