November 26, 2012
The Richmond Journal of Law and Technology is proud to present its first issue of the 2012-2013 academic year. First published in 1995, JOLT is the world’s first exclusively online law review. Embracing the tradition of using technology to enhance legal scholarship, the Journal is proud to announce the launch of its new interactive website and blog. In addition to providing traditional PDFs for printing and citation, entire articles will be available in full text on the Journal’s website so all terms are search engine friendly and readers can comment on individual articles. The Journal’s new platform will offer reader and author interaction, advanced searchable features, links to similar articles and legal theories, and short staff-written articles and updates.
In our first article, “Forensic Collection of Electronic Evidence from Infrastructure-As-a-Service Cloud Computing,” Josiah Dykstra and Damien Riehl explain the challenges involved with electronic discovery and digital forensics that are presented by the very nature of cloud computing. They discuss how the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and the Fourth Amendment apply to cloud forensics. The authors argue that new technologies require new adaptations of existing rules and doctrine.
Our next article, “Technologies-That-Must-Not-Be-Named: Understanding and Implementing Advanced Search Technologies in E-Discovery” is written by Jacob Tingen. He explains how advanced conceptual search and review technologies work, why they are superior in both accuracy and efficiency to traditional manual review, and how attorneys can defend use of these new technologies in court. Tingen argues that attorneys have a legal duty to understand and use these new technologies as part of an e-discovery review process when dealing with large amounts of information.
In our third article, “A ‘Pinteresting’ Question: Is Pinterest Here to Stay? A Study in How IP Can Help Pinterest Lead a Revolution” Stephanie Chau argues that in order to stay economically viable Pinterest must address impending trademark and copyright infringement issues and diversify its business. She suggests that because courts have not addressed whether Pinterest users’ sharing will incur liability, the results of possible future litigation could change the landscape of copyright liability.
Finally, in “An Expected Harm Approached To Compensating Consumers for Unauthorized Information Disclosures,” Rachel Yoo argues that data loss itself should constitute an actionable injury and compensable harm. The article analyzes different types of information, and the corresponding values of harm associated with disclosure of that information. Yoo proposes an approach that considers the expected value of harm and the benefits of disclosure to measure the harm caused by a data breach— concluding that the Federal Trade Commission, should assign values to each type of data loss and enforce compensation.
The success of the Journal would not be possible without the hard work and dedication of its staff. I would like to especially recognize the efforts of last year’s Editorial Board, whose mentorship facilitated a painless leadership transition. The Journal appreciates the continuing support from the University of Richmond School of Law community, most especially the guidance we receive from our faculty advisors, Professors Melanie Holloway, Chris Cotropia, and Jim Gibson. A special thanks to the Journal’s founder, Rick Klau, for graciously offering his support as the Journal continues to explore new electronic mediums that redefine legal scholarship in today’s world.
We are confident you will enjoy our first issue and our new platform. On behalf of the entire 2012-2013 Journal staff, I extend our sincerest thanks for your continued readership. As always, your comments and suggestions are welcome at email@example.com.
Laura H. Cahill