PUBP 710: The Public and Private Regulation of Technology
Spring 2015
Monday, 7:20-10:00pm
Professor: Siona Listokin
Email (preferred): slistoki@gmu.edu
Office: Founders Hall, 651
Phone: (703)-937-9756
Office Hours: Monday 5-7pm and by appointment. On nights with guest speakers, I will
take a small group of students to dinner with the guest before class, pending interest and
availability.
Class website: http://sionalistokin.gmu.edu/techpolicy/
Description of the Course
Today’s global information economy is built on a “free and open internet,” while
increasingly relying on data aggregation to fuel technological advances and industry
revenue generation. The ability to collect, store, and process huge amounts of data and
information opens exciting new capabilities that can improve standards of living and
organizational productivity. New technology can also improve the effectiveness of
national security and intelligence programs. At the same time, important questions of
privacy, freedom and equity are at stake and many existing policy structures are not
equipped to deal with the data revolution.
This course is a seminar in technology policy, with a focus on the roles of government
and industry in the rapid developments in information and communication technology.
The class will review the economics of innovation and networks before tackling major
issues in technology regulation in the U.S. and around the world. We will consider legal,
economic, sociological and moral perspectives in our discussions of the new worlds of
data, networks, surveillance, sharing, and hackers.
Note: This is a new course, and suggestions are welcome.
Learning Outcomes
By the end of this course, students will be able to:
 Use the basic tools and vocabulary of microeconomic theory as it relates to new
technologies and public policy
 Understand the basics of data science, and implications for technological
advancements and privacy intrusions
 Identify the major issues surrounding national intelligence use of data mining
 Compare regulatory frameworks at national and local levels as it relates to the
telecommunication and sharing economies
Course Requirements
Course Grades
Participation
Policy Briefs
Final Project
30%
30%
40%
Participation
This is a seminar style course, and you are expected to participate in class. Class
participation is based on in-class discussions, scheduled student presentations, and online
discussions. We all have different styles of participating and contributing to group
knowledge generation, but do not expect to mentally check out of class while refreshing
March Madness scores and email for three hours (the occasional glance is fine); I notice
and so does everyone else.
Part of your participation grade will be based on midweek Twitter posts and
conversations. We will be tweeting questions and comments about the readings and
guest speakers under the hashtag #gmutechpolicy. If you do not have a Twitter account
(or do not want to use your personal account), you should set one up. Each week, two
students will be designated conversation starters, and everyone is expected to tweet their
contributions by Sunday evening. This requirement alleviates much of the writing
burden (a tweet or series of tweets must be short), but you are expected to be sharp and
insightful. We will review the mechanics of Twitter during the first class of the semester.
I recommend reading the Twitter privacy policy before posting anything.
Policy Briefs
There will be three in-class writing assignments scheduled through the semester. You
will be asked to write a policy memo on a current topic, and base your answers on
material covered in the course. You are expected to use all resources at your disposal, so
bring a laptop (or sit in the computer lab), call your buddy who works in the Dept of
Justice/Facebook Data Science/NSA/Palantir/DC Taxi Commission, and be prepared to
think and write fast.
Thinking critically and writing well under pressure is very difficult. I will be as forgiving
as your “she-seems-nice” boss would be in a similar situation. I recommend swapping
policy memos with a classmate at the ten-minute mark for copyediting.
Final Project
The major deliverable for this course is a final project. This is your chance to put all your
knowledge and enthusiasm for technology policy to good, albeit hypothetical use.
You can choose to take on the role of either an entrepreneur or a public servant with an
eye on national security, economic prosperity, market failures and reelection. You may
work with other classmates for this project. If you choose to collaborate, the scope/value
of your project is expected to be twice (or three times) as impressive.
If you choose the role of entrepreneur, you must develop a short business plan for an app,
extension, or service that is related to the information and communication economy. You
may be optimistically vague about your expected funding rounds and projected user
growth (since we policy folks don’t care much about these mundane issues). You must
be precise about how your service model deals with or improves existing issues related to
data, privacy and security, such as regulations, potential data issues such as breaches [at
the macro (i.e., not engineering) level], government requests for data, personal privacy,
foreign censorship etc.
If you choose the role of public servant, choose a specific policy problem that is related to
the information and communication economy. Fix it! Or explain why the “fix” should be
left to the market or done in collaboration with industry. Be specific about the firms and
end-users that will be impacted, winners and losers, high-level legal issues and good old
practicality. You may be politically optimistic but not stupid. You should think big but
not silly.
No matter which role you take, your fellow classmates will be attacking your proposal, so
be as thorough as possible in preparing your ideas. Your best defense is to anticipate the
weaknesses of your own proposal and fix them.
A third of your project proposal grade will be based on your written critique of two other
(randomly chosen) students’ ideas. Your critical appraisal should be fact-based, concise
and as brutal as necessary.
PhD Students
Doctoral students in the course must complete all the required deliverables EXCEPT the
final project described above. Instead, PhD students should complete an academic
literature review of an area related to information technology. PhD students should meet
privately with me during the first few weeks of class to go over their areas of interest and
formulate a reasonable topic for the article.
Policy on Plagiarism
The profession of scholarship and the intellectual life of a university
as well as the field of public policy inquiry depend fundamentally on a
foundation of trust. Thus any act of plagiarism strikes at the heart of
the meaning of the university and the purpose of the School of Public
Policy. It constitutes a serious breach of professional ethics and it is
unacceptable.
Plagiarism is the use of another’s words or ideas presented as one’s
own. It includes, among other things, the use of specific words, ideas,
or frameworks that are the product of another’s work. Honesty and
thoroughness in citing sources is essential to professional
accountability and personal responsibility. Appropriate citation is
necessary so that arguments, evidence, and claims can be critically
examined.
Plagiarism is wrong because of the injustice it does to the person whose
ideas are stolen. But it is also wrong because it constitutes lying to
one’s professional colleagues. From a prudential perspective, it is
shortsighted and self-defeating, and it can ruin a professional career.
The faculty of the School of Public Policy takes plagiarism seriously
and has adopted a zero tolerance policy. Any plagiarized assignment will
receive an automatic grade of “F.” This may lead to failure for the
course, resulting in dismissal from the University. This dismissal will
be noted on the student’s transcript. For foreign students who are on a
university-sponsored visa (eg. F-1, J-1 or J-2), dismissal also results
in the revocation of their visa.
To help enforce the SPP policy on plagiarism, all written work submitted
in partial fulfillment of course or degree requirements must be
available in electronic form so that it can be compared with electronic
databases, as well as submitted to commercial services to which the
School subscribes. Faculty may at any time submit student’s work
without prior permission from the student. Individual instructors may
require that written work be submitted in electronic as well as printed
form. The SPP policy on plagiarism is supplementary to the George Mason
University Honor Code; it is not intended to replace it or substitute
for it.
Academic Accommodation for a Disability
If you are a student with a disability and you need academic accommodations, please see
me and contact the Disability Resource Center (DRC) at 703-993-2474. All academic
accommodations must be arranged through the DRC.
Schedule
1.
January 26
hello world
Economics of information; Networks; Regulation of new technology
Easley and Kleinberg. Networks, Crowds and Markets: Reasoning
About a Highly Connected World. Cambridge University Press. 2010.
Chapter 1.
Falzone, Anthony. Regulation and Technology. Journal of Law and
Public Policy. January, 2013.
Posner, Richard. The Economics of Privacy. The American Economic
Review. 1981. Vol 71(2), pp. 405-409.
The Economist. Technology: Looking Both Ways. February 22, 2014.
Twitter.com. Getting Started with Twitter.
https://support.twitter.com/articles/215585-getting-started-withtwitter
Twitter.com Privacy Policy
https://twitter.com/privacy
2. February 2
Privacy Law in the U.S. and EU
US Privacy Law; Role of FTC; EU Privacy Rulings
European Commission, Court of Justice “Right to be Forgotten”
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/
GAO. Information Resellers: Consumer Privacy Framework Needs to
Reflect Changes in Technology and the Marketplace. December 18,
2013.
NHPR, The Exchange, July 14, 2014. Should the US Adopt a “Right
To Be Forgotten” Online? Podcast available at NHPR.org
Sengupta, Somini. No U.S. Action, So States Move on Privacy Law.
The New York Times, October 30, 2013.
The White House, Office of the Press Security. Securing
Cyberspace:
President
Obama
Announces
New
Cybersecurity
Legislative Proposal and Other Cybersecurity Efforts. January 13,
2015.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-pressoffice/2015/01/13/securing-cyberspace-president-obama-announcesnew-cybersecurity-legislat
3. February 9
Guest Lecture: Peter Miller
https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=29967695
Senior Counsel at Crowell and Moring LLP, former Chief Privacy
Officer at FTC
Who’s Your Data?
What is Big Data? Crash course on data science; What does your
data say about you?
Acxiom.com, AboutTheData, www.aboutthedata.com/portal
Anderson, Chris. The End of Theory: The Data Deluge Makes the
Scientific Method Obsolete. Wired Magazine. June 23, 2008.
Davenport and Patil. Data Science: The Sexiest Job of the 21st
Century. Harvard Business Review, October 2012.
President.
Big
Opportunities, Preserving Values. May 14 2014.
Executive
Office
of
the
Data:
Seizing
FTC. Protecting Consumer Privacy in an Era of Rapid Change:
Recommendations for Businesses and Policymakers. March 2012.
Oracle.com. Data Mining Concepts.
http://docs.oracle.com/cd/B28359_01/datamine.111/b28129/process.ht
m#DMCON002
Policy Brief I
4. February 16
Guest Lecture: Alex Howard
https://www.linkedin.com/in/alexanderbhoward
Writer and editor, focused on technology, journalism, government and
society.
Neutral Regulation
Net Neutrality, TBD based on the FCC; Regulation of telecommunication
Anders, George. The Right Way to Fix the Internet. MIT Technology
Review. October 14, 2014.
Crawford. Cable Regulation in the Internet Era. 2014, NBER
FCC, “The Open Internet.” http://www.fcc.gov/openinternet
Telecommunications
Approaches with the End in Sight. 2013.
Hausman
and
Sidak.
Regulation:
Current
Howard, Alex. What’s Next for Net Neutrality? Reclassification or
a Tiered Internet? E-Pluribusunum. January 16, 2014. http://epluribusunum.com/2014/01/16/what-next-for-net-neutralityreclassification-or-a-tiered-internet/
5. February 23
Guest Lecture: Lee Peeler
https://www.linkedin.com/pub/lee-peeler/20/78/5b0
President, Advertising Self-Regulatory Council
Glass Houses
Economics of targeted ads; The internet of everything; Social norms
IRL and online; Privacy breaches, price discrimination
Duhigg. How Companies Learn Your Secrets. The New York Times.
February 16, 2012.
Lenard and Rubin. The Big Data Revolution: Privacy Considerations.
Technology Policy Institute. December 2013.
Manjoo. Larry Page On Google’s Many Arms. The New York Times,
June 25, 2014.
Shiller.
First Degree Price Discrimination Using Big Data.
Brandeis University. July 31, 2013.
Tanner.
Different Customers, Different Prices, Thanks to Big
Data. Forbes. March 26, 2014. (see also WSJ 12/24/12 “Websites
Vary Prices, Deals”)
Zarsky, Tal. Desperately Seeking Solutions: Using ImplementationBased Solutions for the Troubles of Information Privacy in the Age
of Data Mining and the Internet Society. Maine Law Review, Vol
56(1). 2013.
Project Proposals Due
6. March 2
Sony! Target! Heartbleed!
Data breaches; Responsibility across business, credit card companies, government;
Pooled insurance for ID theft; Cracking down on hackers
GAO. Cybersecurity: Threats Impacting the Nation. April 24, 2012.
Moore, T. Introducing the Economics of Cybersecurity: Principles
and Policy Options. Proceedings of a Workshop on Deterring
Cyberattacks: Informing Strategies and Developing Options for U.S.
Policy. 2010.
Office of the Attorney General, California Department of Justice.
California Data Breach Report. October 2014.
Note: No Class March 9 (Spring Break)
7. March 16
Guest Lecture: Ben Sperry
https://www.linkedin.com/in/rbensperry
Associate Director, International Center for Law and Economics and
Legal Fellow, TechFreedom
Meta Security
Intelligence innovations; Legal framework for surveillance; Domestic
v. foreign intelligence gathering; Prism, Snowden, NSA
Center for Democracy and Technology. The USA Freedom Act (HR 3361)
Summary
and
Analysis.
June
3,
2014.
https://d1ovv0c9tw0h0c.cloudfront.net/files/2014/06/USA-FREEDOMCDT-sum.pdf
Kehl, Danielle. Surveillance Costs: The NSA’s Impact on the
Economy, Internet Freedom and Cybersecurity. New America’s Open
Technology Institute. July 2014.
President Obama, Press Conference on NSA Surveillance, August 9,
2013. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paZgOC7Wqo0
Rotenberg. On International Privacy: A Path Forward for the US and
Europe. Harvard International Review. June 15, 2014.
Policy Brief II
8. March 23
Guest Lecture: Evan Selinger
http://www.rit.edu/cla/philosophy/Selinger.html
Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy, Rochester Institute of
Technology
Security and Secrets
Social networks and democratization; Domestic and Foreign censorship;
International relations
Heins, Marjorie. The Brave New World of Social Media Censorship.
Harvard Law Review. June 20, 2014.
The Aspen Institute. Is Social Media A Dangerous Force Against
Democracy? August 6, 2014.
Watch the lecture series at
http://www.aspeninstitute.org/about/blog/social-media-dangerousforce-against-democracy
The Economist.
2013.
Special Report: China and the Internet. April 6th,
9. March 30
Sharing is Caring
The Sharing Economy; Local Regulation; Regulatory Capture; Data and Regulation
Dungca, Nicole. In first, Uber to Share Ride Data with Boston. The Boston Globe.
January 13, 2015.
Downes, Larry. Lessons from Uber: Why Innovation and Regulation Don’t Mix.
Forbes. February 6, 2013.
The Economist. All Eyes on the Sharing Economy. March 9, 2013.
Frizell, Sam. A Historical Argument Against Uber: Taxi Regulations are There for
a Reason. Time Magazine. November 29, 2014.
Listokin, Siona. Regulating Uber: Data Collection is Key. Slate.com, January 9,
2014.
PayPal. 21st Century Regulation: Putting Innovation At the Heart of Payments
Regulation.
http://www.ebaymainstreet.com/sites/default/files/PayPal-PaymentRegulations-Booklet-US.pdf
10. April 6
The Courts
Fair Use and
Technology
IP;
Sexting,
cyber
bullying;
Supreme
Court
and
Bazelon, Emily. How to Stop the Bullies. The Atlantic. March 2013.
The Kojo Nnamdi Show. Supreme Court Rulings on TV Viewing and Cell
Phone Searches. June 25, 2014 (listen to show or read transcript)
Manjoo, Farhad. The Tech-Savvy Supreme Court. The New York Times.
June 26, 2014
11. April 13
Guest Lecture: Chris Rasmussen
https://www.linkedin.com/pub/christopher-rasmussen/4/84b/a03
Senior Privacy Specialist, Blue Shield of California. Former Policy
Analyst with the Center for Democracy and Technology.
Brogrammers and Accountants
Industry navel gazing: diversity, ageism,
shortages; Tax avoidance and I <3 Ireland
gentrification;
STEM
Houlder, Boland, Politi. Tax Avoidance: The Irish Inversion. The
Financial Times. April 29, 2014.
Scheiber. The Brutal Ageism of Tech. The New Republic. March 23,
2014.
Vara, Vauhini. Can Intel Make Silicon Valley More Diverse? The New
Yorker. January 11, 2015.
Final Project Due
12. April 20
Guest Lecture: Jen Golbeck
http://www.cs.umd.edu/~golbeck/
Director, Human-Computer Interaction Lab and Associate Professor, University of
Maryland.
The Sociology Network
Social science and big data; Facebook News Feed; Google Flu Trends; Anonymous
networks
Golbeck, Jennifer. The Curly Fry Conundrum: Why Social Media “likes” Say
More Than You Might Think. TED Talk. April 2014.
Kramer, Guillory, Hancock. Experimental Evidence of Massive Scale Emotional
Contagion Through Social Networks. Proceedings of the National Academy of
Sciences of the USA June 2014, Vol 111 no 24, pgs 8788-8790.
Lazer, David, Ryan Kennedy, Gary King, and Alessandro Vespignani. 2014. The
Parable of Google Flu: Traps in Big Data Analysis. Science 343, no. 14 March:
1203-1205.
Rudder, Christian. We Experiment on Human Beings! OkCupid Blog. July 28,
2014. http://blog.okcupid.com/index.php/we-experiment-on-human-beings/
13. April 27
file I/O
TBD. Project Presentations
Project Critiques Due
14.May 4
return 0;
Other topics; Review; What will syllabus for this course look like in
2016?
Policy Brief III