Requirements: Grades will be based on participation (20%),  a final exam covering all material covered in the course, scheduled for Dec 10th from 10:30 AM – 1:00 PM (40%), and a seminar paper of  approximately 10-15 pages (40%), which is due the last meeting on a topic to be arranged after consulting with the instructor. Some suggested paper topics are available online. A brief statement of your proposed topic is due ----, a detailed outline is due ----, and a draft of the paper is due ----. The grade for the seminar paper will be an average of the grade for the draft and for the revision. Students must turn in the outline and draft with professor's comments when turning in the final version. The participation grade will be based on attendance, discussion of readings, and brief written assignments that require analysis of the readings. Assignment may take the form of 1-2 page papers or in-class responses to a prompt. One purpose of the assignments is to give you an indication of how well you are understanding the material well before the final exam and seminar paper are due. Each unexcused absence beyond 1 will result in an automatic 1/3 letter grade reduction for participation.
    To facilitate discussion and assist in preparation for the final exam, students are strongly advised to take notes on the readings and class discussions. A sample brief is online. In some classes, discussion will focus on debates of cases that are starred; arguing these cases effectively requires reading all of the cases for that class. Be sure to bring to each class the reading for that day's class.
    Students agree to adhere to the honor code, the text of which is at www.fau.edu/divdept/honcol/students/honorcode.html. While you are encouraged to discuss course material with each other, all assignments must be entirely your own work, and you are not permitted to copy or borrow from the drafts, outlines, or reading notes of others. If you have any doubts about what constitutes plagiarism or a violation of the honor code, consult with the professor beforehand.

Office Hours: TBA. For additional times, phone 6-8650 or email me at tunick@fau.edu
 

8/22: Handouts on gun detectors; smart highway systems; Kissinger's trash
For those interested: Amy Harmon, 'As Public Records Go Online, Some Say They're Too Public', New York Times, August 24, 2001; Amy Harmon, "Group Deletes Private Information about Voters from Internet," New York Times, August 25, 2001;  Simon Romero, 'Location Devices' Use Rises, Prompting Privacy Concerns', New York Times, March 4, 2001; Jennifer Lee, "Welcome to the Database Lounge," New York Times, March 21, 2002; Monica Davey, "Planned Parenthood is told to Show Children's Files," New York Times, June 1, 2005-- available at lexis-nexis: search news/general news

8/27: Lasson, History and Development of the Fourth Amendment (pp. 13-61, 79-105)(v1); Olmstead v. U.S. (277 U.S. 438, 1928) (v2); Katz. v. U.S. (389 U.S. 347, 1967)(v2)

8/29: Rosen, The Unwanted Gaze, pp. 3-53; and Sipple v. Chronicle Publishing Company (154 Cal. App. 3d 1040, 1984): available online at lexis-nexis

9/3: Rosen, The Unwanted Gaze , pp. 54-158, 196-224
For those interested:
Transcript of Thomas-Hill testimony is available online
"Dirty Laundry, Online for All to See" (NYT, 9/5/02) on Cincinnati's county courts posting records online, available online; the Hamilton County Courts  website
Alice in Unix land

II: Historical and anthropological perspectives on privacy:  How do we decide what expectations of privacy it is reasonable for a society to recognize? Are there universal standards or principles to decide this, or is the measure of reasonableness relative to one's culture or sub-culture? This section's readings lead us to think about whether the value of privacy is historically and culturally relative.

9/5: Flaherty, Privacy in Colonial New England, ch.1; ch. 2 (pp. 66-84) (v1, handout)

9/10: Flaherty, chs. 3, 7 (v1)

9/12: Abraham Marcus, "Privacy in Eighteenth-Century Aleppo: The Limits of Cultural Ideals," International Journal of Middle East Studies 18:165-83 (May 1986), available online at jstor

9/17: Gregor, "Exposure and Seclusion: A Study of Institutionalized Isolation Among the Mehinaku Indians of Brazil" (v1); Schoeman, Privacy and Social Freedom, ch. 7(v1)
Film excerpt: from Luis Buñuel, Phantom of Liberty

9/19: Wasserstrom, "Privacy: some arguments and assumptions" (v1); Aries, Centuries of Childhood, pp. 100-110 (v1)
Recommended: Jodi Wilgoren, "Scholar's Pedophilia Essay Stirs Outrage and Revenge," New York Times, April 30, 2002: available at Lexis-Nexis: search news/general news 

III. The value of privacy: Why is privacy important? Is it good for its own sake, or is it valued because it is a means to some other worthwhile end? Not everyone agrees privacy is so unambiguously good. David Brin, in The Transparent Society, asks, ‘Why should I care if someone sees this if I have nothing to hide?' and argues that anonymity makes it easier to dehumanize others and dismiss their concerns or harm them. So, is privacy really such a good thing? What do we mean by privacy?

9/24: Warren and Brandeis, 'The Right to Privacy' (1890)(v1); Prosser, "Privacy"(v1); Froelich v. Adair (516 P. 2d 993, 1973) (v2)

9/26: Fried, "Privacy"(v1)

10/1: Arndt, "Cult of Privacy"(v1); Bettelheim, "The Right to Privacy is a Myth"(v1); Virginia Postrel, "No Telling," Reason (June 1998), online; Robert Frost, "Mending Walls," available online

For those interested: Theodor Fontane, Effi Briest (and Fassbinder's film version); Ursula K. Le Guin, The Dispossessed (1974); Critics of privacy: David Brin, The Transparent Society; Solveig Singleton, 'Privacy as censorship: a skeptical view of proposals to regulate privacy in the private sector', online.  Defenders of privacy: Tunick, 'Does Privacy Undermine Community?', Journal of Value Inquiry 35:517-34 (December 2001), available online; Andrew McClurg, "Bringing Privacy law out of the Closet: A Tort Theory of Liability for Intrusions in Public Places," 73 N.C.L. Rev. 989 (1995), search law reviews at  lexis-nexis.

IV.  Cases (I)
10/3: Bodily integrity: Breithaupt v. Abram (352 U.S. 432, 1957) available online at lexis-nexis; Schmerber v. California (384 U.S. 757, 1966), available online at lexis-nexis; Bell v. Wolfish (441 U.S. 520, 1979), excerpts (v2); Winston v. Lee (470 U.S. 753, 1985), available online at lexis-nexis; U.S. v. Montoya de Hernandez (473 U.S. 531, 1985), available online at lexis-nexis
For those interested: Greg Winter, "Study Finds no sign that testing deters students' drug use," New York Times, May 17, 2003; referring to Ryoko Yamaguchi, Lloyd D. Johnston, Patrick M. O'Malley, "Relationship between student illicit drug use and school drug-testing policies," Journal of School Health v73 i4 p159(6) (April 2003), available online.

10/8 Visual enhancements: Ponce v. Craven (409 F. 2d 621, 1969); U.S. v. Mankani (738 F. 2d 538, 1984); U.S. v. Minton (488 F. 2d 37, 1973); Commonwealth v. Hernley (263 A. 2d 904, 1970); U.S. v. Kim (415 F. Supp. 1252 (1976); Dow Chemical Co. v. U.S. (476 U.S. 227, 1986); California v. Ciraolo* (476 U.S. 207, 1986); Florida v. Riley (488 U.S. 445, 1989); People v. Mayoff (197 Cal Rptr 450, 1983)--all cases in v2

10/10: Discussion of Francis Ford Coppola's film "The Conversation" (1974, 113 minutes).
Brief statement of your proposed topic is due.

10/15: Sense enhancement: Kyllo v. United States, 99-8508: online; State [of Washington] v. Young (867 P 2d 593, 1994), available online at lexis-nexis; U.S. v. Place (462 U.S. 696, 1983); U.S. v. Thomas (757 F 2d 1359, 1985); Doe v. Renfrow (451 U.S. 1022, 1981)--in v2

10/17: Cordless/cellular phones: State v. Constantino (603 A. 2d 173, 1991); U.S. v. Smith (978 F 2d 171, 1992)--in v2

10/22: Garbage: California v. Greenwood  (486 U.S. 35, 1988) (v2); U.S. v. Scott* (975 F. 2d 927 (1992), available online at lexis-nexis; State v. Hempele (576 A. 2d 793, 1990) (v2--Note: this is out of place in the reader, and appears before U.S. v. Place); State v. Schultz (388 So. 2d 1326, 1980) (v2)

V: Theories on the Fourth Amendment and privacy

10/24: Tunick, "Privacy in the Face of New Technologies of Surveillance," Public Affairs Quarterly 14:259-277 (July 2000) (v1); Loewy, "The Fourth Amendment as a device for Protecting the Innocent," 81 Mich L.R. 1229 (1983), section 2 (v1)

10/29: Sundby, "Everyman's Fourth Amendment: Privacy or Mutual Trust between Government and Citizen?", 94 Columbia L.R. 1751 (October 1994), pp. 1755-63, 1775-1782, 1787-1793 (v1); Slobogin and Schumacher, "Reasonable Expectations of Privacy," 42 Duke L.J. 727 (1993), pp. 727-58, 774-5 (v1); Dana Canedy, "TV Cameras Seek Criminals in Tampa's Crowds," New York Times, July 4, 2001: available at Lexis-Nexis: search news/general news.
Outline of seminar paper is due. What should be included in the outline?

VI: Cases II
10/31: Public restrooms: U.S. v. Billings (858 F. 2d 617, 1988); Smayda v. U.S.* (352 F. 2d 251, 1965); Bielicki v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County (371 P. 2d 288, 1962); Britt v. Superior Court of Santa Clara County (374 P. 2d 817, 1962)--all in v2

11/5: Do the homeless have a right to privacy? U.S. v. Ruckman (806 F. 2d 1471, 1986); Committee for Creative Nonviolence v. Unknown Agents (797 F. Supp 7, 1992); State v. Mooney* (588 A. 2d 1991)--all in v2

11/7: Journalistic invasions of privacy. DeGregorio v. CBS, Inc. (473 N.Y.S. 2d 922, 1984); Cape Publications, Inc. v. Bridges (423 So. 2d 426, 1982)--all available online at lexis-nexis
Video: Politics, Privacy, and the Press (Ethics in America Series)
Recommended: Marcia Chambers, "Case of Art, Icons and Law, with Woods in the Middle," New York Times,  July 3, 2002 (on Tiger Woods' lawsuit against Rick Rush, who  produced prints featuring Woods in the foreground and six other golf greats in the background)-- available at Lexis-Nexis: search news/general news.

11/12: The consequences of yellow journalism
Heinrich Böll, The Lost Honor of Katharina Blum
Film:  Lost Honor of Katharina Blum, directed by Victor Schlöndorff (1975) (1:49)

11/14: Third party consent:Illinois v. Rodriguez (497 U.S. 177, 1990) (v2)
Draft of seminar paper is due.

11/19: Private Searches: U.S. v. Jacobsen (466 U.S. 109, 1984); Walter v. U.S. (447 U.S. 649, 1980); Commonwealth v. Kean* (556 A. 2d 374, 1989)--all in v2

11/21: Employee privacy: Luedtke v. Nabors Alaska Drilling (768 P 2d 1123, 1989) (v2); Abbey and Redel, "Drug Testing in the Workplace" (v1); Norman Bloodsaw v. Lawrence (135 F. 3d 1260, 1998)--you may omit sections 5 and 6 of this case--available online at lexis-nexis

VII. Privacy in cyberspace

11/26:  Lisa Napoli, "Sailor's Case Becomes Privacy and Rights Cause," New York Times Jan. 14, 1998, available online; Philip Shenon, "Sailor Victorious in Gay Case of On-Line Privacy," New York Times, June 12, 1998; and Adam Liptak, "Dispute Simmers Over Web Site Posting Personal Data on Police," New York Times, July 12, 2003: available at Lexis-Nexis: search news/general news.

11/28: No Class. Thanksgiving

12/3: Lessig, Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace, chapters 1-11, 14

For those interested: Jennifer Lee, 'Trying to Elude the Google Grasp', New York Times, July 25, 2002;  'Internet Used to Find Man who is charged in 2 of 10 Killings', New York Times, June 11, 2002 (A.P.): available at Lexis-Nexis: search news/general news; Simson Garfinkel, Database Nation; Jeffrey Rosen, The Unwanted Gaze, ch. 5; Federal Ct. decision on electronic bulletin board seizure; Internet privacy (NYT, April 8, 1999)

Revised seminar paper due on ---
Final exam is ---.

Web Sites on privacy:

• ACLU list of privacy sources
• Center for Democracy and Technology
• EPIC Online Guide to Privacy Resources
• Florida Sunsine Law
• Privacy forum: online journal on privacy issues