1. Ethical and Privacy Challenges in Internet Policy Q&A with Chris Kelly

2. Some Thoughts on the Internet The Internet is merely a reection of who we are as a society; and thus is a tool for good and for bad and a source of great volumes of information and disinformation alike. --Abraham Lincoln

3. Privacy

4. Ethics 1: Ensure Faith in Business "One of the most important lessons we can learn from an examination of economic life is that a nations well being as well as its ability to compete, is conditioned by a single, pervasive cultural characteristic: the level of trust inherent in the society."

5. Ethics 2 Protect Others From Harm

6. Ethics 3 Law as a Normative Statement of Values

7. About CHRIS KELLY Chris Kelly is the founder of Kelly Investments and part owner of the Sacramento Kings. He served in the Clinton Administration before going on to become Facebooks Chief Privacy Ocer and Director of Global Policy. He was a candidate for California Attorney General in 2010 and led the ght for Californias Proposition 35 ghting sex tracking. BENNET KELLEY Bennet Kelley is the founder of the Internet Law Center in Santa Monica and host of Cyber Law and Business Report.

8. Ethical and Privacy Challenges in Internet Policy Appendix Bennet Kelley

9. Honest Abe 2.0 ABA Model Rule 4.1(a) "In the course of representing a client a lawyer shall not knowingly: (a) make a false statement of material fact or law to a third person. . . ABA Model Rule 8.4(c) Prohibits conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation. California Business & Professions Code Section 6106 The commission of any act involving moral turpitude, dishonesty or corruption, whether the act is committed in the course of his relations as an attorney or otherwise, and whether the act is a felony or misdemeanor or not, constitutes a cause for disbarment or suspension. Vega v. Jones, Day, Reavis & Pogue 121 Cal.App.4th 282, 291-294 (2004). A lawyer may not knowingly make false statements of material fact to a third party.

10. SDCBA Legal Ethics Opinion 2011-2 (Adopted by the San Diego County Bar Legal Ethics Committee May 24, 2011.) FACTUAL SCENARIO Attorney is representing Client, a plainti former employee in a wrongful discharge action. While the matter is in its early stages, Attorney has by now received former employers answer to the complaint and therefore knows that the former employer is represented by counsel and who that counsel is. Attorney obtained from Client a list of all of Clients former employers employees. Attorney sends out a friending1 request to two high-ranking company employees whom Client has identied as being dissatised with the employer and therefore likely to make disparaging comments about the employer on their social media page. The friend request gives only Attorneys name. Attorney is concerned that those employees, out of concern for their jobs, may not be as forthcoming with their opinions in depositions and intends to use any relevant information he obtains from these social media sites to advance the interests of Client in the litigation. QUESTION PRESENTED Has Attorney violated his ethical obligations under the California Rules of Professional Conduct, the State Bar Act, or case law addressing the ethical obligations of attorneys?

11. SDCBA Legal Ethics Opinion 2011-2 (Adopted by the San Diego County Bar Legal Ethics Committee May 24, 2011.) Rule 2-100(A) While representing a client, a member shall not communicate directly or indirectly about the subject of the representation with a party the member knows to be represented by another lawyer in the matter, unless the member has the consent of the other lawyer. Contact Violates Rule 2-100(A) But to obtain access to restricted information on a Facebook page, the attorney must make a request to a represented party outside of the actual or virtual presence of defense counsel. And for purposes of Rule 2-100, that motivated communication with the represented party makes all the dierence. Contact Also Constitutes Deception But is it impermissible deception to seek to friend a witness without disclosing the purpose of the friend request, even if the witness is not a represented party and thus, as set forth above, subject to the prohibition on ex parte contact? We believe that it is.

12. NSA & Privacy While the scope of and/or legality of methods used as part of the NSA surveillance programs are still being determined and we oer no opinion on this point. In general, attorneys must be mindful of the following with respect to advising potential violations of the law: Rule 3-210 A member shall not advise the violation of any law, rule, or ruling of a tribunal unless the member believes in good faith that such law, rule, or ruling is invalid. A member may take appropriate steps in good faith to test the validity of any law, rule, or ruling of a tribunal. Penal Code 31 Persons who "aid and abet . . . [or] have advised or encouraged" a crime are punishable as principals.

13. HUMAN TRAFFICKING STATISTICS Human tracking exists all over the United States, but California is California is a hot spot for domestic and international human tracking because of its large population, international borders, large economy, extensive ports, and metropolitan regions. The average entry age of American minors into the sex trade is 12-14 years old. Many victims are runaway girls who have already suered sexual abuse as children. California harbors 3 of FBIs 13 highest child sex tracking areas in the nation: Los Angeles, San Francisco, and San Diego. Foreign nationals are also brought into the U.S. as slaves for labor or commercial sex through force or fraud. The prevalence and anonymity of the internet has fueled the rapid growth of sex tracking, making the trade of women and children easier than ever before. REFERENCES The National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Tracking: Americas Prostituted Children, Shared Hope International, May 2009. The Federal Bureau of Investigations Eorts to Combat Crimes Against Children, Audit Report 09-08, January 2009. Tracking in Persons Report, U.S. Department of State, June 2011.

14. PROP 35 (CASE Act) Summary CALIFORNIANS AGAINST SEXUAL EXPLOITATION ACT ("CASE ACT) Increase prison terms for human trackers Increase nes for human trackers, up to $1.5M to fund victim services Remove the need to prove force to prosecute sex tracking of a minor Mandate human tracking training for law enforcement Make sex trackers register as sex oenders Require that all sex oenders to disclose internet accounts Prohibits use of sexual history to impeach or prove criminal liability of tracked victims

15. Doe v. Harris Case No. 3:12-cv-05713-THE (N.D. Cal.) Case Nos. 13-15263, 13-15267 (9th Cir.) Challenge to requirement that sex oenders provide their ISPs and internet identier which is dened as an electronic mail address, user name, screen name, or similar identier used for the purpose of Internet forum discussions, Internet chat room discussions, instant messaging, social networking, or similar Internet communication. Jan 13, 2013 - Judge Henderson granted a preliminary injunction: On the current record, the Court concludes that Plaintis are likely to establish that the challenged provisions, when combined with the lack of protections on the informations disclosure and the serious penalty registrants face if they fail to comply with the reporting requirements, create too great a chilling eect to pass constitutional muster. While the government may be able to demonstrate narrow tailoring in subsequent proceedings, it has not done so here. Accordingly, the Court concludes that Plaintis are likely to succeed on their First Amendment free speech claim. Sept 10, 2013 Argued before 9th Circuit.