Harvard Law School‘s Cyberlaw Clinic, based at the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society, provides pro bono legal services at the intersection of technology and social justice. The Cyberlaw Clinic was the first of its kind, and it continues its tradition of innovation in its areas of practice.
The Clinic’s work, teaching activities, and client selection are animated by our core values:
- promotion of a robust and inclusive online ecosystem for free expression;
- advancement of diversity as a key interest in technology development and tech policy;
- elimination or mitigation of the impact of bias in the development and deployment of technology;
- respect for and protection of privacy, vis-à-vis both private and government actors;
- open government;
- transparency with respect to public and private technical systems that impact all citizens (and, in particular, members of vulnerable populations);
- access to knowledge and information;
- advancement of cultural production through efficient and balanced regulatory and enforcement regimes; and
- support for broad participation in public discourse.
Participation in the Cyberlaw Clinic helps law students prepare for practice by working on real-world client counseling, advocacy, litigation, and transactional projects. The Clinic strives to center clients in our legal work, helping them to achieve success as they define it, mindful of (and in response to) existing law.
From the Blog
The Cyberlaw Clinic filed an amicus brief (pdf) last week in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, on behalf of Upturn, Inc., a nonprofit organization that advocates for equity and justice in the design, governance, and use of technology. The brief supports the defendant-movant, Corey Pickett, in an appeal seeking source code access to TrueAllele, a DNA analysis software developed by Cybergenetics. The amicus brief submitted by the Clinic focuses on the necessity of independent and adversarial review of novel technologies like TrueAllele in ensuring proper administration of justice within the criminal legal system.→
Over the years, the Cyberlaw Clinic has taken an active interest in cases concerning attempts to use copyright claims to limit access to law. Many of these cases have involved our friends at Public.Resource.org, which actively pushes back in situations where private entities assert that their copyright interests should trump free and open access the text of statutes and related legal documents. Of particular note, the United States Supreme Court ruled last year in Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org that the Official Code of Georgia Annotated is ineligible for copyright protection. (The Clinic had filed an amicus brief in the case for the Caselaw Access Project urging that very result.) →