“Tech Ethics/Corporate Ethics” Dinner Roundtable Conversation

The digital economy is increasingly introducing technologically-derived threats to security: threats to data privacy and information security; hacking and data breaches; cyberattacks; and new forms of cyberwarfare and information warfare, such as disinformation campaigns by domestic and foreign entities. Some experts have called for greater oversight of tech companies, and more robust general data privacy laws and data protection regulation. Other experts have called for more cooperative regulatory relationships between the public and private sectors. The promotion of corporate ethical norms and practices have been considered critical in supporting successful self-regulation models within the tech industry.

Roundtable Conversation|

Technically Right at the Kenan Institute for Ethics is pleased to host a Dinner Roundtable on the topic of “Tech Ethics/Corporate Ethics” at 5:30 pm on Monday, November 11, in the Ahmadieh Family Conference Room (West Duke Building, room 101), located in the Kenan Institute for Ethics on East Campus. The event will be cosponsored by the Future of Privacy Forum and the Duke Law and Technology Review. Members of the Duke and Durham community are welcome to join a dinner conversation that will be facilitated by Margaret Hu, Kenan Institute for Ethics, with opening comments and questions framed by David Hoffman, Director of Security Policy and Global Privacy, Intel Corporation; and Jules Polonetsky, CEO of the Future of Privacy Forum.

Please RSVP to Jeremy Buotte <jeremy.buotte@duke.edu>. SCROLL DOWN FOR PARKING INFORMATION (download parking map PDF).


Jules Polonetsky serves as CEO of the Future of Privacy Forum, a Washington, D.C.-based non-profit organization that serves as a catalyst for privacy leadership and scholarship, advancing principled data practices in support of emerging technologies. FPF is supported by the chief privacy officers of more than 130 leading companies, several foundations, as well as by an advisory board comprised of the country’s leading academics and advocates. FPF’s current projects focus on Big Data, Mobile, Location, Apps, the Internet of Things, Wearables, De-Identification, Connected Cars and Student Privacy. Jules previous roles have included serving as Chief Privacy Officer at AOL and before that at DoubleClick, as Consumer Affairs Commissioner for New York City, as an elected New York State Legislator and as a congressional staffer, and as an attorney.


David Hoffman is Director of Security Policy and Global Privacy Officer at Intel Corporation, in which capacity he covers Intel’s privacy compliance activities, legal support for privacy and security and external privacy and security policy engagements.
Mr. Hoffman serves on the Department of Homeland Security’s Data Privacy and Integrity Advisory Committee and the Board of Directors of the National Cyber Security Alliance. Mr. Hoffman has also served on the US Federal Trade Commission’s Online Access and Security Committee, the Center for Strategic and International Studies Cyber Security Commission, the Steering Committee for BBBOnline, the TRUSTe Board of Directors, and the Board of the International Association of Privacy Professionals. Mr. Hoffman has a JD from The Duke University School of Law, where he was a Member of the Duke Law Journal. Mr. Hoffman also received an AB from Hamilton College.


Technically Right advances ethical tech policy and innovation through interdisciplinary research, coursework for undergraduates and graduate students, and convenings of scholars and practitioners.


“Shifts ran 24 hours a day, and the factory was always bright. At any moment, there were thousands of workers standing on assembly lines or sitting in backless chairs, crouching next to large machinery, or jogging between loading bays. Some workers’ legs swelled so much they waddled.  “It’s hard to stand all day,” said Zhao Sheng, a plant worker.”

Reading this excerpt, save for the word ‘bright’, one would think that they were reading about the horrible working conditions that existed in factories in Western Europe during the Industrial Revolution. But lo and behold, this is an excerpt from the article “In China, Human Costs Are Built Into an iPad” that ran in the New York Times on January 25th 2012 detailing the horrible working conditions in a Foxconn factory in Chengdu, China. Foxconn is one of Apple’s largest suppliers, assembling iPads and other electronics. Like its 18th century predecessors, Apple has mastered the art of capitalism, milking every last bit of value out of labor in the pursuit of higher profits.
Continue reading “iSlave”

#OccupyWallStreet (TM)

If it existed, I would imagine that official Occupy Wall Street merchandise would be the new I <3 NY – at least for a while. Everyone would have to have a t-shirt or a mug – the protesters, tourists and the people who stand in solidarity with the protesters because it’s always trendy to be anti-establishment. But doesn’t it seem strange that someone would be able to profit off of a movement started because of unfair moneymaking games?

Some people have sold merchandise online for the purpose of raising money for the movement. But one Long Island couple paid almost $1,000 to file a trademark application with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office last week for the phrase “Occupy Wall St” for their own business purposes. Additionally, Fer-Eng Investments, LCC filed an application with the USPTO  for Occupy Wall Street phrases. Fer-Eng trade is a sort of shell corporation for Vincent Ferraro, current VP for Kodak and former VP for Hewlett-Packard. (Most certainly part of the 1 percent) The couple, the Marescas, consider themselves to be part of the 99 percent, but wanting to use the protest as a (probably successful) business model is fishy. Continue reading “#OccupyWallStreet (TM)”