Default Fellow

Zoe Bedell

Filter By:

Topic

Type

Recent Commentary

Analysis and Commentary

Facebook, Hamas, And Why A New Material Support Suit May Have Legs

by Benjamin Wittes, Zoe Bedellvia Lawfare
Tuesday, July 12, 2016

The last few months have seen a spree of lawsuits filed against social media companies for allegedly providing material support to terrorists groups, particularly ISIS, by effectively allowing those groups to use their systems.

Analysis and Commentary

Tweeting Terrorits, Part I: Don’t Look Now But A Lot Of Terrorist Groups Are Using Twitter

by Zoe Bedell, Benjamin Wittesvia Lawfare
Sunday, February 14, 2016

In a recent post on the subject of Twitter, ISIS, and civil liability under the material support for terrorism law, we posed what seemed to us like a far-fetched hypothetical: Imagine for a moment that Twitter ran a promotion in which it gave selected users the ability to run a certain number of “Promoted” tweets for free.

Analysis and Commentary

Tweeting Terrorists, Part III: How Would Twitter Defend Itself Against A Material Support Prosecution?

by Benjamin Wittes, Zoe Bedellvia Lawfare
Sunday, February 14, 2016

In Part I of this series, we listed the many designated foreign terrorist organizations (DFTOs) that seem to have overt Twitter accounts. In Part II, we looked at the material support law as interpreted by the Supreme Court and concluded that the company—at least in theory—may have a real problem under the statute.

Analysis and Commentary

Did Congress Immunize Twitter Against Lawsuits For Supporting ISIS?

by Benjamin Wittes, Zoe Bedellvia Lawfare
Friday, January 22, 2016

Back in July, we wrote a lengthy piece about whether Apple could conceivably face civil liability for providing end-to-end encryption to criminals and terrorists. Last week, we wrote about a lawsuit against Twitter that is based on substantially the same legal theory we had outlined in the earlier post.

Analysis and Commentary

Twitter, ISIS, And Civil Liability

by Benjamin Wittes, Zoe Bedellvia Lawfare
Thursday, January 14, 2016

A few months ago, we wrote a lengthy piece about the possibility that Apple could face civil liability for providing end-to-end encryption to criminals and terrorists. We got a lot of heat for this piece. But today it's looking pretty good.

Analysis and Commentary

In Defense of Our “Braindead Jihad Against Encryption”

by Benjamin Wittes, Zoe Bedellvia Lawfare
Thursday, July 30, 2015

We expected that our piece this morning on liability standards with respect to end-to-end encryption would provoke strong reactions.

Analysis and Commentary

Civil Liability For End-To-End Encryption: Threat Or Fantasy? Part II

by Benjamin Wittes, Zoe Bedellvia Lawfare
Thursday, July 30, 2015

In the first part of this series, we looked at the question of whether Apple could be held liable in a negligence tort for refusing to retain the ability to provide law enforcement with decrypted communications in response to legal process.

Analysis and Commentary

Civil Liability For End-To-End Encryption: Threat Or Fantasy? Part I

by Benjamin Wittes, Zoe Bedellvia Lawfare
Tuesday, July 21, 2015

Last week, one of us noted Senator Sheldon Whitehouse’s question to Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates asking whether the manufacturers of encrypted devices might be liable civilly if FBI Director James Comey’s “going-dark” warnings were to come true and public safety were to be harmed as a result.