Hope. I could tell you stories about looking in china to see theres some tea you might be up uphold about, but that was long ago. I think theres also it really is up to the companies. Fda has always to my knowledge at least in duchenne and other fields been willing to entertain and talk about compassionate use . I think for the Rare Disease Community is talks about and get us back to trial design but in general, trials are designed to test a sub set of patients. In the duchenne committee, the six minute walk test is standard outcome, primary outcome measure. That means a child with duchenne would have to walk six minutes and even further as learn more about the testing its in a very narrow subset of people in that six minute walk test. Program was put into place at te National Cancer institute. So with that longitude, that breadth of experience within your specialty, are there things that you want to share with others about what that experience has taught you . Well, let what we did ba
Maybe tried, maybe failed, maybe aborted . I do not, sir. There is the general threat that we make every effort to safeguard against. Im not sure if my colleagues are aware of any attempts to produce a dirty bomb using our sources. If you want to followup with a classified briefing on the topic, we could go into that in more detail. Okay. Good enough. And im going to ask a followon question. If this is not appropriate to answer in this space, just say so, but people can go on the internet and learn all kinds of things, including how to build weapons and nuclear weapons, Pressure Cooker bombs, and i presume dirty bombs. Given the access to that kind of information, why do you suppose no ones done it, at least to our knowledge, and certainly not been successful in doing it . Maybe its because of the security measures that were talking about, in this country pretty good, getting better. Maybe its because thats true in other countries. Maybe the its not as easy as it sounds to do and maybe
General counsels office, they arent going to notify the target. Theyre found by the same disclosure and i think the law should account for that. You know, one of the things that was interesting, i was recently reading the legislative history of ecpa, one of the things that congress stressed, even though it got a fair amount wrong when it drew the 180day line, one of the things they were trying to do, and they made this very clear, is sort of promote the adoption of new technologies like this. So i think without clarifying this, and you know, without clarifying the law in some of these other respects, you risk undermining the adoption of these new technologies which provide a number of benefits as greg was alluding to. Weve talked a fair amount of content, weve been using it as emails for content generally, obviously, both microsoft and google and many other companies store an enormous amount of content, other than emails, you know, including the backed up concepts of phones. But there
Law really hasnt kept pace with technology and the way people are using it. If youre a large Multinational Corporation today, and youre providing your own email service. And you have an onpremise email or Cloud Storage service, the government goes to you to get the information. And they serve an order, a subpoena or sometime, a search warrant, on the company itself. It goes to their general counsels office, and they figure out how to respond to it. And theres certain information that they possess that is afforded protections under the law. There is a great fear out there, not just about government obtaining their information, but doing it without their knowledge. And i think, you know, when youre talking about a company considering moving to the cloud, there are a lot of them that are concerned that theyre going to serve Legal Process on microsoft or google or somebody else and get that information without them knowing because of a nondisclosure order. Our position is basically, you we
Email issue with epka. I think for passage we ought to deal specifically with emails so we can get something and amend it as we progress through technology, keeping its mind, the spirit of the Fourth Amendment as well. Thank you very much for your attention. I appreciate it. Thank you. Ill invite our Panel Members to join me here on stage, as formidable panel as one could ask for an event like this. Joining me, we have if youre here, greg new james from i know quite well. A Senior Council of the senate for democracy and technology and the hed of the project on freedom, security and technology and cochair of the american Bar Committee on American Civil Liberties. And an attorney in private practice and director of Legal Services for the American Discrimination Committee as well as Legislative Council at the American Civil Liberties union. A veteran of the fight for judicial privacy and is also a driving force behind the digital due process coalition. We have several members represented