Can AI Make AI More Compliant (Semi-Automated Analysis - Ex Ante, In Situ, Ex Post)

Seminar

Speaker(s)

Bob Gleichauf, In-Q-Tel
Joshua H. Walker, CodeX: The Stanford Center for Legal Informatics

Date and Time

October 12, 2015 11:30 AM - 1:00 PM

Location

William J. Perry Conference Room
Encina Hall, Second Floor, Central, C231
616 Jane Stanford Way, Stanford, CA 94305

Abstract: A number of senior Intelligence Community (IC) officials describe compliance as one of the IC’s biggest problems, perhaps the biggest. The underlying legal and informational issues are bound to become more acute and complex.  How can AI help? The IC protects our nation by analyzing the relationships between people, places, and things - essentially "connecting the dots.”  Doing so while remaining compliant with policies such as Executive Order 12333[1] and Presidential Policy Directive 28[2] is a balancing act. The interpretation, implementation, and enforcement of policy vary across organizations and administrations.  This frequently leaves analysts struggling to determine what data they can and cannot look at. The Internet, mobile, and “Big Data” generally further complicate the problem. The sheer volume, velocity, and variety of data that is constantly being generated necessitate automation, and even AI, to manage.  However, the benefits of analytic automation over the data deluge will remain limited, until the IC finds a way to scale the processing of legal judgments at a comparable rate.

Before we consider the potential benefits to AI-based methodologies we need to understand two things: Data Rights and Application Uncertainty. Data rights are data attributes derived from laws and dependent institutional policies.  Data rights include but are not limited to classifications, access policies, source limitations, “privacy” constraints, etc. While such data rights are entailed in the data itself, the interpretation and application of these rights are contextual and will vary.  More specifically, application of laws on a data set may be indeterminate: they may vary by time, user, and/or geography; the Second Circuit may issue an unexpected, divergent opinion; access may occur before or after a seminal FISA decision; the Office of Legal Counsel may change its mind; the legal state of a data set at the time of collection may be indeterminate; etc. 
 
About the Speakers: As Executive Vice President at In-Q-Tel, Bob Gleichauf supports technology advancement programs. He is also Director of IQT’s Lab41 initiative, a unique Silicon Valley-based challenge lab that provides “innovation through collaboration” in the area of Big Data analytics. Gleichauf joined IQT from Cisco Systems, where he spent a decade working on the development of secure network infrastructures across a variety of the company’s products. Gleichauf, who has more than a dozen patents in network security, served as CTO for the Wireless and Security Technology Group at Cisco, and is respected globally for his work in information security. He previously served as head of product engineering for the WheelGroup prior to its acquisition by Cisco. Earlier, he was with IQ Software, a leader in the development of database report writing tools. Before making the leap into technology, Gleichauf pursued a Ph.D. in Early Human Prehistory at the University of Michigan, where he earned a fellowship and had the privilege of working in East Africa with the celebrated Leakey family.
 
Joshua H. Walker is an Intellectual Property (IP) partner at Greenberg Traurig, LLP, handling all aspects of IP strategy and transactions, and a legal informatics entrepreneur. Josh has built his career at the nexus of law and computer science. Historically, as an analyst, his work has included helping prosecutors convict orchestrators of the 1996 Rwandan genocide to, now, as an attorney, helping many of the largest and most dynamic technology and financial entities in the world improve IP and data rights outcomes in the M&A, licensing, strategic litigation, and network theft contexts. To help clients solve IP governance, transactional, and risk management problems, Josh cofounded the first law and computer science lab in the country (CodeX), at Stanford University, as well as the top “big data” company for IP litigation (Lex Machina; founding CEO & Chief Legal Architect). However, data wins neither cases nor negotiations. We focus on client collaborations employing engineering efficiencies, design thinking, and empirical data to enhance and advance traditional legal practice. Josh’s IP work has been featured in The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, The Economist, The Financial Times (listed, 2014 Top Ten Legal Innovator for North America), and numerous other publications. He co-taught “IP Analytics, Strategy, and Decision-Making” at Berkeley Law School, and an advanced IP media transactions seminar at Stanford Law School (“SIPX”). He received his J.D. from the University of Chicago Law School, and an A.B. in Conflict Studies (Special Concentrations) from Harvard College, m.c.l.