Abstract
Looking only at the specific problem of the attorney-client privilege, to say that university data privacy policies that fail to explicitly protect professional confidences are a ticking time bomb (as suggested by the title of this Article) may be hyperbolic. Unlike the “Surveillance Society” that has taken hold in the American corporate workplace, most American universities remain committed to the principle of academic freedom and encourage largely uninhibited exploration of ideas. The educational culture itself may foster a greater expectation of privacy in use of information technology—notwithstanding contradictory language in a formal university data privacy policy. If an outside challenge ever were to arise to the privacy of e-mail or documents generated on university-owned equipment or networks in a legal practice in a law school setting, the different mission and environment of the typical university, as well as the expectations of clients, should bolster a defensive claim of attorney-client privilege.
Recommended Citation
Sisk, Gregory C. and Halbur, Nicholas
(2010)
"A Ticking Time Bomb? University Data
Privacy Policies and Attorney-Client
Confidentiality in Law School Settings,"
Utah Law Review: Vol. 2010:
No.
4, Article 10.
Available at:
https://dc.law.utah.edu/ulr/vol2010/iss4/10