Running head: ASSIGNMENT 1

Assignment
Author
Institutional affiliation
ASSIGNMENT 2

Assignment
Question 1
a. Intellectual Property (IP)
Intellectual property (IP) is a legal term used to refer to innovations of the mind, such as
literary works, symbols, designs, and names images among others, used in commerce. IP can be
perceived as a type of property or asset just like any physical asset even though it is intangible.
In recent times, the value of IP assets have increased relative t physical assets due the importance
that creative works and technology hold in the contemporary society. Any violation of IP is
considered counterfeiting or piracy. In recent times, the case of IP violations have been on the
rise and it is hurting the U.S. economy.
The main way through which it is hurting the US economy is through tax loses.
Consumer purchase counterfeit goods, which are much cheaper. Consequently, legitimate
companies are pitted against competitors who neither pay taxes nor comply with the required
safety standards. Additionally counterfeiting adversely affect the foreign direct investment (FDI)
of the enation as well as its ability to attract and develop important innovation hub. Money
obtained from counterfeiting and piracy could be used to fund crimes forcing the US government
to allocate more funds to fight crimes. Such finds could have been channeled on a development
project.
b. Safety and health concerns
As stated earlier, money that s obtained from counterfeiting and piracy could be used to
fund crime and terrorist activities thus posing a security risk. Having more money strengthens
the activity of criminals and this makes it more challenging to fight such criminals and DeTroy
their activities. Consequently, such activates could result in loss of lives, increased cost of
security and emotional impact.
Counterfeit gods could result in health risks. Since counterfeit goods are not subjected to
the normal regulatory standards and the bureaucracy that surrounds legitimate gods, their
consumption could be harmful to health. In most cases, health effect is seen in situation where
edible products are counterfeited. When it comes to counterfeit pharmaceuticals, the problem is
serious since most drugs are going to have incorrect dosage of active ingredient. In some cases,
they might lack active ingredient.
c. IP theft
One way through which it can pose a security threat is in situations counterfeit products are
sold to the government of the United States. In such as case if they fail to function as intended,
they could mess up the government. Moreover, when one is using a pirated software especially
in government computer, it could be used to introduce malware in the system. Therefore, hackers
could access such as system and obtain classified information.
Question 3
ASSIGNMENT 3

A smart border is a set of measures that include an Entry/Exit System (EES) as well as
improvements to the Schengen Borders Code together with border management systems. It is
intended to improve the management of Schengen member states’ borders. The EES is expected
to replace manual stamping of passports. It is going to be implemented to both those who require
a visa and well as those who are visa-exempt. Both the groups will be admitted to stay in the
Schengen area for a maximum of 90 days.
All the third-country nationals traveling to the EU as well as Iceland and Norway with
the exception of the UK will have to be fingerprinted and photographed at the border. The new
data system is going to register details that include name, fingerprints, travel documents, facial
image, enter and exit information as well as refused entry register the can presently be found at
Schengen Information System (SIS).
Practically, the new system nm is supposed to allow travelers crossing the external border
in the Schengen region to do so themselves by using the ePassport gate which is an automated
self-service barrier that is done at the border checkpoints. Norway is not a member state of the
EU but it is considered a member of the Schengen Area that is made up of 26 European states.
Those states have officially abolished their passports as well as other forms of border control in
their shred borders.

The technology has been criticized for lack of respect for human rights. Moreover, its
implementation is expected to be very costly. It is estimated that the cost is going to be 480
million euros. The amount quoted has been criticized by many civil liberty groups. They warn of
a surveilled society due to several measures that will be brought about by the smart border
package. They argue that the biometric data is being tested on asylum seekers and immigrants
since they are taking advantage of their vulnerability to gather the information.

The idea of a smart border was introduced in 2013 but it was rejected. However, in 2017,
the European parliament voted to adopt it. They agreed that is should contain EES as well as
amendment that would integrate it into the Schengen Borders Code. The data collected is going
to be retained for three years. However, for those who overstay, the data will be retained for five
years. The EES is going to be linked to the Visa Information System (VIS) database. Therefore,
it will allow law enforcers to access the database in order to carry out criminal identification.
Further, it will be used to gather intelligence that could be used to prevent serious crimes as well
as terrorism.
Even though the current smart border package gathered a wide consensus in the EU
parliament, humans’ right watch groups have expressed some concern. For instance, he
ASSIGNMENT 4

European Data Protection Supervisor (EDPS) issues a warning in 2013 against possible
violations concerning the EU charter of basic rights especially in articles 7 and 8, which touches
on the respect for private as well as family life. T also touches on the protection of personal data
and goes further to offer recommendations on improvements when it comes to data gathering.
Additionally, EDPS recommends an increase in the protection of private data that has
been collected especially when it comes to the retention periods and the biometric and facial
data. According to 1a, concerns have also been raised regarding the effect of the technology on
immigrant’s life in an irregular circumstance as well as the rights risk of illegal access or
utilization of personal data.
ASSIGNMENT 5

References
Sontowski, S. (2018). Speed, timing and duration: contested temporalities, techno-political
controversies and the emergence of the EU’s smart border. Journal of Ethnic and
Migration Studies, 44(16), 2730-2746.
EDRi. (2018, July 25). Smart Borders: the challenges remain a year after its adoption. Retrieved
from https://edri.org/smart-borders-the-challenges-remain-a-year-after-its-adoption/
Lemley, P. S. & Menell. M. A. (2019). Intellectual Property in the New Technological Age:
2019 (Doctoral dissertation, University of California at Berkeley).