Vivek Krishnamurthy

Lecturer on Law

Fall 2018

Biography

Vivek Krishnamurthy is Counsel in the Boston office of Foley Hoag LLP and an Affiliate of the Berkman Klein Center for Internet & Society at Harvard University.

Vivek’s law practice focuses on the complex regulatory and human rights-related challenges facing businesses that operate across borders, both in cyberspace and in real space. He specializes in advising organizations that are developing or deploying innovative technologies on the conflicting legal obligations they often face, and on the fast-changing expectations of users, regulators, and other stakeholders regarding privacy, cybersecurity, and respect for the full spectrum of civil and political rights.

Vivek has advised governments, corporations, and non-profit organizations on topics ranging from algorithmic accountability to encryption policy and intermediary liability. He is sought after as a commentator on emerging technology and public policy issues by outlets including the New York Times, National Public Radio, Wired, and Vice.

Vivek was previously the Assistant Director of Harvard Law School’s Cyberlaw Clinic and a member of the Global Network Initiative’s Board of Directors. He is a Rhodes Scholar and clerked for the Hon. Morris J. Fish of the Supreme Court of Canada upon his graduation from Yale Law School.

Areas of Interest

Christopher Bavitz, Sam Bookman, Jonathan Eubank, Kira Hessekiel & Vivek Krishnamurthy, Assessing the Assessments: Lessons from Early State Experiences In the Procurement and Implementation of Risk Assessment Tools (Berkman Klein Ctr Research Publ’n No. 2018-8, Dec. 14, 2018).
Categories:
Technology & Law
,
Criminal Law & Procedure
Sub-Categories:
Criminal Justice & Law Enforcement
,
Cyberlaw
Type: Other
Abstract
This piece endeavors to provide context for state and local officials considering tasks around development, procurement, implementation, and use of risk assessment tools. It begins with brief case studies of four states that adopted (or attempted to adopt) such tools early on and describes their experiences. It then draws lessons from these case studies and suggests some questions that procurement officials should ask of themselves, their colleagues who call for the acquisition and implementation of tools, and the developers who create them. This paper concludes by examining existing frameworks for technological and algorithmic fairness. The authors offer a framework of four questions that government procurers should be asking at the point of adopting RA tools. That framework draws from the experiences of the states we study and offers a way to think about accuracy (i.e., the RA tool’s ability to accurately predict recidivism), fairness (i.e., the extent to which an RA tool treats all defendants fairly, without exhibiting racial bias or discrimination), interpretability (the extent to which an RA tool can be interpreted by criminal justice officials and stakeholders, including judges, lawyers, and defendants), and operability (the extent to which an RA tool can be administered by officers within police, pretrial services, and corrections).
Filippo A. Raso, Hannah Hilligoss, Vivek Krishnamurthy, Christopher Bavitz & Levin Kim, Artificial Intelligence & Human Rights: Opportunities & Risks (Berkman Klein Ctr. Research Publ’n No. 2018-6, Sept. 25, 2018).
Categories:
Technology & Law
,
International, Foreign & Comparative Law
Sub-Categories:
Human Rights Law
,
Networked Society
,
Information Privacy & Security
,
Cyberlaw
Type: Other
Abstract
Artificial intelligence (“AI”) is changing the world before our eyes. The promise of AI to improve our lives is enormous. AI-based systems are already outperforming medical specialists in diagnosing certain diseases, while the use of AI in the financial system is expanding access to credit to borrowers that were once passed by. Yet AI also has downsides that dampen its considerable promise. AI-based systems impact the right to privacy since they depend on the collection and use of vast quantities of data to make predictions which, in numerous cases, have served to perpetuate existing social patterns of bias and discrimination. These disturbing possibilities have given rise to a movement seeking to embed ethical considerations into the development and deployment of AI. This project, on the other hand, demonstrates the considerable value in using human rights law to evaluate and address the complex impacts of AI on society. Human rights law provides an agreed set of norms and a shared language and institutional infrastructure for helping to ensure that the promises of AI are met and its greatest perils are avoided. Our project seeks to advance the emerging conversation on AI and human rights by evaluating the human rights impacts of six current uses of AI. Our framework recognizes that AI systems are not being deployed against a blank slate, but rather against the backdrop of social conditions that have complex pre-existing human rights impacts of their own. By digging deep into current AI implementations, we see how they impact the full range of human rights guaranteed by international law, privacy chief among them. We also gain insight into the unequal distribution of the positive and negative impacts of AI on human rights throughout society, and begin to explore the power of the human rights framework to address these disparate impacts.

Bar Admissions

Education History

Current Courses

Course Catalog View