E36 - Michael Clohisy Sports Attorney Privacy and Data Rights Sports Tech
Michael Clohisy
46:15
SUMMARY KEYWORDS
data, sports, athletes, law, noted, people, consent, privacy, NFL, technology, biometric data, area, rights, issues, folks, collective bargaining agreements, players, individual, debbie, collect
SPEAKERS
Michael Clohisy, Debbie Reynolds
Debbie Reynolds 00:00
Personal views and opinions expressed by our podcast guests are their own and are not legal advice or official statements by their organizations. Hello, my name is Debbie Reynolds, they call me "The Data Diva". This is "The Data Diva Talks" Privacy podcast where we discuss Data Privacy issues with industry leaders around the world with information that businesses need to know now. I have a special guest on the show today. His name is Michael Clohisy. He's a sports attorney who is involved in data rights and sports technology. Hello, Michael.
Michael Clohisy 00:42
Hello, Debbie. It's a pleasure to be here with you.
Debbie Reynolds 00:45
I'm excited to have you on the show. Because you have such an interesting niche in privacy as a sports attorney and looking at data rights and things like that. So you and I met on LinkedIn, we've had several chats, I think we had some phone calls before, you always send me really interesting articles about sports and, and Data Privacy. So tell me a little bit about kind of how you ended up kind of merging your sports-legal stuff with the technology and Data Privacy stuff?
Michael Clohisy 01:28
Sure, yeah. And again, thank you very much for having me as a guest. It's an honor and privilege. So I'm a sports attorney and have been practicing law for a little over two decades. And I was a former NFL player agent as a sort of footnote. So I've played college sports. So sports has been sort of part of the fabric of who I am. Personally, but also professionally. So it's a natural segue into some of the things I've done. I've worked in banking, but I've also practiced law, conventional law and business law, real estate, and corporate law for several years. But again, I was a former NFL player agent for 13, 14, 15 years, I've represented a number of NFL players. I worked with former general counsel at the New England Patriots. Jack Mueller, he and I were partners in the agent business at a boutique firm in Boston that was very famous, Bob Wolf Associates, also represented coaches, NFL coaches, college coaches, and some NFL executives and front office folks. So I've also worked for a global marketing tech management consulting firm publicist, Sapient, headquartered in Paris, one of the big three advertising firms, I learned a lot about tech while I was there. And I was there prior to joining a startup last year in the blockchain space. And I was advising that blockchain group for about a year and allowed me to sort of segue back into meeting a lot of folks in the tech space, but also in the sports space, and sort of dusted off some of my Rolodex and circle back to a lot of folks and started working and introducing myself and folks started connecting with me, as I started yet, again, on LinkedIn, I think how we met so sort of started a network on that and just sort of gained a real deep passion for the area of technology, but also Data Privacy and rights and athletes rights as a player agent. And I saw a lot from both sides of the fence, and just saw where I thought perhaps I could make a difference. And currently, I'm working with a Silicon Valley-based company, more so in the Cybersecurity space that wants to segue into more of the data rights and publicity rights space, with tech solutions. And I'm also involved with some colleagues over the UK who are involved in some pretty significant important data rights issues for athletes, as well. So so I'm certainly busy. So it's exciting, and I'm passionate about the area, and again, perhaps as a slight idealist I generally want to make a difference. So.
Debbie Reynolds 04:36
Yeah, I think sports is fascinating and the privacy area, because, as you mentioned, obviously there is kind of publicity rights, but then also, as sports athletes have to share more of their health information. And so that can be, a slippery slope as well, right in terms of what's private and what's not. And then to you're dealing with athletes of all different ages, so depending on where they are and how old they are certain rules may apply. You tell me a little bit about that in terms of just kind of the health angle.
Michael Clohisy 05:16
Yeah, sure. So I think, that sort of gets into the whole area of what I think you and I have discussed in the past and also shared some of the articles on some of the technology now that is collecting a lot of this data. So which involves a lot of sensitive medical data. So, just as a sort of laying the groundwork, and perhaps to educate some of your listeners, some of which may know of this. I mean, you have obviously the Federal law that the HIPAA law, which is the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act that was implemented and ratified in 1996. That's a Federal law that addresses the use of personal health information, that provides certain privacy protections for personal health information, including the prohibition of sharing info without consent. So that's sort of an interesting part of this construct if you will. Because as anyone that knows about HIPAA, hospitals, Physician Group Health Plans, and medical billing companies, meaning going to into your doctor's office, that, they can't share that information. Right. So it's sensitive medical information about you. So but there's, it's not a blanket immunity. So what's interesting is, is as relates to sports, you have employers, state and local law enforcement, and most state agencies and schools that are exceptions to HIPAA. So as part of that, you have a lot of the professional sports leagues now, many of the athletes signed contracts waiving their privacy rights regarding information about their health and performance. And part of that is involving some of the technology that we've talked about regarding wearable pack RFID trackers. And that collects some pretty sensitive information. And so, for example, the team doctors for a sports league, so let's say for the NFL, or the NHL, or the team doctors, are really essentially agents of the employer, and the data collected must be for health and purposes and not for performance. So that's, that's another caveat to that, as well. So it really gets into some really interesting sort of gray areas that have not really been resolved. And I think the 1996 HIPAA law is somewhat antiquated and needs to I think it certainly needs to be taken a look at a little bit more closely. And perhaps there needs to be some, some remedies to that, as well, as a side note. But I think the issue with that, I think, is it's really important to remember that collecting a lot of this data, the teams, schools, as I mentioned to you earlier as employers, law enforcement, but all state agencies, but also I think I noted schools, right? So colleges are able to collect this information. And so they're able to collect this information and where does it go this information, this data, and it is, it sort of sits there somewhere. And it's being used, and it's already monetized. And so hopefully that answers your question, but that, I think that's certainly a part of it. And biometric wearable devices collect a lot of that information. It's worth noting, too, I mean, Google spent $2.1 billion to buy Fitbit, that someone was thinking about last night, sort of entering into this call, I mean, that should underscore the larger point here. If Google is buying Fitbit for $2.1 billion, that should tell you about where the wind is blowing, where the wearable technology space is going. So just wanted to throw that in there.
Debbie Reynolds 09:15
Yeah, I agree with that. , so it's a different ball of wax. So all of this has to do with the kind of consent of the individual, like what the individual is willing to consent to, and then having tech companies moving to the health area of, because they own those companies or some of that stuff, especially, fit Fitbit. It. information collected by a Fitbit is not covered by HIPAA, because it's a consumer. , it's not health portability, or it's mine, a patient-provider or situation so that information is only covered by kind of consumer rights, not kind of the medical rights, but, I'm, you're a sports expert, I don't pretend to be a sports expert, but the thing that I've noticed a lot about sports is that when people are talking about athletes, they're talking very freely about the health of athletes, and that's part of how they get evaluated for, teams or, insurance or, pay and you've been an agent. So, sort of how this thing goes. So, I think, where is the line? I guess? So there are certain things that athletes have to disclose about their, physicality and mental health as part of, being, in sport, right, because I hear a lot of people when they're talking about athletes, they're talking a lot about, their injuries, their issues that they're having, and then, obviously, their therapies that they will probably want to keep private. But I wonder where is that line? So I feel like they give a lot of information about their health.
Michael Clohisy 11:13
Yeah, no, that's a great question, Debbie, I think therein lies the challenge, right. So that's what I've been struggling with, as I've been involved in this space. For the last two and a half years, really struggling reading a lot of law review articles, immersed in the space, former player agent, following the law, following common sense or following some of the medical issues, sort of the wearable tech space, the evolving tech space, really, that's moving in a direction that's really becoming sophisticated. I think, the issues here, if I may, if I can focus on the US, for example, I think a lot of what is controlled is by the unions with the respective sports. So you have the big four big five arguably with MLS with soccer as well. , the collective bargaining agreements, really control as, as, that their labor agreements between management and the players' unions, and the unions are there to protect the players' rights, health, wellness, of the players, their rights, their ability to monetize, who they are the publicity rights, licensing agreements, etc. So it's all a business construct, right. But it's also the unions are there to protect the players, where I think, where it's moving in the direction, where I'm sort of monitoring and following some of the collective bargaining agreements, that really the terms and conditions and the provisions within these collective bargaining agreements, really set the table for what's going on right now here in the US. So you've got the NFL, the NHL, the NBA, Major League Baseball, and MLS. And some of the provisions within the collective bargaining agreements, some of them moving in the direction where I think are beneficial to the players, some of which I think are a little dated. I think some of those CBAS are for renewal. I believe the thing it's the NHL or MLB, I think. I think the negotiations are still continuing. And I think the expiration date on the NHL is 2022 if I'm not mistaken, and MLB as well, I think the right around the corner. The NFL, for example, however, ratified their collective bargaining agreement last year in March of 2020. And I think that one is certainly worth noting. I think, what they've done is they've addressed the issue, which certainly makes sense because some of these collective bargaining agreements are negotiated over a period of time, I think the agreements themselves last a considerable amount of time. So things changed within that period of time. So the NFL in particular, is really interesting, because again, excuse me, they were able to ratify the collective bargaining agreement last year in March of 2020, as I noted, but it's a 10-year agreement, right? So a lot of stuff can happen within 10 years, a lot of stuff can happen within two years, the way technology is moving right now. So, one of the interesting things I noted as I was reading some of the NFL collective bargaining agreement, which I read in its entirety last year, all 480 pages, pretty boring stuff to most people. But what I noticed in there were the provisions including or as it relates to paid biometric data, and so, For the purposes of education and people listening who don't know, I think biometric data is, is sort of a subcategory of biometrics, which is an individual's physiological, biological and behavioral characteristics, including DNA that can be used in combination with other, or other identifying data to establish an individual identity. That's, that's really important to remember. So athlete, biometric data, again, is a subset of that. And it deals with the acceleration, body composition, speed, cardiac heart rate, the body fat, reaction time, temperature, blood, urine, things like that sleep, I mean, you've got whoop, which is a company here based in Boston, that they're famous, they do a really good job. Excuse me. And, I think I think part of that is, so they've included language within the provisions of these collective bargaining agreements. And with the NFL, as I noted, I think it's worth noting that I was reading it very carefully. And again, I sort of took a peek at it again last night. And I was looking at to get into the weeds in the minutiae. But Article 12, contained in the NFL collective bargaining agreement noted, Section 14, regarding sensors, so they use the word sensors, right, so you can argue it's wearable technology, sort of used words used interchangeably to describe some of the technology, right, so. But the sensors, they used to sort of language that's really interesting that I found and again, I know, folks at the NFL is an agent, I do a lot of management. I know folks at the league office, I think they do a terrific job, and they're in the business of making money. But what I find the words mean a lot, right? So these things are binding, and they're legally enforceable. They're regulations. And they're essentially bylaws, right? So some of the languages I looked at one, in particular, was regarding the sensors. And so I took note of this, and I wrote it down, NFL may use data concerning player's performance and movements collected from sensors during NFL games commercially, including, but not limited to, with broadcast partners. So if you think about that, and that's fine, that, two sides sort of arguing, little give and take, certainly over years of collective bargaining over a labor agreement. It's a lot of give and take. But if you think about the words of that sentence, it certainly opens up the areas of how including but not limited to, so the words commercially, etc. Broadcast partners. Well, broadcast partners right now are sort of wedded to the media, the data companies, the OTT digital platforms, the gambling operators. So, therefore, you sort of ask yourself, well, the data that's being collected on the players, is this being bundled aggregated, disseminated sold to the third party partners that have relationships with the league? So, I don't want to go too far off the rails here. But I think I think you get my point. It's a really strong one, in the sense that some of the leagues in the collective bargaining agreements really dictate what's going on here in the US.
Debbie Reynolds 18:30
Yeah. So what's happening right now in sports privacy that is concerning you.
Michael Clohisy 18:41
I think there are folks like you and others that we both know, in the Data Privacy space that isn't necessarily quite in the sports space that has taken note, folks that I know, that I chat with often who sort of provide me with insights into the GDPR. And some of the provisions within the GDPR. Some of the new provisions within this CCPA are the second iteration CPRA, BIPA, some of the more of the state laws here, obviously, you're following them as well. And as am I some of the bills that are being submitted at the Federal level as well. what frustrates me is that we know, we know that there are some challenges in Washington, right. So there's, there's not a whole lot of bipartisan legislation going on right now. So that's certainly stalling legislation at the Federal level. I think what we really need is a Federal privacy bill, similar to GDPR that would harmonize the Data Privacy laws for all citizens here in the US, similar to the GDPR. I've sometimes feel like we're sort of inching closer I've taken a look at all the various bills. I sort of look at the highlights contained in some of these bills. And it frustrates me because I sort of see them stalling within the legislative process. And that gives me sort of some concern as it relates to sports. I do think there are really strong advocates on that, a sort of representative of labor unions, and I think they're taking note of the significance of where wearable technology and data and data rights and data governance and data rights for athletes are, and I think, I think they're certainly pushing those, I'd like to see more of it, quite frankly, where advocates and attorneys sort of take a deeper look into the granular aspects and see the overlap with it within some of the privacy rights that we often talk about and read about and write about you. And I, I'd like to see those may be more concentrated and explored more deeply, because, because I think that's where it's a lot of this is heading as it relates to, for example, sports betting, which is a huge revenue producer for major sports here in the US. And with the advent of 5G technology, I think you're going to see a lot more betting the volume of betting. And as a result of that, consequently, the data that you're gonna see an exponential amount of volume of data, as a result of in-play prop betting, they call it. So you'll be able to sort of bet with the 5G technology, which is 100 times faster, approximately, than the current 4G technology, you know that configuring a lot of the stadiums now. So sports betting is a big part of this construct for the business, folks. And I think that's part of going back to what I was talking about what the NFL, and the sensors and some of the regulations within the provisions that are interestingly, tucked away in the back of the collective bargaining agreement. So the devils in the details, Debbie?
Debbie Reynolds 22:12
Yeah, you touched on a lot of great points. I guess the thing that concerns me about legislation, and, I've seen, as you see, in our seeing a lot of people put up bills, and I'm getting stalled and stuff like that. And so, for me, of course, having I like to look to see kind of what's happening, but I kind of want people to bake the cake first. Before I kind of go into it. So I want to see the bill passed in this final version to go over it. But I think, what, one thing that concerns me greatly about the way that legislation gets passed, here in the US, and probably other places, too, is that unfortunately, some a lot of these laws are very reactionary. So it's like this harm occurred, and we don't think we should have occurred. So let's create this law. And then, um, the reason why I'm really concerned about this is when you're doing things with people's biometrics, and , their information in that way, the harm can be almost immediate and catastrophic, right. So you may not be able to wait for a court process to get redress for those types of things.
Michael Clohisy 23:32
Correct? Yeah, no, that's a really great point, because you and I are probably following some of the legal cases that are going on right now that also sort of have a great deal of significance. And are very relevant to a lot of topics that we're discussing right now, even though some of them are not really sports-related. I do know, for example, with with the, in the UK, there's a sports case, Project redcard, where 750 plus footballers right now are in the process of legal action, for their data rights, as a result of a lot of what we talked about with performance data, and then it deals with the issues of keeping it simple with consent and the issues of GDPR. I also think Lloyd versus Google is a really important one that I'm sure you're following as well as many others. That's a huge case that was before the appeals court in the UK and as people probably on this call notes, on behalf of, I think there's probably 4 million maybe, exactly, that are affected individuals in England and Wales. And I remember there was an interesting quote, and I'm trying to remember it, but it's sort of talked about the wholesale and deliberate misuse of personal data. without consent, I think that was paraphrasing, hopefully maybe trying to quote, sir undertaking with with with the objective of commercialization if that is correct, but I think I think the if I'm close to being accurate, I think, but that I think that really is significant because that sort of segues into the loss of control and the issues of what we're talking about. And as you noted earlier, in a very powerful way, there's a sort of reactionary type of framework that exists right now. And that's part of what I'm trying to do with some of the initiatives. And I'm involved with that appeal to be at this stage of my life with a background in sports and business and law. And I see this reactionary model, as I'm not saying it's futile, but I think it's, it's fraught with challenges. So I think I think it's more of, to quote my good friend, Richard Dutton in the UK front foot, as I as he often says, and I quote him. And I think that's really a profound statement because I think that sort of illustrates where I think we should be thinking as professionals in this space as being more proactive, rather than reactive. So I really respect that people that are involved in implementing technology, also tapping into legislators, to shape legislation, that would be more proactive, rather than reactive. And also looking at perhaps some other solutions. That is some people are pretty creative, and sort of looking at different things where you can protect the data rights of individuals that are more proactive rather than reactive. So again, Richard Dutton's front foot. And I think that data trust is one of them. That's an interesting one that I just discovered a couple of months ago on an article and I'm in chats with some folks over in the UK about that initiative. It's called the data trust initiative in the UK with some super folks at Cambridge University that are looking into that. So it's a little above my paygrade right now, and it's in its infancy stages. But, but those are some interesting thoughts, as as to your point, in terms of trying to be proactive versus reactive.
Debbie Reynolds 27:36
Yeah, you sent me a fascinating article a couple of weeks ago. The title is "Biometric Data is the newest statistical frontier for sportsbooks and betters". Can you tell me a little bit about this? This is very eye-opening to me because I didn't, obviously, people who do sports betting, we try to use as, as much information as they can get right. But I didn't realize that they would delve deep into biometric data.
Michael Clohisy 28:11
Yeah, I think biometric data is, is a fascinating subset. And I think, let's, let's sort of break it down to its simplest, baseline athletes produce the product, they're the grease that moves the wheel, right. So the athlete data, the way they move, the way they kick the ball, or whether you feel gold, some of this athlete data is very valuable to the broadcasters, and the gambling operators, especially as 5g takes place and play betting takes place. So for example, think of it as a hypothetical. So we have a golf tournament, this weekend in Ohio, the colonial so if you have, say, Jordan Speith. So soon, I think within the next year or so you're seeing moving in that direction, you're gonna see apps, and you're also gonna see what the 5G technology sort of taking place geographically and being more ubiquitous, around the country and also, geographically throughout the world, really, I think you're gonna see more of some of this in-play betting. So for example, Jordan Speith could be sitting over a putt, eight feet two inches, and they'll be the algorithms with the 5g moving at speeds that are very similar to the way you see in milliseconds. trading in the financial markets, you're gonna see that at such speeds, that the algorithms are going to be pumped out to your phone within an app. They're going to be taking those that data, and they're going to be using it to create the algorithms that then create the betting odds, where you're going to be able to bet on a percentage Whether it's JORDAN SPEITH is going to make that putt as a sort of micro bet, in a microcosm within the larger construct of the entire tournament. So you're going to see the volume of betting increase, you're going to see, that's only going to increase the commercial value. I think of broadcasters, it's going to increase fan engagement. There is a downside to it, I might add, so, you have a problem gambling. So, that's an issue that has to be addressed. I think some of the data providers that also work in the integrity services as well, genius sports and sports radar, do a really good job in terms of the integrity services. But again, it's the volume of data, it's really hard to find a needle in a haystack. But again, the technology is pretty sophisticated to try and catch some of that stuff. So it's really, it's really something I also sort of encouraged people. I know, most people don't want to really read law review articles. But if you want to read an interesting one that I just read about two weeks ago, and it came out, I think it was maybe Florida State Law Review, I'm not sure. If I said that incorrectly, I apologize to the School of Law Review. But it was John Holden, who's a professor at Oklahoma, and also Kimberly Hauser, they wrote a law review article, taboo transactions, selling athlete biometric data, which really sort of gets into the areas of how data is being sold, and how athlete biometric data is valuable, commercialized commodity. And I think that would educate some of your viewers if so wanted to go through 63 pages or so of some of that, but I'm sort of giving you the Cliff's notes version, it really gets into the areas of, of how data is really used in the gambling markets. And trust me, it's extremely valuable, and the traffic and the commercialization and the and the price points of the partners that are involved. It's very big business, it just needs to be carefully regulated, and it just needs to be monitored. So it doesn't get out of control. And the athletes are also not removed from getting their slice of the pie if you will,
Debbie Reynolds 32:30
Right, because that brings in algorithms and transparency and what they're doing with the data and how it's being transferred, especially to the third party. So this is a worldwide issue that we're seeing pop up a case of So, I know, you've seen some of the cookie cases in the EU and stuff like that, but all that really is about third-party data sharing without the consent of the individual. So, fortunately, for the EU, they have no laws for that we have some state laws in the US regarding that, um, and I'm hoping would see more, but kind of the third party, data sharing without consent, to me is like a huge issue in the future, something is going on now, that will impact that. So I feel like the regulations are going in the opposite direction. So countries and states and cities that are passing these privacy regulations on following them address, kind of this third party transfer, whether it be opt-in or opt-out, how you get consent, you're saying, big companies like Google and Apple, sort of shift their risk on third-party data sharing where they're saying, the third party, if you want more granular data about the individual, you have to, get consent for that person, so it's sort of like a separation between, the first-party data collector, so like, he's like, you have a customer relationship with an organization. So so you have more they have more agency, right? what they can do with the data because you've sort of consented to whatever their product or services and then you have kind of these, what I call tagalongs, where they want to benefit from that relationship. So basically, the trend is that these companies don't want to have the risk. They don't want to assume the risk of a third party when they can have a third party develop their own relationship and then the flip side of that is that a lot of these third parties are invisible for a reason. Right?
Michael Clohisy 35:08
Correct.
Debbie Reynolds 35:09
They don't want to be seen, they don't want to be known. So I think, to me, that means that if these companies can't create a first-party relationship with someone, they're gonna monetize, they're gonna try to entice people with money or incentives of some sort to share data. What are your thoughts?
Michael Clohisy 35:34
I think you're spot on Debbie. I think these third-party organizations, like for example, television broadcasting companies, sports betting operators, fantasy sports companies, that they're really chomping at the bit to include data from wearables and their business offerings. But I think there's there's a movement, I think, in the area, however, of folks like you, and others who are sort of giving voice to folks that really go about their lives and really don't follow this stuff very closely. So I'll sort of pivot in a way that's it's relevant. But I think what's important to remember is, as you noted, the consent issue, that's really critical. Right. So the Lloyd versus Google, I think, I think the real underlying issues of that are loss of control. Right? So, I also think, too, with the the the sports, legal action in the UK, with the football or as part of the great part, I think you've got similar issues of control, right, loss of control, and also consent, but also informed consent, which is, which is often people use the word and throw it around consent, but they don't add that that sort of informed consent part of the equation as well. So it's, it's really the way a lot of these agreements are tailored and drafted, which provided a lot of air cover for various enterprises, given the wording that they use, and some sophisticated lowering, if you will. So I expect future litigation is teams, leagues, third party vendors, and I think some of the issues will be scope, a waiver, undue influence capacity can contract, and also, most importantly, the informed consent part of that equation. So, I think that's just important to sort of flush out, some of these cases, I'm not saying I'm an advocate one way or the other. But I think sometimes litigation just sort of forces the issues. I think you've got the issue here with named members likeness before the Supreme Court were the NCAA versus Austin case, I think these sort of allow precedents to establish future precedent as to how people are going to handle these types of issues. So as college athletes, which is maybe a segue into the area of what I talked about earlier, in terms of younger folks, consent of minors, right, so if you're under a certain age and certain I know when the GDPR I believe that there's language as a result, as a consequence of miners giving their consent. I think you have issues also with the footballers within various contracts, and also some of the wearable language as well. , I think that gets overlooked, I think some of the players that play over there, some of which are under the age of 18. So, and then you've got to really look at the protection of not only athletes, but amateur athletes, consumers, college athletes, right, and you need protection for them, the pros have their unions, their players, unions that protect their interests, college athletes, who do they have, who are they going to turn to they're going to turn to their schools, the people internally, they may not have the sort of level that is at the time really, or I mean, they're handling a myriad of issues. They're spending lots of plates. And so the players often get left answering questions and sitting there dumbfounded asking, What do I do? My niece played the division one soccer University of Florida, and if some of our teammates were wearing wearable technology, and that technology is being used to collect data, and then it's aggregated, and then where's it going? Where is it being stored? Well, what about the Cybersecurity issues, the protection of that data? , those are really critical issues that need to be addressed as well. And as, and I've listened to your podcast, that's an issue. I think you're passionate about that. I mean, data breaches are ubiquitous now. So it's, yeah, it's a challenge. It's a real issue. And some of this data with these athletes is pretty sensitive, right? So you enter into a Super Bowl or World Cup or just the game in general, a major league baseball game, and you breach into a person's personal website or their emails, and it's a hack. He gets some pretty interesting stuff that's private in nature. And, they can certainly use that to leverage, and fairness actors can take advantage of that.
Debbie Reynolds 40:35
Yeah, this is a huge area, I'm happy to have you back, we could talk a little bit more about some of the other cases and see how they turn out down the road. But if it was the world, according to you, Michael, and we would do everything you say, what will be your wish for privacy, either in the US around the world, anything, do sports, technology, anything?
Michael Clohisy 41:03
Well, I think it goes back, maybe this gets into the weeds a little bit, but I sort of follow the history of, of the privacy, the oranges, origins of protecting human dignity and privacy. So in a perfect world, you go back to the German writer, personality, and we spoke before we hopped on a call. And I think that could sort of getting into the weeds for some folks and lose people. But I think it's really important to remember the genesis of some of the scholars and courts that influence some of the personality rights, but also human dignity. And the terror retirement often says to me, and as many others and I believe it, privacy is a fundamental human right, which was, I believe, ratified in 1948, and the UN, with the UN council during that, that gathering. So I think that's really important. The right to be left alone under the Warren and Brandeis, the right to privacy, the seminal Harvard Law Review article in 1898. I think it was with Louis Brandeis and Samuel Warren, as everyone knows, Brandeis went on to serve on the Supreme Court. , I also think Proshow was very influential with his torts. And he was former dean of the School of Law at the University of California, Berkeley, and he certainly was a leader and sort of authority on torts here in the US. , there's, there's so much there, but I think I'll sort of maybe summarize it in a way that I think Shoshana Zuboff reading her book and listening to her the age of surveillance capitalism. I think she heard sort of nails in a more modern context where surveillance capitalism is sort of the new laws and can the accumulation I think she noted, and, I think in some ways, it's, we've got our challenges right now, it's daunting, there's a lot of money in printing right now, and big tech and big data. But I think, as people sort of, like you, and others, and I like to play a small role in that, sort of challenge some of the status quo and try and move the needle back to privacy and data rights. I think that that's, that's sort of my objective, that's where I want to go, perhaps in a perfect world, not sure if there is one but as close to it as possible. And, and I'm trying to do everything in my power to sort of move the needle back in the direction and empowering the consumers, but also, as a subcontext, the athletes.
Debbie Reynolds 43:58
Very good, Michael, this is great, this is great. I was really excited to have you on the show because I love what you're doing in sports and trying to, pull it together. A lot of people probably aren't watching this area as close as you're watching it. But, is very important. I think, as you say, because there's so much, money involved in this, it'll probably be something that will kind of escalate the route pretty fast, right? , more so than, than kind of data rights and wearable things with ordinary consumers because we know that, they're tracking, then the health and well being of athletes for, not just for health purposes. So I think this is really interesting.
Michael Clohisy 44:49
Well, it's been my pleasure. It's been super exciting, and I'm happy to share whatever I can to help contribute to the discourse and help sort of empowering people to understand a little bit more about this area, and certainly on the athlete and sports side as a sort of niche practice. I'm sort of excited and passionate about the area. So whatever I can do to help, certainly sort of incentivizing to do so.
Debbie Reynolds 45:20
Yeah. Well, thank you so much. I'm happy to have you on the show. This is a great episode, I think people will really enjoy it. And, we'll still keep in clips on LinkedIn, and you always send me interesting articles. So keep that up. I like those.
Michael Clohisy 45:38
Absolutely Debbie. We'll certainly stay in touch and reach out anytime. And it's my pleasure. And thanks again. It's been an honor being on your show, and I look forward to hopping on again at some point in the future.
Debbie Reynolds 45:51
All right, Michael. We'll talk soon. Bye. Bye.
Michael Clohisy 45:54
Thanks. Thanks so much, Debbie. Have a great day. Thank you.
