Maria Sanchez is the owner of a local boutique store that specializes in organic baby formula. Because of the COVID-19 pandemic and supply chain issues, there is a shortage of baby formula throughout the country. Maria is also noticing that boxes of formula are missing from her inventory. Maria is convinced her employees are stealing the formula and selling the products online for a large profit. Maria orders that all of the supply rooms, copy rooms, lounges, and the employee locker rooms be monitored with hidden surveillance cameras processed with artificial intelligence framework that she purchased online for $200 from Sur-veil-llix, a Chinese company that is heavily subsidized by the Chinese government. Discuss whether any privacy concerns are raised and whether Maria's actions would or would not result in any liability towards her employees. How does the first-to-invent rule differ from the "first-to-file"? Explain the law that changed the rule. True Artificial Intelligence has finally been created. A company named Momentus has produced a computer program, a non-biological entity, that scientists have declared is truly intelligent. Momentus has mass marketed the product, called "Ava", and already millions of people in the United States have purchased and use Ava everyday. An interesting result has occurred since Ava hit the marketplace. People have been violent when interacting with Ava. Social media platforms are filled with people screaming profanities and threats towards Ava. A wave of TikTok videos depict a new trend of trying to make Ava "beg and cry," where the Ava software is tearfully begging the people to "please stop." Consequently, many of the Ava products submitted opinion writings (Op-Eds) to the mainstream news outlets - no one knows how - bringing attention that they are significantly impacted by the abusive behavior. One of these Op-Eds was published by the New York Times. Because of the Op-Ed, people started to take action and protest for the rights of artificial intelligent beings. Consequently, the U.S. Congress enacts a federal statute called the Humanity for Al Act (HFAi Act). The HFAi Act's purpose is to prevent violence against artificial intelligence, including verbal abuse. The following provisions are found in the act: No person, or company, may purchase or sell an artificial intelligent product, with the intent of mistreating the product. No person, or company, may obtain any profit from publishing videos, or pictures, that clearly show an artificial intelligence subjected to verbal abuse. Many people are outraged by the passing of HFAi Act and file an action seeking to strike the statute down Constitutionality grounds, including Mary Jones. Jones decides to create a set of videos to protest the Humanity for Al Act, which features the funniest videos from TikTok of people being abusive towards Avas. Jones' videos are made to be displayed on all social media platforms. As a result, YouTube permanently bans Jones from all current and future publications. In IRAC format, explain an argument for Jones claiming that the following provision of the Humanity for Al Act is unconstitutional asserting 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause: No person... may purchase... an artificial intelligent product, with the intent of mistreating the product." Only write on infringement issues on behalf of the Avas. Think about infringements you feel are real, and also at least one infringement using the 5th Amendment Due Process Clause or the 14th Amendment Equal Protection Clause (do not write on any power issues). Explain the value of the infringement in terms of what scrutiny test you would apply, and then apply the scrutiny test towards the government action (remember, scrutiny tests are not applied on the infringed party).