Welcome to the Globethics.net Library!

 

  • Intellectual Property Policy Online: A Young Person’s Guide

    Boyle, James (Duke University School of Law, 1996-01-01)
    This is an edited version of a presentation to the "Intellectual Property Online" panel at the Harvard Conference on the Internet and Society, May 28-31, 1996. The panel was a reminder of both the importance of intellectual property and the dangers of legal insularity. Of approximately 400 panel attendees, 90% were not lawyers. Accordingly, the remarks that follow are an attempt to lay out the basics of intellectual property policy in a straighforward and non-technical manner. In other words, this is what non-lawyers should know (and what a number of government lawyers seem to have forgotten) about intellectual property policy on the Internet. The legal analysis which underlies this discussion is set out in the Appendix.
  • Beyond the Schoolhouse Gates: The Unprecedented Expansion of School Surveillance Authority Under Cyberbullying Laws

    Suski, Emily F. (Reading Room, 2014-10-01)
    For several years, states have grappled with the problem of cyberbullying and its sometimes devastating effects. Because cyberbullying often occurs between students, most states have understandably looked to schools to help address the problem. To that end, schools in forty-six states have the authority to intervene when students engage in cyberbullying. This solution seems all to the good unless a close examination of the cyberbullying laws and their implications is made. This Article explores some of the problematic implications of the cyberbullying laws. More specifically, it focuses on how the cyberbullying laws allow schools unprecedented surveillance authority over students. This authority stands in notably stark contrast to the constraints on government authority in other contexts, including police authority to search cell phones. In June 2014, the Supreme Court recognized in Riley v. California that police searches of cell phones require a warrant because of the particular intrusions into privacy attendant to those searches. While some surveillance authority over students may be warranted, the majority of the cyberbullying laws implicitly give schools unlimited, or nearly unlimited, and unfettered surveillance authority over students' online and electronic activity whenever, wherever, and however it occurs: at home, in bedrooms, at the mall, on personal cell phones, on tablets, or on laptops This Article argues that the cyberbullying laws, though well meaning, vastly expand school authority through the broad, if implicit, allowance of surveillance authority over students and implicate privacy harms that are made more acute because the authority lies with schools over students. Although no doctrine yet exists on the limits of school surveillance authority, limits on school authority in other contexts do exist. First and Fourth Amendment doctrine in student-speech and search cases, as well as doctrine on government surveillance more generally, offers some guidance on where the boundaries of school authority lie. The surveillance authority in most cyberbullying laws goes beyond these bounds, indicating that cyberbullying laws expand school authority. To protect students from excessive school surveillance authority and attendant privacy harms, realistic limits need to be imposed on school surveillance authority under the cyberbullying laws both by way of a framework for determining the boundaries of school authority and a cause of action for students. This Article calls for both and draws on the nexus doctrine in First Amendment student-speech cases to develop such a framework.
  • Conditional citizenship? Electronic networks and the new conditionality in public policy

    Henman, Paul (Berkeley Electronic Press, 2011-08-01)
    Governments throughout the world are increasingly making use of new forms of ‘conditional’ public and social policies. While some policies have always been conditional, for example through means-testing, these new policies are notable for making a benefit or service in one policy domain conditional on a situation or behavior in another policy domain. In addition to political rationalities and realities, this article argues that any understanding of the rise of such policies must take account of electronic information networks. Such networks not only enable such policies to be implemented, they have also stimulated networked ways of thinking among policy makers. This argument is illustrated by reference to the electronic Australian Childhood Immunisation Register and the conditional Maternity Immunisation Allowance. The article concludes by examining how this combination of electronic technologies, political ideas and political realities is reconfiguring contemporary social citizenship, making it more conditional, segmented, individualized and unequal.
  • A Submission on the Copyright Amendment (Online Infringement) Bill 2018 (Cth) to the Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee

    Rimmer, Matthew (Senate Environment and Communications Legislation Committee, Australian Senate, 2018)
    This submission makes a number of recommendations. It reviews the operation of the Copyright Amendment (Online Infringement) Act 2015 (Cth). It examines the proposals to expand this regime even further, with the Copyright Amendment (Online Infringement) Bill 2018 (Cth). The submission considers the question of safe harbours for intermediaries. While safe harbours have been granted to telecommunication carriers, internet service providers, and educational institutions, Australia’s safe harbours regime does not extend to search engines or cloud computing services or social media. The submission examines the question of copyright exceptions – particularly looking at the proposals of the Australian Law Reform Commission, the Harper Review and the Productivity Commission for the introduction of a defence of fair use. The lack of modern copyright exceptions makes the site-blocking and search filtering power even more troublesome and problematic in Australia. The submission highlights the recommendations of the IT Pricing Inquiry and the Harper Competition Policy Review in respect of copyright law, consumer rights, and competition law. It also makes a number of recommendations in respect of the reform of political lobbying, political donations, and copyright law reform. The submission also calls for a new approach for Internet regulation by the Australian Parliament. The submission also highlights the need for a bill of rights in Australia – particularly in an age of the Internet, search engines, social media, and cloud computing. As Sir Tim Berners-Lee says, we need a Magna Carta to protect an open and accessible Internet — rather than a government web of censorship and surveillance.

عرض المزيد