RSS 1.0Welcome to the Globethics.net Library!
Komunitas disini
Pilih komunitas untuk melihat koleksinya.
Recently Added
-
Problemy i wyzwania związane z zastosowaniem unijnych narzędzi prawa konkurencji do rynku wyszukiwarek internetowychPlatformy internetowe takie jak wyszukiwarki internetowe stanowią nowe wyzwanie dla egzekwowania prawa konkurencji z co najmniej kilku powodów. Ze względu na swoją dwustronną naturę oraz dominujący charakter innowacji jako kryterium konkurencji - tradycyjna analiza antymonopolowa może w niewystarczający sposób odzwierciedlić funkcjonowanie konkurencji na rynku wyszukiwarek internetowych. Chociaż platformy te posiadają specyficzne cechy, które muszą być brane pod uwagę w analizie prawa konkurencji, to jednak narzędzia używane do wyznaczania rynku właściwego oraz oceny pozycji dominującej są wystarczająco elastyczne, aby odpowiednio stosować je do tego rodzaju usług. W tym kontekście zasadne jest postawienie pytania, czy Komisja będzie skłonna dostosować istniejące narzędzia prawa konkurencji do dynamicznego charakteru rynku, na którym funkcjonują wyszukiwarki internetowe.
-
Speech EnginesAcademic and regulatory debates about Google are dominated by two opposing theories of what search engines are and how law should treat them. Some describe search engines as passive, neutral conduits for websites’ speech; others describe them as active, opinionated editors: speakers in their own right. The conduit and editor theories give dramatically different policy prescriptions in areas ranging from antitrust to copyright. But they both systematically discount search users’ agency, regarding users merely as passive audiences. A better theory is that search engines are not primarily conduits or editors, but advisors. They help users achieve their diverse and individualized information goals by sorting through the unimaginable scale and chaos of the Internet. Search users are active listeners, affirmatively seeking out the speech they wish to receive. Search engine law can help them by ensuring two things: access to high-quality search engines, and loyalty from those search engines. The advisor theory yields fresh insights into long-running disputes about Google. It suggests, for example, a new approach to deciding when Google should be liable for giving a website the “wrong” ranking. Users’ goals are too subjective for there to be an absolute standard of correct and incorrect rankings; different search engines necessarily assess relevance differently. But users are also entitled to complain when a search engine deliberately misleads them about its own relevance assessments. The result is a sensible, workable compromise between the conduit and editor theories.
-
Tollbooths and Newsstands on the Information SuperhighwayCountering the perception that speech limitations affecting distribution necessarily reduce access to information, this Essay proffers that copyright expansions actually can increase access and thereby serve important copyright and First Amendment values. In doing so, this discussion contributes to the growing literature and two recent Supreme Court opinions discussing whether copyright law and First Amendment interests can coexist.
-
Twelve Simple Security TricksI’m generally not very surprised about how long I’ve been working in information security. I can’t help but notice that times do indeed change, even if it’s just ten years. In 2005, I published an article on ARP Spoofing in Swiss IT-magazine itbusiness [1] which still came out in print back then. I admit, the subject of ARP Spoofing wasn’t cutting edge back then, but today it’s definitely old news. If anything, the topic comes up out of nostalgia and not because people are actually worried about the effects of local man-in-the-middle attacks. Back then, information security was a topic that was interesting pretty much exclusively to companies. Today, in the age where smartphones are always online and the age of the Internet of Things dawns, it’s a topic that everybody must think about.