Cyberlaw/Day 3: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
|||
(8 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== The Net Security Problem == | == The Net Security Problem == | ||
* Is it just about viruses, or does it raise a more fundamental problem? | * Is it just about viruses, or does it raise a more fundamental problem? | ||
* | |||
== Defamation overview == | |||
* Defamation = false statement + conveyed to 3rd party + harm to reputation of Ï | |||
* Remedies: | |||
** Damages | |||
** Injunctions (worrisome, given 1st Amendment implications) | |||
== On to intermediaries == | |||
* Hourglass architecture | |||
* Cloud | |||
* types of intermediaries: | |||
** publisher | |||
*** liability here = Pottery Barn rule. You take responsibility for what's offered to you by a third party. You (e.g., a newspaper) are on the hook for publishing a letter to the editor as if you had drafted it yourself. There's some wiggle room if you properly frame the defamatory material. But generally this creates a pretty strict editing regime. | |||
** bookseller/distributor | |||
*** liability here = much harder to apply. Unless you're in a situation where the distributor is ''clearly on notice'' that they're selling defamatory material, you're pretty safe. | |||
* What to ask of intermediaries? (See Officer Mason example, from ''Small Town Justice''.) | |||
** (1) Stand in the shoes of bad people. | |||
** (2) Help ''identify'' the bad people. |
Latest revision as of 16:13, 4 January 2008
The Net Security Problem
- Is it just about viruses, or does it raise a more fundamental problem?
Defamation overview
- Defamation = false statement + conveyed to 3rd party + harm to reputation of Ï
- Remedies:
- Damages
- Injunctions (worrisome, given 1st Amendment implications)
On to intermediaries
- Hourglass architecture
- Cloud
- types of intermediaries:
- publisher
- liability here = Pottery Barn rule. You take responsibility for what's offered to you by a third party. You (e.g., a newspaper) are on the hook for publishing a letter to the editor as if you had drafted it yourself. There's some wiggle room if you properly frame the defamatory material. But generally this creates a pretty strict editing regime.
- bookseller/distributor
- liability here = much harder to apply. Unless you're in a situation where the distributor is clearly on notice that they're selling defamatory material, you're pretty safe.
- publisher
- What to ask of intermediaries? (See Officer Mason example, from Small Town Justice.)
- (1) Stand in the shoes of bad people.
- (2) Help identify the bad people.