Law's Role in Regulating Online Conduct and Speech: Difference between revisions

From Technologies of Politics and Control
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
 
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
{| border="0" cellspacing="4" cellpadding="4" style="background:#eeeeff; text-align: left;"
{| border="0" cellspacing="4" cellpadding="4" style="background:#eeeeff; text-align: left;"
|  
|  
* [[Politics and Technology of Control: Introduction|Jan 25]]
* [[Politics and Technology of Control: Introduction|Jan 24]]
* [[Paradigms for Studying the Internet|Feb 1]]
* [[Paradigms for Studying the Internet|Jan 31]]
* [[New Economic Models|Feb 8]]
* [[New Economic Models|Feb 7]]
* [[Peer Production and Collaboration|Feb 15]]
* [[Peer Production and Collaboration|Feb 14]]
* [[Collective Action and Decision-making|Feb 22]]
* [[Collective Action and Decision-making|Feb 21]]
* [[New and Old Media, Participation, and Information|Mar 1]]
* [[New and Old Media, Participation, and Information|Feb 28]]
* [[Law's Role in Regulating Online Conduct and Speech|Mar 8]]
* [[Law's Role in Regulating Online Conduct and Speech|Mar 6]]
* Mar 15 - ''No class''
* Mar 13 - ''No class''
|  
|  
* [[Regulating Speech Online|Mar 22]]
* [[Regulating Speech Online|Mar 20]]
* [[Internet Infrastructure and Regulation|Mar 29]]
* [[Internet Infrastructure and Regulation|Mar 27]]
* [[Copyright in Cyberspace|Apr 5]]
* [[Copyright in Cyberspace|Apr 3]]
* [[Control and Code: Privacy Online|Apr 12]]  
* [[Control and Code: Privacy Online|Apr 10]]  
* [[Internet and Democracy|Apr 19]]
* [[Internet and Democracy|Apr 17]]
* [[Internet and Democracy: The Sequel|Apr 26]]
* [[Internet and Democracy: The Sequel|Apr 24]]
* [[Cybersecurity and Cyberwarfare|May 3]]
* [[Cybersecurity and Cyberwarfare|May 1]]
* [[Final Project|May 10]] - ''No class''
* [[Final Project|May 8]] - ''No class''
|}
|}
<br clear="right" />
<br clear="right" />
</div>
</div>
'''March 8'''
'''March 6'''


What is law's role in regulating online conduct and speech?  At this point in the course you should be ready to tackle this question from a number of different perspectives. In this class we will begin to explore what role law is ''capable'' of playing as well as what role it ''should'' play.  Remember John Perry Barlow's [http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~zs/decl.html Declaration of Independence of Cyberspace] which you read earlier in the course?  Has his view of law's limited role been borne out?  The sources of law impacting online conduct and speech are many, from intellectual property to tort to the First Amendment.  Throughout today's class, we’ll tie the legal doctrines together with three themes:
What is law's role in regulating online conduct and speech?  At this point in the course you should be ready to tackle this question from a number of different perspectives. In this class we will begin to explore what role law is ''capable'' of playing as well as what role it ''should'' play.  Remember John Perry Barlow's [http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~zs/decl.html Declaration of Independence of Cyberspace] which you read earlier in the course?  Has his view of law's limited role been borne out?  The sources of law impacting online conduct and speech are many, from intellectual property to tort to the First Amendment.  Throughout today's class, we’ll tie the legal doctrines together with three themes:
Line 31: Line 31:
* The new kinds of power possessed by online intermediaries.
* The new kinds of power possessed by online intermediaries.


[http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/is2011/sites/is2011/images/IS2011slides_2011-03-08.pdf Slides: Law's Role in Regulating Online Conduct and Speech]
 




Line 57: Line 57:


== Class Discussion ==
== Class Discussion ==
I have received another derogatory grade for my second assignment and need a feedback of my classmates on that. For those who read my prospectus, what grade do you think it deserves? For those who did not read it, I encourage you to take a look at my prospectus and make your comment below on this page or e-mail it me privately to ''vladimirkruglyak@mail.ru'' stating whether the project of this magnitude worth 3, 4, or 5 points on the 5 points scale (note that the prospectus is submitted on time). If your grade is below 5, please explain in what instances other projects supersede mine. When you read "sources sharing common domains" do you raise any questions, what are they? To be objective, consider the motive behind the grade of (3) for this type of prospectus submitted at this type of the course. Note that I do realize that this project, in order to be completed, requires a series of surveys that must be funded. Without surveys I have to rely on someone else's data or on "pickpocketing" which is unethical and therefore is not my goal. Nevertheless, I believe that the project could have produced several revealing results without significant changes. I think, along with dozens of my colleagues who are majoring in various disciplines, that if the prospectus such as I did deserves the grade of 3, no other project should gain more than that because there is no alternative prospectus has been submitted in this course or replicated based on my prospectus. Do you agree, disagree, and why? Thank you everyone for the survey!!
As per today's lecture, I found many aspects such as long-arm statute, interstate commerce law, interpol networking, and stock trading/investing accounts outsourcing that could have illustrated the problem with jurisdiction over the electronic source. I am not sure if it has been said, but the principle of cloud computing is also important for many amateurs who wish to hide the hosts of their web pages. I am also encouraging you to read the J.Gilies and R. Cailliau's book called "How the web was born" so that you can understand better the notion of the internet policy that has originally been imposed in various countries. The authors have a diverse perspective on ideological and legal concepts related to the internet. I have much deeper concepts in mind which I do not mind to share with people who signed up for this course but to share them on the web page of the course in which my work is unfairly graded is senseless. For intellectually curious people and those who in general finds my comments on this site and in the prospectus as interesting, I am offering to join my facebook group where we can create a more profound discussion by exchanging superior educational materials and debating about the issues discussed in this course. The page which soon is going to become autonomous web page of a non-profit organization is located at http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=7314616938 --[[User:VladimirK|VladimirK]] 03:03, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
**VladimirK, stop flaming and calm down.  This type of hostility will not reward you.  If you are concerned about your grade perhaps you should speak with the professors and teaching fellows as to how to improve your project.  I believe that I have tried to help you by leaving comments both on the assignment page, and on your personal page in more detail.  I am glad that you have considered the ethical implications of your research and have come to the conclusion that you did.  Now all you really need to do is update your sources to the 21st century. Also, remember, this is just one grade out of several, and just the beginning of your project.  Have fun with your topic, enjoy the work, and you will do fine.  good luck ======:) [[User:Deinous|Deinous]] 09:33, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
**Hi Margaret, I did not notice that you also commented on my personal page. Thank you. I am absolutely calm and rather curious to see how administrators will review the second assignment because my prospectus apparently exceeds in many regards the posted expectations. Yes, I agree that I have to define some technical frameworks, so as everyone's prospectuses that are in fact half shorter than mine, but it is not what constitutes my grade. The oxymoron consists in the fact that the grading mechanism is acting against its own description of the grading criteria, even more funny, the grader does not know what the line between the good and perfect assignment is. In terms of pickpocketing, the common code of ethics suggests that it is unethical to jeopardize someone else's privacy, unless there is a serious exception such as duty. This code is broken in so many ways by both government and private entities that it makes no sense to bring the notion of ethics. It is rather about cryptography, super computers, and who can do more of techno-art without getting prosecuted. Take a look for example at the scandal with Russian spies versus the conflict in Libya. In both cases a sabotage is carefully organized in order to defame the adversary. It just does not square out how the twin towers could have been attacked with such a powerful networks that detected so many spies. In Libiya, the internal political climate just does not have enough reasons to create a protest of this magnitude. The notion of reciprocity persists regardless of geographic situation, and the internet is the perfect way to support all ethical and unethical causes of action. It just a matter of power, as we heard in class, to stop the perpetrators at the foreign territory. As of today, there is enough evidences in theory and perhaps on the internet to execute G.W. Bush and dozens of his allies for crimes against humanity, but which court would do that? It is similar to the grading issue in this class: I have a proof posted on the page that I have been degraded for other than academic reasons, but there is no authority in this school who can intervene to establish the status quo. The more prospectuses I see with the grade of five, the more reasons I have to submit this project at another school. So, with all this being said, I guess I will work on my outline and talk with people you are suggesting along with other professionals and journalists to develop further my project. --[[User:VladimirK|VladimirK]] 02:53, 10 March 2011 (UTC)
Perhaps I am missing some of the complex nuances of the arguments, but to me the resolution seems straightforward.  Laws exist to govern people not machines.  The legal entities are citizens, companies and governments, not routers and servers.  Every Internet web service is a transaction between two legal entities at each endpoint with subcontractors facilitating the transport.  The Internet or, more precisely, the collection of independent service providers that comprise the Internet, should be regulated in the same manner that all domestic and foreign commerce is managed today.  Germany, for example, requires every German web site to include an "impressum" page listing the legal owner of the site and contact information.  Just as it is more complex to import and export goods across national boundaries, we should expect similar complexities with transnational web services.  Whether or not we agree with the laws of a particular sovereign nation, it seems prudent that international law should preside in cyberspace as surely as anywhere else on the planet. [[User:ChrisSura|-Chris Sura]] 03:12, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I just want to encourage anyone who hasn't yet read the optional reading by Grimmelmann on the fate of HavenCo to do so; it's a terrific read. I find the central irony of the piece - essentially that HavenCo, ostensibly an organization devoted avoidance of the law, was actually heavily dependent on the rule of law to operate, and that lack of law, not the opposite, is what ultimately destroyed HavenCo - to be fascinating. [[User:BrandonAndrzej|BrandonAndrzej]] 04:17, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Like any good reader of mystery novels who once hooked into the plot flips to the back of the book to discover the ending, my curiosity forced me to google what happened to HavenCo and Sealand.  Found http://www.theconstitutional.org/2011/02/15/sealand-and-havenco-part-ii-the-rise-and-fall-of-havenco/.  Will take Brandon's suggestion and read the optional reading on the subject, but for the quick answer here it is.  [[[[User:Sjennings|sjennings]] 14:55, 8 March 2011 (UTC)]]
I was truly inspired by Orin Kerr's The Problem of Perspective in Internet Law. Someone who is deeply curious about Internet Law has to read this review! The basic legal principle of application of law based on fact raises a fundamental question within Internet Law. The most critical issue of current digital law is not how to list all the newly created technologies but on which perspective we are going to observe the case and apply laws. The view points of users and outsiders can be very tricky but need to be clarified for more accurate legal judgment. I would love to read the rest of this review and other related topics so that I develop better insights in analyzing Internet controversies. --[[User:Yu Ri|Yu Ri]] 15:20, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks Brandon and Sjennings for the tips - I was also curious about the fate of HavenCo, and found it particularly interesting to learn that they were originally founded and registered in the UK. So yes, much more dependent on law than they led the public to believe. It also seems shortsighted that, in an effort to stretch the boundaries of the Internet, they saw the creation of a new physical space with its own set of lax regulations as the ultimate design. Other rebellious projects (i.e., torrent services, wikileaks, etc) were able to accomplish as much by operating entirely within the virtual space and defying territorial boundaries. [[User:Jsanfilippo|Jsanfilippo]] 16:01, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
The Problem of Perspective in Internet Law was a really good read. I'm convinced there must be a way for governments to have jurisdiction over the actions in their countries via the Internet. Sealand was a great example of this. If the United States wants to take action against a hacker living in Britain with servers at Sealand, can they? I read the piece on HavenCo, and it seems clearer to me that no matter what happens the government will be able to govern the web. Cyberpunks beware.[[User:Elishasurillo|Elishasurillo]] 21:15, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
In reading “The Problem of Perspective in Internet Law” it brought up some interesting thoughts about the blurring between the “physical” and “virtual” worlds. How will law govern these types of scenarios in the future?  In November, there was a sale of virtual property for $335K in the Virtual Entropia Universe. This was the largest virtual real estate deal to date and creates a whole new set of challenges with Internet law.  What laws do you apply/enforce to a property that technically does not exist in the true sense of the physical definition?  [[User:Earboleda|Earboleda]] 16:56, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
This is a piece of an article called "Cybersmearing and the Problem of Anonymous Online Speech." It highlights the pressure corporations put on lawmakers to censor online speech. There are companies that desire to control the flow of information employees or disgruntled customers might reveal. They might use lobbying pressure or other means, to try to convince government officials to put a handle on internet speech. I am concerned that companies may use politics to protect themselves. [http://heinonline.org/HOL/LandingPage?collection=journals&handle=hein.journals/comlaw18&div=25&id=&page= Cybersmearing and the Problem of Anonymous Online Speech]  [[User:Joshuasurillo|Joshuasurillo]] 18:37, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
I would like to point out that there are many organizations that are in favor of protecting online speech. Also, there are yet other companies that are hypocritical and say they are in favor of free speech, when actually they are not wholly committed. Here is an article from the NY times that discusses this.[http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/28/technology/internet/28privacy.html Big Tech Companies Back Global Plan to Shield Online Speech]  [[User:Joshuasurillo|Joshuasurillo]] 18:37, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
In the article I posted above it discusses the Global Network Initiative which the Berkman Center for Internet and Society took part in. [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/research/principles]  [[User:Joshuasurillo|Joshuasurillo]] 18:37, 5 May 2011 (UTC)


== Links ==
== Links ==
[http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/03/geohot-site-unmasking/ Judge Lets Sony Unmask Visitors to PS3-Jailbreak Site] desscribes an interesting jurisdictional question to a copyright infringement case. [[User:Deinous|Deinous]] 00:35, 9 March 2011 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 19:24, 17 November 2011

Syllabus


March 6

What is law's role in regulating online conduct and speech? At this point in the course you should be ready to tackle this question from a number of different perspectives. In this class we will begin to explore what role law is capable of playing as well as what role it should play. Remember John Perry Barlow's Declaration of Independence of Cyberspace which you read earlier in the course? Has his view of law's limited role been borne out? The sources of law impacting online conduct and speech are many, from intellectual property to tort to the First Amendment. Throughout today's class, we’ll tie the legal doctrines together with three themes:

  • How regulation changes when it’s carried out by computers, rather than by people.
  • Whether going online increases or decreases government control.
  • The new kinds of power possessed by online intermediaries.




Readings

Optional Readings


Videos Watched in Class

Class Discussion

Links

Retrieved from "http://cyber.harvard.edu/is2013/?title=Law%27s_Role_in_Regulating_Online_Conduct_and_Speech&oldid=7021"