CMS 790 MEDIA THEORIES and METHODS I Pr

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

CMS 790 MEDIA THEORIES and METHODS I Pr CMS 790 MEDIA THEORIES AND METHODS I Pr. William Uricchio Florence Gallez December 13, 2008 [updated summer 2009] A reception study of Mike Godwin’s book Cyber Rights – Defending Free Speech in the Digital Age and its role in the discursive positioning of a new technology for collaborative journalism in a free, open online space. Be glad that U r free Free 2 change your mind Free 2 go most anywhere, anytime Be glad that U r free There's many a man who's not Be glad 4 what U had baby, what you've got Be glad 4 what you've got Soldiers are a marching, they're writing brand new laws Will we all fight together 4 the most important cause? Will we all fight 4 the right 2 be free? Free (Be glad that U r free) Prince, 1999 album (1982) Reason for selection of text: It may well be that the Prince fan in me was subconsciously influenced by the musician’s joyful hymn to freedom and call for less regulation when I selected Cyber Rights – Defending Free Speech in the Digital Age by Mike Godwin as the central text on which to base my case for more free speech in online news production – one of the guiding principles of my thesis and related research project, Open Park. But then, a call for more freedom on the Net and less regulation in cyberspace is precisely one of Godwin’s core arguments in his second book, first published in 1998 and revised in an expanded edition by MIT in 2003. But there are other reasons for which I selected this book about the First Amendment and how it is applied to the Internet: mainly, it presents a system of ethical and democratic values which I fully espouse and on whose foundation I plan to develop a new journalistic practice for collaborative online news production. The concrete application for this new practice of openly sharing knowledge and resources among journalists covering the same beat or issue is “Open Park” – a Web-based platform for journalists to work together on news stories. The website is now in its second phase of development, with myself and our design team working on developing the new media news-reporting tools that OP journalists will be using. Thus, Godwin's text informs both dimensions of my project for CMS – the building of a free, unfiltered/uncensored space online for Open Park for journalists and other users, and the formation of a normative system of values and principles that protect and foster free speech on the Internet/Net and other digital rights. This normative system will take the shape of a proposed Code of Ethics for collaborative journalism - that is, for all the new forms of digital, hybrid and group-based online news production, such as Twitter reports feeds and news updates on social networks, which so far lack code-based regulations for their practical and ethical use. This new Code of Ethics for today's online journalism is the proposed subject of my CMS thesis. Here it is important to note that in this particular paper I will be focusing on the second part of my project - the theoretical basis for a value-based journalistic practice and its establishment in a new [or one could say 'updated'] Code of Ethics. How Godwin’s methodology for the study of freedom of speech online, as elaborated in his book, was received and how this criticism can further inform my own research on free, open online spaces for collaborative journalism is a crucial exercise in building the ethical foundation of this new practice to be formalized into a new Code. There is actually a section on the OP website devoted to the elaboration of this Code of Ethics, where both my own research and that of similarly interested contributors is published. Here too, the section has the principles of free expression at its heart, with a forum where users and readers can post their own thoughts on an ideal Code of Ethics for today's new journalistic models. So I am using Godwin's book as the basis for my main argument for increased protection of free speech online and of the moral values and professional principles needed for high-quality collaborative journalism. More specifically, as OP reporters and journalism students will be covering the case studies in small and large groups, both local and remote, I expect to be applying Godwin's views on free speech and other constitutional rights in the digital age to the ethical dilemmas that they might encounter in their work, such as dealing with difficult sources. I have also been looking closely at existing cyber laws and how Godwin's interpretation of them can be applied to my own decision of exerting minimal editorial control of what is being published by contributors on the OP website, be it the news report of a group of journalism students or comments by readers to a published story. Thus, all the sections of the site are open to users' comments, from the OP team's personal blogs to the discussion forums. Moderation in the forums is being kept at a minimum, and minimal monitoring of who can post comments or contribute in other ways is also applied, thus paving the way for the OP platform to become a news-reporting and discussion tool for non-skilled users such as the concerned residents of a community and citizen journalists. And, as Godwin argues in Cyber Rights, in Open Park too, unpopular or minority views are welcome as they often spark the most interesting debates. Another right supported by Godwin is also guaranteed in Open Park - that of online anonymity for those contributors to forum discussions who wish to voice uncommon or controversial views but keep their identities secret. Anonymity, the lawyer says, is one of the main guarantors of the free, unconstrained exchange of ideas. Thus, for OP this text is key. Contextual location of the selected text The central role Godwin's Cyber Rights plays in the elaboration of my proposed practice are clear, and this is why the issues of free speech protections and rights he raises in this book and other writings are so important to my project. But does this mean that Godwin's views, and this particular book, were well received and broadly accepted at the time of its release in 1998 and in subsequent writings? Did he convince the skeptics and more conservative elements in society who are calling for a 'safer' Net, with limits on what can be published in order to protect our children for example, but also resulting in limits on free speech? Did they disrupt the discourse on free expression rights at the time, and how did the concrete court cases he worked on informed that debate, or perhaps changed its course? Here a useful comparison can be made with another of my favorite authors in the sphere of developing the Net's full democratic potential and defending diverse voices in online speech: Cass Sunstein, the Harvard Law School professor, now the Obama Administration's regulatory chief person. His views on the dangers of limiting free speech by too much fragmentation of online discourse into specialized niches of interest provoked strong reactions from cyber-optimists at the time of the release of his book Republic.com before 9/11. So much so that he felt compelled to address them and revisit some of his thinking and proposed reforms in a follow-up book, Republic.com 2.0. On this point, it is noteworthy that contrary to Sunstein who reconsiders his theories significantly in his second work so as to take into account criticisms and the latest technological developments, sometimes sounding a little apologetic, Godwin on the other hand makes no such shift in his stance in the second edition of Cyber Rights, opting simply to reformulate his thoughts with an update of the new technological context. In any case, the receptions of these two lawyers' writings are worth juxtaposing for the controversy that they caused upon their publication. Interestingly, Sunstein's main arguments for 'chance, unplanned encounters in open, public space, aimed at embracing and fostering a wider range of views in a democratic debate have still, to this day, failed to garner much appeal and an enthusiastic following. It will certainly be interesting to watch whether his proposals gain acceptance with time. It also did not evade me that despite the time difference between the release dates of Godwin's Cyber Rights and Sunstein's Republic.com, the prevalent doubts and fears among the public about what it considers too lax speech liberties have not changed much and persist throughout those years to this day. Just to be clear, I am using Cyber Rights' 1998 edition as my primary text. In seeking to position Cyber Rights in the context of its publication for a more accurate analysis, it may be useful to remember that Godwin was writing at a time when the nascent sphere of new media was attracting a lot of interest from the legal and regulatory community, as the latter sought ways to contain within normative boundaries a sphere seen as developing uncontrollably, especially on the Internet. Perhaps this is why the early reviewers of Cyber Rights seem to reflect these concerns and sense of uncertainty. Steven J. Dick of Southern Illinois University Carbondale writes in The International Journal on Media Management “I pick up a book called Cyber Rights and I pick up a conundrum. Lawyer and technology analyst Mike Godwin has all credentials to write an important yet nearly incomprehensible book.
Recommended publications
  • Botnets, Cybercrime, and Cyberterrorism: Vulnerabilities and Policy Issues for Congress
    Order Code RL32114 Botnets, Cybercrime, and Cyberterrorism: Vulnerabilities and Policy Issues for Congress Updated January 29, 2008 Clay Wilson Specialist in Technology and National Security Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Botnets, Cybercrime, and Cyberterrorism: Vulnerabilities and Policy Issues for Congress Summary Cybercrime is becoming more organized and established as a transnational business. High technology online skills are now available for rent to a variety of customers, possibly including nation states, or individuals and groups that could secretly represent terrorist groups. The increased use of automated attack tools by cybercriminals has overwhelmed some current methodologies used for tracking Internet cyberattacks, and vulnerabilities of the U.S. critical infrastructure, which are acknowledged openly in publications, could possibly attract cyberattacks to extort money, or damage the U.S. economy to affect national security. In April and May 2007, NATO and the United States sent computer security experts to Estonia to help that nation recover from cyberattacks directed against government computer systems, and to analyze the methods used and determine the source of the attacks.1 Some security experts suspect that political protestors may have rented the services of cybercriminals, possibly a large network of infected PCs, called a “botnet,” to help disrupt the computer systems of the Estonian government. DOD officials have also indicated that similar cyberattacks from individuals and countries targeting economic,
    [Show full text]
  • What Every Citizen Should Know About DRM, A.K.A. “Digital Rights Management”
    What Every Citizen Should Know About DRM, a.k.a. “Digital Rights Management” By Mike Godwin Senior Technology Counsel Public Knowledge PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION What Every Citizen Should Know About DRM, a.k.a. “Digital Rights Management” By Mike Godwin Senior Technology Counsel Public Knowledge NEW AMERICA FOUNDATION Washington, DC Acknowledgements This “DRM primer” would not have come about without the author’s having worked with an informal “Risks of Copy Protection” expert group that includes Ed Felten, Matt Blaze, Phil Karn, Steve Bellovin, Bruce Schneier, Alan Davidson, John Morris, Hal Abelson, and Bill Cheswick. Two members of the group — Ed Felten and Matt Blaze — deserve special thanks for framing a number of copy-protection technology issues with such clarity that I have to some extent reproduced that clarity here. Phil Karn similarly deserves special thanks for his discussion of the extent to which peer-to-peer file-sharing is a feature of the Inter- net’s fundamental design. Andy Moss and Aaron Burstein each made a wide range of helpful comments and observations on earlier drafts of this primer. I’m particularly grateful to my boss, Gigi Sohn, for giving me the opportunity to explore the landscape of digital rights management and to develop further some of my ideas about the directions in which DRM may take us. I’m also thankful for the support and feedback of my other fellow staff members at Public Knowledge — Sarah Brown, Alex Curtis, Ann Dev- ille, and Nathan Mitchler. I consider myself fortunate to be backed by such a knowledgeable and resourceful team; each of my colleagues contributed in many ways to the development of this project, and all of them read this paper in various stages of development and offered helpful corrections and suggestions.
    [Show full text]
  • Forbidden Feeds: Government Controls on Social Media in China
    FORBIDDEN FEEDS Government Controls on Social Media in China 1 FORBIDDEN FEEDS Government Controls on Social Media in China March 13, 2018 © 2018 PEN America. All rights reserved. PEN America stands at the intersection of literature and hu- man rights to protect open expression in the United States and worldwide. We champion the freedom to write, recognizing the power of the word to transform the world. Our mission is to unite writers and their allies to celebrate creative expression and defend the liberties that make it possible. Founded in 1922, PEN America is the largest of more than 100 centers of PEN International. Our strength is in our membership—a nationwide community of more than 7,000 novelists, journalists, poets, es- sayists, playwrights, editors, publishers, translators, agents, and other writing professionals. For more information, visit pen.org. Cover Illustration: Badiucao CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 4 INTRODUCTION : AN UNFULFILLED PROMISE 7 OUTLINE AND METHODOLOGY 10 KEY FINDINGS 11 SECTION I : AN OVERVIEW OF THE SYSTEM OF SOCIAL MEDIA CENSORSHIP 12 The Prevalence of Social Media Usage in China 12 Digital Rights—Including the Right to Free Expression—Under International Law 14 China’s Control of Online Expression: A Historical Perspective 15 State Control over Social Media: Policy 17 State Control over Social Media: Recent Laws and Regulations 18 SECTION II: SOCIAL MEDIA CENSORSHIP IN PRACTICE 24 A Typology of Censored Topics 24 The Corporate Responsibility to Censor its Users 29 The Mechanics of Censorship 32 Tibet and
    [Show full text]
  • BEYOND NAPSTER: Copyright, Fair Use, Intellectual Property Collide in Cyberspace E-Mal for Life!
    Stanf- yer BEYOND NAPSTER: Copyright, Fair Use, Intellectual Property Collide in Cyberspace e-mal for life! www.stanfordalumni.org ired ofhaving to send your new e­ Tmail address to family and friends every time you change your provider? Avoid the hassle by signing up today for a permanent Stanford Alumni Association (SAA) e-mail account Best of all, it~ FREE! Here's what you'll get: It's as easy as 1-2-3. • An address that's easy to remember Log on to www.stanfirdalumni.org-useyour OStanford ill number (above your name on [email protected] the Stanfird Lawyer mailing label) • 24/7 access to your mail on the C1 After you've signed up, you might want to Web-great when you're traveling ~ update your address in the SAA online • Automatic forwarding to your Alumni Directory to let your friends know where you are. Just click on "Update Your every-day account-keep current Profile." This directory is a great resource. with classmates and friends ~ Contact your Law School friends Ii:.I and classmates frequently ... They'll be glad and so will you. www.stanfordalumni.org SUMMER 2001 / ISSUE 60 Contents Features ,------------------------------_e 14 BEYOND NAPSTER By Doug Fine Copyright, Fair Use, and Intellectual Property Collide in Cyberspace P2P networking technology has revolutionized file swapping, but now new business models are emerging to beat down the legal challenges faced by upstarts like PROFESSOR Napster. Here's what the experts LAWRENCE LESSIG ----1------111IIII--------- see in our digital future. I 20 ELECTION REVIEW By Mel Taylor Stanford Law School was very well represented during Election 2000.
    [Show full text]
  • Civil Liberties and Security in Cyberspace
    Hoover Press : Cyber DP5 HPCYBE0500 06-11-:1 11:53:04 rev1 page 183 CHAPTER 5 Civil Liberties and Security in Cyberspace Ekaterina A. Drozdova Measures to protect information systems against cyber attacks are receiving increasing attention as the threat of attacks grows and the nature of that threat is better understood. Among these measures are sophisticated technologies for monitoring computer networks and us- ers, detecting intrusion, identifying and tracing intruders, and preserv- ing and analyzing evidence, all discussed in the previous chapter. What legal standards should govern the use of these measures? What non- technical constraints are likely to be placed, or ought to be placed, on them? What importance should be assigned to these constraints in designing and implementing technologically robust solutions, as well as international agreements to facilitate law enforcement? Specific answers to these questions will ultimately be determined Hoover Press : Cyber DP5 HPCYBE0500 06-11-:1 11:53:04 rev1 page 184 184 Ekaterina A. Drozdova by evaluating the specific measures or agreements proposed. But cer- tain legal principles are broadly applicable, including the right to pri- vacy, the protections against self-incrimination and unwarranted searches and seizures, and the right to due process of law. These civil liberties are supported in international law and guaranteed in varying forms by the national laws and institutions of many countries. An international regime against cyber crime and terrorism must operate within the constraints of these principles, as defined by the legal frame- works of its States Parties. There is often a tension between protecting civil liberties and en- forcing laws to maintain public safety and order.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Rights in the Digital
    Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 09:13 03 November 2016 HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE DIGITAL AGE Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 09:13 03 November 2016 Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 09:13 03 November 2016 HUMAN RIGHTS IN THE DIGITAL AGE Edited by Mathias Klang and Andrew Murray Downloaded by [University of Liverpool] at 09:13 03 November 2016 First published in Great Britain 2005 by The GlassHouse Press, The Glass House, Wharton Street, London WC1X 9PX, United Kingdom Telephone: + 44 (0)20 7278 8000 Facsimile: + 44 (0)20 7278 8080 Email: [email protected] Website: www.cavendishpublishing.com Published in the United States by Cavendish Publishing c/o International Specialized Book Services, 5824 NE Hassalo Street, Portland, Oregon 97213-3644, USA Published in Australia by The GlassHouse Press, 45 Beach Street, Coogee, NSW 2034, Australia Telephone: + 61 (2)9664 0909 Facsimile: +61 (2)9664 5420 Email: [email protected] Website: www.cavendishpublishing.com.au © Cavendish Publishing Ltd 2005 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning or otherwise, without the prior permission in writing of Cavendish Publishing Limited, or as expressly permitted by law, or under the terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organisation. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Cavendish Publishing Limited, at the address above. You must not circulate this book in any other binding or cover and you must impose the same condition on any acquirer.
    [Show full text]
  • Jurisdictional Analysis Formatted
    Jurisdictional Analysis Comparative Study Of Intermediary Liability Regimes Chile, Canada, India, South Korea, UK and USA in support of the Manila Principles On Intermediary Liability Version 1.0, 1 July 2015 Authors and Affiliations Jyoti Panday (Programme Officer) Centre for Internet and Society, India J. Carlos Lara (Research and Policy Manager) Derechos Digitales, Chile Kyun S Park (Professor) Korea University Law School; (Director) Open Net, Korea Kelly Kim (General Counsel) Open Net, Korea Acknowledgements The author would like to the inputs and feedback of Rishabh Dara, Jeremy Malcolm, Gabrielle Guillemin, Shradha Nigam, Elonnai Hickok, Pranesh Prakash and Sunil Abraham. Declaration of Conflicting Interests The author declares no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this analysis. Funding Research, authorship, and/or publication of this article and the development of the Principles has been generously funded by a grant from MacArthur Foundation. Permissions The author has sought permission from the Steering Committee developing the Manila Principles and members who have contributed to this analysis. Corresponding Author Jyoti Panday, Centre for Internet and Society Top Floor, G-15 Hauz Khas New Delhi 110016 INDIA Email: [email protected] jURISDICTIONAL ANALYSIS - MANILAPRINCIPLES.ORG 1 Abstract Governments around the world undertake speech regulation through the imposition of liability on intermediaries for third-party content, and often impose related obligations of proactive monitoring, exercising due diligence, and other such requirements. This study highlights the trends and crucial differences in existing liability regimes across Chile, Canada, India, South Korea, UK and USA. This analysis has been undertaken by the steering committee developing the Manila Principles and is aimed at supporting the development of the Manila Principles - a global civil society initiative.
    [Show full text]
  • In Search of a Balance Between Police Power and Privacy in the Cybercrime Treaty D.C
    Richmond Journal of Law and Technology Volume 9 | Issue 1 Article 5 2002 In Search of a Balance Between Police Power and Privacy in the Cybercrime Treaty D.C. Kennedy Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.richmond.edu/jolt Part of the Computer Law Commons, Intellectual Property Law Commons, International Law Commons, and the Internet Law Commons Recommended Citation D.C. Kennedy, In Search of a Balance Between Police Power and Privacy in the Cybercrime Treaty, 9 Rich. J.L. & Tech 3 (2002). Available at: http://scholarship.richmond.edu/jolt/vol9/iss1/5 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by UR Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Richmond Journal of Law and Technology by an authorized administrator of UR Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Volume IX, Issue 1, Fall 2002 In Search of a Balance Between Police Power and Privacy in the Cybercrime Treaty by D.C. Kennedy[*] Cite As: D.C. Kennedy, In Search of a Balance Between Police Power and Privacy in the Cybercrime Treaty , 9 RICH. J.L. & TECH. 3 (Fall 2002), at http://jolt.richmond.edu/v9i1/article3.html. TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION II. THE PROBLEM OF CYBERCRIME A. Cybercrime and the Cybercriminal B. The New Tools of the Cybercriminal C. Challenges for Law Enforcement III. TREATY ON CYBERCRIME A. Draft 19: The First Publicly-Released Version of the Cybercrime Treaty B. The Outcry C. Draft 27: The Final Revision to the Treaty IV. EXAMPLES OF PRIVACY PROTECTIONS PROVIDED UNDER DOMESTIC LAWS A.
    [Show full text]
  • Cybersmear Or Cyber-SLAPP: Analyzing Defamation Suits Against Online John Does As Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation
    COMMENT Cybersmear or Cyber-SLAPP: Analyzing Defamation Suits Against Online John Does as Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation Joshua R. Furman* A recent advertising campaign by a national Internet Service Provider (ISP) depicts a happy home of consumers who never have to leave their house thanks to their super-fast connection and the won- ders of limitless shopping on the web. Television spots show people in awe over the selection and convenience as they click away at laptops purchasing kitchen appliances, trading stocks, and occasionally greet- ing a courier with the latest treat materializing from their online ad- ventures. In some ways these ads are a fanciful depiction of our cur- rent reality. While many of us have felt the excitement of a dot com shipment just a few clicks away, the seamless function of technology and infrastructure depicted is probably a bit more idealized than we would recall. However, as we move closer to a society in which online activities increasingly usurp real world activities, we must ask whether fundamental rights will follow. Consider the problem of John Doe, a member of our utopian cy- ber-shopping household, who wants to comment on a web forum * J.D. Candidate 2002, Seattle University School of Law. Innumerable thanks are due to the staff of Seattle University Law Review whose commitment to enriching the legal community through exceptional scholarship is unparalleled. Many individuals have been of indispensable assistance in transforming this article from scraps on my hard drive to a printed reality. I would particularly like to thank Deirdre Mulligan and Alan B.
    [Show full text]
  • Internet Governance
    AN INTRODUCTION TO INTERNET GOVERNANCE Jovan Kurbalija 5th Edition i The history of this book is long, in Internet time. The original text and the overall approach, including the five-basket methodology, were developed in 1997 for a training course on Information and Communications Technology (ICT) Policy for government officials from Commonwealth countries. In 2004, Diplo published a print version of its Internet governance materials, in a booklet entitled Internet Governance – Issues, Actors and Divides. This booklet formed part of the Information Society Library, a Diplo initiative driven by Stefano Baldi, Eduardo Gelbstein and Jovan Kurbalija. Special thanks are due to Eduardo Gelbstein, who made substantive contributions to the sections dealing with cybersecurity, spam, and privacy, and to Vladimir Radunovic and Ginger Paque who updated the course materials. Comments and suggestions from other colleagues are acknowledged in the text. Stefano Baldi, Eduardo Gelbstein, and Vladimir Radunovic all contributed significantly to developing the concepts behind the illustrations in the book. In 2008, a special, revised version of the book, entitled simply An Introduction to Internet Governance, was published in cooperation with NIXIIndia on the occasion of the Internet Governance Forum 2008 held in Hyderabad, India. In 2009, a revised third edition was published in the cooperation with the Ministry of Communication and Information Technology of Egypt Internet Governance. The fourth edition (2010) was produced in partnership with the Secretariat
    [Show full text]
  • Freedom on the Net 2009
    0100101001100110101100100101001100 110101101000011001101011001001010 011001101011001001010011001101011 0010010100110011010110010010100110 011010110010010100110011010110100Freedom 101001100110101100100101001100110 1011001001010011001101011001001010on the Net 0110011010110010010100110011010110 0100101001100110101101001010011001 1010110010010100110010101100100101a global assessment of internet 0011001101011001001010011001101011and digital media 0010010100101001010011001101011001 0010100110011010110100001100110101 1001001010011001101011001001010011 0011010110010010100110011010110010 0101001100110010010100110011010110 0100101001100110101101000011001101 0110010010100110011010110010010100 1100110101100100101001100110101100 1001010011001101011001001010011001 1010110100101001100110101100100101 0011001101011001001010011001101011 0010110010010100101001010011001101 0110010010100110011010110100001100 1101011001001010011001101011001001 0100110011010110010010100110011010 1100100101001100110101100100101001 1001101011010010100110011010110010 0101001100110101100100101001100110 1011001001010011001101011001001010 FREEDOM ON THE NET A Global Assessment of Internet and Digital Media April 1, 2009 Freedom House Freedom on the Net Table of Contents Page Overview Essay Access and Control: A Growing Diversity of Threats to Internet Freedom .................... 1 Freedom on the Net Methodology ........................................................................................................... 12 Charts and Graphs of Key Findings ..................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Rule of Law on the Internet and in the Wider Digital World Law on the Internet and the Wider Digital Environment
    The rule of We exercise a significant part of our human rights today using the and in the wider digital world on the Internet rule of law The law on the Internet and the wider digital environment. But our human rights can also be breached using these very same means. Internet and There is general agreement that human rights should be enjoyed online as they are offline. In practice, however, the actors who can ensure that we enjoy human rights are not exactly the same in the in the wider two environments. In particular, the disproportionate influence and control that certain states and certain private companies exercise on the Internet and its physical infrastructure at the global level, are two digital world essential elements of this difference. This issue paper looks at how the rule of law can be maintained in an environment characterised by these specific governance issues, focusing on some policy areas of particular human rights relevance: freedom of expression, data protection and privacy, cybercrime and national security. It suggests possible ways forward to ensure that we can trust the rule of law to apply to our online activities. www.commissioner.coe.int 70114 ENG PREMS ENG The Council of Europe is the continent’s leading Issue paper human rights organisation. It comprises 47 member states, 28 of which are members of the European Union. All Council of Europe member states have signed up to the European Convention on Human Rights, a treaty designed to protect human rights, democracy and the rule of law. The European Court of Human Rights oversees the implementation of the Convention in the member states.
    [Show full text]