Cyberlaw and Information Intermediaries

2,470 views
2,383 views

Published on

"Cyberlaw and Information Intermediaries" (กฎหมายไซเบอร์และตัวกลางข้อมูล) by Eddan Katz, International Affairs Director, Electronic Frontier Foundation http://eff.org/, นำเสนอในงานอบรมเชิงปฏิบัติการ จัดโดยเครือข่ายพลเมืองเน็ต 25 ก.ค. 2552

Published in: Technology
1 Comment
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Great Article. Thanks for the info. Does anyone know where I can find a blank 1125 a to fill out?
       Reply 
    Are you sure you want to  Yes  No
    Your message goes here
No Downloads
Views
Total views
2,470
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
24
Comments
1
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Cyberlaw and Information Intermediaries

  1. 1. Cyberlaw and Information Intermediaries Eddan Katz International Affairs Director Electronic Frontier Foundation
  2. 2. Cyberlaw Intellectual Property Telecommunications Media Law Cybercrime Internet Jurisdiction
  3. 3. Netizen Rights Freedom of Expression Due Process Privacy Transparency Consumer Protection
  4. 4. Access to Knowledge Innovation Open Infrastructure Collaborative Production Development Economic Growth Individual Autonomy
  5. 5. Regulating Behavior developing strategies to use human or institutional intermediaries indirectly regulate individual behavior by changing the technology itself
  6. 6. Traditional Gatekeeper Role Whistleblower Bouncer Chaperone
  7. 7. Types of Information Intermediaries Hosting Providers Internet Service Providers Search Engines Domain Name Registrars Participative Web Platforms Financial Intermediaries Virtual Worlds Auction Platforms and Distributed Computing eCommerce actors Social Networks
  8. 8. Immunity from Liability Communications Decency Act §230 (1996) No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider. 1. The defendant must be a "provider or user" of an "interactive computer service." 2. The cause of action asserted by the plaintiff must "treat" the defendant "as the publisher or speaker" of the harmful information at issue. 3. The information must be "provided by another information content provider," i.e., the defendant must not be the "information content provider" of the harmful information at issue.
  9. 9. Copyright Safe Harbor Digital Millennium Copyright Act §512 (1998) Transitory Digital Network Communications System Cacheing Information Residing on Systems Information Location Tools
  10. 10. Notice & Takedown Procedure Infringement Allegation Notice The name, address, and electronic signature of the complaining party [512(c)(3)(A)(i)] The infringing materials and their Internet location [512(c)(3)(A)(ii-iii)], or if the service provider is an "information location tool" such as a search engine, the reference or link to the infringing materials [512(d) (3)]. Sufficient information to identify the copyrighted works [512(c)(3)(A)(iv)]. A statement by the owner that it has a good faith belief that there is no legal basis for the use of the materials complained of [512(c)(3)(A)(v)]. A statement of the accuracy of the notice and, under penalty of perjury, that the complaining party is authorized to act on the behalf of the owner [512(c)(3)(A)(vi)].
  11. 11. Counter-Notice & Putback Proecdure Counter-Notice Requirements The subscriber's name, address, phone number and physical or electronic signature [512(g)(3)(A)] Identification of the material and its location before removal [512(g)(3)(B)] A statement under penalty of perjury that the material was removed by mistake or misidentification [512(g) (3)(C)] Subscriber consent to local federal court jurisdiction, or if overseas, to an appropriate judicial body. [512(g)(3) (D)] Putback [512(g)(2)] If the copyright owner does not bring a lawsuit in district court within 14 days, the service provider is then required to restore the material to its location on its network. [512(g)(2)(C)]
  12. 12. Trademark Infringement Lanham Act 32(2) (B) Where the infringement or violation complained of is contained in or is part of paid advertising matter in a newspaper, magazine, or other similar periodical or in an electronic communication as defined in section 2510(12) of title 18, United States Code, the remedies of the owner of the right infringed or person bringing the action under section 43(a) [15 USC 1125(a)] as against the publisher or distributor of such newspaper, magazine, or other similar periodical or electronic communication shall be limited to an injunction against the presentation of such advertising matter in future issues of such newspapers, magazines, or other similar periodicals or in future transmissions of such electronic communications. The limitations of this subparagraph shall apply only to innocent infringers and innocent violators.
  13. 13. Netizen Rights (redux) Freedom of Expression Due Process Privacy Transparency Consumer Protection
  14. 14. Freedom of Expression Freedom of Speech Right to Read Chilling Effects Democratic Culture Anonymity
  15. 15. Due Process Notice of Procedure Specificity of Claims Right to Appeal Redress for Abuse/Misuse of Law
  16. 16. Privacy Notice/Disclosure/Collection Limitation Mandatory Disclosure of Personal Data Choice/Consent Access Security/Integrity Enforcement/Redress
  17. 17. Transparency Arbitrary Application of Law Conflicts of Interest Accountability Accuracy
  18. 18. Consumer Protection Anti-Competitive Behavior False Advertising Contracts of Adhesion/Terms of Service Unconscionable Terms
  19. 19. Open Innovation End-to-End Principle Interoperability Freedom to Tinker Creative Destruction Distributed Responsibility Level Playing Field Self-Organizing Community Collaborative Production Reputation Economies Modularity Correctability Granularity
  20. 20. Domestic Economic Growth Translation Adaptability to Local Customs Network Effects Open Standards Skill Development
  21. 21. Thank you. Eddan Katz eddan@eff.org Danny O’Brien danny@eff.org

×