Archive for the ‘privacy’ Category

Take Down "David Blade, Attorney at Law" and Isanybodydown.com -- Who's with me?

October 31, 2012

Reblogged from The Legal Satyricon:

When it comes to porn, here are my rules:

Rule #1: The subjects must be adults
Rule #2: The subjects must be consenting adults

If you don't break either of those rules, I am on your side. I will defend your right to make, watch, display, and sell that content.

Break either rule, and I want to hurt you for the damage you do to others.

Read more… 831 more words

English: Head-shot of Marc J. Randazza in Mass... First Amendment attorney Marc Randazza provides a forensic demonstration on how a real "take down lawyer" handles an online scam artist who is impersonating a lawyer and extorting his victims for a fee. See also, Marc's follow-up posts: isanybodydown.com responds! , More on operation "involuntary porn" and Still more on isanybodydown.com   I also highly recommend Ken @ Popehat's companion post: "The Takedown Lawyer": Let's Help Marc Randazza Investigate A Scammer, Shall We?

Ontario appeal court: No reasonable expectation of privacy in using IP address to obtain customer info

October 3, 2012

In R. v. Ward,2012 ONCA 660, the Court of Appeal for Ontario has confirmed that that there is no reasonable expectation of privacy in identifying an internet user through his IP address in the course of a child pornography investigation.  (more…)

Nancy S. Kim, “Website Design and Liability”

September 28, 2012

 Nancy S. Kim (California Western School of Law) has published “Website Design and Liability”, Jurimetrics, Vol. 52, No. 383-431, 2012. The abstract states:

Two regrettable behaviors have emerged online: the posting of content about others without their consent; and impulsive postings with no consideration of long-term consequences. Website operators can either encourage or discourage these regrettable behaviors and influence their consequences through the design of their website and by the fostering of norms and codes of conduct. Unfortunately, courts interpret section 230 of the Communications Decency Act as providing websites with broad immunity. In an earlier article, I argued that a proprietorship standard should be imposed upon websites, which would require them to take reasonable measures to prevent foreseeable harm. This article further champions the concept of website proprietorship liability and proposes that section 230 should be amended to recognize such liability with provisions for the following “safe harbors” for website operators that: (1) permit only postings by identified posters; (2) have nonprofit status and do not accept ad revenue; and (3) remove postings upon request of the victim. This article also addresses anticipated objections that are based upon market concerns and free speech concerns.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Paul A. Bernal on “The Right to Online Identity” (@PaulbernalUK)

September 21, 2012

Paul A. Bernal (University of East Anglia (UEA) – Norwich Law School: Twitter: @PaulbernalUK and website :http://www.paulbernal.co.uk/) has posted a working paper entitled, “The Right to Online Identity”. Here’s the abstract:

If people have a right to internet access then should they have a right to an online identity? This paper will suggest that such a right should exist – and will look at the form that it might take, how it might be brought into practice, and what the implications of such a right might be in terms of the form and functions of the internet in the future. In particular, it will be suggested that the right to identity has three components: the right to create an online identity, the right to assert that online identity, and the right to protect that online identity.

Online identity needs to be looked on as something more complex than a matter of authentication of a link from an online actor to a real person – online identities are complex, multifaceted and constantly developing, and with both similarities and significant differences from ‘real-world’ identities. In order to understand how online identity should be treated from a legal perspective that complexity and those similarities and differences need to be better understood and taken properly into account.

A copy of the paper is available for download via SSRN here.

UPDATED: Your Privacy Ends Where Your Tweet Begins

September 14, 2012

Twitter image via Inforrm’s Blog.

Oh, Twitter, you used to be cool. You used to be the rebel. You used to be the shining light among social media platforms that fought for privacy and First Amendment rights. Now you’re just part of the “1 Percent”. Well, you were never part of the “99 Percent”, but at least we thought you cared.

Joseph Ax of Thomson Reuters reports that Twitter has folded like a cheap lawn chair under threat of contempt and substantial fines by a New York criminal judge. Malcolm Harris was among 700 people arrested during a peaceful protest march in support of the Occupy Wall Street Movement. He was charged with one count of disorderly conduct for blocking traffic. The prosecutor served three subpoenas on Twitter  for 3 1/2 months’ worth of information from Harris’ Twitter account. (Note: I am unable to verify whether any of Harris’ tweets related to what he ate for breakfast or whether he thinks One Direction is way better than Justin Bieber.)  (more…)


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,587 other followers

%d bloggers like this: