To block or not to block: European approaches to content regulation,and implications for freedom of expression

Based on the limited effectiveness of state laws, and lack of harmonization at international level a number of states started to introduce policies to block access to Internet content and websites deemed illegal which are situated outside their legal jurisdiction. However, blocking policies are not always subject to due process principles, decisions are not necessarily taken by the courts of law, and often administrative bodies or Internet hotlines run by the private sector decide which content or website should be subject to blocking. Therefore, increasingly, the compatibility of blocking action is questioned with regards to the fundamental right of freedom of expression. This article assesses significant developments at the pan-European level with regards to the development, and implementation of Internet content blocking policies. Adaptation of content blocking policies from certain member states of both the European Union and the Council of Europe will be used to assess the nature and implementation of access blocking policies. It will be argued that there could be a breach of Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights if blocking measures or filtering tools are used at state level to silence politically motivated speech on the Internet.     

Protecting Children While Silencing Them: The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act and Children's Free Speech Rights

In 1998, Congress passed the first law protecting the privacy of individuals on the Internet. The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) restricts the online collection of personal information from children aged 12 or younger. Under the law, Web sites that maintain chat rooms directed at children must either condition a child's participation on the consent of a parent or guardian or monitor the chat room and censor references to personal information. This article examines whether COPPA's chat room restrictions infringe on the free speech rights of children. The examination finds that aspects of the chat room restrictions are constitutionally suspect because it is questionable whether the parental consent requirement is narrowly tailored.     

The V‐chip and cyber cops: Technology vs. regulation

This article explores the interests involved in regulating television violence and indecency on the Internet, and how those interests might be better served by receiver‐based filtering technology rather than the traditional content‐based sender control. Receiver‐based control technologies represent a promising opportunity to remedy an outdated system that relies on restrictions on expression at their source to regulate media content. Traditional source‐based content restrictions, while they served a purpose in the earlier days of broadcasting, are no longer the least restrictive means of protecting society from material that is offensive or inappropriate for some. Government speech restrictions are not only constitutionally disfavored, but may soon come under increased scrutiny by the courts, especially when the technological means are available to tailor program content to individual needs.     

No Place in the Law: The Ignominy of Criminal Libel in American Jurisprudence

The application of the Sullivan standard to the crime of libel was a mistake. There is no common law affiliation with or legal justification for the existence of criminal libel in a democracy. Its existence is antithetical to the First Amendment's guarantees of equality of speech, as well as to the broader constitutional guarantees of equality of speaker. The crime has become almost completely indistinguishable from the tort of libel, both in form and function, as a result of its evolution in America-from the importance of truth as a defense to the audience's responsibility for its own reaction to the speech, violent or not. And the American experience demonstrates clearly and ignominiously that the abuse of prosecutorial discretion, and even the mere threat of prosecution, results in the suppression of constitutionally protected speech.     

Logic,licensing and public relations

This article focuses on the need to move past First Amendment concerns to foster a meaningful debate about the licensing of public relations practitioners. Whether, and to what extent, public relations should be licensed is not the subject of this discussion. Instead, this article uses Aristotelian logic to dispute the spurious conclusion that any licensing scheme for public relations work and / or the individuals who perform it is unconstitutional on its face. Relying on First Amendment jurisprudence, the article demonstrates that some restraints on speech in the form of licensing are allowed, that not all public relations work involves protected speech or press, that there is a similarity to the constitutionally permitted licensing of certain speech‐related professions and that a hypothetical case can be constructed regarding those who could qualify as licensed public relations counsel. The article concludes that the First Amendment does not necessarily prevent licensing certain public relations practitioners.     

美国网络色情言论管制的“空间”标准——从ACLU案到ALA案

在网络色情言论管制中，美国司法机关通过案例建立起“空间”标准，以及对“空间”标准的审查基准。“空间”标准是指在网络色情信息和成年人之间形成封闭空间，避免未成年人轻易接触网络色情信息。“空间”标准的建立，是保障特定人群免遭色情言论污染的一个重要运用。网络的虚拟性和开放性决定了这一封闭空间很难做到完美，而有可能侵害非色情信息发布者的言论自由。ACLU案和ALA案是美国最高法院建立和完善“空间”标准的两个里程碑式的案例。经过案例的积累和发展，美国最高法院逐渐形成了立体化的“空间”标准。为保障未成年人免遭色情言论侵扰提供了法制上的保障，也缓解了网络色情言论管制与言论自由之间的张力。     

Private Spaces and Public Interests: Internet Navigation,Commercialism and the Fleecing of Democracy

This article explores the implications of commercial control of Internet navigation for democratic society. The article argues that remedies, such as labeling, aimed at separating commercial content from conduit would better serve American society's compelling interest in devising a less consumerist system of Internet navigation. At a time when powerful marketing interests are exploiting the commercial aspects of the Internet to influence human behavior, the article suggests that steps be taken to facilitate user filtering of advertising content as a way to correct market failure in the Internet medium.     

A trojan horse goes to court: Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp

In Bolger v. Youngs Drug Products Corp., the Supreme Court held that a statute prohibiting the mailing of unsolicited advertisements for contraceptives was unconstitutional as applied to Young's advertisements for condoms. The decision rested on a balancing of the first amendment's grant of free speech with the Government's interest in safeguarding an individual's privacy. The Court noted that the advertisements promoted the flow of information on contraception, and pertained to constitutionally protected private activity. This Case Comment argues that the Court's decision is sound and criticizes the view of the concurring opinion that shielding individuals from potentially offensive speech is a substantial governmental interest. The Comment concludes that the Court's decision expands upon precedent which established an individual's right of privacy regarding the use of contraceptives.     

Protecting Tobacco Advertising Under the Commercial Speech Doctrine: The Constitutional Impact of Lorillard Tobacco Co.

Since 1980, the Supreme Court has used a complex form of intermediate constitutional scrutiny-the Central Hudson analysis-when government regulations of commercial speech are challenged on First Amendment grounds. In Lorillard Tobacco Co. v. Reilly, the Court used this analysis for the first time to test the constitutionality of government restrictions on tobacco advertising. This article reviews the Court's commercial speech doctrine including previous treatment of governmental attempts to restrict harmful product advertising. The article then provides an overview of the national regulatory framework for tobacco advertising and analyzes the Supreme Court's 2001 opinion in Lorillard Tobacco. The article then explores the impact of the case on the Court's commercial speech doctrine and in subsequent lower court opinions.     

Delineating and derogating constitutional rights in Trinidad and Tobago

This article examines the approach taken by courts in Trinidad and Tobago when analysing the Parliament’s power under section 13 of the Constitution to derogate from constitutionally guaranteed rights protected under section 4. The author analyses inconsistencies in the tests applied by the courts over the years in various cases and considers a different approach that could be adopted in order to protect citizens’ rights while having due deference to the Parliament’s power to legislate.     

China's campaign-style Internet finance governance: Causes,effects, and lessons learned for new information-based approaches to governance,

China's Internet companies and citizens are now world leaders in developing and using the Internet and related information technologies for financial transactions. Accordingly, it is important that China becomes a world leader in identifying challenges posed by Internet finance, and providing law and governance solutions to address these challenges. While the Internet and its associated technologies are now globally available, a core question is whether, and to what extent, regulatory challenges and opportunities are common across different jurisdictions, or whether they reflect local circumstances. In short, an interesting question is what can the world learn from China as it takes the lead in addressing Internet finance challenges, and what can China learn from the world as it seeks to do so?This article first identifies the landscape of China's burgeoning Internet finance market, including key technologies and services and government and nongovernment players. The article then turns to key regulatory challenges, with a focus on factors especially significant in China. The article then examines the “top down” “campaign style” approach to regulation, which is China government's initial response to emerging challenges. Following an analysis of the campaign, some suggestions are then made for future possible governance strategies. We explain how emerging “information” based and experiment-based approaches to governance are drawing on both global and Chinese experiences to harness the capabilities of the Internet and the collective energies of Internet finance enterprises and users to advance the regulation of the China Internet finance system in a way that is conducive to the public interest.     

The Chickens Have Come Home To Roost: Individualism,Collectivism And Conflict In Commercial Speech Doctrine

The Supreme Court of the United States has spent more than two decades constructing its commercial speech doctrine but has failed to articulate a principled approach, which has created disarray in the definition and protection of commercial speech. Analysis of the Court's conception of commercial speech protection, using individualist and collectivist political philosophies, concludes that the Court's commercial speech doctrine has suffered from a fundamental internal conflict arising from the difficulty in choosing one or the other of those political philosophies. That conflict will continue-as will the Court's inability to express a coherent commercial speech doctrine-until the Court makes an overt choice between collectivist and individualist approaches to the protection of commercial speech. The principled solution is for the Court to adopt a strict scrutiny approach to commercial speech, thus giving it protection commensurate with that given ideological speech.     

Fundamental rights and private enforcement in the digital age

This article addresses the shift inthe paradigm of fundamental rights protection on the Internet. More and morethe enforcement of such rights is being delegated to private Internet operators, and the urgent question is how the task of balancing conflicting rights affects the status of Internet Service Providers (ISPs). The article examines the increasing privatisation of fundamental rights enforcementon the Internet, highlighting the impact of this trend. Following the analysisof recent developments, it argues that the pillars governing ISP liability should not be altered. In particular, the early determination that ISPs should not be presumptively saddled with content monitoring tasks should not be called into question. Therefore, the regulatory pressure on ISPs shouldbe lowered, as the spectre of liability, combined with ISPs' increasing role indeciding the proper balance between conflicting rights, unduly burdens the activity of ISPs and generates incentives to delete even lawful content.     

The liability of website owners for defamation in Israel: A challenge yet to be solved?

From the end of the twentieth century to the present we have witnessed the effects of technology on the way we consume and distribute information. The print media, which in many ways was the natural product of the printing revolution, has given way to the electronic media with websites providing the new “town squares” in which the public discourse is held on political, economic and social issues among others. The Israeli legal system, like the legal systems in other countries, faces a variety of challenges and complex ethical and legal issues when required to regulate (often retrospectively) the manner and processes through which the discourse will be conducted in the virtual “town hall”. In essence, this article focuses on one of the many questions occupying the Israeli legal system and that is whether website owners should be liable in defamation for speech published by third parties on the Internet (through blogs, tweets on Twitter, posts on Facebook,¹ uploaded video clips on YouTube and the like) when no connection exists between the third party and the site owner apart from the fact that the third party has used the website as a platform to publish the offensive speech. The issue of the liability of the website owner has ramifications for the injured party's capacity to institute an action for defamation against the website owner, as often only the latter will be in a position to compensate the injured party (financially) for the offensive speech. The Israeli legal system, which in many ways furnishes a unique and interesting framework for examining the question posed above, as we explain in the body of the article, presents a fascinating example of how the Israeli legislature and the courts have dealt and continue to deal with claims filed against website owners for damage to reputation as a result of speech published by third parties. The article offers a comprehensive review of the status of the right to freedom of speech, anonymity and the right to reputation in Israel, the considerations for and against the imposition of liability on website owners and the latest case law on these questions.     

The right of publicity in the digital age – Doctrinal tensions, common law theories and proposals for solutions

In the fall of 2007, a federal appeals court ruled that the use of the names and records of Major League Baseball players without license or permission by an Internet fantasy sports website was protected speech and trumped the property rights of the players. The ruling by the U.S. federal appeals court in CBC v. MLBAM marks the latest skirmish in the long-simmering tension between the scope of the “Right of Publicity,” a common-law based doctrine that has expanded over the last half-century and the First Amendment's guarantee of free speech. This issue of where free speech ends and proprietary protection begins is the subject of a long line of cases – with conflicting rulings, different doctrines and a haphazard state-by-state approach. With the evolution of the Internet as a marketing and commerce tool, the economic implications of digital rights have increased the problem. This article tracks the development of the right of publicity tort, discusses the leading cases and proposes solutions.     

Indian Copyright Act and new communication technologies: A special focus on webcasting

The main aim of this paper is to consider whether the Indian Copyright Act 1957 (ICA) gives protection to future technologies. It follows an earlier paper on Webcaster's protection under copyright published in [2011] 27 CLSR 479–496. By way of asking that question it is sensible to examine whether webcasting/streaming is protected by ICA or not. In order to enquire the same, we need to study the penetration of streaming/webcasting technology into the Indian market and its application. Since the technology is linked with the Internet, it is also essential to examine its penetration and the availability of bandwidth and the potential market for such communications. All these aspects are studied in the first part of this paper. In the second part a brief outline is offered of the relevant provisions of the Act. At issue is whether they give protection to the future technologies or not. This will be considered in part three. The same will be examined with the proposed amendment to the Act too. The paper concludes that the Act fails to give protection to future technologies and therefore that streaming/webcasting is not protected in India under the copyright regime.     

The First Amendment Right to Receive Online Information in Public Libraries

A decade after the Supreme Court of the United States upheld the Children's Internet Protection Act, which mandated Internet filters in public libraries, filtering problems have not been resolved, and the disabling of Internet filters upon the requests of adults does not seem to be as easy or automatic as the justices had presumed. In upholding CIPA, the Supreme Court seemed to misunderstand the parameters of the disabling provision, ignored the right-to-receive doctrine, and missed the opportunity to update public forum doctrine to include the Internet. This article concludes that the Court needs to reevaluate public forum doctrine in the context of twenty-first century technology and designate Internet access in public libraries as a metaphysical public forum.     

The Contentious American Debate: The First Amendment and Internet-based Hate Speech

This essay reviews the debate over what constitutes hate speech and whether or not such speech is protected by the American First Amendment. First, the concept of white racialism and white supremacy is defined and illustrated. Then after a brief discussion of the legal debate, the nature and problematic definition(s) of hate speech is presented. The unique speech environment of the internet is reviewed alongside attempts to limit and censor topics available on the internet. The arguments for and against restricting first amendment protection are discussed, with a focus on Michael Israel's five criteria for withdrawing first amendment protections. The work concludes with a discussion of the difficulty in constraining discourse on the internet.     

Northern Ireland Dimensions to the First Decade of the United Kingdom Supreme Court

This article focuses on the relationship between the United Kingdom Supreme Court and Northern Ireland over the course of a constitutionally significant period of time, namely the first decade of the Court's existence. It does this by exploring what difference the Court has made to the law of Northern Ireland, what significance the cases from Northern Ireland have had for the law in other parts of the United Kingdom, and what part has been played in the Court's work by the sole Justice from Northern Ireland, Lord Kerr of Tonaghmore, and by the Attorney General for Northern Ireland, John Larkin QC. It concludes that the Court has established itself as an indispensable component of the legal system of Northern Ireland.