Delfi AS v Estonia: The Liability of Secondary Internet Publishers for Violation of Reputational Rights under the European Convention on Human Rights

In October 2013, the European Court of Human Rights in Delfi AS v Estonia upheld a decision of the Estonian Supreme Court to impose liability on the owners of an internet news portal for defamatory comments which had been posted on their website by anonymous third parties. This note suggests that the decision is important in the context of publications with a ‘public interest’ element to them, because it appears to afford more protection to the right to reputation (deriving from the Article 8 right to privacy) and less to freedom of expression than was formerly the case. It is further argued that the Court's emphasis on the positive obligation of states to protect this right to reputation may mean that the existing English law in this area, including, potentially section 5 of the Defamation Act 2013, is inconsistent with the ECHR jurisprudence.     

The regulation of civilian drones' impacts on behavioural privacy

Surveillance technologies have burgeoned during the last several decades. To surveillance's promises and threats, drones add a new dimension, both figuratively and literally. An assessment of the impacts of drones on behavioural privacy identifies a set of specific threats that are created or exacerbated. Natural controls, organisational and industry self-regulation, co-regulation and formal laws are reviewed, both general and specific to various forms of surveillance. Serious shortfalls in the regulatory framework are identified. Remedies are suggested, together with means whereby they may come into being.     

论隐私权在治安管理领域的诉求——以违法信息的公开为视角

治安管理处罚法第八十条确立了保护隐私的原则,在治安管理中公安机关应当保护公民的隐私权不受侵扰。但是实践中,少数公安机关仍然将被处罚人的个人信息公开曝光,引发了社会各界的争议。争议的焦点正是治安管理权与公民隐私权的冲突。公安机关在违法信息的公开中,应以实现公共利益和公民个人利益的平衡为途径,通过建立和完善违法信息公开听证制度与违法信息查询的期限制度来对违法信息的使用及保护加以规制。     

职务侵占罪与盗窃罪的区别

职务侵占罪与盗窃罪在性质方面的根本差别在于：职务侵占罪除了行为人利用职务便利非法占有单位财产之外,还存在对＂信赖利益的破坏＂,即对社会诚信的践踏。只要与单位存在＂事实劳动关系＂就可成为职务侵占罪的犯罪主体。盗窃罪的客观表现是一般主体秘密窃取公私财产,彼此之间没有交集性质的＂信赖＂。     

公民个人信息疑难问题的刑法保护

《刑法修正案（七）》将侵犯公民个人信息纳入刑法规制范畴,但本罪在理论和司法实践中仍然存在一些疑难问题亟待解决。文章从公民个人信息的概念,公民个人信息与隐私的关系,＂违反法律规定＂的法律依据,行为方式的完善,＂情节严重＂的细化,行为主体以及罪数形态几个方面对公民个人信息的刑法保护进行探讨。     

罪犯隐私权的冲突与协调

罪犯隐私权的狱内冲突主要体现为罪犯隐私权与行刑权和他犯权利的冲突。罪犯隐私权限制的标准是公共利益,构成对罪犯隐私权限制的公共利益应当符合预防狱内犯罪、维护监内正常改造秩序、实现执法公正、提高改造质量和避免罪犯群体性危难等特定行刑目的。在严格限制罪犯隐私权的同时,也要加强对罪犯隐私权的保护,其主要路径是加强对罪犯隐私权的...     

智能信息系统的隐私保护问题研究

智能信息系统是运用人工智能技术的信息系统,可以对信息进行智能分析,实现信息挖掘,从而提升信息的价值。智能信息系统面临的主要挑战在于如何能够在使用个人数据的同时,确保个人身份信息和个人隐私得到保护。智能信息系统隐私权保护是一项系统工程。国家和政府应当在保护个人信息方面更加积极有力。司法机关在保障公民隐私权方面扮演着平衡各方利益的角色。保护公民隐私权,应当强化技术创新。互联网企业应承担起个人数据保护的主体责任,加强自我约束。社会组织收集个人信息不能超过必要的限度与合目的性。个人隐私权遭受侵犯时应积极主动地运用法律捍卫自己的合法权益。