Culture & Technology: A Case Study We live in a time where information is only a mouse-click away for a large portion of the country and the world. Up until ten years ago, people had to go to their local library or purchase an expensive encyclopedia set for their home just to obtain information. Now, information is free and easily accessible from the home. Why pay five hundred dollars for an encyclopedia set when you can get on the Internet and obtain even more information for free? Also, within the last couple of years, Internet service to the home has become available free of charge through certain providers that subsidize their service through advertisements. But with all these advantages, there definitely has to be a flip side of the coin. An old adage says that everything comes with a price, and that is definitely true of the Internet. The purpose of this paper is to discuss how this new technology has affected Mass Media Law society, and culture. With the Internet becoming more and more popular, the world now faces many new legal and moral questions raised by this emerging technology. How do we keep indecent material from minors? How do we protect authors of original material from having their creation spread all over the world for everyone to copy? How do we create a system where people that libel other individuals anonymously on the Internet can be prosecuted for their crime? It is questions like these that our world has had to face in the past two to three years since the Internet has come into the foreground.
The Essay on The Internet And World Wide Web Defined
Christopher L. Isaacs 1010 – Technical Writing Extended Definition 00 March 6th The “Internet” and “World Wide Web” Defined In recent years the Internet and World Wide Web (WWW) have become more and more popular as an information resource. Many people believe that the WWW is the same as the Internet. This is untrue. The Internet was designed in the late 60’s as a way for a few military computers ...
In 1996, Congress passed the Telecommunications Act. The purpose of this act was To promote competition and reduce regulation in order to secure lower prices and higher quality services for American telecommunications consumers and encourage the rapid deployment of new telecommunications technologies.(Cate, p. 56) In and of itself, the act was intended to create healthy competition in the new, fast-emerging, unregulated market that the Internet, cable television, and telephone companies had helped to create. It was also to help foster fair competition in this new market. It is Section 5 of this act that gets the most attention, however. Section 5 is also known as The Communications Decency Act of 1996. The CDA attempted to restrict all people, regardless of age, from creating, viewing and transmitting indecent material via the Internet.
(Wallace, p. 129) The Telecommunications Act was passed in 1996, but Section 5, otherwise known as the CDA, was later declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court in Reno v. ACLU, not because it presented high barriers to entry for minors, but because it presented those same barriers to adults, thus infringing on their constitutional right to view indecent material. The question remains: if the government cannot keep indecent material on the Internet from minors, then who can legally take up that task? If parents take up the task of monitoring what their children view on the internet, not only will they have control over what they see, but this will also force the parents to spend more time with their children. This is a perfectly legal way to control minors’ access to pornography. On the internet today, all a minor needs to do in order to access pornography is to click on a disclaimer at the start of a pornographic web page, stating that they are 18 years of age or older, and that pornography is not illegal in their community. This solution is not talked about much because a good number of parents in America are too busy with work or other activities to take the time to monitor their children’s behavior. The secondary avenue for protecting minors from Internet pornography is using filtering software or “Family-friendly Internet Service Providers,” which should be used in conjunction with parental monitoring. (Wallace, p.
The Essay on Can Internet Be Regulated?
Can the Internet Be Regulated?One of the basic rights that Americans have today is in jeopardy; that right is freedom of speech. As of now U.S. citizens are restricted on what they can say and post on the Internet. This is due to the fact of the Communications Decency Act. This act is part of the Telecommunications Bill of 1996, and severely restricts what we can do and say on the Internet. He ...
160) There is a bottom line for this issue: If parents do not want their kids viewing pornographic or other material that they deem inappropriate for minors, then they must get involved. Involvement is a small price to pay for tomorrow’s future. Libel can be defined as “Published or broadcast communication that lowers the reputation of an individual by holding him or her up to contempt, ridicule, or scorn.”(Gelman, p. 84) In order for a plaintiff to win a libel suit, there are five conditions that must be proven to exist: (A) The libel was published. (B) The words were dealing with the plaintiff involved in the suit. (C) The material contained in the publication is defamatory.
(D) The material contained in the publication is false. (E) The defendant in the suit is found to be at fault. (Gelman, p. 87) All five of these conditions must exist for a plaintiff to win a libel suit. The Internet is considered to be a mass medium the same as radio, television, or newspaper, in regards to libel law. Before the passage of the Telecommunications Act of 1996, On-Line Service Providers (OSPs) would have been held liable for any acts of libel or defamation committed using their services or equipment. As for the OSPs, most of them, such as AOL, CompuServe, and Prodigy will only police web pages originating from their servers when they are alerted to an offense.
Even considering the Terms of Use agreement forms created by AOL and CompuServe, these legal notices do not say much concerning obscenity, let alone libel and defamation. CompuServe, for example (which is owned by AOL and therefore has the same legal notice), states the following in its service agreement which every member who signs up for service must agree to and digitally sign: Neither CompuServe nor any of its partners, agents, affiliates, suppliers or content providers shall be liable for any direct, indirect, incidental, special or consequential damages arising out of or relating to any use of compuserve.com (Cooper, p. 111) While this legal notice may not specifically deal with obscenity or libel, other parts of it do seriously address the issue of copyright, which will be discussed in more detail in the next section. Even if it is granted that we could hold OSPs and ISPs liable for any and every crime that is committed using their services, are we to ignore individual responsibility? It is not Prodigys fault that someone posts a libelous statement in one of their public forums or uses web space provided by Prodigy to create an obscene website. The service provider should have a responsibility to remove the offensive materials and terminate the users account. If OSPs and ISPs were to make official claims that they prohibit certain actions such as libel, the courts could possibly find them liable for the offenses. But, if service providers want to keep their immunity that is granted to them by the Telecommunications Act, then they must successfully self-regulate and police their property without making themselves available to litigation.
The Term Paper on Federal Trade Commission Children Internet Web
Parents Protecting Children on the World Wide Web Abstract This essay provides an overview of how to protect children against accessing inappropriate material on the Internet. In doing so, it addresses a number of issues. Firstly, it examines the benefits of 'surfing' the World Wide Web. These benefits include accessing a wide range of materials, educational games, e-mail applications, discussion ...
(Rosenoer, p. 223) If service providers police libel as seriously as they police spamming (the sending of unsolicited email messages), they would be well on the way to effectively policing themselves. Many have hypothesized that because of the global nature of the Internet, jurisdiction as it is known in the real world, as opposed to cyberspace, will be thrown out. Apparently, this is not true, at least in the United States. However, the government runs into a wall when it tries to pursue offenders outside its borders. If each state wants to effectively prosecute Cyberspace offenders, they must adopt long-arm statues if they havent already adopted them.
According to the Due Process clause of the fourteenth amendment, states are allowed to enable a long-arm statute which allows local courts to obtain jurisdiction over nonresident defendants when the cause of action is generated locally and effects local plaintiffs.() The Global Village may end up not being as global as we thought it was. The one advantage that the every-day Internet user has is that unlike traditional media such as Television or Newspapers, the Internet allows the libellee to respond instantly without any barriers to entry. Copyright is defined as that body of law which protects the works created by writers, painters, photographers, performing artists, inventors, and other persons who create intangible property.(Rosenoer, p. 175) Copyright was first created in Great Britain back in the 1500s when the government was granting privileges to printers who gave their loyalty to helping the government get rid of anti-establishment writers. However, authors rights were not protected until the 18th century when the British government made the nations first copyright law. Later, when the United States was officially formed and the Constitution was written, the founding fathers included the same copyright law that had existed in Britain. In 1976, after almost 200 years, the government changed Copyright Law to protect music, writing, and the arts.
The Term Paper on Copyright Laws
... produced by a state or federal Government agency, it becomes a part of the public domain and is free of any copyright restraints. [36 ... affirmative defense to infringement is fair use, and in the Internet context, it has not been proven to be successful. [47 ... do certain acts with an original work or other copyright subject-matter.FN9 FN9 Copyright Law in Australia - A Short Guide, October 1997, ...
B. Internet Domain Names and Copyright Did you ever wonder how places like Yahoo! get their own web space called www.yahoo.com? This is known as domain name registration. The domain name in www.yahoo.com is yahoo.com. Getting a personalized domain name is a very simple process, and it is relatively the same price for everyone. The current running price is approximately $70 to register with InterNIC, the organization that registers all the domain names on the Internet, and this fee is renewed annually. Then a setup fee is paid to the ISP that will be hosting the web page. Finally a monthly charge is paid to the ISP for the ability to use their server on a monthly basis.
(Edwards, p. 96) However, if you are content with not having your own personalized domain name, you can sign up at one of the many places on the web that will provide free web space. These providers can offer free space because they run advertisements in the background whenever your web page appears on the screen. Basically, domain names are like license plates for cars: you can pay a nominal fee for a random license plate, or you can pay a large fee for a customized license plate, either of which must be renewed annually. However, what happens when someone registers www.gwbush.com and then attempts to sell it to Republican presidential candidate George W. Bush for a large sum of money? This tactic is known as cyber squatting.
The anti-cyber squatting legislation approved by the House and Senate conferees would give individuals, as well as trademark and service mark holders, the ability to recover statutory damages of up to $100,000 from those registering their names or marks as domain names in bad faith.(Cooper, p. 227) The punishment does not stop there. The Senate bill also creates criminal penalties for repeat offenders of cyber squatting. Currently, when two companies want to use the same domain name, InterNIC will suspend the user of that name until the dispute is resolved in court or by arbitration. While the domain name is on hold, it is unavailable for use by any person or entity.(Godwin, p. 138) Although licensing may seem to be a viable alternative to selling domain names, one must consider whether or not this will invite government regulation. Before the Federal Radio Commission began regulating radio, radio was left to police itself.
The Essay on Internet Copyright Laws Material Information Book
Kevin Kearney May 4, 2003 MGT 251 / Extra Credit Internet Copyright Laws student comes home to his dorm at the University of Scranton after a rough day of classes. With the quick internet connection provided on the school's network, the student makes a few clicks and logs into Morpheus, a program that enables music fans to download free music. Within a few minutes he is on his way to owning an ...
It was unsuccessful in this effort, resulting in the creation of the FRC and later the FCC. Could Internet domain name registration take the same path? If things get out of control, then the government will have no choice but to intervene. Still another area that copyright law on the Internet will affect is the rights of the authors of literary works, scientific works, and musical works. What happens to the author that publishes one of his or her stories on their web page and someone else comes along and “cuts and pastes” the story to his web page claiming that he wrote the story? What happens when a professor at MIT publishes his findings on cold fusion, and a scientist at Los Alamos National Labs comes along and copies the findings and puts them in his report on cold fusion? This is more commonly known as the law of misappropriation, or unfair competition. (Godwin, p. 170) This is easily punishable here in the United States, but what about that Los Alamos scientist that just copied the MIT scientists findings on cold fusion? One way to prevent this problem would be to follow the ASCAP (American Society of Composers, Authors and Publishers) licensing model.
ASCAP is the organization that protects authors, composers and publishers from copyright infringement by selling and licensing the rights to copyrighted works. The way in which performance rights organizations regulate transmission of music over the radio and television provides a model solution to Internet copyright infringement. Similar organizations could license Internet Service Providers (ISPs), the companies that provide access to the Internet for individuals, to allow their users to transmit different types of digital information, such as music, documents, and computer programs over the Internet. Copyright holders could regulate the transmission of information through these licensing companies the same way music writers and publishers use performance rights organizations today. The final subject that I will address is that of junk email, more commonly known as Spam. Spam is unsolicited email on the Internet usually pertaining to commercial purposes. Its physical equivalent is the same junk-mail that people receive through the United States Postal Service. Currently, only three states have enacted legislation outlawing the act of Spamming: the State of Virginia, the State of Washington, and the State of California.
The Essay on Notes On The State Of Virginia
Any study of the United States should include Thomas Jeffersons Notes on the State of Virginia. Not only does he meticulously gather information, categorize and document the natural resources, but also discusses Virginias constitution and laws, which he uses as a microcosm for the United States government. Jeffersons celebration of the national bureaucracy is not without the various problems that ...
(Cooper, p. 94) Why have these three states taken such action? First, both Virginia and Washington have a large number of Internet-based businesses as well as ISPs located within their borders. Washington State is also the home of the software giant, Microsoft. America Online (AOL) is based in Herndon, Virginia as well. Even if a person in Florida spams someone in Chicago, chances are that that email passes through servers located in Virginia, thereby giving Virginia the right to prosecute. Basically, these two states are after people that use false email addresses full of false promises and false hope.
As usual, the rest of the states are expected to follow. Certainly, no one enjoys getting Spam mail, let alone junk mail in the real world. Yet alternatively, how does this affect the privacy of the individual? If one does not want to read the Spam, he can simply delete the offending message and let that be the end of the issue. In this paper, I have attempted to discuss how Internet has changed the society and culture of the United States. Clearly, there are not enough pages or enough time to discuss every single issue that exists today. There is a new age upon us and it is the Information Revolution.
What we do with it and how we choose to govern it is up to us. In order to understand the future of the Internet, we must understand its beginnings. The original intent of the Internet was to create a computer network that could communicate even after a nuclear attack on all major cities in the U.S. (Edwards, p. 116) Instead, it grew to be a new technology that can deliver information to anyone, anywhere in the world that has access to a computer, and changed society and culture of our country at large. Words Count: 2,549.
Bibliography:
Cate, Fred H. Internet and the First Amendment: Schools and Sexually Explicit Expressions.
Phi Delta Kappa Intl Press Inc: 1998. Cooper, Jonathan, ed. Liberating Cyberspace: Civil Liberties, Human Rights, and the Internet. Pluto Press: 1999. Edwards, Lilian and Charlotte Waelde, eds. Law and the Internet: Regulating Cyberspace. Hart Publishers: 1997. Gelman, Robert B., et al. Protecting Yourself Online: The Definitive Resource on Safety, Freedom, and Privacy in Cyberspace.
HarperCollins: 1998. Godwin, Mike. Cyber Rights: Defending Free Speech in the Digital Age. Times Books: 1998. Rose, Lance, Scott Rogers, and Joanne Cuthbertson, eds. Netlaw: Your Rights in the Online World. Osborne McGraw-Hill: 1995. Rosenoer, Jonathan.
Cyberlaw: The Law of the Internet. New York: Springer: 1997. Wallace, Jonathan, and Mark Mangan. Sex, Laws, and Cyberspace: Freedom and Censorship on the Frontiers of the Online Revolution. Henry Holt: 1997..
