A blog relating to Internet legal issues by Professor John Swinson, University of Queensland
Adsense HTML
Privacy
We have swapped weeks 3 and 4 of class, so Monday will be all about PRIVACY and will be taught by Carly.
During class we will be talking about a wide range of issues concerning privacy and the internet. To prepare, you can review the following:
Australian law
Office of the Privacy Commissioner - (Includes links to Privacy Act and Privacy Principles)
Australian Broadcasting Corporation v Lenah Game Meat Pty Ltd (2002) 208 CLR 199
Regulation
Internet Industry Association - (see Code of Conduct)
International Rights
Article 17 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Privacy Policies
See for example:
Disney Privacy Policy
Amazon Privacy Policy
Are they sufficient?
Cookies
Cookie Central
Workplace email / internet privacy
Workplace policies
Google
Articles regarding Buzz (already posted on blog)
Google Earth
Bullying
Online privacy
Use in litigation
Shopping
Solutions?
TrustE
We have swapped weeks 3 and 4 of class, so Monday will be all about PRIVACY and will be taught by Carly.
During class we will be talking about a wide range of issues concerning privacy and the internet. To prepare, you can review the following:
Australian law
Office of the Privacy Commissioner - (Includes links to Privacy Act and Privacy Principles)
Australian Broadcasting Corporation v Lenah Game Meat Pty Ltd (2002) 208 CLR 199
Regulation
Internet Industry Association - (see Code of Conduct)
International Rights
Article 17 of International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Privacy Policies
See for example:
Disney Privacy Policy
Amazon Privacy Policy
Are they sufficient?
Cookies
Cookie Central
Workplace email / internet privacy
Workplace policies
Articles regarding Buzz (already posted on blog)
Google Earth
Bullying
Online privacy
Use in litigation
Shopping
Solutions?
TrustE
Apple Sues Maker of Google's Android Phone
See NY Times article
"In the lawsuit, filed with the office of the United States International Trade Commission and the United States District Court in Delaware, Apple said that HTC phones running Android violated 20 of its patents, including those relating to the iPhone’s ability to recognize the touch of multiple fingers on its screen at once."
Throwing the Book at Facebook
See this article in the Business Spectator.
"Companies and individuals are increasingly beginning to query why they should simply wear slanderous online comments that they wouldn't hesitate to take legal action against if it appeared on the printed page. From the heady early days when the internet was seen as a beast too wild to be tamed by the law, there is growing debate as to whether and how the web should be regulated.
In the past few weeks, we have seen a series of legal issues arise in relation to comments on the internet – particularly on Facebook.
In one case, $30,000 in damages was rewarded in response to defamatory comments by a man using various pseudonyms on a stock market forum. We have also seen an Indonesian man currently face jail time for insulting his music mentor on Facebook. ..."
See also - Facebook Ads article
iCyte page
Websites
This is the course website:
Peter Black, who co-taught this subject last year, has this blog. http://freedomtodiffer.com/ He has become a famous Twit.
Google falls foul of privacy once again
From JL:
It is interesting to note that once again Google has reached for the freedom of speech lever as the apparent universal panacea absolving itself of any and all responsibility for breaches of privacy.
I for one would have though that, as an American company, Google would have been well-versed in the notion that freedom of speech is only 'free' to the extent that it does not impose on, contravene or breach another person's legal rights.
If tertiary institutions have the capability of analysing work submitted by students for plagiarism through the use of algorithm programs, then surely the technical boffins at Google can devise some process whereby material submitted for posting to the web can be assessed.
In this particular case, it is difficult to embrace the Google's Code of Conduct "Don't do evil" as being anything other than a marketing slogan. For mine, aiding and abetting the doing of evil equates to the same thing. If Google is serious about corporate social responsibility, then I suggest it not just talk about it, but in the words of another multinational "Just do it!"
See also NY Times
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
How should damages be assessed for privacy and cybersecurity breaches
Listen to this podcast where I discuss how damages should be assessed in privacy and cybersecurity lawsuits. The Lawyers Weekly Show host J...
-
The issue of content regulation in China was mentioned in this blog last year . In the last few weeks, this issue has once again pushed into...
-
The United Nations intellectual property agency (WIPO) is the latest front in the US-China trade war. http://www.theage.com.au/world/sad-am...
-
Google LLC v Defteros [2022] HCA 27 , decided 17 August 2022 by High Court of Australia. The High Court decided that for the purposes of ...