Google, China and Content Regulation

From The New York Times:

What Happens as Google Uncensors Search in China?

Google has stopped censoring results on its Chinese search engine, but many underlying pages are still blocked. Meanwhile, some Chinese say Google risks a government shutdown of its service.

http://s.nyt.com/u/68V

See also this story

Issues in Creating a Social Website

"...As a result of this trend, companies that were long content to have a Web site consisting of nothing more than an online brochure are now actively exploring creating Web sites with social media capabilities. Before implementing social media capabilities (e.g., hosting user-generated content, giving users the ability to share content with other members of the Web site community), though, the company should weigh the business justification for doing so, because the legal issues involved can be tricky. "

See this article

http://www.kilpatrickstockton.com/

Google and Copyright

Viacom and Google broke their silence Thursday in their legal battle, as Viacom claimed that Google's YouTube unit had sought to exploit copyrighted works for profit, while Google argued that Viacom itself had secretly uploaded copyrighted clips it later demanded YouTube remove. The claims are among the many divulged as a federal judge and the parties to the case released a slew of documents.

Week 5 will cover the three related issues of SPAM, CRIME and PHISHING

You should review the following for some background understanding (as well as the material referred to in the study guide):

Spam

Spam Act
ACMA
IIA Code

Crime

Australian Federal Police
Costs - UK
On the rise - US
Recent case

Phishing

Anti-Phishing
Westpac
SARS

Is legislation or technology/awareness the solution? Which countries have attempted to combat phishing by legislation?

Following on from last week's discussion of Buzz, Google has now been sued by a user - see article.

Internet Jurisdiction

The next class is Internet jurisdiction. In addition to the notes in the Study Guide, please read the following:

Sliding Scale Test:

Zippo case

Effects Test:

Calder v. Jones (US Supreme Court)

Application of Effects Test:

Ubid v. GoDaddy

Weather Underground case (and complete court file for this case if interested)

Article

Australian approach:

Dow Jones v. Gutnick (High Court of Australia)

[Defamation - including Internet cases - background information if interested]

Comment: Determining Internet Jurisdiction

Queensland Police information

Could two courts come to an inconsistent result in the same case:

See The Secret litigation

• Background: The Australian

• Australian Trial Judge Decision
• Full Court of Federal Court Decision

• Note regarding US decision on jurisdiction

See also prior posts if interested, for example.

Translate Google

An article on Google's translation service: NY Times

One of the article links (Google - Bullying) is redirecting to the wrong article. This is the correct article.

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

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."