Week 5 EOC: Legal Challenges With Modern Internet

There is much to be concerned about with the easy accessibility of the Internet in modern society. Nearly any piece of information you could think of is available online and, whether people are really aware of it or not, this includes your personal information, as well. It does not matter if you actively use a social media website or not, your information is still documented on sites such as the white pages or even when you pay a bill online – in fact, people that have never used a computer before in their lives are even documented online. Thus, one of the most important legal issues to exist on the web today is cyber crime. “Human rights such as the right to private life, freedom of expression and information and intellectual property rights need to be reviewed and reinterpreted in the light of the evolution of Internet applications.”  Napoleon Xanthoulis, Vice-President of the UCL Student Human Rights Programme (UCLSHRP) (http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/1010/10102602). 

Why are cyber crimes a relevant issue in modern society? It’s easy to steal someone’s identity on the internet. An individual’s personal computer, billing accounts, bank accounts, email, and more can easily be hacked through a variety of methods or just simple computer proficiency, and it is an effective way of seriously ruining someone’s life. There are, of course, other legal issues that may be less serious or perhaps more so on a federal statute level. For instance, there are limitations on the first amendment to freedom of speech on the internet – such as defamation, breach of contract, tortuous interference with business, and securities fraud – and this also includes online harassment in the form of bullying! Perhaps the most well known legal issue of the internet, however, is child pornography. “The Child Online Protection Act (COPA) makes it a crime to publish ‘any communication for commercial purposes that includes sexual material that is harmful to minors, without restricting access to such material by minors.’” (http://www.offthepagecreations.com/legal_issues_internet.php) 

Andrew Murray, Reader in Law at London School of Economics (LSE), argued that “with so much of our lives reliant on online access – banking, communications, social networking, relaxation, content delivery etc. do we need more than just a right to access?  Is it now time for a Cyberspace Bill of Rights?” (http://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/1010/10102602). Alternatively, social networking sites are held to two important statutes: Section 512(c) of the Digital Millenium Copyright Act and Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act. What do these mean? “Section 512(c) removes liability for copyright infringement from websites that allow users to post content, as long as the site has a mechanism in place whereby the copyright owner can request the removal of infringing content. The site must also not receive a financial benefit directly attributable to the infringing activity.” (http://technology.findlaw.com/modern-law-practice/understanding-the-legal-issues-for-social-networking-sites-and.html). In plain terms, sites like YouTube can claim the 512(c) defense in a lawsuit against media giants suing for content violations.  Lastly, we have Section 230: “Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act immunizes website from certain liability resulting from the publication of information provided by another. This usually arises in the context of defamation, privacy, negligence and other tort claims. It does not however, cover criminal liability, copyright infringement or other intellectual property claims.” (http://technology.findlaw.com/modern-law-practice/understanding-the-legal-issues-for-social-networking-sites-and.html). This statute protects the social website from certain liability of publication when a user posts defamatory or otherwise illegal content. Ultimately, this begs the question: will legislation push to protect the privacy of users and their own personal copyright, or continue to create loopholes with social networking sites that are bound legally to the media industry? Andrew Murray may have the right idea about a Cyberspace Bill of Rights.

Week 4 EOC: Patently Ridiculous

Copyright is a legal right given exclusively to originators of intellectual property. It is often very confusing to understand because of how court cases are handled legally, but it is important to know what the difference is between what copyright actually is, and what is necessary to be done to protect your rights to your work.

Week 3 EOC: Erin Brockovich

In an article posted in February of 2006, the LA Times discussed the PG&E case that was made famous by the 2000 film “Erin Brockovich.” One of the defining characteristics of this particular case was the fact that many of the resident’s houses were being bought out for far less than fair market value prices from PG&E. Ultimately, the case became well known because of Erin, who lead the way for the “largest direct action lawsuit in history” with a settlement that resulted in 333 million dollars split between more than 1,000 residents of Hinkley, California and the surrounding area. The company also issued an apology to the residents.  "Clearly, this situation should never have happened, and we are sorry that it did. It is not the way we do business, and we believe it would not happen in our company today” (http://articles.latimes.com/2006/feb/04/local/me-erin4). Additionally, the spokesman for the company, Jon Tremayne also added: "The differences between the plaintiffs and our company in the case centered on opposing views of the health science on chromium. Although the settlement does not resolve these differences, we believe it is best to move forward." (http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/2006-02-06-pge-settlement-brockovich_x.htm)

PG&E finally settled the last of the cases in 2008. Although much of the story was largely fiction in the film, each plaintiff did get roughly about $307,000 themselves in the settlement, which pales in comparison to the lifetime damages done to these plaintiffs. "Many of these people truly suffered and money doesn't make that go away," Erin Brockovich said in an interview. "But I hope it gives them a sense that they stood up for something; and I hope they can use the money to help with their medical conditions or to make their lives easier." (http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/industries/energy/2006-02-06-pge-settlement-brockovich_x.htm).

Week 2 EOC: Supreme Court

In May 2012, The Supreme Court ruled after hearing arguments in Town of Greece v. Galloway, a case that could change the way we deal with invocation prayers at city council meetings. It was concluded that the town halls prayers were an endorsement of a religious viewpoint, according to the judge.

Week 1 EOC: My Voice

As a professional wedding photographer, there are two important things to remember, no matter who you're shooting for: 1) your bride and groom are more nervous about having their pictures taken than you are about taking them, and 2) set aside your personal life, because their special day is not about you. Every day is a learning experience out in the field, and I aim to take full advantage of the lessons each new person may offer. I am a firm believer that formal education is important, but the only way to discover your strengths and weaknesses is through trial and error – of which there are many opportunities during a face-to-face encounter with clients. You will go far if you know the technical aspects of photography, but those technicalities should never impede your desire to deliver the best possible experience; after all, no matter how good your photography, if your client does not have a good time with you, they won’t care whether you know how to use a camera or not. Lastly, the following quote describes the most important aspect to photography: "I think a photography class should be a requirement, because it makes you see the world, rather than just look at it. " – Unknown.