|
|
| |
CYBERSPACE LAW ABSTRACTS
"Net Neutrality and Canada's Telecommunications Act"
CRAIG MCTAGGART, TELUS Communications Company Email: craig.mctaggart@telus.com
The ongoing policy debate under the banner of "net neutrality" engages fundamental questions regarding the form of governance that best protects the interests of Internet stakeholders and advances the development of the Internet itself. While incidents sparking net neutrality concerns in North America have been isolated, often misunderstood, and rarely repeated, the attention that they have attracted is indicative of the level of interest in this issue. There are a variety of legitimate concerns on all sides. While some are calling for new legislation or regulation of Internet access to address net neutrality concerns, this paper seeks to demonstrate that, unlike in the United States, Canada's existing Telecommunications Act provides the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC) the authority it needs to address any problems that may arise. I propose certain general public policy principles regarding residential wireline Internet access, followed by a set of specific interpretive principles using which the Telecommunications Act may usefully be applied to Canada's competitive Internet access marketplace.
"Understanding Privacy"
Daniel J. Solove, UNDERSTANDING PRIVACY, Harvard University Press, May 2008
DANIEL J. SOLOVE, George Washington University Law School Email: dsolove@law.gwu.edu
Privacy is one of the most important concepts of our time, yet it is also one of the most elusive. As rapidly changing technology makes information increasingly available, scholars, activists, and policymakers have struggled to define privacy, with many conceding that the task is virtually impossible.
In UNDERSTANDING PRIVACY (Harvard University Press, May 2008), Professor Daniel J. Solove offers a comprehensive overview of the difficulties involved in discussions of privacy and ultimately provides a provocative resolution. He argues that no single definition can be workable, but rather that there are multiple forms of privacy, related to one another by family resemblances. His theory bridges cultural differences and addresses historical changes in views on privacy.
Drawing on a broad array of interdisciplinary sources, Solove sets forth a framework for understanding privacy that provides clear, practical guidance for engaging with relevant issues, such as surveillance, data mining, identity theft, state involvement in reproductive and marital decisions, and other pressing contemporary matters concerning privacy.
Chapter 1 is available for download.
"Dignity as a New Framework, Replacing the Right to Privacy"
Thomas Jefferson Law Review, Vol. 30, No. 1, 2007
JEREMY M. MILLER, Chapman University - School of Law Email: KAYSHVA@aol.com
Privacy if not now, will soon be a dead letter in legal analysis. However, the related concept of dignity will fill the void; and make sense out of a tangled area of law.
Whether the Court is protecting invasions of privacy under tort law, the Fourth Amendment, the First Amendment or those fundamental rights, it is dignity that serves as their common bond. The several cases discussed in this article, reveal the frequent inability of the Court to discuss privacy without referencing dignity, or one of its synonyms: i.e. respect, value, self-worth, self-respect, etc. Thus, it is suggested that the Court is truly protecting human dignity as the underlying value of privacy.
In the context of the Fourth Amendment or invasion of privacy under tort law, the question of whether privacy still exists arises. With modern technology, the concept of privacy diminishes. Even with fundamental rights, is the right to marriage, procreation, family relationships, child-rearing and education, homosexual sodomy, or even the right to die properly termed privacy? It is apparent that true rights are undoubtedly associated with human dignity, for inherent in all of these privileges is the ability to freely determine one's path without inviting judgment of the state. This liberty creates individuality and sustains the right to be individuals, and in every sense of the word promotes self-respect, self-worth, and value. More accurately stated, this is dignity. Although limitations must exist for a properly functioning society, the interest in maintaining an open and free nation demands that legislatures and courts protect this core value.
Privacy can promote crime, but dignity promotes only goodness. The cases discussed illustrate such analysis is already being adopted, and thus upholding dignity as a protected value is not only plausible, it is proven to be possible by its subtle, already existing application. Without nationally recognizing the need for re-focus, the right to erroneous enforcement of a privacy right will continue to remove certain freedoms that are necessary for our Republic to prosper, remain free, and allow men and women to live and die seeking happiness. Additionally, once realized that privacy is a legal fiction, its amorphous contours can be trimmed, with principal, and expanded, again when such is with principal. The widespread problem of private child abuse and child pornography indicates that privacy is not a good in itself. However, dignity is always good and always must be maximized insofar as possible.
The continued use of the fiction privacy, places our glorious country in danger. Dignity is one such legal value and right that without which our system cannot endure. Additionally, once perceived it will undoubtedly aid in creating stability and predictability in several areas of the law.
| ^top
Solicitation of Abstracts
Cyberspace Law publishes abstracts of papers dealing with all aspects of the regulation of cyberspace, whether that regulation is through law, social norms, or the architecture of the network. The approach of the journal is inter-disciplinary: We will abstract papers in law and in other related social science disciplines that raise issues related to the regulation of cyberspace.
To submit your research to SSRN, log in to the SSRN User HeadQuarters, and click on the My Papers link on the left menu, and then click on Start New Submission at the top of the page.
Distribution ServicesIf your Institution is interested in learning more about increasing readership for its research by becoming a Partner in Publishing or starting a Research Paper Series, please email: Management@SSRN.com.
Distributed by: Legal Scholarship Network (LSN), a division of Social Science Electronic Publishing (SSEP) and Social Science Research Network (SSRN)
Directors
LSN SUBJECT MATTER JOURNALS BERNARD S. BLACK
University of Texas at Austin School of Law, McCombs School of Business, University of Texas at Austin, European Corporate Governance Institute (ECGI) Email: bblack@law.utexas.edu
RONALD J. GILSON
Stanford Law School, Columbia Law School Email: rgilson@leland.stanford.edu
Please contact us at the above addresses with your comments, questions or suggestions for LSN-Sub.
Advisory BoardCyberspace Law A. MICHAEL FROOMKIN
University of Miami - School of Law I. TROTTER HARDY
College of William and Mary - Marshall-Wythe School of Law DAVID R. JOHNSON
Visiting Professor of Law, New York Law School ETHAN KATSH
University of Massachusetts at Amherst - Department of Legal Studies MARK A. LEMLEY
Stanford Law School JESSICA LITMAN
Professor of Law, University of Michigan DAVID G. POST
Professor of Law, Temple University School of Law MARGARET JANE RADIN
Wm. Benjamin Scott & Luna M. Scott Professor, Stanford Law School PAMELA SAMUELSON
Richard M. Sherman Distinguished Professor of Law & Information, UC Berkeley School of Law EUGENE VOLOKH
Gary T. Schwartz Professor of Law, University of California, Los Angeles - School of Law |
| |
| | | | |
| | |