Adsense HTML

Google continues to expand

Google aims to become a $US100 billion company according to Australian IT today. The article also notes that despite Google's new products, 97% of its revenue is from search-related advertising.

More on when will email cease to be free?

This issue was raised in this blog on Wednesday, but I thought it interesting to posit the idea that perhaps that rather than all-free email or all-pay email, we could be seeing the introduction of a two tiered system. This is certainly the allegation that is being levelled at AOL (see this Financial Times article).

Is there anything wrong with a two tiered system? If users are prepared to pay for an email system that guarantees increased speed and authentication, why shouldn't just accept that it is their right to do so? It all comes back to the fundamental questions: should email be free, and why?

Internet performance in Australia

The Australian Communications and Media Authority has also issued a report on the data rates and reliability of internet connections in Australia. Although the report is quite technical, it concludes that Australian internet performance across different technologies and access plans is generally consistent with transmission protocols and the inherent nature of the internet. The report is titled Understanding your Internet Quality of Service 2004-05.

ACMA warning on phishing

The Australian Communications and Media Authority has issued a warning about phishing, a topic we will cover a bit later in the semester. You can read the warning here.

Are we too email dependent?

Are we too email dependent? Joceyln Noveck wonders if that is so in her article "In the age of e-mail and instant messaging, the lowly handwritten note gains currency ..."

Do you agree or disagree? Is the handwritten note gaining currency?

Content Regulation in China

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 international media. The Washington Post recently published an excellent series of stories on this issue, titled The Click That Broke a Government's Grip.

Here are some other recent stories relating to content regulation in China:
  • The Chinese government continues to prosecute people for subversion for online writings. For example, on Tuesday the AP reported that a Chinese journalist has been whose reports on rural poverty and unemployment riled local officials has been charged with subversion after posting essays on the internet.
  • China is cracking down on spam and piracy.
  • Much to the chagrin of the US government, various internet companies have agreed to China's censorship demands.

For a detailed study, see this report from the OpenNet Initiative: Internet Filtering in China in 2004-2005.

Of course, the Chinese government defends its right to regulate the internet in the way it does.

There are really two issues here. First, how successful has China's regulation been? And second, assuming the Chinese government's attempts at regulation have been relative successful, should a government be able to regulate what its citizens can access through the internet? So basically, the first is a practical or technical question - does it work? - while the second is the moral or philosophical question on the role of government and the value of free speech? Any thoughts or different perspectives? Who would defend what China is doing?

New Phishing Law Used

America Online has filed three lawsuits under Virginia's anti-phishing law. Read more here.

Do we need such new specialised legislation to combat phishing, or can existing laws be used.

Technological protection measures

The House Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs has handed down it's report on the inquiry into technological protection measures (TPM) exceptions.

A copy is available here:

http://www.aph.gov.au/house/committee/laca/protection/report.htm

This is more a straight IP issue, but has some impact on Internet distribution of content.

When will email cease to be free?

In class on Monday night, someone asked when internet companies were going start charging for email. Here may be the answer - CNN reports that Yahoo! and America Online plan to start charging businesses to send commercial e-mail messages. Of course, as the article points out, this planned move is provoking protest.

We need to think about why should email be free? Is it just because it always has been? Or are there other reasons? Note that for the moment at least, the plan is only charge to businesses. Will this last, or will all email users eventually have to pay a fee for each email they send? Would charging a fee for each email sent impact upon the use and adoption of email and the internet?

IT Today

Each Tuesday, The Australian newspaper has a special section called IT Today, which includes IT Business. It is worth reading (or at least skimming) this section each week.

Here a few interesting articles from the section published today that touch upon issues we will cover later in the semester:

There are also interesting and relevant articles that are not available online, so it was worth buying The Australian each Tuesday just to stay on top of what is happening.

Who owns the Internet?

Following on from the question posed in class last night - who owns the internet? - look at this article from CNN, "Tolls could dot the Internet highway". The article refers to the major telecommunication companies as "the operators of the Internet" and reports that they wish to provide a tiered service whereby consumers pay more for a faster service.

The article is worth reading as it reinforces a number of things discussed last night - how information on the information is carried in packets, the historical origins of the internet, how the internet has evolved, as well as positing that perhaps it is the telecommunication companies that own the internet. What do you think? And if the telecommunication companies do impose what the article refers to as a toll, what would be the implications on internet usage? Also, what privacy issues may this raise?

Cyberlaw at QUT

Let's begin with a posting about QUT ...

A new "open access to knowledge" project hosted by the Queensland University of Technology aims to ensure that anyone can legally share knowledge across the world, whether they be an every day citizen or a top end researcher.

The QUT team, led by School of Law head, Professor Brian Fitzgerald is embarking on a $1.3 million, two year project to develop legal protocols for managing copyright issues in an open access environment.

For more information, see the press release or visit the project's homepage.

What do you think? Is this a valuable project? Should research be available under an open access protocol? What should such a protocol involve?

Welcome to LWN117 Students

Welcome to all the LWN117 Legal Regulation of the Internet students for semester 1, 2006. As well, welcome to anyone else who happens to read and/or wishes to contribute to the posts.

I hope you find this to be a good way of keeping up to date with a wide variety of issues and of contributing to the discussion of the issues we cover in this unit.

Thanks and I hope you enjoy the semester!

Release of geographic names in com.au and net.au

auDA is lifting the restriction on the use of geographic names as domain
names in com.au and net.au.

auDA has determined that the fairest and most effective way of releasing
the geographic names will be by way of individual ballots.

auDA intends to launch the ballot process in June 2005.

For more information please refer to the announcement at
http://www.auda.org.au/news.php?newsid=37

Too much IT jargon?

"It says something of the times that the latest great hoax has not been foisted upon the art and literary world but the jargon-laden internet industry." To read the rest of the article and discover the hoax, visit The Australian.

More cybercrime

LexisNexis has disclosed that criminals may have breached computer files containing the personal information of 310,000 people. The personal information was apparently accessed by unauthorised individuals using stolen passwords and IDs.

Read more here.

Euthanasia and a proposed internet ban

The Criminal Code Amendment (Suicide Related Material Offences) Bill 2005 aims to stop use of the Internet, the telephone and faxes for communication that "counsels or incites suicide." (More information is contained in The Explanatory Memorandum to the Bill.)

Critics have contended that this would threaten Australia's freedom of political communication, as well as freedom of the press and rational adults' right to have access to information. Electronic Frontiers Australia has made a submission to the Senate Committee inquiry.

Dr Philip Nitschke has also suggested that banning the spread of information on voluntary euthanasia over the Internet could boost the number of people who commit suicide. Read more here.

Should the internet be regulated in this way?

Another way to deal with content regulation

Another solution to the content regulation issue may be for parents to make an internet use agreement with their child. That's one option presnted by GetNetWise.

What do you think of this approach?

E-tendering

In Monday's class we will be looking at a case study of e-commerce implementation: e-tendering. The discussion will be informed by a recent report of Cooperative Research Centre for Construction Innovation (CRC CI) .

The report was the result of collaboration between project members, researchers and affiliates from the CRC CI, QUT (Law, IT/Security and BEE), University of Newcastle, Queensland Crown Law, Queensland Department of Public Works, Queensland Department of Main Roads, and Brisbane City Council.

The report can be accessed here. (You will need your QUT Access usernsame and password to open the file.) Although an overview of the report will be presented in class, if you are interested it may be useful to have a browse through the report before class.

Parents use of internet filtering software

Another report updating some of the issues we discussed in our class on content regulation.

In the United States, more and more parents are using internet filtering software, according to a report by the Pew Internet and American Life Project. Robert MacMillan of the Washington provides a summary here, and the full report is available here.

Content Regulation in China

In class a few weeks ago, we considered content regulation in China. Now, a study by the OpenNet Initiative has found that the Chinese government's Internet controls have kept pace with rapid changes in technology and are buttressed by self-censorship.

For a summary of the findings, click here.

Web Wrap Agreements

There is an important recent decision upholding web-wrap agreements. Register.com v. Verio http://www.icann.org/registrars/register.com-verio/decision-23jan04.pdf.

In that case, one of the three appeal judges died while writing the decision. (He was dissenting). This case has special circumstances -- repeated use of website and bad conduct -- so even though it is from an important court, I am not sure if it will be followed in all circumstances.

More on the Yahoo Nazi paraphernalia case

For another aspect of the French Yahoo case involving auctions of Nazi paraphernalia that were once held on Yahoo's web site, referred to in this blog on 29 March, click here. The article discusses the finding of a Paris appeals court to uphold a decision to throw out accusations by French human rights activists who said that Yahoo should be held legally responsible for the auctions.

Regulation of political blogs?

Here is an interesting article on the Federal Election Commission in the United States considering whether to regulate political blogging.

What do you think?

Yahoo Japan sued in class action

YAHOO Japan has been sued by customers for scams on its site in the nation's first class-action suit seeking compensation from an online auction broker.

A total of 572 people across Japan paid via Yahoo for auctioned items such as liquid-crystal televisions and digital cameras but did not receive the goods, said Noboru Mizuno, who leads the group.

To read more, click here.

Google in the news

Here are some recent articles involving Google:

And check out Google Gulp.

Is Amazon becoming Big Brother?

From the Associated Press:

"Amazon.com Inc. has one potentially big advantage over its rival online retailers: It knows things about you that you may not know yourself.

"Though plenty of companies have detailed systems for tracking customer habits, critics and boosters alike say Amazon is the trailblazer, having collected information longer and used it more proactively. It even received a patent recently on technology aimed at tracking information about the people for whom its customers buy gifts."

Read more here.

Should we be concerned about our privacy? Or is it making online shopping more convenient? What does Amazon's Privacy Policy say?

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...