VassilevaCMPT 408 – Freedom of Speech 1 Freedom of Speech - Objectives 1.Discuss the different legal treatment of different medial regarding Freedom of Speech 2.Discuss various types of offensive speech 3.Discuss various issues related to freedom of speech 4.Discuss some currently available technological means to ensure or to restrict freedom of speech Monday: overview, based on Chapter 5 of Baase Wednesday: (finish overview) + discuss several of the questions at the end of Chapter 5 of Baase: –look at general exercises – 9, 14, 15, 16, 17, 21; –be ready to discuss them Friday: discussion of cases and articles accessible from Comtella Activities

VassilevaCMPT 408 – Freedom of Speech 2 The Legal Context U.S. Constitution –first amendment “Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press …” –fourth amendment “the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated …” Canadian Constitution: 1982 Constitution Act Charter of Rights and Freedoms –section 2 (b) guarantees “freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication...” –section 8 guarantees that “everyone has the right to be free against unreasonable search and seizure…” –charter rights have been held as vitally important and only to be restricted in the clearest of circumstances

VassilevaCMPT 408 – Freedom of Speech 3 Other Canadian Laws and Regulations Affecting Freedom of Speech provincial human rights codes Criminal Code of Canada prohibitions –section 163: distributing pornography –section 319: incitement to hatred and genocide –section 326: theft of telecommunications –section 342: unauthorized use of a computer system –section 430: mischief in relation to data various laws against misrepresentation, protecting copyright and trademark, etc. publication bans –for example on minor’s names, opinion polls during elections (B.C.), broadcasting election results before the polls close, etc. content rules –for broadcasting (CRTC) doesn’t apply to internet (yet) –Québec language laws applies to commercial web sites in Québec, but not extraterritorially

VassilevaCMPT 408 – Freedom of Speech 4 Different Legal Treatment of Different Media Print media ( books, newspapers, pamphlets  1 :m) –Protected by Constitution (from government censorship, not individual or corporate – see pg. 195, last paragraph and 1996 ) –Almost free press in U.S. and Canada –Libel laws still apply, inciting violence is illegal, but advocating illegal acts is usually legal Common carriers ( phone, post  1:1) –No control or responsibility for content Broadcast ( TV, radio  1:m) –Strong government regulation (through licensing) –Justification: Limited number of licenses (frequencies) leads to monopoly of broadcasters; comes into the home (children-viewers) Cable (1:1) –More freedom of speech than broadcast, but less than press Computer communications ( Internet newsgroups, services like AOL, Yahoo, MSN  m:m) –Theoretically: unlimited freedom of speech –Practically: a battlefield –Similar to all media listed above + libraries, bookstores, rented meeting rooms, and all these are treated differently by the laws

VassilevaCMPT 408 – Freedom of Speech 5 Types of Offensive Speech Libel –person can be sued –can the internet service also be sued? Hate Speech –Promotion of hate directed at particular races, or groups of individuals such as gays or doctors providing abortions. –Promotion of religious bigotry. –False information. Anti-social Speech –Anti-government propaganda –Information about illegal or anti-social acts, such as bomb- making, hacking or virus-making. Other Offensive Speech –Religious –Racist or Nazi propaganda –Abortion / Ant-abortion information –Advertisements (e.g. for tobacco, alcohol) –Violence depictions (e.g. violent movies or games) –When commercial interests are affected (e.g. legal software or medical advice websites have been sued by professional organizations) All these things existed before the Internet –The Internet changed the scale (easy access, anonymous, straight into the homes, school libraries etc…)

VassilevaCMPT 408 – Freedom of Speech 6 Types of Offensive Speech Pornography –Illegal (child pornography) vs. inappropriate for children –defined by local community standards, –but virtual communities cross the local boundaries –“least common denominator” community standards –U.S. Communications Decency Act (1996) aimed at preventing child pornography part of 1996 Telecommunications Act makes it illegal to distribute child pornography applies to both individuals and to the internet service severe penalties but too vague and broad and does not use the least restrictive means of accomplishing its goals  ruled unconstitutional by supreme court in 1997 –The Child On-line Protection Act (1998) Similar fate like the Common Decency Act Encourage development of preventing technology The responsibility on the users’ own shoulders –are there other ways of preventing pornography? parental and societal responsibility monitoring and web sites technological solutions (eg. NetNanny, MicroWebToolkit)

VassilevaCMPT 408 – Freedom of Speech 7 Possible Controls Using blocking software. Forcing ISPs or libraries to use blocking software Using existing laws. Passing new laws. Civil cases. PICS (Platform for Internet Content Selection)

VassilevaCMPT 408 – Freedom of Speech 8 Holding Internet Services Responsible? Are they similar to libraries, or to newspapers? –Libraries are government institutions, subject to the 1 st Amendment –Newspapers are private and are not obliged to publish things they don’t agree with Can content be monitored? –impact on privacy (e.g. in discussion groups) –filters not reliable, restrict more than needed, aren’t sensitive to who is accessing the material, can’t filter P2P exchange of files Who decides what is offensive? Will internet services move offshore? –Approaches to restrict access outside of a country –Challenges, e.g. anonymizer services

VassilevaCMPT 408 – Freedom of Speech 9 Free Speech Issues anonymity and pseudonymity –anonymous , browsing, user information should really be called “pseudonymous” (false name) –used for both good help groups – protects privacy and allows disclosing intimate information whistle blowers, e.g. John Doe lawsuits… –and bad Fraud, Harassment, Misrepresentation Criminal and antisocial uses (e.g. distributing child pornography, to infringe copyrights) –should anonymity be banned? comparison to letters to editor Guaranteed right by the First Amendment (U.S.) rule of thumb: anything with reactions this strong should probably not be prohibited –When do internet service providers NOT protect anonymity? Only in case of special circumstances (e.g. suicide, terrorist threat, or libel lawsuit After a period of waiting, and informing the anonymous users the provider can reveal their identity

VassilevaCMPT 408 – Freedom of Speech 10 Spammers say they exercise their right to free speech –It is cheap and obviously effective But it costs the recipient and the internet service provider (connection time on dial up, disk space on web- mail, effort to clean up mailbox, clogs the network, loss of customers) –Violates private property rights of internet service providers (ISPs) –ISPs are private companies (like newspapers) are not obliged by the First Amendment to publish everything Courts have ruled that spam is not protected by free speech, since the perpetrator is using somebody else’s resources without their permission –So ISP have the right to filter spam –But then they may move out of the country –Other solutions: spammer pays every recipient a micropayment Laws regulating spam (pg. 222) But what if a spam-like message is not commercial? –If a mail expresses political views, human-rights issues or blowing the whistle, can the ISP filter it? –Is every mass mailing = spamming? Spam and Freedom of Speech

VassilevaCMPT 408 – Freedom of Speech 11 How to ensure valuable content on the internet? If everyone can publish, how to find educational and useful materials among all the content? If government funds programs to create useful material or make such material more visible, will this be a violation to the freedom of speech of the authors of the other materials? No strong agreement in the public about what is valuable content. Experience with other media –press  diversity of information and opinion, many publishing companies make decisions what to publish (influenced by their expectations about what will sell). –broadcasting networks  only several networks define the content  less diversity Internet  we are seeing mergers of large ISPs  will only a few viewpoints be presented? Large companies will use laws and regulations to restrict competition, commercial interests will dominate? Will volunteers have a chance to continue providing independent content?

VassilevaCMPT 408 – Freedom of Speech 12 Initiative: –Internet Content Rating Association (ICRA): a non-profit org., including AOL/Time Warner, Bell South, BT, IBM, MSN, UUNet, Verizon. –Mission – to enable the public to make informed decisions through open and objective labeling of content –Authors answer a questionnaire about the content of their material  a label (piece of code) is generated automatically –Labels follow an Internet standard notation, called PICS (Platform for Internet Content Selection). –Users, can set their browsers to disallow websites with objectionable content. ISP, companies can easily filter content. Weaknesses: –Authors can lie –The majority of currently available web- content is not labeled. How can these problems be alleviated? –Collaborative recommendations to verify ratings… –…? How to ensure valuable content on the internet?