Search

This literature review covers the following topics: The fundamental rights underpinnings of copyright and freedom of expression. Background to the debate: factors and developments which have focused attention on the tension between copyright and freedom of expression. Nature of the interaction between copyright and freedom of expression: the extent to which the relationship between the two is one of conflict or one of co-existence and co-operation. Specific issues: contexts in which the tension between copyright and freedom of expression is particularly acute. Proposals for accommodating freedom of expression within copyright law frameworks. Related issues and themes: in brief, implications raised by copyright for human rights other than the right to freedom of expression. &nbsp

This article is based on comparative comments (with special attention paid to Irish law) presented at a seminar on breach of confidence and privacy. It is first argued that a continuing uncertainty regarding the role of statute in relation to privacy is common to the development of doctrines in both England and Scotland, with similar anxieties present in other jurisdictions. In the absence of statutory clarity, the questions arising out of debate on the nature of the cause of action, and the consequences of variation in definitions of "privacy", are considered - with special attention to developments in Ireland and New Zealand. The relationship between the evolution of breach of confidence and the human rights framework is also noted. Finally, the prospects for law reform and/or convergence across jurisdictions in the United Kingdom are assessed.

This paper discusses the legal implications of CCTV sniffing and war walking, legally problematic uses of wireless networks, for the purpose of art. Using Bitnik’s “surveillance chess” as starting point, it asks if new forms of computer enabled art require new forms of protection, especially in countries without constitutional guarantee of freedom of art.

This article considers a dispute between the European Union and Council of Europe regarding their respective roles in the broadcasting field, so as to explain and assess its relevance for the development at the international level of media law and policy. The dispute is a long-running one and dates back to the adoption of the first EEC Directive and Council Convention on this subject in 1989. It is argued that the expansion of the scope of EU broadcasting law and the consolidation of the European Commission’s role in external affairs left little room for the Council to continue to exercise influence over the regulation of the electronic media in the way it has done for some time. The exact nature of the dispute between the institutions, and the response of a vocal member state, is ascertained through consideration of published minutes and internal correspondence, set in the context of doctrinal and political developments. The article concludes with analysis of possible future actions for the Council.

This paper discusses the legal implications of CCTV sniffing and war walking, legally problematic uses of wireless networks, for the purpose of art. Using Bitnik’s “surveillance chess” as starting point, it asks if new forms of computer enabled art require new forms of protection, especially in countries without constitutional guarantee of freedom of art.

This paper assesses the regulation of smartphone 'app stores.' At the outset, the adoption of smartphones and apps is noted, alongside the ways in which scholars and journalists have used these markets as the basis for the discussion of legal and economic issues. The importance (commercially and as a study in governance and control) of the iOS App Store (Apple) is highlighted. Part 2 deals with the relationship between Apple and app developers; three themes of Apple’s Guidelines are identified (content, development and payments), and the ways in which control can be challenged (through jailbreaking, ‘web apps’ and regulatory intervention) are scrutinised. Part 3 considers three ways in which apps are already regulated by law: the protection of consumers (particularly through the UK system for 'premium rate services'), user privacy, and (in brief) the regulation of video games and video-on-demand services in Europe. Finally, in Part 4, the tension between comparatively 'open and 'closed' app stores is highlighted; the problems of applying general provisions to emerging formats are emphasised. It is concluded that the emerging status of non-carrier app stores as neither retailer nor platform means that it is not yet possible to identify the form of regulation that is in operation, but that some steps are available to legislators that could shift the balance between closed and open models.

The article examines the net neutrality debate in Canada and the European Union (EU). It notes the essentiality of considering net neutrality in the context of significant political and social debates concerning plurality, speech and innovation as an approach. It mentions the likeliness of commercial Internet service providers (ISPs) to impose additional restrictions on user behaviour even those that had initial restrictions.

The Digital Economy Act 2010, better known for its much-debated copyright provisions, also facilitates major changes to the statutory regulation of computer and video games in the United Kingdom. This article sets out the history of the regulation of game content by the BBFC and the video game industry, reviews the various reports and interventions that led to the 2010 provisions, and considers the implications of various new definitions. The possible separation of film and games is considered, as are developments in relation to tax relief and to the regulation of games in other jurisdictions.

In this paper, the treatment of self-regulatory and other private bodies for the purposes of English public law is reviewed. Starting with the expansion of the scope of judicial review of administrative action in Datafin, the question is explored alongside other key aspects of public law, with an argument being advanced that there are in fact multiple definitions of public authorities and public function currently used for a range of purposes. Datafin is compared with the case law under section 6 of the Human Rights Act, including YL. Particular attention is paid to the less familiar areas of the law where specific statutes require public authorities to carry out duties, such as legislation pertaining to freedom of information and equality rights. It is argued that, while the definitions and lists used in the case of these statutes draw upon the experiences of the courts in applying Datafin and section 6, there are significant gaps in accountability and scrutiny that should be addressed. Finally, the question of new forms of self- and co-regulation in relation to new media are summarised, and it is concluded that further clarity on the scope of public law, including statutory schemes, is required, and that actions taken thus far in Parliament have not addressed this problem in an adequate fashion.

A report on the 5th Internet, Law and Politics Conference hosted by the UOC in July 2009. The author, who attended the conference as a rapporteur and wrote a ‘live blog' during the two-day event, reviews some of the contributions, reflects on the theme of social networking sites (‘pro or con?') and explores the different approaches of the disciplines of law and political science, suggesting that the increased importance of such sites means that considerations such as privacy, security, political engagement and copyright are the subject of necessary and interdisciplinary public debate.

Due to legal uncertainty surrounding the application of key provisions of European and UK data protection law, the public interest in protecting individuals’ informational privacy is routinely neglected, as are the public interests in certain uses of data. Consent or anonymisation are often treated as the paradigmatic example of compliance with data protection law, even though both are unable to attend to the full range of rights and interests at stake in data processing. Currently, where data processing may serve a realisable public interest, and consent or anonymisation are impracticable (if not impossible to obtain) the public interest conditions to processing are the rational alternative justifications for processing. However, the public interest conditions are poorly defined in the legislation, and misunderstood and neglected in practice. This thesis offers a much-needed alternative to the predominant consent-or-anonymise paradigm by providing a new understanding of the public interest concept in data protection law and to suggest a new approach to deploying the concept in a way that is consistent with the protective and facilitative aims of the legislation. Through undertaking legislative analysis new insight is provided on the purpose of the public interest conditions in data protection law, revealing critical gaps in understanding. By engaging with public interest theory and discovering the conceptual contours of the public interest, these gaps are addressed. Combined with the insight obtained from the legislative history, we can determine the reasonable range of circumstances and types of processing where it may be justifiable to use personal data based on the public interest. On this basis, and to develop a new approach for deploying the concept, other legal uses of the public interest are examined. The lessons learned suggest legislative and procedural elements that are critical to successful deployment of the public interest concept in data protection. The thesis concludes with the identification of key components to allow a clearer understanding of the public interest in this field. Further, these insights enable recommendations to be made, to reform the law, procedure and guidance. In doing so, the concept of the public interest can be confidently deployed in line with the aims of data protection law, to both protect and facilitate the use of personal data.