Law in the Internet Society

View   r5  >  r4  ...
JayTongkakFirstEssay 5 - 06 Feb 2020 - Main.EbenMoglen
Line: 1 to 1
META TOPICPARENT name="FirstEssay"
Line: 32 to 32
 Freedom of speech on the Internet can often be controversial. One might argue that the Internet should be a free space, without any boundaries or regulation, as supported strongly in the EFF's Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace. While to some extent, content regulations can be useful against criminal content. Those aforementioned content regulations could potentially give "chilling effect" over the content on the Internet. There is also a study on chilling effects under several scenarios including online surveillance showing negative impacts of such activities. The Internet allowing information to be spread and received throughout the world could potentially expose the users to more government enforcement. A clear example would be talking verbally and in-person with one of your friends about criticizing the government may not result in any negative legal enforcements. On the other hand, discussing the same topic and conversation online could distract more engagement and government may also be knocking your door because the conversation becomes more public and accessible.

This draft is a more coherent essay. It can be made better in a few ways:

  • "The Internet" is not a synonym for "Facebook or WeChat or Twitter" or some other data-mining social media "service." As I tried to explain in class, "the Internet" is a collection of pipes and switches enabling a condition of universal interconnection through a network of digital devices that the underlying design of the network of networks treat as inherently equal. It is good to write about "the Internet" without fundamentally misidentifying what you are writing about.

  • Trying to decide whether something is A or B—whether these technical arrangements for universal interconnection are for free expression or against free expression,for example—is a false inquiry. One might say that the answer is certain to be "both." One might equally say that the inquiry should be "how does X alter what we mean by free expression?" Or. given that the real subject is current geopolitics, "how can societies that deny the value of free expression and those that exalt it operate their networks without mutual hostility?"

You are entitled to restrict access to your paper if you want to. But we all derive immense benefit from reading one another's work, and I hope you won't feel the need unless the subject matter is personal and its disclosure would be harmful or undesirable. To restrict access to your paper simply delete the "#" character on the next two lines:

Revision 5r5 - 06 Feb 2020 - 15:27:39 - EbenMoglen
Revision 4r4 - 03 Feb 2020 - 23:01:23 - JayTongkak
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
Syndicate this site RSSATOM