štvrtok , 20 jún 2019

DANKOvci ŠOKujú: Budeme REGULOVAŤ INTERNETové média. Šíria HOAXY

Slovensko by potrebovalo jeden nový komplexný mediálny zákon, ktorý by zahŕňal aj internet. V diskusnej relácii RTVS Sobotné dialógy to uviedol podpredseda Výboru Národnej rady (NR) SR pre kultúru a médiá Karol Farkašovský z SNS, ktorá chce navrhnúť reguláciu internetových médií.

Poslanec Farkašovský vidí problém v tom, že nové médiá sú ťažko kontrolovateľné a preto by SNS chcela regulovať internetové médiá, šíriace hoaxy.

„Objavuje sa množstvo hoaxov, konšpirácií. Ľudia nevedia, kde je pravda,“ uviedol poslanec za SNS K. Farkašovský. Ako dodal, právna norma by sa týkala aj určitej kontroly statusov na sociálnych sieťach, konkrétnu podobu návrhu však treba podľa neho technologicky aj legislatívne prepracovať.

Mimoriadne zaujímavá analýza v oblasti regulácie internetu sa nachádza na stránkach austrálskeho parlamentu TU – Can the Internet be regulated?

Problem issues relating to the Internet

  • Pornography
  • Internet provisions in the US
  • Copyright
    • Transmission right
    • Fair dealing
    • The international environment for copyright
  • Citizens using the new medium require a less complex law
  • Information disclosure and the right to privacy
    • Information disclosure
    • Privacy
  • Censorship of private email
  • Defamation
    • Simplified uniform defamation laws are needed
  • Freedom of Speech
  • Liability of Internet Service Providers
    • Cases suggest a lack of understanding of their functions

Possible alternatives for Australia

  • New approaches to remedies may be needed
    • Self-help remedy – reply by the plaintiff
    • Apology and retraction by defendant
    • A code of practice for ISPs
  • Technological solutions
  • More use of alternative dispute resolution (ADR)
  • Cyberspace virtual courts
  • Further international cooperation



Glossary of Internet and technical terms

Major Issues

There is bipartisan policy for the provision of wide access to the Internet. The Internet can enhance democracy, provide people with wide access to information and promote their membership of groups with similar interests.

It is necessary to understand how the Internet differs from familiar media communication technologies in order to understand the practicability of regulating it. The Internet is not a single thing. It is more like a set of communication standards that let computers talk to each other. It provides a wide range of types of communication and has been described as the ‚anything, anytime, anywhere‘ network.

The Commonwealth would have power over the Internet in Australia. Under s 51(v) of the Constitution it has power in respect of ‚postal, telegraphic, telephonic and other like services‘. The phrase ‚other like services‘ indicates the power was designed to cover new technological developments.

However the Internet will be hard to regulate in practice because of

  • the lack of centralised control
  • the difficulty of controlling the spread of information
  • the availability of encryption
  • the world-wide nature of the Internet
  • the difficulty of determining the originator of information which is anonymous or pseudonymous
  • the unfamiliarity of policy makers with the technology and the fluid nature of the technology

There is concern that children could gain access to material via the Internet, which would otherwise be unavailable to them because of their age. The impression has been created that hard core pornographic material is easy for children to find on the Internet. However, Internet experts report it is hard to access such material. A seven-hour search by the Office of Film and Literature Classification (OFLC) for child pornography found no material of this nature. However, material that is unsuitable for minors is more readily available.

Existing case law has failed to acknowledge that Internet Service Providers‘ (ISPs) are unable to monitor material effectively. Content liability should be focussed on the originator of the offending material and individuals who access that material with the knowledge that the material is offensive. ISPs should only be liable where it can be shown that they

  • have full control over the material on their service, or
  • were aware of the offending material
  • and were able, by lawful and practical means, to remove that material from their service, but did not do so within a reasonable time.

A code of practice for ISPs is needed. Legislation currently being considered by the various Australian states and territories provides an incentive for establishing this. It proposes offences for ISPs who knowingly provide access to objectionable material or provide minors with access to material which is restricted under the existing classification regime. The legislation is expected to establish compliance with a code of practice as a defence to prosecution.

Legislation on pornography and copyright should be technology neutral and not effectively more restrictive in the Internet environment than for other communication technologies.

This paper recommends that technological solutions would be most effective in censoring material unsuitable for children. Not only should blocking devices be available as an optional extra but a code of practice or legislation could require that each commercial service offer a channel blocking feature to parents.

Setting up a ‚refused access list‘ would be a possible strategy to block adult access from offending overseas sites containing material that would be refused classification in Australia. Australian ISPs with international access would be required to filter out data packets from addresses on that list.

The Internet raises strong right-to-privacy issues, as users‘ communications can easily be monitored. The House of Representatives Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs recommended that the protections of the Privacy Act1988 should be extended to the private and public sectors alike by means of a national privacy code. This code should address Internet privacy issues.

Citizens using the new medium require less complex law. Electronic communication provides a medium for publication by ordinary people who were not previously able to publish widely. Problems for them are particularly likely to arise with copyright and defamation law. There is already a commitment towards simplification of the law in the Justice Statement.

Simplified, uniform, defamation laws are needed in the context of the Internet. The Justice Statement says uniform national defamation laws would ‚best ensure equal access to justice for all Australians‘. Legislation less specific to particular media is required, otherwise Internet users may have less protection than with established media. In a western democracy like Australia, there will always be tension between freedom of speech and an individual’s right to be protected from defamation. The free speech culture of the Internet, in combination with the implied freedom of communication, should tip the balance in favour of free speech. However, new approaches to remedies may be needed. The law of defamation should take advantage of the technological capabilities of the Internet, and incorporate existing self-help approaches – for example, a defamed person can send a reply to the same readers who read the offending material.

Internet development in Australia was initially mainly in the research and educational sector. These users have developed a strong tradition of exchanging information freely. The Copyright Law Review Committee is examining ways in which the Copyright Act 1968 (Cth) can be strengthened, simplified and drafted in plain English. Strengthening raises two major concerns: the recommendation of a transmission right, and that defences against infringement such as fair dealing and educational use should be retained. If ‚pay per view usage‘ were implemented, citizens could lose access to information that they previously had some access to in hard copy format.

There could also be Cyberspace virtual courts, which would be more attuned to network customs and would be able to mete out punishment enforceable in the Internet. The need for speed in Internet cases suggests more use of alternative dispute resolution.

The Internet will require that some issues (such as anonymity of publishers) be resolved on an international basis. In the U.S. the legal academic Henry Perritt has proposed that a model code of cyberspace law be enacted by the United Nations.

Viac zo stránky  austrálskeho parlamentu TU

Vaše TIPY do DENNÍKa POLITIKA zasielajte na email: TIPYdoDENNIKA@dennikpolitika.sk alebo formou SMS na 0950 857 893



Zdroj info a foto ilustračné: web, youtube, fb a TU



Pozrite sa tiež

Muž spôsobil nehodu a ušiel do krčmy, policajtom sa prihlásil poriadne opitý

Vodič citroënu z miesta ušiel a asi o hodinu zavolal na operačné stredisko, že je v pohostinstve.

Pridaj komentár

Vaša e-mailová adresa nebude zverejnená. Vyžadované polia sú označené *