|
1
|
- Emily Miller-Francisco
- Southern Oregon University
|
|
2
|
- Goals for this presentation
- 3 Scenarios
- 1 Caveat
|
|
3
|
- ACRL Information Literacy Standards
- Standard One: Determine the extent of information needed
- Standard Two: Access the needed information effectively and efficiently
- Standard Three: Evaluate information and its sources critically
- Standard Four: Incorporate selected information into one’s knowledge
base
- Standard Five: Use information effectively to accomplish a specific
purpose
- Standard Six: Understand the economic, legal, and social issues
surrounding the use of information, and access and use information
ethically and legally
|
|
4
|
- Goals for the Course
- Demonstrate an understanding of major issues in information ethics such
as free speech, copyright, and privacy.
- Demonstrate an understanding of how technology impacts each of these
issues.
- Demonstrate an understanding of a variety of ethical approaches and how
they can be utilized to discuss information ethics issues.
- Demonstrate an understanding of the legal context within which debate
about information issues takes place.
|
|
5
|
- Ethical Frameworks
- Utilitarian Ethics
- Duty/Deontological Ethics
- Virtue Ethics
|
|
6
|
- First Amendment:
- Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of
speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to
assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
|
|
7
|
- Types of censorship:
- Sexual
- Religious
- Political
- Social
- Violence
- Etc.
|
|
8
|
- Different levels of protection:
- Print
- Broadcast media
- Common carriers
|
|
9
|
- Legal limits to free speech:
- Defamation
- Obscenity
- Fighting Words
- Gag rules
- Security Issues
- Etc.
|
|
10
|
- Legal History of Internet Filtering:
- Communications Decency Act (1996)
(struck down in 1997)
- Child Online Protection Act (1998)
(remanded twice by the Supreme Court)
- Children’s Internet Protection Act (2000)
(upheld in 2003)
|
|
11
|
- Is there such a thing as free speech?
|
|
12
|
- Types of Protection:
- Copyright:
Fixed expression
- Patents:
Inventions & processes
- Trademarks:
Logos, designs, etc. that point to a company
- Trade secrets, publicity, etc.
|
|
13
|
- Copyright History:
- Printing Press (1400s)
- Statute of Anne (1710)
- U.S. Constitution
- Copyright Acts of 1790, 1909, and 1976
- Sonny Bono Extension Act (1998)
|
|
14
|
- Balancing copyright:
- Fair Use
- Purpose/character of the use
- Nature of the original work
- Amount borrowed in relation to the whole
- Effect on market value
- Public Domain
- Waited 14 years (+14 years renewable) in 1790
- Now wait for the life of the author + 70 years
|
|
15
|
- Impact of Technology:
- Boundary confusion
(e.g. software: patent or copyright?)
- New kinds of copyright
(e.g. Tasini v. New York Times)
- New ability to control
(e.g. digital rights management and licensing)
- New participants
(e.g. Napster)
- New attempts to respond:
Digital Millennium Copyright Act (1998)
|
|
16
|
- Impact of Technology & the Quest for Balance:
- Open Source movement
- Copyleft and the GNU Project (Richard Stallman)
- “The Cathedral and the Bazaar” by Eric Raymond
- Linux
- Other responses to copyright
- The Future of Ideas by Lawrence Lessig
- “The Economy of Ideas” by John Perry Barlow
- Creative Commons at http://creativecommons.org
|
|
17
|
|
|
18
|
- Plagiarism:
- Ideas versus their Expression
- Ethics versus law
- Our little incident(s)
|
|
19
|
- Defining:
- Freedom from intrusion
- Control of information
about yourself
- Freedom from surveillance
|
|
20
|
- History:
- “Right to Privacy” (1890)
by Warren & Brandeis
- Watkins v. U.S. (1957):
government can’t expose private affairs without justification
|
|
21
|
- History:
- Griswold v. Connecticut (1965):
Right to use contraceptives
- Justice Douglas: Privacy is a right that can be derived from the
“penumbras and emanations” of the Bill of Rights:
- j free
speech
- l no
soldiers in the house
- m no
unreasonable searches & seizures
- n right
against self-incrimination
- r the
rights listed in the Constitution aren’t the only rights
- Led to other cases like Roe v. Wade (1973) & Lawrence v. Texas
(2003)
|
|
22
|
- History:
- Katz v. U.S. (1967):
- requires government to have
a warrant to perform wiretapping
- people can have a “reasonable expectation of privacy” even in public
places
- Now: USA Patriot Act (2001)
- expands the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 and allows
wiretapping for domestic crimes as long as the information is relevant
to the investigation
|
|
23
|
- Also statutory law:
e.g. Privacy Act (1974):
Gives a citizen the right to review & amend their government
records and to sue for violations of that right
|
|
24
|
- Impact of technology:
- Marketing: Consumer online privacy, datamining, spam, etc.
- Surveillance issues
(online and off)
- Health/Genetic privacy
|
|
25
|
- Impact of technology:
- Hackers and viruses
- Cyberstalking
- Cyberterrorism
|
|
26
|
|
|
27
|
- Emily Miller-Francisco
- Southern Oregon University
|