Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Past Future
Centre and People Projects Past◦ Unlocking IP◦ Interpreting Privacy Principles◦ Virtual Worlds◦ Regulating Online Investing
Projects Present◦ CI Copyright Shifting Amndts◦ ACCAN privacy telco complaints◦ ACMA cybersafety
Copyright Orphans Censorship and ‘filtering’ Privacy and the cloud Surveillance/uber-veillance Malware and cybercrime iiNet: Disenfranchisement
without trial? Getup: Enfranchisement
without a party?
What and who
URL: http://www.cyberlawcentre.org/ A centre for the public interest in networked
transactions Research, education and advocacy◦ Prof Graham Greenleaf◦ Alana Maurushat◦ Lyria Bennet Moses, Alex Steel, omnes◦ Chris Connolly ◦ Kate Bond, Abi Paramaguru◦ Roger Clarke, Nigel Waters
IP and privacy
New models for Trading and Sharing IP Open Content, Open Source, Open Standards ARC Linkage project 2005-2009 UNSW CLPC, Linux, IBM, Bakers, OSIA, AESN Emergence of Creative Commons and FFE Now mainstream Not absolutist, hybrid business models Screenrights: $1m for free lesson plans = cash flow
positive http://cyberlawcentre.org/unlocking-ip/ Statutory and other licences
URL: http://cyberlawcentre.org/ipp/ ARC Discovery Privacy Principles in the Asia Pacific Submissions to the ALRC Report 108 – most cited Access Card ‘Cloud’, cross border data flow
Property Privacy Regulatory models Jurisdiction Content regulation Linkage application thwarted by GFC
URL: http://cyberlawcentre.org/onlineinvesting/ Dimity Kingsford Smith, Discovery Analysis of how to protect consumers of financial
services via online sales systems. Databases
Follow on IP and privacy, new themes
Belated consideration of user improvements Rejected Fair use proposals – abandonment of FTA aim
of real ‘Harmonisation’ with US copyright law Format Shifting Time shifting Very narrow: rendering CD to iPod arguably still illegal
if kept in AIFF format Controversial, Bill amndt in parliament, relatively rare Not technologically neutral
Did the sky fall in when iPods were legalised? Many minimal exceptions, specific narrow ‘fair dealing’ iPod and TiVo illegal Digital Agenda amendments 2001; A-US FTA 2004 No ‘fair use’ despite harmonisation Further changes in 2006: format shifting and time
shifting finally legalised
No one noticed; sky did not fall Controversy evaporated Loss of opportunity to ‘tax’ blank media Incremental improvement of consumer position iPods and TiVo now legal Minor improvements in compliance, attitudes Safe for elsewhere? CI interest Challenges not addressed – old tech focus What about next tech: iPad, phones, mixups, YouTube
TIO, ACMA, Privacy Commissioners Office Delays, confusion, different outcomes Report out tomorrow URL:
http://cyberlawcentre.org/privacy/ACCAN_Complaints_Report/report.pdf
With Galexia Survey of international sources - report Little evidence of evaluation or User centred design Little analysis of what worked for various groups Separate from Cybersafety
Clouds and spies
Review of privacy law – ALRC 108 Sudden emergence of the cloud – ‘It’s inevitable’!? Failure to target cross border controls in PPs Conflicting business models: your money or your data? Failure of robust regulation: sleeping watchdogs? WiFi Kids at risk: Consequences hidden, cost/benefit fail Exposure to foreign powers, litigants, and villains Not just US – Cybercrime Convention and the EU Stumbling into a surveillance state? Lack of will?
It’s not censorship,Won’t somebody think of the children?
1,000 items in 1,000,000,000,000, no checking 10 billion change per month Appalling spin and shifting goals for the magic box Appeasing the swinging fundamentalists Real child protectors: What risks? Does filtering work? Parents want to be rescued, Panic Button is for them Cargo cult mentality, denial and hope of a saviour Does not address real problems: resilience, detection
of criminals, communication with techno kids Sexting, ‘slash’ fiction and innocents on the loose
The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse:◦ You, your mate, YouTube and FaceBook◦ The evil data mongers of cyber-Russia◦ Businesses who just want to know you◦ Government agencies who just need to catch you
One law to rule them all? Will our current apathy become as unfashionable as
climate change denial when the consequences are realised? Or are privacy advocates just old whingers?
Perfect free copy tools provoke evidence gathering Marketers demand right to ‘behavioural targeting’ Data aggregators prefer not to discuss it Law enforcement assumes we’ll be safer if we forfeit
centuries of protections against strong states Data retention obligations coming in from offshore Data heading offshore, scant restraint or redress Filtering logs look awfully tempting … Data breach notifications? Or ‘Informed consent’ FAIL? All supported by invisibility, and the cult of exposure
Cybercrime goes invisible
Dare not speak its name; researchers threatened Bad guys based in former SU lift off into cyberspace You’ll never know where they came from or went Malware and the failure of IT perimiter security Social engineering: the new computer infection Recombinant undetectable malware evolution All your base are belong to us: zombie networks Leave no clues Losing the war?
Administrative defenestration from the cyber tower
Allegations of copyright infringement, P2P file sharing A smaller ISP targeted, not Telstra or Optus Assertions, repeated, render carrier liable for load? Death of the common carrier? Earlier take down notices: 30,000 at once to Verizon ISP loses ‘safe harbour’ protection when aware: no
trial necessary before they must act against client ‘Three strikes’ rule pushed: disconnect on 3 claims Result: excluded from the Internet on mere assertion
of breach of private right?
Online litigant and policy campaign engine
340,000 recipients cf. 10,000 party membership Poll recipients: should we go to HCA re poll closure? Instant litigation funding base, security for costs may be
less of an impediment (cf taxpayer: business, ligiled) Remarkable successes in re-enfranchisment actions Ban on recommending candidates Campaigning on policy alone? Opposite to modern parties: policies optional? Challenge to legal policy development? (Senate Online: problems of constituency)
