scholarly journals NORMA PERSATUAN SEBAGAI BATASAN PERBUATAN PIDANA PENYEBARAN UJARAN KEBENCIAN MELALUI INTERNET

2020 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 94-126
Author(s):  
Hwian Christianto
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Public Debate ◽  
Free Expression ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Pluralistic Society ◽  
Normative Approach ◽  
It Impacts ◽  
The Law ◽  
Penal Sanction

The Law no 11 of 2008 contains a penal rule against spreading hatred by the means of the internet (or digital social media). The enforcement of this penal sanction, due to its vagueness on the meaning of the term hate and spread of hate, consequently result in a public debate on how it impacts on people’s right of free expression. Apparently this vagueness opens up the possibility to limit even suppress freedom of expression. Using a juridical normative approach, this article discusses the leitmotiv of the above penal sanction.  The author suggests that the express purpose of this article is to secure the unity and integrity of a pluralistic society. 

18. Freedom of Expression

2017 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey ◽  
Elizabeth Wicks ◽  
Andclare Ovey
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Free Expression ◽  
The Internet

This chapter examines the protection of the freedom of expression in the European Convention on Human Rights, discusses the provisions of Article 10, and explains that the majority of cases concerning Article 10 are brought by persons who have received some penalty for defaming or insulting other people. It analyses what constitutes an interference with free expression and considers the limitations on freedom of expression. The chapter also examines the judgments made by the Strasbourg Court on several related cases, including those that involved incitement to violence and hate speech, obscenity, and blasphemy. It also covers the development of case-law concerning social media and the internet.

scholarly journals LIMITATIONS OF THE FREEDOM OF SPEECH IN THE INTERNET

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bartosz Brzyski
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Freedom Of Speech ◽  
Free Expression ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Internet Services ◽  
Modern Times ◽  
The Social ◽  
The Right

The development of Internet services lead to many changes in forms of expression of our opinions and ideas. The author shall discuss whether the term “freedom of speech” is still suitable for modern times, regarding the conversations in the social media. As we all know, the freedom of speech and the freedom of expression were never absolute and certain limitations of them are completely legal and necessary. However, as the author will try to prove, there are some serious concerns about executing such limitations online as well as effectively proving if someone’s rights have been violated due to excess of freedom of expression. The possible ideas of fighting the hate speech and other acts of trespassing the right to free expression shall also be presented.

18. Freedom of Expression

2020 ◽  
pp. 488-526
Author(s):  
Bernadette Rainey ◽  
Pamela McCormick ◽  
Clare Ovey
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Human Rights ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Case Law ◽  
European Convention ◽  
Free Expression ◽  
The Internet

This chapter examines the protection of the freedom of expression in the European Convention on Human Rights, discusses the provisions of Article 10, and explains that the majority of cases concerning Article 10 are brought by persons who have received some penalty for defaming or insulting other people. It analyses what constitutes an interference with free expression and considers the limitations on freedom of expression. The chapter also examines the judgments made by the Strasbourg Court on several related cases, including those that involved privacy, incitement to violence and hate speech, obscenity, and blasphemy. It also covers the development of case-law concerning social media and the internet.

scholarly journals Guilty of using Google: Reconciling the right to a fair trial with the right to freedom of expression and addressing juror misconduct in the age of social media

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Emma Jane Smith
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Legal System ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Fair Trial ◽  
Communications Technology ◽  
Independent Research ◽  
The Subject ◽  
The Law ◽  
The Right

<p>It is widely accepted that the right to a fair trial is one of the most important guarantees contained within our legal system. That right is undermined when a jury member conducts his or her own research into a case. This type of juror misconduct constitutes contempt of court. In the light of the fact that the law of contempt is currently the subject of review in a number of jurisdictions, this paper considers how the law of contempt could be adapted to better manage the risk of jurors undertaking independent research. After a discussion of the current law and some problems with it, particularly those created by modern communications technology, this paper considers a number of possible reform options. It makes two broad recommendations. First, that the law should focus relatively more on preventing jurors undertaking their own research than on limiting publication. Second, that independent research by jurors should be the subject of statutory criminalisation, and a range of measures should be adopted to increase jurors’ understanding of the importance of not going outside the evidence before them and to minimize any incentives for jurors to conduct their own research.</p>

scholarly journals Extreme Speech, Democratic Deliberation, and Social Media

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeffrey W. Howard
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Hate Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Alternative Mechanism ◽  
Democratic Deliberation ◽  
Media Companies ◽  
Moral Responsibilities ◽  
The Law ◽  
Democratic Discourse

Social media are now central sites of democratic discourse among citizens. But are some contributions to social media too extreme to be permitted? This entry considers the permissibility of suppressing extreme speech on social media, such as terrorist propaganda and racist hate speech. It begins by considering the argument that such restrictions on speech would wrong democratic citizens, violating their freedom of expression. It proceeds to investigate the moral responsibilities of social media companies to suppress extreme speech, and whether these ought to be enforced through the law. Finally, it explores an alternative mechanism for combatting extreme speech on social media—counter-speech—and evaluates its prospects.

scholarly journals Fakebook: why Facebook makes the fake news problem inevitable

2018 ◽  
Vol 69 (4) ◽  
pp. 513-530
Author(s):  
Paul Bernal
Keyword(s):  
Social Media ◽  
Business Model ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Fake News ◽  
Mass Data ◽  
The Difference ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Internet And Social Media

The current ‘fake news’ phenomenon is a modern manifestation of something that has existed throughout history. The difference between what happens now and what has happened before is driven by the nature of the internet and social media – and Facebook in particular. Three key strands of Facebook’s business model – invading privacy to profile individuals, analysing mass data to profile groups, then algorithmically curating content and targeting individuals and groups for advertising – create a perfect environment for fake news. Proposals to ‘deal’ with fake news either focus on symptoms or embed us further in the algorithms that create the problem. Whilst we embrace social media, particularly as a route to news, there is little that can be done to reduce the impact of fake news and misinformation. The question is whether the benefits to freedom of expression that social media brings mean that this is a price worth paying.

scholarly journals O MARCO CIVIL DA INTERNET NO BRASIL: DIREITOS, DEVERES E PROGRAMAS

2015 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcelo Doval Mendes
Keyword(s):  
Civil Rights ◽  
Literature Review ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Good Time ◽  
The Internet ◽  
The Core ◽  
Keywords Internet ◽  
The Law ◽  
Use Of The Internet ◽  
Made In

O artigo objetiva analisar a Lei n� 12.965/2014, que disciplinou o uso da Internet no Brasil. Com base na interpreta��o de seus dispositivos, na revis�o da literatura e na observa��o da jurisprud�ncia, o estudo centra-se em tr�s aspectos do denominado marco civil da Internet: os direitos garantidos, os deveres institu�dos e os programas almejados. Quanto aos direitos, o foco est� nos usu�rios, tra�ando um panorama geral e abordando especificamente as d�vidas quanto � inviolabilidade das comunica��es via Internet face �s disposi��es constitucionais pertinentes. Quanto aos deveres, os objetos s�o a manuten��o dos registros pelos servidores e sua responsabiliza��o civil, estabelecendo-se compara��o com o quadro jurisprudencial anterior ao diploma legal. Finalmente, quanto aos programas, o cerne da discuss�o � o desejado sopesamento legislativo de princ�pios constitucionais, com o debate sobre a preval�ncia da liberdade de express�o. Na conclus�o, destacam-se a boa hora em que veio a legisla��o e sua feitura no melhor espa�o para regula��es desse tipo, o Parlamento. Sem preju�zo, s�o apresentadas as preocupa��es quanto a poss�veis restri��es de direitos, quanto a formas de fiscaliza��o do cumprimento dos deveres e quanto � necess�ria densifica��o de conte�dos das normas ainda abertas do diploma. Palavras-chave: Internet. Marco civil. Brasil Abstract: The article analyzes the Law No. 12.965/2014, which regulates the use of the Internet in Brazil. Based on the interpretation of its provisions, the literature review, and observation of jurisprudence, the study focuses on three aspects of the called civil rights framework for Internet: guaranteed rights, imposed obligations and targeted programs. With regard to rights, the focus is on users, tracing an overview and specifically addressing questions concerning the inviolability of Internet communications under the related constitutional provisions. With respect to obligations, the objects are the maintenance of records by servers and their civil liability, comparing the new law and the previous jurisprudential framework. Finally, regarding the programs, the core of the discussion is the desired legislative assessment of constitutional principles, paying attention to the debate over the prevalence of freedom of expression. In conclusion, the highlights are the good time of the legislation and the fact that it was made in the best space for such regulations, the Parliament. Notwithstanding, the article presents concerns about possible restrictions of rights, forms of the enforcement of obligations and required densification of the contents of the law. Keywords: Internet. Civil Rights Framework. Brazil.

What’s next for social media companies? The digital regulatory scene in Turkey during the COVID-19 pandemic

2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-95
Author(s):  
Aslı Tunç
Keyword(s):  
Public Policy ◽  
Social Media ◽  
Point Of View ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Media Law ◽  
Media Companies ◽  
The Law ◽  
Draft Bill ◽  
Media Company

In the midst of the Coronavirus pandemic, on 9 April 2020, a draft bill was presented to fight against the spread of COVID-19 in Turkey. Eight articles were buried deep in the proposed legislation, which mostly included economic measures and aid packages, directly targeting any social media company that had a platform accessed by over one million users daily. Although the articles on social media were dropped from the parliamentary schedule on 14 April 2020 to make way for more urgent bills on the economy and health, the uncertainty regarding social media companies’ situation in the country remained. Then, on 29 July 2020, the new social media law, officially ‘The Law on Making Amendments to the Law on Regulation of Publications on the Internet and Combating Crimes Committed by Means of Such Publication’, numbered 7253 was adopted by the parliament. This article approaches this issue from the perspective of social media companies, specifically Facebook and Twitter, and analyses the post-Coronavirus digital scene and public policy attempts from the corporate point of view.

scholarly journals Defining a right of reply: An examination of the Law Commission's proposals to use a right of reply to regulate online conduct

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Katharine Stove
Keyword(s):  
Free Speech ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
Digital Communications ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Regulatory Regime ◽  
Proportional Limit ◽  
Briefing Paper ◽  
The Media ◽  
The Law ◽  
Case Basis

<p>This paper examines the Law Commission’s proposals to use a right of reply as a remedy within a new regime to combat harmful digital communications on the Internet in its Ministerial Briefing Paper, Harmful Digital Communications: The Adequacy of Current Sanctions and Remedies. It seeks to determine whether a right of reply is a suitable tool to use in an online context against ordinary citizens, when it has typically been an offline remedy for use against the media. It also considers the best form for a right of reply under this new regulatory regime, in order for it to constitute a proportional limit on a defendant’s right to freedom of expression. It concludes that a right of reply could be a suitable remedy under the regime, and it could constitute a proportional limit on a defendant’s freedom of expression, but a Court should carefully balance the harms a right of reply might pose against the values of free speech implicated in each circumstance, on a case-by-case basis, in order to ensure the limitations a right of reply might pose on freedom of expression are always proportional and justified.</p>

scholarly journals The clash between the employee's right to privacy and freedom of expression and social media misconduct: What justifies employee's dismissal to be a fair dismissal?

Obiter ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. 504-518
Author(s):  
Simphiwe P Phungula
Keyword(s):  
South Africa ◽  
Social Media ◽  
21St Century ◽  
Freedom Of Expression ◽  
The Internet ◽  
Right To Privacy ◽  
Employee Relationship ◽  
Use Of The Internet ◽  
Use Of Social Media ◽  
The Way

The 21st century has an increase in the use of the internet as a means of trading. The use of the internet has also influenced the use of social media as a means of communication. This communication extends to the employer–employee relationship in the workplace. However – in South Africa – due to the rapid use of social media both in and out of the workplace, it has become blurry of what constitutes social media misconduct for which an employee may be disciplined. This is exacerbated by the lack of specific legislation dealing with employees and social media misconduct in South Africa. This article deals with the blessings and the curse of using social media as a means of communication in the workplace. It reveals the difficulties faced by both employers and employees when determining to what extent the behaviour of an employee can constitute adequate grounds for dismissal in relation to that employee’s social media misconduct. Recommendations are made on the way forward.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document