无标题 @mollyeahlcitlaw - Tumblr Blog

Posts

A plan by the National Institute of Information and Communications Technology (NIICT) to implement high-tech camera software inside the Osak

WEEK 10

In Osaka, a facial recognition system in a train station was discontinued because of invasion of privacy and being seen as disrespectful

In today’s class, when it came to facial recognition programs, we did not mention another important reason to be against that. In China, Japan or other Asian countries, mutual respect is prized in daily life. Mcstay also said there are protocols around privacy and codes of behaviour that guide relationships and interaction.

No matter the facial recognition or other EAI, they may all probably be deemed as an offence in public.

Thank you, Hermione! I am truly grateful for all your time and attention to our class ❀❀❀

#thank you

WEEK 9

smart cities require smart citizens

#Youtube

week 8 online privacy

Handouts of week 8 proposes an interesting question about the function of new online privacy laws.

Online privacy laws, such as General Data Protection Regulation(GDPR) or the Privacy of Electronic Communication Regulation(EC Directive) or other legal documents, concerning advertisement business, all point to one goal that is not to sacrifice user experience and privacy to deliver pushy, unintelligent advertisements.

Let us assume a world without any supervision and authority to control advertising driven business. Undoubtedly, due to collecting and processing users’ personal data fearlessly, both online platforms and advertisers can classify and segment their wanted audience and consumers, no matter in commercial areas or political ones. Especially in modern technology age, the public are more reliable on online information, in other words, individuals will be trapped in information cocoons. Probably at the beginning, people think it is comfortable to see satisfying contents, but in the long run, those specially custom-made will only make them feel like living in the Truman show. No privacy in 21 century, equal to big brother in 1984, but authorization objects become private enterprises that are more greedy as well as uncontrollable.

Okay, come back to real life. Thanks to such a great amount of directives and laws to regulate information collection. One of the most typical regulations in the world is GDPR. Article 5 sets fair information principles, including lawfulness, purpose limitation, data ministration, accuracy, storage limitation, confidentiality and accountability. Among the whole rules, “consent” is the core point. Many articles argue about how the consent of the data subject should be given. In previous rules, subjects were not empowered initiatives. Nowadays, user's consent needs to be informed, prior and specific, article 29 working party against the use of default browser settings as a means to provide prior consent. to ensure user’s validity, article 5(3) of EU Eprivacy Directive states scope of application is “private sphere”. In addition, for sensitive data like political opinions, GDPR has its specific rules. In principle, processing that kind of data is prohibited, but there are exceptions, under certain circumstances and the data subject’s explicit consent.

Just like Facebook, we all know what this tech giant does in our daily life. Because of generating close to 84.2 billion U.S. dollars in ad revenues in 2020, Facebook always walks through the margin of privacy. How to target specific groups are their jobs, and how to defend our privacy is our right.

Google is worth mentioning too, this company was fined 50 million Euros for lack of transparency and lack of valid consent regarding the ads personalization.

Expected to see our privacy be treated with respect.

Even now when I am typing, the right side of the webpage is advertising what I browsed around 2 weeks ago. Couldn’t be more urgent to hope to protect privacy. I don’t remember whether I ticked the box to give consent to cookies, maybe I need to find the cancel button.

The distributed ledger technology that started with bitcoin is rapidly becoming a crowdsourced system for all types of verification. Could i

WEEK 7

This article explores how blockchain can function in various industries which has endless potential, but may also be used to disrupt someone's business with blockchain technology or vice versa.

week 6 file sharing and platform liability

Peterson v. Google LLC (c-682/18) probably is one of the most important cases concerning liability of platforms. CJEU’s decision on this case has an important impact, because it rules that these intermediaries do not infringe copyright in works illegally uploaded by platform users merely by making the platforms available to users. However, they can still be directly liable for copyright infringement where they fail to take diligent steps to avoid copyright infringement on their platforms.

As far as I am concerned, this judgement is likely to protect tech giant’s interests for not investing platforms with a good deal of responsibility. In other words, it seems to cease action of file sharing then platforms could escape from liability totally except they play an active role in the distribution of illegal content.

At the same time, China also faces similar problems of sharing infringed works on platforms, then the company that operates online platforms is brought to court for infringement of intellectual properties. In Chinese jurisdiction, it adopts “no-fault” liability, as long as platforms could prove they only provide legal online services and have no fault to do other things, they were not infringing others’ rights.

However, there is one point I think that is very different between the EU and China. when reading cases and articles, i get to know that liability of monitoring is not a universally recognised function to platforms. In China, we have two systems to monitor content sharing on public platforms, the operating company and administration agency. as the first guard, no matter whether tech companies like it, they must fulfill their obligations. One case( 2019 Beijing 0491 civil 23408), douyou company argued as one platform, they were not to review video content and not edit, summarize, process or do anything. Beijing Court held that because douyou entered into contract with influencers, then took the profit of those works. that agreement asked douyou to examine the content. On the 29th october, the Chinese authority published a paper “guidelines for the implementation of the responsibility of internet platforms”, it classifies platforms by number of users and economic level, and takes corresponding responsibility. Therefore, monitoring is widely accepted that platforms act as the first defense. in contrast, just like SABAM v. NV (case 360/10), judges held a negative attitude towards monitoring uploaded contents, because it contradicted the right to run business, data protection and freedom of information.

In my mind, filtering content is relevant to technology but not company management. About data protection, even though companies are not monitoring before publishing, records will also be stored on servers. As to the last point, it compares individuals and the public, each one has its own thoughts, so skip it.

What really needs protection is common people, not those companies. Right holders have to fight for their legal rights under more severe environments.

Communication to the public online: protecting copyright or breaking the Internet? by Andrew McWhirter The exclusive r

week 5

Add another link, because orignial one does not work now. I just want to share professor Andrew McWhirter's article, but every hyperlink I tried to post would be invalid quickly.

week 5

communication to the public online: protecting copyright or breaking the internet? Andrew Mcwhirter

This is an article professor Andrew Mcwhirter wrote in 2020. His performance in week4 and week5 left me a good impression so I read this article hope to know more about his knowledge system. Just like he indicated "CJEU was in favour of freedom of expression and access to information at the expense of the interests of rights holders". Admittedly, atmosphere of protecting copyright on internet China has fallen behind. Before learning lesson about hyperlinks, I never thought sharing that will be deemed as infringemnt as it jumps outside the original target, in other words, new public. How amazing the class is!

week4

Copyright is deemed as an exclusive right to the right-holder both in the United Kingdom. This week learned knowledge about infringement of IT copyright, at that time I came to realize how challenging to balance information spreading and copyright protection.

“…authors with the exclusive right to authorise or prohibit any communication to the public of their works…” (Article 3(1) of Directive [2001/29]). A large amount of this week’s reading case are interpreting this article, underlining “public” and “communication”.

Svensson v. Retrieve Sverige(case c-466/12), answers the question about extent of authorization. Even though RS’s hyperlink clearly made the protected work to an indeterminate number of potential recipient and implied a fairly large number of persons, because original website made available to all cyber citizens, which declared no new public, no new authorization. Refer to original judgement, “a public not taken in to account by the copyright holder when they authorized the initial communication to the public”.

In contrast, Land Nordrhein Westfalen v. Renkhoff, the public changed dramatically in 2 websites, one for travelers and one for primary school students, so this hyperlink was ruled illegal.

However Svensson case is not solve the problem, that what if the website setting hyperlink is illegal at the beginning? How to apply to tort liability?

Another case GS Media v. Sanoma Media Netherlands gave the answer. The CJEU discussed whether a website link to a wok placed online without consent of right holder was a communication to the pubic depended on financial gain. If it is provided other than financial gain, by someone who did not know and could not be reasonably know, that not accounts to tort and vice versa.

One famous American case cannot be ignored, that is Perfect 10, Inc v. Amazon ＆ Google, United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit used “server test” and concluded that use of thumbnail version of plaintiff’s images was a fair use.

Comparing EU with USA, it is not difficult to find that in terms of hyperlink, or copyright behind this, EU behaves more aggressively to IT industry when USA supports those tech giants. As far as I am concerned, this phenomenon is based on IT industry’s different developing and boosting speed, no one can deny that USA is and will continue dominating IT market for a long time. Interest patters are formed, apple, google, facebook, twitter as well as amazon, those represents every area on Internet.

In conclusion, points of CJEU can be a great reference for China to solve with hyperlink issues. Before I learn this week reading session, I even not noticed there is a legal question in hyperlink. It is too normal as well as widespread to notice it.

In China, most judicial practice is concentrating on setting the link to legal website, and in general, only when the linked website constitutes infringement then website initiating links would assume corresponding responsibility indirectly. China still has a long way to go.

#it law #copyright

Ambassadors of the World Trade Organization (WTO) have agreed on the need for wider access to COVID-19 vaccines and treatments, according to WTO spokesman Keith Rockwell.

Professor Hague just mentioned it in class very briefly about whether the world waives IP rights on it. In my mind, we will live with Covid-19 for a long time, and this disease will kill thousands of people every day. Vaccines are the most efficient way to stop the globe sinking deeper in this mire.

I always believe the origins and existence of law is uesd to create a better world, and now, if IP rights hinders popularrizing of vaccines, then it shoudl be waived. Just like our class about regulations on IT, and key point is the more flawless the regulation is, the better IT will develops. ALL FOR BETTER FUTURE!

#vaccine #ip

Trending Blogs

Recently Viewed Blogs

无标题