ARIN6902 Internet Cultures and Governance

Governments say they need Internet censorship, surveillance of the Internet, internet filtering system and so on to protect their citizens. But they should know that they are taking the freedom of choice away from the individual and also taking the responsibility away from the individual.

It seems like Internet censorship is compatible with democracy. It is shame that South Korea is with the countries of the Islamic theocracies of Saudi Arabia and some of less than democratic countries in the Middle East. South korea seems fond to mimic the US and Japan, but is the freedom of speech on the Net a thing they particularly want to stand up for themselves?

Social networks become the prime target for cybercrime, according to a Cisco report. Malicious code is masked as an online game on a social networking site, that once clicked, infects the user's computer without them knowing

Banks were the target of the clampi cyber virus which basically stole the online banking details of those using infected computers

The FBI cracks down on online crime as part of Operation Cyber Sweep in 2003. Although some would argue, that protecting users in the first place would be far more useful

A cyberbullying bill put to a House sub-committee in the US wasn't met with much enthusiasm as members felt it was an "unconstitutional breach of free speech." The proposed legislation was put forward in response to a 13-year-old girl who committed suicide because she was bullied online

And if so - what are the implications for whichever search engine takes the reins?

 Is it OK to rely on members to moderate and monitor  content or should companies be responsible for the content that their users post?  

This is a surprise... I didn't know Microsoft had their own foundation for open code

Skype has put the SILK codec, the backbone of its software, freely available to the developers community in order to receive feedback to improve the codec.

Information about the Digital Economy Bill provided by the UK Parliament. Includes a summary of the bill, its progress, latest news and the link to the full bill.

Amendments made to the digital economy bill last week, handing courts the power to force internet service providers (ISPs) to block certain websites, threaten freedom of speech and will lead to British websites being blocked without due judicial process, the chief executives of leading technology companies said in an open letter to the Financial Times. The heads of the four largest UK internet service providers as well as Google, Facebook, eBay and Yahoo have all co-signed the letter, along with consumer groups and academics, objecting to amendment. Theoretically the amendment could lead to sites such as YouTube being blocked in the UK.

Ilse Aigner, Germany's minister of food, agriculture and consumer protection, who usually concentrates on issues over rotten meat, genetically engineered corn and imitation cheese, recently took on a different kind of issue: the Internet and data privacy. Suddenly Aigner finds herself facing online giants Amazon, Facebook and, above all, Google. Soon Google plans to send cars equipped with cameras out onto Germany's roads once again for the company's Street View project. Aigner is now insisting that Google should ask permission before violating the privacy of German citizens. The minister's attack and the following discussions reveal just how divided the German government is when it comes to the online world. The debate revolves around questions of national security and individual self-determination on the Internet. But it also concerns the power of the large giants such as Apple, Microsoft, Amazon and MySpace, as well as the question of what these companies are doing with the records of our everyday data, and how they will be able to obtain information from us, influence us or perhaps even control us in the future. It seem like, once again, a German politician is exploiting the popular issue of internet privacy and censorship in a superficial way in the hope of scoring political points.

The website was designed by a University of Technology Sydney student named Chris Webster, the website examines the effects and severity of cyberbullying, and offers a wide array of information (types of cyberbullying, Internet safety, mobile phone tips, examples of cyberbullying etc) and surveys on cyberbullying and Internet safety. Cyberbullying causes incredible distress to those who fall victim to it. Cyberbullying does not leave physical scars, however the cruelty of others becomes evident through web pages, social network sites that exist on the Internet, as taunting does not only persist during school hours; but extends to time at home where cruelty is displayed through online text messages, posts, and other outlets that leave an extensive amount of emotional damage.

This article discusses who is held resposible for cyberbullying. Three executives from Google have been convicted of privacy violation, and have been accused of not acting swiftly enough to take down an online video of an autistic boy being beating by teen bullies. There are many issues that arise from this topic, for example, how far does accountability stretch, does it stem from the original poster, to the Internet Service Provider, the company hosting the content.It brings to question who do we hold responsible, and under which jurisdiction and set of laws do we use. Should there be a screening process to prevent such videos from being posted online?

Google thought they were jumping on the social networking bandwagon with this but it seems to have backfired! Talks of privacy issues puts google in a bad position with their users.

During a speech at the Media Institute in Washington [February 24, 2010], Larry Strickling, President Obama's top official at the Department of Commerce and administrator of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), suggested that there should be policy discussions between government agencies, foreign governments and key Internet constituencies on issues such as privacy, child protection, cybersecurity, copyright protection and Internet governance. "It's now time to respond to all the social changes being driven by the growth of the Internet," Strickling said. "We need Internet Policy 3.0. We enter this new decade recognizing that we rely on the Internet for essential social purposes: health, energy efficiency, and education. It's also a general engine for economic and social innovation. We must take rules more seriously if we want full participation, but we must keep the need for flexibility in mind."