Chapter 5: Crime

Name Robert Feind Class time: 11am
KEEP THIS TO 1-3 – PAGES LONG (EXCLUDING REFERENCE PAGE)

Author: Sara Baase
Date of Publication: 2008
Book: A Gift of Fire
Sections read: 3.1-3.3

1. (Knowledge)Tell three interesting elements of this chapter:
a. There is both white-hat hacking and black-hat hacking. White-hat refers to those who do it for the simple thrill or to expose threats to companies, while black-hat refers to those who hack to commit a felony (Baase, 257).
b. Hacktivism has become an important term since hacking began, referring to the hacking of a site for a political cause; it is very subjective on whether this is a crime or not because of the political aspect (Baase, 263).
c. Some companies hire those who have hacked them, as they can help the company fix massive loopholes in their security system (Baase, 268).

2. (Comprehension) Summarize what is being discussed within this chapter?

With computer technology, theft of information has become much more severe; while robbing a bank would get someone near 5,000 dollars, computer crimes go past $100,000 (Baase, 253). Hacking was originally a positive term referring to those who exposed systems for their flaws for the sheer fun of it, but once hackers realized the potential of this in the digital age it was viewed with more disdain. The New Hackers Dictionary describes a hacker as a person “who enjoys exploring the details of programmable systems and how to stretch their capabilities; …one who programs enthusiastically (even obsessively)” (254). Hacking as many websites as one could soon became a goal. In the 1980’s a German hacker broke into US computers in order to sell information to the Soviets. Social engineering – fooling people into disclosing info – became a key part of finding out the information on a person (255). Hackers refer to malicious hackers as “crackers”, and white and black-hat hackers helps to explain the differences between the two groups (257). Security Researches are hackers who expose flaws to show them to the company, even though the company may be slow to respond (258). Viruses such as the “Love Bug” have caused over 10 billion dollars in damage. Denial-of-service attacks overload websites to shut them down; 15-year old “mafiaboy” did this while finding a script to do so on a site intended for “script kiddies”. Zombies are computers that the hacker has complete control of, which can have dangerous consequences (260). Hacktivism is hacking to promote a political cause; one example of this is when three teenagers hacked into an atomic research center in India to protest their use of nuclear weapons. However these goals became an easy cover for more dangerous hackers to hide their work. Hacktivism is debatable concerning its legality, as politics are completely subjective, and what may look like a statement to one person may look like a felony to another (263). The Computer Fraud and Abuse Act of 1986 protects areas where the federal government has jurisdiction, as well as computers connected to the internet. The Patriot Act expanded on the CFAA, including with it the costs of responding to the attack, assessing the damage and restoring systems, as well as increasing the harshness of penalties - a 1st offense became 10 years of incarceration instead of 5). The government can also spy on suspected hackers without a warrant (265). Through computer forensics, experts can track hackers through tracking their ISPs and hidden serial numbers in Microsoft Office, though hackers eventually wised up (267). Unfortunately due to the complexity of computer systems and the constant updates in software, it is hard for the web to be fully secure (269). The Defense Information Systems Agency reported 500,000 attacks on the Defense Department, 65% of which were successful and less than 1% were detected (270). Firewalls were created to monitor incoming information and filter out suspicious items, though hackers have been known to find loopholes in these as well (271). People have thought of criminalizing the scripts that cause damage themselves, however this would make research very difficult, and also violates freedom of speech, which becomes an issue (273). Identity theft is easier than ever through card numbers, SSN and files, and a security company executive even says that, “A complete identity sells for less than $20” (273). Phishing is a common tactic where millions of emails are sent to fish for info used to impersonate someone and steal money and goods; this is a form of social engineering as a lot of trickery is involved to extort it from the victim (274). There is also pharming, which is similar except that it lures people to a false website. There are other methods as well, such as recording keystrokes and Trojan Horses, defined as malicious software hiding in an apparently innocent program which is downloaded willingly (275). There have been measures to prevent fraud, such as software in banks that look for fraudulent activity and secure payment sites such as PayPal (277). In 1998 it became a federal crime to use another person’s identification with the intent to commit a felony. Other preventions of fraud are expressed through fraud alerts, which are flags on a person’s credit report that forces a bureau to call you for confirmation if a new account is opened (280). Through biometrics – biological characteristics unique to an individual – protecting information has been thought of as much more effective, providing measures such as fingerprint and retina scanners (281). However it has been proven that these systems can be fooled, and if a criminal were to get this specific of information the results may be devastating (282). Hackers and thieves make the internet a sketchy place to be, as there is little you can do to stop a hacker besides hope for the best that your trust is placed in the correct websites.


3. (Application)Name a specific example or NEW solution for this type of problem/similar situation in society or that you have experienced – BE SPECIFIC AND EXPLAIN?

One situation of potentially dangerous hacking deals with Mark Zuckerberg, CEO of Facebook himself. In the early years of Facebook, it has been found that Mark would use login information to hack into peoples’ private email accounts, and while the purposes were unclear it is still unethical. It is also found that he hacked into ConnectU, a competitor, and changed information to his liking (More on the incident can be found at http://articles.businessinsider.com/2010-03-08/tech/29969831_1_facebook-mark-zuckerberg-business-ethics). I have also recently experienced an event dealing with identity theft; about a month ago my mother bought from a less than secure website, and about a week later her card was cancelled. Someone had gotten a hold of her information and went above and beyond her credit limit to buy extravagant items (thankfully the bank caught on and did not hold her liable). Nevertheless, this is an example of how easy it really is to have your information stolen.



4. (Analysis)Address ANY that apply. How can you compare one of the situations in this chapter to something that does not relate to computers, technology, or the Internet? Be sure to reference the chapter and your solution. What ideas NEW can you add to the issue that is being presented within the reading? Try to connect what you have by reading this article and how it applies to the stages in Bloom's taxonomy in 2 full sentences.

The chapter talks about fraud through the internet, but it also makes a good point about fraud in general. On page 281, Baase states that a good chunk of identity theft occurs when a wallet or checkbook is stolen, not just when info is given out on the internet, so even outside of the internet one must be wary of their surroundings. While there will always be hackers, I believe all sites should incorporate PayPal as the default payment option; on page 277 Baase goes into how secure PayPal is and how it is the most secure payment site on the web. If all shopping sites were to default to PayPal, I believe it can stop a lot of identity theft.


5. (Synthesis) Address all that apply. Do you agree with what is being said within the article (Why/Why not? Back up with FACTS)? What new conclusions can you draw about this (or other topics) after reading this material?

I believe that hacking and identity theft are very real – and scary – realities, not to mention one that will always be as advanced as the technology that tries to protect people from it. Hackers are known for their tenacity and love for exposing flaws, so when new technology comes out that makes everything more secure, criminals on the internet will find new ways to go around it, or they’ll come out with new technology (such as skimmers) to make their job even easier than before.

6. (Evaluation) Address all that apply. Judge whether or not this topic is relevant in today’s society? Evaluate why you are viewing the topic in this manner based on your experiences. What ethical evaluations (see Chap1-1.4 for exp of Ethics) or decisions were made/can be assumed from this chapter? What new ideas will you make after reading this chapter?

This topic is very relevant to today’s society, as a large chunk of society owns a credit card (and everyone has an SSN), so everybody is susceptible to identity fraud. Hackers can make the internet – as well as the computers they hack – their plaything no matter how hard we try to protect it sometimes. As people who use the internet, we constantly run the risk of being attacked by these digital criminals, and when we become privy to one of their tactics, they will simply come up with a new one. This shows how exceptionally important it is to keep personal information to yourself at all costs, even if it means alienating yourself from online shops and using paper money more often.





References

Baase, Sara. "Chapter 5: Crime." A Gift of Fire: Social, Legal, and Ethical Issues in Computing. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2008. Print.


Blodget, Henry. "Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg Needs To Address The Hacking Incidents." The Business Insider. 08 Mar. 2010. Web. 22 Oct. 2011. .

Chapter 4: Steal This Film II

Rob Feind Class time: 11am

Name of Movie: Steal this Film
Year: 2006
Producers: The Pirate Bay


1. What questions/thoughts/reactions do you have after watching this film? (QUESTIONING):
o I thought it was interesting how at one point the Pirate Bay was compared to Google, as a good point was made. Essentially, the Pirate Bay simply indexes what people decide to put on it, as Google does with websites, which I considered a very interesting argument.
o Another intriguing point is how 18th century publishers using printing presses had very similar issues. The fact that they weren’t allowed to copy certain works (and would be apprehended if they did) rings true to this situation, and questions the same parts of freedom of speech that persecution of internet piracy does.
o At the end, the movie mentions that 35% of internet traffic is due to internet piracy. Not only does this show how significant this is to today’s society, it also shows that piracy is becoming an unstoppable force and will be impossible to be fully persecuted against as time goes on.



2. Foundation (UNDERSTANDING):
a. What is the Pirate Bay?
The Pirate Bay is a peer-to-peer file hosting site where people can share virtually anything, from music to games to movies. While it has legitimate purposes, many people use it to pirate movies.
b. What do they stand for (what is their mission)?
Their mission is to connect people and help share information as freedom of speech intends. They also encourage the promotion of work that otherwise wouldn’t be known (such as the “Grime” movement), hoping to connect more ideas as time goes on.
c. What is their purpose for making and distributing this film as a free download?
Their purpose was to inform more people about piracy and the issues and debates surrounding it. They were also making an important statement by distributing it for free, as that is exactly what they push for with such file hosting sites, declaring it a necessary freedom.



3. Provide 3 referenced connections to Baase readings (LINKING).
a. The Rio mp3 player was mentioned in the movie as well as A Gift of Fire; in the movie it was mentioned how it couldn’t be prosecuted for being the medium of mp3 files, and the link is made to the Pirate Bay not being able to be prosecuted for being the medium of all works found on the internet. (Baase, 214)
b. The issue of Napster being shut down was mentioned in both the movie and the book. In both sources, it is mentioned that this was the first attempt for file sharing online, and even though it was shut down, it started the movement to share all types of files on the internet through peer-to-peer sites. (Baase, 209)
c. Sony’s video recorder being under fire is also mentioned in both of these sources. Both sources mention how the movie industry wanted to come down hard on this technology as they thought it would ruin the industry even though it was only used for private reasons. (Baase, 207)




4. There are at least 10 people interviewed in this film. Name 5 of these people, explain why they are included in the film (why they are significant). How do they relate/add information to the overall theme of the film (KNOWLEDGE):
a. Peter Sunde – Co-owner of the Pirate Bay, and one of the ones on trial. He firmly believes that he has the right to host everything for everyone, and to do otherwise would infringe on our freedom of speech.
b. Rick Prelinger – The owner of a vast internet archive site. Prelinger acknowledges how important intellectual property on the internet is, as he is in a similar business. He also discusses how despite all the issues, suits won’t solve anything as there are too many users who partake in internet piracy.
c. Erik Dubelboer – Owner of mininova, another renowned file sharing site. Dubelboer believes that suits will realistically do nothing to stop peer-to-peer hosting; he thinks they are too aggressive, and are rarely actually effective.
d. Rasmus Fleischer – A part of the Bureau of piracy, Rasmus discusses how the WTO would place trade sanctions against Sweden if they did not take action against the Pirate Bay. He firmly believes this is another effort by America to try and police the world.
e. Frederik Neij – Another owner of the Pirate Bay. In court he mentioned how his hosting site is no more different than Google, as they index in very similar fashions. “If we are guilty, then Google is guilty.”



5. Name, and define, 3 significant people interviewed in the movie (KNOWLEDGE):
a) Peter Sunde – Co-Owner of the Pirate Bay, a strong advocate for file hosting and ending corporate greed.
b) Frederik Neij – Another advocate of the Pirate Bay with Sunde, Neij doesn’t see what he does as inherently wrong, as they are only providing a medium for users to share information with each other.
c) Yochai Benkler – A Yale professor, he argues that the spread of information is something we are entitled to, and more importantly, something he thinks will be unstoppable as file sharing continues to grow in strength.



4. What are the main ideas being discussed within this movie? By referencing the book, make 2 connections between Baase and this film (COMPREHENSION).

The main ideas being discussed are that file sharing and hosting is becoming an increasingly significant issue, as well as one that government agencies are constantly trying to crack down on. On one note this persecution is justified, as in A Gift of Fire, it is stated that affecting the market and the work as well as hosting the files themselves (unless the site takes actions to remove the content, which the Pirate Bay had no intention of doing) are reasons enough to make the activity look illegal (Baase, 205-206). However, Baase also put forth the idea that these peer-to-peer sites and tools only act as a medium for people to post information, and because of this should not be frowned upon as some such as the movie industry do (Baase, 211).



5. What is BitTorrent? Explain what it does and how this technologic advancement had changed society. (COMPREHENSION)

BitTorrent is a tool used by people to download files on the internet that would otherwise have copyright protection, such as music, movies, games, etcetera. This has greatly changed society, as even as some of the interviewees in the movie have said, people rarely ever buy CDs anymore and some don’t even see it as something you should spend money on now.



6. Based on the main point off this film (If you don’t understand read: http://stealthisfilm.com/Part2/). Where do you see connections to your experiences, or within society – BE SPECIFIC AND REFERENCE THE BOOK (APPLICATION)?

I see connections as it is mentioned that 35% of internet traffic is due to piracy; I myself know several people who use these peer-to-peer hosting sites and applications (In fact, 9/10 people I know), so this statistic seems correct, if even a bit small. There is another connection in society in the sense of the Digital Rights Management materials Baase mentions; these are a normal part of iTunes, and while it keeps music from being stolen, it still has issues with new computers, operating systems and etcetera (Baase, 215).


7. Analyze what you’ve watched. Use your Baase connections. What do you think is the future of distribution, production and creativity? What do you think is the future of Intellectually Property in the Information Age? ? (ANALYSIS)

I personally believe that such piracy on the web may cause some artists to show a decline in creativity due to the easy spread of things and lack of money involved, however at the same time I picture it increasing creativity for young independent artists who are simply trying to gain a fan base. With increasing technology I do believe that copyrights will become a thing of the past, as in the video it is even told that file sharers are growing by the day, and even at today’s numbers it is impossible for authorities to shut something like the Pirate Bay down. I believe the Information Age will make Intellectual Property very irrelevant.



8. Do you think that downloading is stealing someone’s Intellectual Property? Why or why not? Back up with Baase (ANALYSIS)?

Downloading to me is not entirely stealing somebody’s intellectual property; as an example I’ll use a band. Because of the fair-use doctrine, one can argue that it deprives the members of their income as people are downloading albums for free, and that in turn lowers their value on the market (Baase, 206). However at the same time this is creating a larger fan base for the band, and while CD’s are being downloaded, that means more people will attend concerts of theirs, buy band merchandise, and maybe even buy an album regardless to show appreciation. Considering most money that is made from albums goes to the record company instead of the artist, this isn’t always necessarily stealing someone’s intellectual property, as the band is still getting money out of it in the long run.



9. How do you see issues of copyright and Intellectual property effecting the world 50 years from today? BE SPECIFIC (SYNTHESIS)

In 50 years, I feel that intellectual property will either be completely impossible to enforce, or that the government will have strong enough restrictions on the internet to stop sites that BitTorrent once and for all. At the rate it is going, it’s plausible to believe that the government won’t be able to do anything about the copying of intellectual property and that file sharing may even send us into a new era with new concepts of this being introduced. However, it is also possible that the government will get tougher on these sites and start shutting them down, making sure torrent sites are not used, and those who create or use them will be persecuted. In that scenario, I see our internet becoming similar to that of China’s or India’s, though I do not personally believe we will take that route.



10. Do you agree with what is being said within movie? Explain. (EVALUATION)

I am conflicted with the message being sent in the movie. In a sense I do believe that hosting files on sites such as the Pirate Bay is the ultimate form of freedom of speech, and creators of such sites are only trying to link people together, help indie groups be heard, and show us what the internet is truly capable of. At the same time, I do believe a publisher is entitled to their rightly earned money and recognition, and torrent sites may take this away. Also, for some this will definitely cause a drop in creativity in works, which is something that is understandable regarding the nature of file sharing.



11. Has your opinion shifted on this topic after watching this film? Have you created any new ideas after watching, and thinking about, this film? (EVALUATION)

I cannot say my opinion has shifted, as I have always thought that people have come down too hard on peer-to-peer applications and sites, and that whatever they do is their own business. I say if people want to share movies, music, games and more over the internet, they should be allowed to do so, despite others seeing it as immoral or unfair to the publisher.

Chapter 4: Musicians Look Por Pay In An MP3 World

Laura Sydel makes a point that with the spread of music on the internet, sales in music have gone down tremendously. As Attorney Don Passman says, "You can't compete with free", and Sydel believes that this will also lower the value of music that will be created in the future, considering that if artists know it'll be available for free on the internet, they won't work as hard at it (For the 2 billion songs iTunes sells a year, 15 billion a year are pirated). What differs in this audio segment is that Laura Sydel argues that this may actually help some artists. The video becomes different from the Lars Ulrich standpoint when she mentions Jonathan Coulton, a low-key artist who posts his music online. Coulton says that he gets a fanbase from doing this, a benefit which many artists overlook. He also says that he has much more freedom than if he were to sign with a record label, and while he isn't making fortunes, he has made enough to quit his day job.

Chapter 4: Chuck D and Lars Ulrich

While Erik Schmidt sees property rights as fundamental in today's world, he wants publishers to be represented but also wants to encourage the use of such intellectual properties. He believes all this info should be available to people but made out in a way so that people would not mind paying for it (he gives iTunes as an example, as they charge a small amount per song and it's enough for people to want to use it). Chuck D has no problem with the sharing of music on the internet. He argues that while the invention of radio and cassette players also threatened intellectual property, it has done nothing wrong. In fact, he argues that putting music on the internet is a great way to expose people to music which may even be the next big thing, and he believes people should not be restricted from that. Lars Ulrich believes differently and wants this restricted. He says that while it isn't about money, it is about control, and that the publisher (in this case Metallica) should have the rights to distribute it and give it to the public, much like albums they sell. In his eyes this may devalue his own work and in turn the market prices for his work, which is a key issue at stake.

Chapter 4: Intellectual Property

Name Rob Feind Class time: 11am
KEEP THIS TO 1-3 – PAGES LONG (EXCLUDING REFERENCE PAGE)

Author: Sara Baase
Date of Publication: 2008
Book: A Gift of Fire
Sections read: 4.1 – 4.3.2

1. (Knowledge)Tell three interesting elements of this chapter:
a. A copyright is something that protects creative works (books, songs, software, etc), and doesn’t need to be applied for; it always applies to intellectual property (Baase, 198).
b. Piracy is a billion dollar industry that copies this property illegally, and also deals with “cracks” for property with copyright protection (Baase, 202).
c. The fair-use doctrine allows the use of copyrighted material that contributes to the creation of a new piece of work that isn’t likely to deprive the author of their income; fair uses are for “criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarships and research” (Baase, 206).

2. (Comprehension) Summarize what is being discussed within this chapter?

Copyrights protect creative works of people who decide to publish them. One can also apply for a patent which protects software and allows them to be the publisher for a set amount of years (Baase, 198). These are mainly to protect the compensation that publisher deserves. The public domain is when a copyright expires, meaning its information is available to all the public (Baase, 199). In general, it was meant to protect creative expression. With the invention of CDs/DVDs, scanners and whatnot, copying this info has become much easier (Baase, 201). New digital technology gives us the power to both be copyrighters and to infringe upon others (Baase, 202). Piracy – high volume, unauthorized copying of digital property – has been made much easier in the past decade, and is a billion dollar industry (Baase, 202). Of course, with new technology copyright laws constantly need to be amended. The No Electronic Theft Act of 1997 made it illegal to distribute and copies of something worth over 1,000 dollars and distributed within 6 months. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 prohibits circumventing copyright protection systems, and also protects web sites if they try to remove illegal material (Baase, 204). This is controversial, as it outlaws software that may otherwise have legitimate purposes. The fair-use doctrine allowed use of copyrighted material that wouldn’t deprive the publisher of the income they deserve. It also gave 4 factors to consider – The purpose and nature of its use, the nature of the original work, the amount and significance of the portion used, and the effect on the market and original work’s value (Baase, 206). In Sony v. Universal City Studios, Sony was sued because people used Sony’s Betamax cassettes to tape programs on TV; because it was for noncommercial, private uses, Sony won the case (Baase, 208). Napster wasn’t so lucky; they were sued for providing the transfer of unauthorized songs, resulting in a negative impact of music sales. Napster lost the case and shut down (Baase, 209-211). In MGM v. Grokster, movie studios sued Grokster and StreamCast, owners of a widely known peer-to-peer network, however they only provided the software, not the actual files to download, and in doing so also served a legitimate purpose. Distribution of file sharing software is legal, but companies can still sue these software publishers if they chose to do so (Baase, 211). While companies use many measures to stop unauthorized copying (dongles, serial numbers, etc), people found this extraneous, and others nevertheless found ways to “crack” it. The Business Software Alliance “polices” the internet for pirates, and has since busted many companies for pirated software (Baase, 213). Digital Rights Management (DRM) gives publishers many ways to protect their property, however there are many issues with how well it works (one being DRM movies won’t run on Linux), and people can still “crack” it if desired (Baase, 216-217). DeCSS was created to let DRM-protected movies run on Linux, and while people used it to illegally distribute material, it is still deemed legal for that reason alone (Baase, 218). As technology expands it gets even harder for companies to protect what is theirs, and see conflict through the entire process.



3. (Application)Name a specific example or NEW solution for this type of problem/similar situation in society or that you have experienced – BE SPECIFIC AND EXPLAIN?

One case that pertains to this that is still fairly fresh is that of thepiratebay.org. The Pirate Bay is one of the leading peer-to-peer sites on the internet to date, and accounts for a lot of the piracy issues on the web. Similar to Napster, The Pirate Bay provides the source for pirates to download music, games, software, and more. While they did nothing to take it off the site, all four owners were taken to trial and received guilty verdicts of a year and prison and astronomical fines. People view this case with caution, as they believe this will only create more trials and make it more complex a situation than it needs to be. Nevertheless, thepiratebay.org is still up and running as of today despite these rulings (More information can be found here - http://torrentfreak.com/the-pirate-bay-trial-the-verdict-090417/).



4. (Analysis)Address ANY that apply. How can you compare one of the situations in this chapter to something that does not relate to computers, technology, or the Internet? Be sure to reference the chapter and your solution. What ideas NEW can you add to the issue that is being presented within the reading? Try to connect what you have by reading this article and how it applies to the stages in Bloom's taxonomy in 2 full sentences.

This issue seems a lot like the issue of plagiarism of essays and books, however with the internet it has become much broader. Unfortunately for publishers, it doesn’t seem like they will ever have the upper hand in the copyright wars. No matter what they do, be it DRM, CSS or even the threat of lawsuits, people will continue to download and share illegally, find cracks to expose loopholes in otherwise protected systems, and maybe even make a buck off of it. It seems that the people who share cannot get in trouble, but the internet hosts can, which seems trivial. I feel that with the creation of the internet there will always be problems with copyrights.


5. (Synthesis) Address all that apply. Do you agree with what is being said within the article (Why/Why not? Back up with FACTS)? What new conclusions can you draw about this (or other topics) after reading this material?

I agree with what is being said in the article, as it explains how increasingly hard it is to protect copyrights as technology expands. People who “crack” are very good at what they do and will find a loophole whenever the opportunity presents itself. Such is the case of the creator of DeCSS; as it was used for practical reasons (so that Linux users can view copyright-protected material), it still proves the point (Baase, 218). I simply don’t believe that this issue will go away, as no matter the security precautions, hackers will always find a way to exploit it, and this will continue to occur.

6. (Evaluation) Address all that apply. Judge whether or not this topic is relevant in today’s society? Evaluate why you are viewing the topic in this manner based on your experiences. What ethical evaluations (see Chap1-1.4 for exp of Ethics) or decisions were made/can be assumed from this chapter? What new ideas will you make after reading this chapter?

This topic is extremely relevant, as a large portion of the world downloads music illegally through peer-to-peer programs such as Frostwire and torrent sites, and excluding the hosts, there are absolutely no repercussions. I can relate in this way in that while I have stopped since, I am one of the many million who would download music in this way, and in the many years I have done it there were no consequences; not to mention the fact that I knew many people who did the same and experienced similar results. I can conclude that copyrights may inevitably become a thing of the past due to the internet, and while I do not know if that is necessarily a good or bad thing, it will be interesting to see the transition.





References

Baase, Sara. "Chapter 4: Intellectual Property" A Gift of Fire: Social, Legal, and Ethical Issues in Computing. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2008. Print.

TorrentFreak. "The Pirate Bay Trial: The Official Verdict - Guilty." TorrentFreak. 17 Apr. 2009. Web. 14 Oct. 2011. .

Chapter 3: Questions from Dr. RSM

In your own words define the phrase ‘least restrictive means'.
"Least restrictive means" refers to the fact that the government should use the least amount of intrusion in the internet, and idea supported by the Supreme Court's decision concerning the Communications Decency Act (Baase, 147). A lot of people believe in this principle as they see the internet as nothing more than a "participatory form of mass speech", and therefore requires a very little amount of government intrusion (147).

Why is this term important? How does it effect Freedom of Speech. Why or why not?
This term is very important, being that it recognizes that the government cannot do much to limit freedom of speech on the internet. For one, the Telecommunications Act recognizes that the common carrier is not the publisher of information on the net, and therefore cannot be prosecuted against by the government (Baase, 147). Freedom of speech is affected, as for other forms of media such as broadcasting devices, government control is extensive (146). However, the internet is arguably even more expansive than these broadcasting companies, however because of the publishing issues they are better protected under the first amendment.

Do you consider the Internet an appropriate tool for young children? Why or why not?
I do not consider the Internet an appropriate tool for children. Despite the possible learning that can be done, there is still shady material on the web; after all, there are 400,000 pornography sites, and the fact that it's growing daily makes it very hard for any internet filter to keep it all out of the hands of children (Baase, 150). In one case, a child even accessed pornography at a library, and was able to save it and print out copies for his friends (157). The internet is a very intriguing tool, but I believe it is much better suited for a more mature audience.

Chapter 3: Questions from Baase p 189

3.1 - Briefly explain the differences between common carriers, broadcasters, and publishers with respect to freedom of speech and control of content.
Common carriers are a medium of information (telephone, internet, etc), and many believe it should be restricted the least in terms of freedom of speech. It is highly protected by the first amendment, and content cannot be controlled, as the common carrier is not the publisher and has no legal responsibility (Baase, 146). Broadcast (TV and radio) are heavily regulated by the FCC, and they will threaten to revoke licenses for questionable material (146). They argue this is because the material can easily reach children at home, therefore content must be controlled (146). Print media (newspapers and magazines) have a few limitations. While advertisements and content are dictated by the publisher, there are very few restraints put on it by the government, though they were regulated more heavily in the past (145).

3.2 - Describe two methods parents can use to restrict access by their children to inappropriate material on the web.
The Child Online Protection Commission advocates for site filters - while they may not block everything and are entirely subjective, they nevertheless help filter out bad information, and may still help restrict inappropriate material (Baase, 154). They can also set up their child's email account with specialized settings; for example, they can specify which email addresses can actually send email to their children, or they may have the option to not even set up an email address for them at all, dramatically decreasing spam, scams and otherwise harmful material (160).

3.8 - One of the arguments used to justify increased government control of television content is that television is "invasive". It comes into the home and is more difficult to keep from children. Do you think this argument is strong enough to outweigh the First Amendment? Give reasons. Is this argument more valid for the Internet than for television, or less valid for the Internet than television? Give reasons.
I do not believe this is enough to outweigh the first amendment, as there is still a way to monitor what your children are watching. These days it's very simple to put a password on specific channels so that children don't have the option to view them; they may even need a password to even view any channel at all. Also, racier shows are usually on much later at night, so that a minor would usually be in bed before the show was even close to airing. I believe this is more valid for the internet than television, as while shows may have very questionable content, literally anybody can post anything they want on the internet with the click of a button. There is some very obscene material on the web, and if a child were to stumble onto it, results could be concerning.

Chapter 3: Freedom of Speech

Name Rob Feind Class time: 11am
KEEP THIS TO 1-3 – PAGES LONG (EXCLUDING REFERENCE PAGE)

Author: Sara Baase
Date of Publication: 2008
Book: “A Gift of Fire”
Sections read: 3.1.1 – 3.3.4

1. (Knowledge)Tell three interesting elements of this chapter:
a. While the government has extensive control over television and radio broadcasting (Baase, 146), they struggle to exert the same control over an entity such as the internet.
b. Some governments can easily filter out what can be searched on the internet; for example, Saudi Arabia blocks sites on the Bahai Faith and sites dealing with the holocaust (Baase, 172).
c. Some large companies decide to work with countries who impose strict filters on its people, such as when Google made it’s Chinese counterpart, google.cn (Baase, 174)

2. (Comprehension) Summarize what is being discussed within this chapter?

Freedom of speech is a very important issue with the internet, and there are valid arguments for both restricting and upholding it. While the government has stopped regulating books as much, they have a strong grip on broadcasting such as TV and radio (Baase, 145). With the introduction of common carriers (such as the internet), this became troublesome; the government couldn’t control the content, due to the carriers having no legal responsibility for what is poster (146). The Telecommunications Act of 1996 was made, stating this exact principle (147). When the Communications Decency Act of 1996 was declared unconstitutional, it was to be said the internet needs the least amount of government intrusion possible (147). The issue of pornography on the internet has also stirred much controversy, though Wired magazine says it’s already in magazines and just as accessible to anyone (149). Miller v. California of 1973 declared what is obscene; it must depict sexual activity whose depiction is strictly prohibited by law, it depicts the act in an offensive manner, and it has no serious literary/artistic/social/political/scientific value (151). While the Communications Decency Act made it a crime to made such info to minors, a child could easily find it online, and the bill was deemed unconstitutional (152). Under this idea, even things such as Shakespearian plays or the bible could be banned from the internet (153). The Child Online Protection Commission came along, advocating filters – and unlike the other ideas this one had some decent support (154). Nevertheless, filters don’t always work, and it even lets things such as filesharing get past it (156). The Children’s Internet Protection Act passed, asking schools and libraries to install filters, and in return they would get funded for it (the reason it was deemed constitutional) (158). Info on questionable material (ie: bomb making) is alright, as long as the author isn’t directly advocating for illegal activity (159). Spam is an increasing problem, and it was estimated in 2006 over 30 billion were sent per day (161). After Cyber Promotions, a notorious email selling site, put a suit against AOL for blocking their spam, AOL made further battles to stop the reach of spammers (AOL won the suit) (161). “Challenge-Response” spam filtering is a technique where the spam sender has to do a simple task to send the email, so it proves it’s a real person and not an automated account (163). There was also the idea of attaching a small price to emails to “certify” them, which some believe is a surefire way to help slow down spam (164). The CAN-SPAM Act of 2004 stated that commercial emails must have a valid header info, return address and physical post address; deceptive subject lines are prohibited (165). Certain software also raised some issues; software like Quicken and Nolo Press were blocked by courts, as it helps people do things that only experts otherwise could (167). Posting and selling sensitive materials can also cause controversy; when yahoo took their “adult” merchandise down due to people complaining, people also started complaining once it was taken down (168). A general rule of thumb is to use discretion and consider unintended readers, potential risks, and ways to limit the access to users only (169). Legality and accessibility to info in other countries is a touchy subject, as it’s an easy way to circumnavigate laws. In 1995, German prosecutors told CompuServe to block access to indecent articles; these were not only cut off from Germany, but the rest of the world as well (170). Yahoo had a similar issue for selling Nazi memorabilia which is illegal in France and Germany; however they still saw it (171). Censorship in other countries is commonplace and serves the government, for example in China not only must you register your internet with the police, but they filter a lot of material (democracy, religious sites, Google, Wikipedia, etc) (173). Companies like Google give in and comply to these restrictions, which angers many human rights organizations (174). In short, while the first amendment protects our freedom of speech, there are ongoing problems on the internet that deal with this and need to be addressed.



3. (Application)Name a specific example or NEW solution for this type of problem/similar situation in society or that you have experienced – BE SPECIFIC AND EXPLAIN?

After looking into it, there is one online freedom of speech issue that is compelling. Katherine Evans was suspended for 2 years for posting a hate profile for her teacher, which was found to have no especially rude or harmful material, and didn’t disrupt much. The Supreme Court is now ruling in the student’s favor, but it nevertheless is food for thought when it comes to noticing how free we really are to say what we want on the web. (More info here)



4. (Analysis)Address ANY that apply. How can you compare one of the situations in this chapter to something that does not relate to computers, technology, or the Internet? Be sure to reference the chapter and your solution. What ideas NEW can you add to the issue that is being presented within the reading? Try to connect what you have by reading this article and how it applies to the stages in Bloom's taxonomy in 2 full sentences.

This is easily relatable outside of the web, as we have had freedom of speech issues in just about every time period. Tiananmen Square is a solid example, a group of students protesting against the Chinese government were quickly thwarted by the government – and quite violently at that. I believe that freedom of speech on the internet should be the same as it is in the real world; you are free to express whatever your thoughts are as long as they don’t put anybody in danger (A hate speech gone violent) or cause public disorder (Yelling “bomb” on an airplane).


5. (Synthesis) Address all that apply. Do you agree with what is being said within the article (Why/Why not? Back up with FACTS)? What new conclusions can you draw about this (or other topics) after reading this material?

Baase seems to think that freedom of speech online is not only very important, but heavily protected in the 1st amendment. I agree with this, as even as one opinion is different from yours or you may see objectionable material, it isn’t a problem unless it physically hurts or threatens you. As Voltaire says, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” (149) This material has helped me realize that while this may be true, the internet may still be too racy for children, which is why monitoring them online or using filters is still a good idea, even if they don’t work 100% of the time. Adult content should be restricted, but other than that freedom of speech is essential to preserve.


6. (Evaluation) Address all that apply. Judge whether or not this topic is relevant in today’s society? Evaluate why you are viewing the topic in this manner based on your experiences. What ethical evaluations (see Chap1-1.4 for exp of Ethics) or decisions were made/can be assumed from this chapter? What new ideas will you make after reading this chapter?

This topic is extremely relevant to today’s society, as the internet is a new technology, and we clearly don’t have an exact formula for figuring out what is and is not okay to say and show on the internet. I believe in years to come we will have a more solid legal idea of it, but for now we are very conflicted. This section has taught me how necessary it is for me to be wary of what I post on the internet, as well as what I search, buy and view.






References

Baase, Sara. "Chapter 3: Freedom of Speech." A Gift of Fire: Social, Legal, and Ethical Issues in Computing. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 2008. 144-75. Print.

Kravets, David. "Student’s Facebook Tirade Against Teacher Is Protected Speech."Wired.com. Wired, 16 Feb. 2010. Web. 06 Oct. 2011. .