Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Law

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Law

Establishing legal accountability for anonymous communication in cyberspace

Article Abstract:

The most effective way to limit the improper use of anonymous remailers on the Internet is to impose liability on remailer administrators for activities that they have constructive knowledge of. Anonymous remailers are being used to distribute child pornography, defame people and infringe on copyrights. Banning remailers is too extreme because they do serve some benefit, but someone must be accountable for the harm that results from anonymity. Administrators could be held liable if they have been informed that an anonymous user is using the account improperly and they allow the conduct to continue.

Author: Levine, Noah
Publisher: Columbia Law Review
Publication Name: Columbia Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0010-1958
Year: 1996
Internet, Electronic mail systems, Email, Anonymous letters

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Fighting words and fighting freestyle: the constitutionality of penalty enhancement for bias crimes

Article Abstract:

The US Supreme Court decision in R.A.V. v City of St Paul does not apply to statutes that are facially content neutral. Therefore, statutes that provide enhanced penalties for bias crimes are not threatened by that decision, although state supreme courts in Wisconsin and Ohio have reached the opposite conclusion and held their state penalty-enhancement statutes unconstitutional. The statute in R.A.V. outlawed certain forms of expression based on content whereas penalty-enhancement statutes typically address bias as a motive for crime rather than the expressive content of conduct.

Author: Grannis, Eric J.
Publisher: Columbia Law Review
Publication Name: Columbia Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0010-1958
Year: 1993
Hate crimes

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Symbolic speech and social meaning

Article Abstract:

The jurisprudence of symbolic speech should be reconfigured to reflect the factors used and the weight given those factors by courts. The US Supreme Court's decision in Spence v. Washington requires courts to determine whether 1st Amendment protection is warranted in symbolic speech cases by assessing actors' intent and the facts of the cases. Courts in practice apply a more general approach by determining the social meaning of the conduct and imputed intent at most. Modifying the doctrine to mirror judicial practice would provide academic and practical benefits.

Author: Waldman, Joshua
Publisher: Columbia Law Review
Publication Name: Columbia Law Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0010-1958
Year: 1997
Flag desecration

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Subjects list: United States, Laws, regulations and rules, Freedom of speech
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: Keeping secrets in cyberspace: establishing Fourth Amendment protection for Internet communication. O.J. Simpson, Bill Clinton, and the transsubstantive Fourth Amendment
  • Abstracts: Criminal law; penalties for lying. Drug dealer convicted in overdose death. Not the usual sex and drugs proceeding
  • Abstracts: Justiciability. Personal jurisdiction
  • Abstracts: Establishment and toleration in Edmund Burke's "constitution of freedom."
  • Abstracts: New Australian Patents Act. Problems in proving lost profits in multiple competitor situations
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.