Internet Privacy: Behind closed doors

Internet Privacy is a very huge issue today, because the generation today is a generation that live online and on-camera. The same way people in times past expect the mails and private correspondence to be private, so do people today expect what they do, even if it is online as long as it is tagged as private, it should remain so. The legal system has come a long way since the 1800’s, with every case a new precedence is set and it is adapting with the jetting changes of our time. Now MRI scan are admissible in court as evidence in to a defendant’s thought pattern, so privacy rights and human rights have over the years been eroded by the legal system.

Since the introduction of the Internet, the way we did many things before became obsolete. Even some words took a whole new meaning or where expanded in extent. Internet privacy has been an issue that has never been set in stone from the get go. It has been a very dynamic issue that is a continuum. Of all the human rights in the international catalog, privacy is perhaps the most difficult to define. Privacy is the state of being free from unsanctioned intrusion (Houghton Mifflin Company, 2009). Privacy is a fundamental human right. It underpins human dignity and other values such as freedom of association and freedom of speech. It has become one of the most important human rights of the modern age (Laurant, 2003). It is something everyone as a human being holds dear and cherishes, if it is allowed to be eroded then where is the sense of self and individuality?

This issue not only deals with privacy but also free speech, because if we are to worry about every thing we write and put out there, then where is our free speech? Facebook and many other sites like it, are the way the world lives today. With all the progress made with technology, trying to inhibit the outcome of it is simply ludicrous. With the advent of cyber social communities, the world has become a global village. Now people can keep in-touch with friends they otherwise would have lost contact with, and precious relationships saved. People even forge connections business connections and valuable networks. So putting personal information and a profile so that potential contacts and network circles can get to know you and add a personal touch to an otherwise impersonal form of communication should not be something to be punished for. As mentioned in the case the lawyer looking to obtain these personal writing is actually doing something that is unethical. If a person where going through a trauma and decides to open up to a few close people to facilitate healing, does that mean that everything they say is open to the public? Like Phillip Malone, director of the cyber law clinic at the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School, says the generation that has grown up online have different privacy expectations, and believe they can put material on the Internet with the expectation that only a limited group will see it (Stein, 2008). The world we live in today is a world where people have gotten used to living in front of cameras and the Internet. So because of these changes the notion of privacy and individuality should be done away with?

Networking online is not only limited to social sites, but also even ones where people go to escape the pressures of life and unwind. People relax in so many ways, some people play golf with golf buddies or poker with poker buddies, some people go surfing with other surfers, but most of the time they do these things with people the barely know but are united just by their love of a common sport or game. Now with technology in the mix new types or recreational activities have sprung up. People now go online to play games that help them escape, sometimes even assume a second identity. Second life is a virtual world developed by Linden Lab that launched on June 23, 2003, and is accessible on the Internet. A free client program called the King Bee[1] enables its users, called Residents, to interact with each other through avatars. Residents can explore, meet other residents, socialize, participate in individual and group activities, and create and trade virtual property and services with one another, or travel throughout the world (which residents refer to as "the grid"). Second Life is for people aged 18 and over (Wikipedia.org, 2009). It is an online game that has a community all of it own, here people take up pseudonyms and play characters that they create. So people escape into a world where they want to be able to say things anonymously and get some burdens off. If privacy does not apply here where else can people go to get the privacy they need?

Now begs the question, do we have a right to privacy when we share personal information with friends or family in real space? And does the same apply when we share this under a pseudonym in second life. With the way the world has changed the legal system has to pick up and not be left behind. Since the way most of our communication is made has changed new things have to be factored in when making a case. Yes the legal system is doing a good job to protect citizens better, but do they do it at the expense of the same people? When changes occur people should consider, what is replacing what? If a private conversation between two people could be considered evidence before then a phone call can used as evidence, if a private letter is admissible in court as evidence then emails and be used, if a public announcement is evidence then a blog can be an evidence.

In conclusion, when we are trying to adapt to changes it should not be used as an excuse to get rid of basic fundamental human rights.


REFERENCES
Houghton Mifflin Company. (n.d.). Privacy - definition. Retrieved April 6, 2010, from The free dictionary: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/privacy

Laurant, C. (2003). Privacy and Human Rights 2003: Overview. Retrieved April 6, 2010, from Privacy International: http://www.privacyinternational.org/survey/phr2003/overview.htm

Stein, M. (2008, February 05). Daily Brief. Retrieved April 06, 2010, from Portfolio.com: http://www.portfolio.com/views/blogs/daily-brief/2008/02/05/facebook-page-or-exhibit-a-in-court

Wikipedia.org. (2009, March). Second Life - Wikipedia. Retrieved April 06, 2010, from Wikipedia.org: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Life

Internet Governance: Internet Filtering

Internet filtering or Internet censorship is control or suppression of the publishing or accessing of information on the Internet. One difference is that national borders are more permeable online: residents of a country that bans certain information can find it on websites hosted outside the country. A government can try to prevent its citizens from viewing these even if it has no control over the websites themselves. In today's world getting information is just with the touch of a button. There is a lot of information on the internet, and it is now readily accessible to people. So how do we stop this information from getting into the wrong hands? Wrong hand for information maybe Pornography in the hands of an under-aged child, credit information in the hand of an internet crook or chance meeting of a gullible innocent and a predator online. Censorship and filtering of internet content is pertinent to some extent; some information have no business being circulated around on the internet. Examples are: Home made explosives and drugs, How to dispose of a body you killed, How to rob a bank, child pornography e.t.c. What rules are there in place to make sure that harmful information like these are not available to the general public and impressionable minds of kids?


With the world moving steadily toward a society of democracy, things like free speech and human rights are holding sway worldwide. Free speech or Freedom of speech is the freedom to speak without censorship and/or limitation. The synonymous term freedom of expression is sometimes used to indicate not only freedom of verbal speech but any act of seeking, receiving and imparting information or ideas, regardless of the medium used. When does free speech broach into Hate speech or the dissemination of harmful information? The internet is the one place where free speech is still almost reigning supreme. Information and things posted on the internet are not really censored and is really hard to censor. According to an article in Australia where the government is moving to have contents on sites filtered in the country. Does this have any infringement on freedom of speech? I say no. No, because like everything else nothing is absolutely perfect. With this technology of internet filtering, there is an acceptable use and unacceptable use of it. Countries like Mexico and the Caribbean nations are on the extreme lax side, in the sense that nothing is censored in those regions. Countries like Canada and the U.S could pick up with a little more censoring of the things allowed in there internet space. Countries like China and Korea which are referred to as “Black holes” are on the other extreme where freedom of speech is now being denied and the formation of the ‘Thought Police’ is very much real.

Yes internet filtering has some drawbacks that make it seem inadequate, because some of the contents the government is trying to filter out can still be gotten from servers outside the country and legitimate site could be hampered. The Australian filter was among a number of new measures aimed at strengthening online protection for families. It aims to block material such as child pornography, bestiality, rape and other sexual violence, along with detailed instructions about committing crimes or using illicit drugs. Such material is already banned from publication on Australian sites, but the government currently has no control over it being accessed on servers overseas. Critics say illegal material such as child pornography is often traded on peer-to-peer networks or chats, which would not be covered by the filter. The only issue with the implementation of the Australian filter in 2011 is the lack of transparency of the whole process, because it leaves skeptics with the doubt that legitimate businesses could be black listed and corrupt government officials could use this as an avenue to extort money from legal businesses. Seeing that the world of today is a cyber-world where almost everything is electronic, from e-mails to e-commerce. A company that is unable to tap into the vast market and opportunity of the internet in their own home country stands to lose a lot, so the secrecy of the Australian blacklist by the government might raise a couple of free speech issues.

In conclusion, to put to rest the concerns of the critics, the Australian government should make the internet filter blacklist draft an open and transparent process. They should also have well stated rules and guidelines that the people support in the determination of blacklist sites.



Works Cited

How get away with murder. (2004, June 13). Retrieved March 13, 2010, from Ask metafilter: http://ask.metafilter.com/7921/If-you-killed-somebody-how-would-you-dispose-of-the-body-without-getting-caught

Internet censorship - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. (2008, August). Retrieved March 13, 2010, from Wikipedia.org: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship

SULLIVAN, R. (2009, December 15). Australia Plans Internet Filter Blocking 'Obscene' Content, Criminal Sites. Retrieved March 13, 2010, from Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/12/15/australia-internet-filter_n_392393.html