Articles Tagged: censorship

Showing 8 of 8 articles tagged with "censorship"

Advertisement

Discussion Points

  1. Balancing Free Speech and Liability: How can online platforms balance their responsibility to protect users from harm with the need to preserve free speech and avoid censorship?r
  2. Section 230 Immunity: A Double-Edged Sword: Can Section 230 immunity be used as a tool for holding perpetrators accountable, or does it ultimately shield them from liability?r
  3. Redefining Defamation in the Digital Age: How can we reevaluate our understanding of defamation and its application to online platforms, considering the rise of user-generated content and social media.

Summary

R The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of Grindr, a popular dating app, citing Section 230 immunity. The plaintiff, who was misclassified as an adult on the app, brought various claims against Grindr, but the court dismissed all except for a federal civil sex trafficking claim.

The ruling affirms that online services cannot be held responsible for publishing harmful user-generated content. While this decision may seem to shield platforms from liability, it also highlights the need foeevaluating our approach to defamation and holding perpetrators accountable in the digital age.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit correctly held that Grindr, a popular dating app, can’t be held responsible for matching users and enabling them to exchange messages that led to real...

Read Full Article »

Discussion Points

  1. Platform Accountability in Crisis: How can existing frameworks be improved to address the alarming developments in platforms' content policies and their enforcement? What role can civil society organizations play in strategizing and discussing a human rights-based approach to platform governance?r
  2. Amplifying the Voices of Digital Rights Defenders: What steps can be taken to support digital rights defenders in Taiwan and East Asia, particularly in light of the current challenges they face? How can we foster resonance with their experiences and contribute to the global dialogue on pressing issues?r
  3. Mutual Support and Global Dialogue: What can we learn from Taiwan's tech community and civil society about addressing pressing human rights challenges in digital spaces? How can we ensure that the global conversation on these issues prioritizes the needs and perspectives of those most impacted.And here is a

Summary

EFF will be attending RightsCon in Taipei, Taiwan from 24-27 February. Several members, including director-level staff and experts, will participate in sessions, panels, and networking opportunities.

The EFF delegation includes individuals leading sessions on platform accountability, digital rights defenders, and human rights challenges. They will connect with attendees, particularly at the following sessions: "Mutual Support" and "Platform Accountability in Crisis".

These events aim to foster dialogue, learn from Taiwan's tech community, and contribute to the global conversation on pressing issues. EFF hopes to engage with attendees and support the global dialogue on digital human rights challenges.

EFF is delighted to be attending RightsCon again—this year hosted in Taipei, Taiwan between 24-27 February. RightsCon provides an opportunity for human rights experts, technologists, activists, and ...

Read Full Article »

Discussion Points

  1. Is the TAKE IT DOWN Act a necessary step to protect victims of non-consensual intimate imagery, or does it pose a threat to free speech and user privacy?
  2. How can the bill's provisions be balanced to address concerns around online content removal while minimizing the risk of censorship and overreach?
  3. What exemptions or safeguards should be included in the bill to protect encrypted services and prevent them from being forced to compromise user privacy?

Summary

The TAKE IT DOWN Act has raised concerns about its potential to speed up the removal of non-consensual intimate imagery online, but at the cost of threatening free expression and user privacy. The bill's notice-and-takedown system could lead to overreach and censorship, particularly with broad definitions and lack of safeguards.

Exemptions for encrypted services are also unclear, posing a threat to private conversations and end-to-end encryption. Critics argue that the bill does not adequately address the problem it claims to solve and would instead create a far broader internet censorship regime than existing laws like the DMCA.

Congress has begun debating the TAKE IT DOWN Act (S. 146), a bill that seeks to speed up the removal of a troubling type of online content: non-consensual intimate imagery, or NCII. In recent years, c...

Read Full Article »
Advertisement

Discussion Points

  1. Protection of Whistleblowers and Public Interest: How does the court's ruling on Jack Poulson's case affect the ability of journalists to report on whistleblowers and matters of public concern?
  2. The Limitations of Court Orders in Censoring Free Speech: Can court orders, even those related to sealed records, be used as a tool for silencing journalists and censoring the public discourse?
  3. The Role of Anti-SLAPP Statutes in Protecting Free Speech: How effective are anti-SLAPP statutes in shielding journalists from baseless lawsuits designed to chill their free speech, and what implications does this have for a healthy press?r

Summary

A California court has ruled in favor of journalist Jack Poulson, striking down a lawsuit by tech CEO Maury Blackman that attempted to silence Poulson's reporting on Blackman's arrest for felony domestic violence. The court agreed with Poulson that the First Amendment protects his right to publish truthful speech concerning matters of public interest, even if obtained illegally.

This ruling is significant in upholding principles established in Bartnicki v. Vopper and serves as a crucial check against CEOs attempting to use court orders to rewrite history and censor the press.

Anti-SLAPP statutes played a pivotal role in this outcome.

Jack Poulson is a reporter, and when a confidential source sent him the police report of a tech CEO’s arrest for felony domestic violence, he did what journalists do: reported the news.   The CEO,...

Read Full Article »

Discussion Points

  1. The recent executive orders by the new president have led to a widespread censorship of information on U.S. government agencies' websites, including those related to Trans people and climate justice. Is this a violation of freedom of speech and access to information?r
  2. How can individuals and organizations work together to preserve and archive information that has been removed or censored? What tools and resources are available for this purpose?r
  3. What are the implications of this censorship on vulnerable communities, particularly those who rely on scientific research and accurate information for their well-being and survival? Summary r The recent executive orders have resulted in the removal of thousands of web pages and datasets from U.S. government agencies' websites, citing a memo from the Office of Personnel Management. This has led to a censorship of information on Trans people and climate justice, resulting in an anti-science and anti-speech fit of panic. However, institutions like the Internet Archive have provided tools to fight these memory holes. Individuals and organizations can help preserve and archive information by submitting links to the Wayback Machine or using other available resources. This is a critical effort to protect established science and historical records.

Summary

R The recent executive orders have resulted in the removal of thousands of web pages and datasets from U.S. government agencies' websites, citing a memo from the Office of Personnel Management.

This has led to a censorship of information on Trans people and climate justice, resulting in an anti-science and anti-speech fit of panic. However, institutions like the Internet Archive have provided tools to fight these memory holes.

Individuals and organizations can help preserve and archive information by submitting links to the Wayback Machine or using other available resources. This is a critical effort to protect established science and historical records.

Who needs a DDoS (Denial of Service) attack when you have a new president? As of February 2nd, thousands of web pages and datasets have been removed from U.S. government agencies following a series of...

Read Full Article »

Discussion Points

  1. The impact of the executive order on the global landscape of digital rights and freedoms, particularly in countries where these tools are crucial for protecting citizens' security, privacy, and anonymity.
  2. The potential consequences of suspending contracts with organizations that rely on State Department funding, including the effects on researchers, developers, and users of these freedom technologies.
  3. The role of international cooperation and diplomacy in ensuring that the United States upholds its obligations to protect digital rights and freedoms, rather than undermining them through executive orders.

Summary

The EFF is sounding the alarm about the devastating impact of the Trump Administration's executive order on global digital rights. The Reevaluating and Realigning United States Foreign Aid has led to the suspension of contracts with hundreds of organizations that rely on State Department funding, including those working on critical freedom technologies like Tor, Guardian Project, and OONI.

This move has severe consequences foesearchers, developers, and users worldwide, who will be forced to curtail or halt their work. The EFF urges a full reinstatement of these programs, highlighting their crucial role in supporting freedom and human rights abroad.

In the first weeks of the Trump Administration, we have witnessed a spate of sweeping, confusing, and likely unconstitutional executive orders, including some that have already had devastating human c...

Read Full Article »
Advertisement

Discussion Points

  1. The concept of "memory-holing" is a serious threat to a free and open internet, as it allows powerful individuals and organizations to hide their past mistakes and misdeeds.r
  2. The use of copyright claims as a tool for memory-holing is particularly insidious, as it can be used to silence critics and erase embarrassing information from the public record.r
  3. The existence of archived websites, such as the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine, provides a crucial counterbalance to memory-holing efforts, allowing users to access and preserve historical content.Summary r The internet's ability to store and share information has created a powerful tool for those seeking to hide their past mistakes. "Memory-holing" allows individuals and organizations to erase embarrassing information from the public record, often through copyright claims or website changes. This threatens a free and open internet, as it silences critics and erases historical context. However, archived websites like the Wayback Machine provide a counterbalance, preserving earlier versions of content and allowing users to access a more complete picture of history. Preserving this functionality is crucial for a functioning democracy and an open society.

Summary

R The internet's ability to store and share information has created a powerful tool for those seeking to hide their past mistakes. "Memory-holing" allows individuals and organizations to erase embarrassing information from the public record, often through copyright claims or website changes.

This threatens a free and open internet, as it silences critics and erases historical context. However, archived websites like the Wayback Machine provide a counterbalance, preserving earlier versions of content and allowing users to access a more complete picture of history.

Preserving this functionality is crucial for a functioning democracy and an open society.

If there is one axiom that we should want to be true about the internet, it should be: the internet never forgets. One of the advantages of our advancing technology is that information can be stored a...

Read Full Article »

Discussion Points

  1. r.
  2. The information provides valuable insights for those interested in research.
  3. Understanding research requires attention to the details presented in this content.

Summary

(100-word)The practice of swiftly deleting anonymized numbers of bug discoveries has sparked concerns about accountability and transparency. Companies may be attempting to avoid repercussions for their products' vulnerabilities, rather than taking responsibility for fixing them.

Alternatively, deletions could be an attempt to cover up potential security issues.This practice can have severe consequences, including hindering the work of security researchers who rely on such reports to identify and fix vulnerabilities. The impact on the overall security landscape is significant, as it can leave users unprotected from potential threats.A more transparent approach is necessary to ensure that companies take responsibility for their products' security.

Anonymized numbers of bug discoveries swiftly deleted after pushback...

Read Full Article »