SYLLABUS
LAW 425D.001
CYBERSPACE LAW:
FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN THE CYBERSPACE
2020-21
FALL TERM
MONDAY 9:30-12:30
ON-LINE
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
UBC’s Point Grey Campus is located on the traditional, ancestral, and unceded territory of the xwməθkwəy̓əm (Musqueam) people. The land it is situated on has always been a place of learning for the Musqueam people, who for millennia have passed on in their culture, history, and traditions from one generation to the next on this site.
COURSE INFORMATION
Course Title Course Code Number Credit Value
Cyberspace Law LAW425D.001 3
PREREQUISITES
None. But it would be better if the students have a basic knowledge of constitutional protection of freedom of expression. And the students are better prepared to discuss the uniqueness of the cyberspace and apply their knowledge on constitutional law, especially freedom of expression, to the cyberspace.
COREQUISITES
None
If you are interested in detailed analysis of freedom of expression issues, take LAW343C.001(Term 2) Topics in Public Law: Freedom of Expression, and if you are interested in legal issues arising from e-commerce, take LAW447 (Term 2) Topics in Commercial Law: e-Commerce. They are not co-requisites but may be of interest to you.
CONTACTS
Course Instructor(s) Contact Details Office Location Office Hours
Prof. Shigenori Matsui (SM)
Professor of Law
University of British Columbia,
Peter A. Allard School of Law
1822 East Mall, Vancouver, BC V6T 1Z1
Phone 604-822-5592
e-mail matsui@allard.ubc.ca
Law 354
Office hours:
Monday 12:30 to 14:00
Thursday 10:30 to 12:30
If I was not in my office during office hours, please come again. If the student needs an appointment, please feel free to ask for an appointment by e-mail.
COURSE STRUCTURE
Seminar: Monday 9:00 to 12:30
On-line
This is a seminar to learn about various legal issues raising from the development of the cyberspace, especially focusing on freedom of expression issues. The students are supposed to read the first two powerpoint files distributed in advance and familiarize with the basics of information technology, computer technology, and network. The seminar combines two topics in a day separated by fifteen minutes break in the middle. The seminar starts with the examination of the basic of cyberspace law: how the cyberspace functions, what kinds of function the cyberspace can perform, the challenges raised by the rise of cyberspace and then examine how law should operate to respond to this rise of cyberspace. The seminar next examines the jurisdiction of the courts, choice of law, recognition and enforcement of foreign judgment, and potential reach of government power together with the issues on the liability of intermediaries. Then it will examine how constitutional protection of freedom of expression should reach to cyberspace, especially focusing on the difference between cyberspace and broadcasting. Then the seminar moves to discuss some of the most controversial expression restriction in the cyberspace, including the protection of national secret and public safety, defamation and invasion of privacy, hate speech and cyber porn as well as child porn, and other harmful expression and the need for protection of minors. It will also consider revenge porn and cyberbullying. Then the seminar turns its attention to freedom of expression and intellectual property rights in the cyberspace, including trademark and copyright protection. Then, the seminar will consider the constitutional issues rising from the necessity of protecting privacy and personal information, including to what extent the government can intervene to protect privacy and personal information of users, to what extent the government should restrict the privacy and personal information of users to secure the safety and security, and to what extent the government should be allowed to monitor and perform surveillance on the users. The final chapter is left for further discussion, for those students who are interested in the future of democracy through the cyberspace and the possible challenges.
SCHEDULE OF TOPICS
Tentative (subject to change)
00 introduction
01 development of computer technology (pre-reading)
02 development of the Internet (pre-reading)
September 7
03 expression in the cyberspace – what are the characteristics of the cyberspace?
03-1-1 ACLU v. Reno, 929 F. Supp. 824, 830-44 (E.D.Pa. 1996), aff’d, 521 U.S. 844 (1997)
04 Internet Governance and Law
04-1 Internet and governance
04-1-1John Perry Barlow, A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace
http://www.eff.org/~barlow/Declaration-Final.html
04-1-2 David R. Johnson & David Post, Law and Border
--The Rise of Law in Cyberspace, 48 Stan. L. Rev. 1367, 1367-68, 1370-72, 1378-80, 1387-91, 1400-02 (1996)(available online from the LEXIS)
04-1-3 Jack L. Goldsmith, Against Cyberanarchy, 65 U. Chi. L. Rev. 1199, 1199-1201, 1212-24, 1230-45 (1998)(available online from LEXIS)
04-2 code
04-2-1 Lawrence Lessig, Constitution and Code, 27 Cumberland L. Rev. 1, 1-15 (1996)(available online from LEXIS)
September 14
05 jurisdiction
05-1 personal jurisdiction: Limits of personal jurisdiction
05-1-1 Bensusan Restaurant Corporation v. King, 126 F.3d 25 (2d Cir. 1997)
05-1-2 Zippo Manufacturing Company v. Zippo Dot Com, Inc., 952 F. Supp. 1119 (W.D. Pa. 1997)
05-1-3 Dow Jones & Company Inc. v Gutnick [2002] HCA 56 (10 December 2002)
05-2 personal jurisdiction: Canada
05-2-1 Braintech, Inc. v. Kostiuk, 171 D.L.R. (4th) 46 (1999)
05-2-2 Bangoura v. Washington Post, 258 D.L.R. (4th) 341 (2005)
05-2-3 Crookes v. Holloway, [2008] B.C.J. No. 834, 2008 BCCA 165
05-2-4 Breedem v. Black, 2012 SCC 19
05-2-5 Haaretz.com v. Goldhar, 2018 SCC 28
06 choice of Law, recognition and enforcement of foreign judgment and reach of the government regulatory power
06-1 choice of Law
06-1-1 Restatement (2d) of Conflict of Laws, § 145
06-1-2 Wells v. Liddy, 186 F.3d 505 (4th Cir. 1999)
06-2 recognition and enforcement of foreign Judgment
06-2-1 Yahoo! Inc. v. La Ligue Contre le Racisme et L'Antisemitisme, 169 F. Supp. 2d 1181 (N.D.Cal. 2001)
06-2-2 SPEECH Act
06-3 extraterritorial regulation
06-3-1 YAHOO! CASE
UEJF and Licra v. Yahoo! Inc. and Yahoo France (TRIBUNAL DE GRANDE INSTANCE DE PARIS May 22, 2000)
http://www.juriscom.net/txt/jurisfr/cti/yauctions20000522.htm
(Translated into English by Richard Salis)
06-3-2 Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada v. Canadian Assn. of Internet Providers, [2004] 2 S.C.R. 427 (2004)
06-4 world-wide injunction
06-4-1 Google Inc. v. Equustek Solutions Inc, 2017 SCC 34
September 21
07 liability of Internet service providers: defamation
07-1 the United States
07-1-1 Cubby, Inc. v. CompuServe Inc. 776 F. Supp. 135 (S.D.N.Y.)
07-1-2 Stratton Oakmont, Inc. v. Prodigy Services Company, 1995 N.Y. Misc. (S.Ct. N.Y. 1995)
07-1-3 Lunney v. Prodigy Services Company, 250 A.D.2d 230; 683 N.Y.S.2d 557 (Sup.Ct. N.Y., App. Div. 1998)
07-1-4 Communication Decency Act
07-1-5 Zeran v. America Online, Incorporated, 129 F.3d 327 (4th Cir. 1997) cert. denied, 524 U.S. 937 (1998)
07-1-6 Grace v. eBay, 120 Cal. App. 4th 984; 16 Cal. Rptr. 3d 192 (Ct. App. Cal. 2004)
07-2 other countries
07-2-1 Goodfrey v. Demon Internet, [1999] 4 All Eng 342, [2000] 3 WLR 1020
07-2-2 U.K. Defamation Act
07-2-3 Australian Broadcasting Services Amendment Act of 1999
07-2-4 DIRECTIVE 2000/31/EC OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market (Directive on electronic commerce)
07-2-5 Google Spain SL, Google Inc. v. Agencia Espanola de Protection de Datos, Mario Costeja Gonzalez, CJEU May 13, 2014, http://curia.europa.eu/jcms/upload/docs/application/pdf/2014-05/cp140070en.pdf
07-3 Canada
07-3-1 Google Inc. v. Equustek Solutions Inc, supra
08 liability of Internet service providers: other liabilities
08-1 copyright infringement: the United States
08-1-1 Religious Technology Center v. Netcom On-Line Communication Services, Inc., 907 F. Supp. 1361 (N.D. Cal. 1995)
08-1-2 Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 512
08-2 copyright infringement: Canada
08-2-1 SOCAN v. Canadian Assn. of Internet Providers, supra
08-2-2 The Copyright Modernization Act, 2012
08-3 other intermediaries: Google, You Tube and limits of take-down request
08-3-1 Parker v. Google, Inc., 242 Fed. Appx. 833 (3rd Cir. 2007)
08-3-2 Viacom International, Inc. v. YouTube, 676 F.3d 19 (2d. Cir. 2012)
08-3-3 Lenz v. Universal Music Corp., 572 F. Supp. 2d 1150 (N.D.Cal. 2008)
08-4 criminal liability
08-5 administrative liability
08-5-1 German Act to Improve Enforcement of the Law in Social Networks
September 28
09 access to cyberspace
09-1 access to the Internet
09-1-1 access to the cyberspace: Telecon Decision CRTC 99-11
09-1-2 Reference re Broadcasting Act, 2012 SCC 4
09-2 network neutrality
09-2-1 H.R. 5417: Internet Freedom and Nondiscrimination Act of 2006
09-2-2 FCC, Preserving the Open Internet, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-09-23/pdf/2011-24259.pdf
09-2-3 Verizon v. FCC, 740 F. 3d 623 (D.C.Cir. 2014)
09-2-4 CFR Protecting and Promoting Open Internet
09-2-5 Telecom Regulatory Policy CRTC 2009-657
09-2-6 EU Open Internet Regulation
09-3 ISP censorship
10 freedom of expression in the cyberspace
10-1 freedom of expression in the cyberspace: CDA
10-1-1 Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U.S. 844 (1997)
10-2 freedom of expression in the cyberspace: COPA
10-2-1 Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union, 542 U.S. 656 (2004)
10-3 broadcasting or newspaper?
10-3-1 Canada Broadcast Act
10-3-2 Broadcasting Public Notice CRTC 1999-84
10-3-3 Exemption Order 1999-197
10-3-4 Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada, Canada’s Communications Future: Time to Act (Jan. 2020), https://www.ic.gc.ca/eic/site/110.nsf/eng/00012.html
October 5
11 protection of the national security in the cyberspace
11-1 protection of national security information
11-1-1 Security of Information Act
11-1-2 U.S. Espionage Act
11-1-3 Executive Order
11-1-4 Pentagon Papers Case
11-2 WikiLeaks
12 protection of public safety in the cyberspace
12-1 protection of public safety: sedition
12-1-1 Canada Criminal Code
12-1-2 Brandenburg v. Ohio, 395 U.S. 444 (1969)
12-2 facilitation and promotion of terrorist acts
12-2-1 Canada Criminal Code
12-2-2 U.K. Terrorism Act of 2006
12-3 disclosure of dangerous information
12-4 application to the cyberspace
12-4-1 U.K. Terrorism Act of 2006
12-4-2 U.K. Terrorism Act of 2000
12-5 breach of the peace
12-5-1 Canada Criminal Code
12-5-2 Cohen v. California, 403 U.S. 15 (1971)
October 12 thanksgiving day – University closed
October 19
13 defamation in the cyberspace
13-1 defamation and freedom of expression
13-1-1 R. v. Lucas, [1998] 1 S.C.R 439
13-1-2 Hill v. Church of Scientology of Toronto, [1995] 2 S.C.R. 1130
13-1-3 Grant v. Torstar Corp., [2009] 3 S.C.R. 640
13-2 defamation in the cyberspace
13-2-1 Wiebe v. Bouchard, [2008] B.C.J. No. 435, 2008 BCSC 249
13-2-2 Ottawa-Carleton District School Board v. Scharf, [2007] O.J. No. 3030 (Ontario Superior Court of Justice)
13-2-3 Griffin v. Sullivan, [2008] B.C.J. No. 1333, 2008 BCSC 827 (BCSC)
13-2-4 Crookes v. Newton, 2011 SCC 47, [2011] 3 S.C.R. 269
13-2-5 Baglow v. Smith, 2015 ONSC 1175
14 invasion of privacy in the cyberspace
14-1 invasion of privacy
14-1-1 Aubry v. Editions Vice-Versa Inc, [1998] 1 S.C.R. 591
14-1-2 Campbell v. MGM, [2004] 2 AC 457
14-2 invasion of privacy in the cyberspace
14-2-1 A.T. v. L.T.H., [2006] B.C.J. No. 2975; 2006 BCSC 1689 (B.C.S.C.)
14-2-2 Nesbitt v. Neufeld, [2010] B.C.J. No. 2232, 2010 BCSC 1605
14-2-3 Protecting Canadians from Online Crime Act, S.C. 2014, c. 31
October 26
15 pornography in the cyberspace
15-1 obscenity
15-1-1 Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 (1973)
15-1-2 Paris Adult Theatre I v. Slaton, 413 U.S. 49 (1973)
15-1-3 R. v. Butler, [1992] 1 S.C.R. 452
15-2 pornography in the cyberspace
15-2-1 United States v. Thomas, 74 F.3d 701 (6th Cir. 1996)
15-2-2 R. v. Smith, 76 O.R. (3d) 435, [2005] O.J. No. 2811 (Ontario CA)
15-2-3 Ginsberg v. New York, 390 U.S. 629 (1968)
16 child pornography in the cyberspace
16-1 child pornography
16-1-1 R. v. Sharpe, [2001] 1 S.C.R. 45
16-1-2 Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, 535 U.S. 234 (2002)
16-1-3 United States v. Williams, 553 U.S. 285 (2008)
16-2 child pornography in the cyberspace
16-2-1 R. v. Morelli, [2010] 1 S.C.R. 253
November 2
17 hate speech in the cyberspace
17-1 hate speech ban
17-1-1 R. v. Keegstra, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 697
17-1-2 Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Taylor, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 892
17-1-3 Saskatchewan (Human Rights Commission) v. Whatcott, [2013] 1 SCR 467
17-2 hate speech in the cyberspace
17-2-1 Sabrina Citron, Toronto Mayor’s Committee and Race Relations, and Canadian Human Rights Commission v. Zundel, T.D. 1/02 2002/01/18
17-2-2 R. v. Noble, [2008] B.C.J. No. 294, 2008 BCSC 215
17-3 blasphemy
17-3-1 blasphemy in Canada
18 other harmful information and protection of minors
18-1 harmful expression for minors and protection of minors
18-1-1 What is Harmful Expression?
18-1-2 Need for Protection of Minors
18-2 sexually explicit expressions and minors
18-2-1 Ginsberg v. New York, supra
18-3 offensive and indecent speech
18-3-1 Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 315 U.S. 568 (1942)
18-3-2 Cohen v. California, supra
18-3-3 Reno v. ACLU, 521 U.S. 844 (1997), supra
18-3-4 Ashcroft v. ACLU, 542 U.S. 656 (2004), supra
18-3-5 ACLU v. Mukasey, 534 F.3d 181 (3rd Cir. 2008), cert. denied, 129 S. Ct. 1032 (2009)
18-4 access to harmful expression in the library
18-4-1 United States v. American Library Association, 539 U.S. 194 (2003)
November 9 FALL READING BREAK NO CLASS
November 16
19 copyright protection in the cyberspace
19-1 uploading copyrighted materials
19-1-1 Playboy Enterprises Inc. v. Frena, 839 F. Supp. 1552 (Fla. 1993)
19-2 copying webpage
19-2-1 British Columbia Automobile Assn. v. Office and Professional Employees' International Union Local 378 (2001), 85 B.C.L.R. (3d) 302 (S.C.), 10 C.P.R. (4th) 423 (BCSC)
19-2-2 Guillot v. Arvic Search Services Inc., 2001 FCT 799 (T.D.)
19-3 browsing copyright infringing site
19-3-1 Intellectual Reserve, Inc. v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry, Inc., 75 F.Supp. 2d 1290 (C.D. Utah 1999)
19-4 linking
19-4-1 Shetland Times Limited v. Dr. Jonathan Wills, [1997] FSR 604 (Ct. Sess.)
19-5 search engine
19-5-1 Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corp., 280 F.3d 934 (9th Cir. 2002)
19-6 transmission on the Internet
19-7-1 American Broadcasting Cos, Inc. v. Aereo, Inc., 134 S.Ct. 2498 (June 25, 2014)
19-7 limitations
19-7-1 CCH Canadian Ltd. v. Law Society of Upper Canada, 1 S.C.R. 339 [2004]
19-7-2 Alberta (Education) v. Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency (Access Copyright), 2012 SCC 3719-8 copyright protection and freedom of expression in the cyberspace
19-7-3 Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., 464 U.S. 417 (1984)
19-8 copyright protection and freedom of expression
19-8-1 Harper & Row, Publishers, Inc. v. Nation Enterprises, 471 U.S. 539 (1985)
19-8-2 Eldred v. Ashcroft, 537 U.S. 186 (2003)
19-8-3 Golan v. Holder, 565 U.S. – (2012)
19-9 frontiers of copyright protection in the cyberspace
20 domain name and trademark protection in the cyberspace
20-1 trademark restriction on domain name
20-1-1 Panavision International, L.P. v. Toeppen, 141 F.3d 1316 (9th Cir. 1998)
20-1-2 Cybersquatting
20-2 limitations on domain name
20-2-1 similarity: Pinet Inc. v. O’Brien, [1995] P.E.I.J. No. 68
20-2-2 similarity: Itravel2000.com Inc. v. Fagan, [2001] O.J.No. 943 (Ontario Superior Ct.)
20-2-3 similarity: Saskatoon Star Phoenix Group Inc. v. Noton, 12 C.P.R. (4th) 4 [2001]
20-2-4 government’s name: Canada v. David Bedford a.k.a. DomainBaron.com, 27 C.P.R. (4th) 522; 2003 C.P.R. LEXIS 145 (BC International Commercial Arbitration Centre)
20-2-5 city’s name: Excelentisimo Ayuntamiento de Barcelona v. Barcelona.com Inc.
WIPO Administrative Panel Decision Case No. D2000-0505
http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2000/d2000-0505.html
20-2-6 city’s name: Toronto.com v. Sinclair, (2000) 6 C.P.R. (4th) 487 (F.C.T.D.)
20-2-7 celebrity’s name: Julia Fiona Roberts v. Russell Boyd
WIPO Administrative Panel Decision
Case No. D2000-0210 http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2000/d2000-0210.html
20-2-8 common words: Black v. Molson Canada, (2002) 21 C.P.R. (4th) 52 (Ont.Sup.Ct.)
20-2-9 no legitimate interest: Coca-Cola Company v. Purdy, 382 F.3d 774 (8th Cir. 2004)
20-3 trademark protection and freedom of expression
20-3-1 Bally Total Fitness v. Faber, 29 F.Supp.2d 1161 (C.D.Cal. 1998)
20-3-2 Lucent Technologies, Inc. v. Lucentsucks.com, 95 F.Supp.2d 528 (E.D.Va. 2000)
20-3-3 Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. walmartcanadasucks.com and Kenneth J. Harvey,WIPO administrative panel decision
Case No. D2000-1104 http://www.wipo.int/amc/en/domains/decisions/html/2000/d2000-1104.html
20-3-4 union: British Columbia Automobile Assn. v. Office and Professional Employees' International Union Local 378 (2001), 85 B.C.L.R. (3d) 302 (S.C.)
20-3-4 offensive words
November 21 private regulation and co-regulation
21 private regulation and self-censorship
21-1 private regulation and self-censorship: platform
21-1-1 platform’s terms or use
21-1-2 hate speech and glorification of violence
21-1-3 fake news
21-1-4 Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship (May 28, 2020), https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-preventing-online-censorship/
21-2 public university as ISP
21-2-1 public university as ISP
21-2-2 Blaber v. University of Victoria, 123 D.L.R. (4th) 255 (BCSC)
22 filtering
22-1 filtering and rating
22-1-1 Microsystems Software, Inc v. Scandinavia Online AB, 226 F.3d 35 (1st. Cir 2000)
22-1-2 Media3 Technologies, LLC v. Mail Abuse Prevention System, LLC, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1310 (D. Mass. 2001)
22-2 use of filtering by the public library
22-2-1 Mainstream Loudoun v. Board of Trustees of the Loudoun County Library, 24 F. Supp. 2d 552 (E.D. Va. 1998)
22-3 court-ordered filtering
22-3-1 Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc. v. Fung, 710 F.3d 1020 (9th Cir. 2013)
22-3-2 Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs compositeurs et éditeurs (SABAM), EUCJ, Case C-70/10 (Nov. 24, 2011)
22-4 government-ordered censorship
November 30 privacy and protection for personal information in the cyberspace
23 protection of personal information in the cyberspace:
23-1 anonymity in the cyberspace
23-1-1 Phillip Services Corp. v. John Doe Court File No. 4592 / 98 Ontario Court (General Division) http://aix1.uottawa.ca/~geist/Philip.v.JohnDoe.24jun98.html
23-1-2 BMG Canada, Inc. v. John Doe, [2005] F.C.J. No. 858; 2005 FCA 193; 2005 Fed.C.C. LEXIS 731 (Fed. Ct. App. Ontario 2005)
23-1-3 John Doe No. 1 v. Cahill, 884 A.2d 451 (Del. 2005)
23-1-4 Melvin v. Doe, 575 Pa. 264 (Pa. 2003)
23-2 encryption
23-2-1 Bernstein v. United States DOJ, 176 F.3d 1132, 1999 U.S. App. LEXIS 8595 (9th Cir. Cal., 1999), withdrawn by 192 F.3d 1308 (9th Cir. 1999)
23-3 the ban on anonymous speech
23-3-1 ACLU v. Miller, 977 F. Supp. 1228 (N.D. Ga. 1997)
23-4 search and seizure
23-4-1 United States v. Scarfo, 180 F. Supp. 2d 572 (D.N.J. 2001)
23-4-2 United States v. Arnold, 523 F.3d 941 (9th Cir. 2008)
23-4-3 In the matter of the search of an Apple iphone seized during the execution of a search warrant on black Lexus IS300, California License Plate 35KGD203 (D.C. Central Dist. Cal. 2016), https://www.justice.gov/usao-cdca/file/825001/download
24 government surveillance over the cyberspace
24-1 government electronic surveillance
24-1-1 electronic surveillance system
24-1-2 FISA Court
24-2 government surveillance and the Constitution
24-2-1 ACLU v. Nat'l Sec. Agency / Central Sec. Serv., 438 F. Supp. 2d 754 (E.D. Mich. 2006), vacated by, remanded by ACLU v. NSA, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 16149 (6th Cir.) (6th Cir. Mich., 2007)
24-2-2 Warshak v. United States, 490 F.3d 455 (6th. Cir. 2007), vacated by, on rehearing at, en banc, stay granted by Warshak v. United States, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 23741 (6th Cir., Oct. 9, 2007)
24-1-3 Clapper v. Amnesty Int'l USA, 568 U.S. ___ (2013)
24-1-4 Obama v. Klayman, No. 14-5004 (D.C. Cir. Aug. 28, 2015)
24-3 big data
For those who are interested…
25 cyberdemocracy
25-1 The possibility of cyberdemocracy
25-2 hurdles ahead
25-3 peril of cyberspace
25-3-1 Cass Sunstein, republic.com 3-16, 23-50 (Princeton University Press 2001)
25-4 possible solutions?
25-4-1 Noah D. Zatz, Note: Sidewalks in Cyberspace; Making Space for Public Forum in the Electronic Environment, 12 Harv. J. L. & Tech. 149, 151-53, 172-225 (1998)
LEARNING OUTCOMES
Course objective: To Learn the legal issues implicated by the rise of the cyberspace, especially focusing on freedom of expression issues.
The development of the cyberspace raised new constitutional issues with respect to freedom of expression without clear precedents and without clear guidelines. The seminar will prompt the students to consider all these legal questions in light of the necessity of constitutional protection of freedom of expression and the necessity of securing the safety and security of the public. The students should be ready to face any new questions, not examined in the class, and offer their own perspectives in addressing them.
LEARNING ACTIVITIES
seminar structure: This seminar meets once a week on Monday, from 9:30 to 12:30, with a mid-time fifteen minutes break. Due to on-going impact of COVID-19, the seminar will be offered on-line this fall. We will use zoom meeting, sharing the power-point presentation. The students can log in using any handle names but I would ask students to turn on video and ready to use voice to ask questions or answer to my questions. It is not mandatory to participate in time because some of the students might get access to meeting from other parts of Canada or from other countries with significant time difference. I will record the whole meeting and upload the video file together with powerpoint file on dropbox (I will circulate the dropbox access link) so that everyone can take a look at them at any time. I will cut short the video meeting and allow students to ask questions anonymously. If you want to prefer the privacy, please ask question after I turn off the recording.
The seminar will examine various specific cases and issues implicated by the rise of the cyberspace. The students are supposed to discuss and share their opinions on each issue and explore further implications on related issues. The students will obtain the basic knowledge and skills to face new issues and possible future cases throughout these discussions.
IT IS EXPECTED THAT ALL OF THE STUDENTS WILL READ THE ASSIGNMENT FOR EACH CLASS AND PARTICIPATE IN DISCUSSION.
LEARNING MATERIALS
There is no mandatory textbook.
Course materials will be sent to the participating students on-line. Some of the listed materials are available on-line in the library.
Other useful casebooks and textbooks include (not all these books are collected by the law library):
Michael Geist, Internet Law in Canada (3rd edition Captus Press 2002)
Raymond S.R. Ku & Jacqueline Lipton, Cyberspace Law: Cases and Materials (4th ed. Aspen 2016)
Patricia l Bellia, Paul Schiff Berman, and David G. Post, Cyberlaw: Problems of Policy and Jurisprudence in the Information Age (4th ed. Thomson West 2010)
James Grimmellmann, Internet Law: Cases and Problems (7th ed. Semaphore Press 2017).
ASSESSMENTS OF LEARNING
Class participation 30% and final assignment 70%. Students will be evaluated based upon the class participation and final essay paper. The essay paper will be assigned 70% of total evaluation and the class performance will be assigned 30% of total evaluation. Since not all of the students can join in the class at the meeting time, I would use additional method to measure your degree of participation. I will ask one short question at the end of seminar and ask the students to provide me with the brief answer to the question I ask within a week. Just a half-page answer would be suffice. I will evaluate to what extent you understand our materials and questions and to what extent you are ready to face the specific questions.
Class participation: Class participation mark is evaluated based upon the class attendance and the degree of active participation in the class discussion. Each student is required to attend the class after reading assigned materials and is encouraged to participate in the class discussions. Regular attendance and active participation are especially important to provide you with deeper knowledge and understanding. During the classroom discussions, we will pick up many specific issues, including new issues and new judgments, and discuss how we should resolve the cases. With respect to major issue for discussion, we might pick up the student moderator to moderate the discussion. If you miss too many classes, you will not be eligible to submit your final paper.
Final paper: With respect to final paper, each student should choose a particular topic from the areas covered by this course and submit the outline of the paper by the end of February (you can just send an e-mail outlining your paper) and then write a substantial paper (roughly 15 pages—this is merely a suggestion and is not the minimum or maximum limit) by the end of submission deadline (4:00 p.m. of the final day of the examination, December 22, 2020. Please send your paper with your email to me. But please make sure to keep your original copy with you just in case and make sure to receive my reception e-mail.
You do not have to pick up the topic discussed in the class. You can pick up any subject that might be relevant to our course. I will be happy to advise you on your choice of topic and you should talk with me before finalizing your outline. The paper will be evaluated based on the choice of topic, the extent of the research, the organization and structure of analysis, the analytical skill, the writing skill and the overall persuasiveness. I don’t care what format you would choose, what citation method or citation style you would prefer to use or how long you would choose to write. All I will care is the substance of your research, writing and analysis.
After separately evaluating class participation mark and paper mark, I will add these marks to produce tentative final mark. Then, in order to comply with the law school’s grading policy, sometimes I will have to add final adjustment to reach the final marks to be submitted.
For the law school’s grading policy, see http://www.allard.ubc.ca/sites/www.allard.ubc.ca/files/uploads/registration/grades_dist_1819.pdf.
For the law school policy on late submission, see http://www.allard.ubc.ca/sites/www.allard.ubc.ca/files/uploads/JD/penalties_for_late_assignments.pdf#search=%27UBC+law+school+late+submission%27.
For the law school’s academic concession policy (including deferral of exam or extension of deadline of submission of paper), see http://www.allard.ubc.ca/sites/www.allard.ubc.ca/files/uploads/registration/grades_dist_1819.pdf.
UNIVERSITY POLICIES
UBC provides resources to support student learning and to maintain healthy lifestyles but recognizes that sometimes crises arise and so there are additional resources to access including those for survivors of sexual violence. UBC values respect for the person and ideas of all members of the academic community. Harassment and discrimination are not tolerated nor is suppression of academic freedom. UBC provides appropriate accommodation for students with disabilities and for religious observances. UBC values academic honesty and students are expected to acknowledge the ideas generated by others and to uphold the highest academic standards in all of their actions.
Details of the policies and how to access support are available on the UBC Senate website.
COPYRIGHT
Most of the reading materials are edited copies of the decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court Supreme Court of Canada and there is no copyright for using them. All other materials are available through library or online. All the class instructions and distributed materials can be shared among other participants of the class but cannot be published or distributed without permission. No recording is permitted without permission.
Updated June 20, 2020