Suchergebnisse

Much legal and philosophical work has been devoted to discussing the importance of protecting freedom of expression from legislative curtailment by the state. That state-centric focus has meant that the ways that wider social phenomena can stifle freedom of expression have, with a notable exception, escaped sustained philosophical attention. The paper reflects on the nature of socially coercive restrictions on free expression and offers an account of how it is appropriate to respond to such forms of social coercion. First, it considers a range of social costs pertaining to expression and argues that such costs can constitute meaningful restrictions on the freedom to express. Second, it reflects on the normative implications concerning that threat to free expression and defends two related moral duties citizens have to refrain from being complicit in unjustified social coercion—a duty of expressive toleration and a duty of respect for expressive agency.

Gunnar Nygren, professor emeritus at Södertörn University, Stockholm, reviews Freedom of Expression in Russia's New Mediasphere edited by Marielle Wijermars and Katja Lehtisaari.

This paper argues that sound principles of freedom of expression protect an individual's choice of which language to speak. They do so, not to guarantee against mistranslation, but rather to ensure that speakers are able to reach their intended audiences and, more importantly, to allow for the expressive value of speaking a particular language as a symbol of ethnic or political identification. The example of Quebec's Charter of the French Language and the resulting litigation is considered in some detail.

I The First Half of the Century -- II Erosion of Old Attitudes -- III The Emergence of the Idea: The Legislative Commission and its Significance -- IV The Period of Growth — Theory -- V The Period of Growth — Practice -- VI The "Reaction" of the "Nineties" -- VII The Balance Sheet of Catherine's Reign Freedom of Expression under Paul I -- Conclusion.

The publication of the "Danish cartoons" generated a continuing conflict between freedom of expression and religious tolerance. The article examines the history of cartoon satire, invoking past examples of racial and religious discrimination in cartoons while emphasizing the important role cartoonists have played in criticizing and checking the exercise of power. The legal implications of the "Danish cartoons" is analyzed through the lens of international human rights law, in particular the concepts of hate speech, racial discrimination and religious defamation. Finally the present movement in the UN towards "cartooning for peace" is promoted.

Recent years have seen a sequence of "moral panics" regarding accessibility of information on the internet and its exercise for criminal/harmful activity. Such problems and wider availability of internet raises the public policy concerns among governments over whether the internet should be regulated or not. Some believe it should not, considering that internet regulation will discourage what really internet is purported to encourage i.e. 'free flow of information'. They see internet regulation as a potential threat to the 'freedom of expression', which is possibly one of the most prominent aspects that are instrumental in the growth and popularity of this technology. On the other hand, the others who are against the free access of internet underscores the danger of problematic content and illegal activities on the internet. They claim that much of these activities and content are illegal in most jurisdictions. Adding to this, unrestricted right to freedom of speech and expression may possibly threaten other's rights. Thus many government organizations and internet users call for the regulation of internet. In this backdrop, paper revisits relevant literature and attempt to respond to the contentious problem of internet regulation. In this process, the paper also examines the experiences from several countries grappling with the problem of internet regulation. It concludes that any regulation on the internet has to be multi-faceted, culturally sensitive, and globally coordinated.

WOS: 000251613000005 ; This paper presents recent events including the Danish cartoon crisis occasion - a re-examination of John Stuart Mill's argument for freedom of expression. Despite the appeal of liberalism, Mill's philosophy had from the start been subject to intense criticism. The rise of political Islam opens a new phase in the debate; the difficulties pointed out by Mill's critics are indicative of the obstacles that liberalism still faces.

Preface and Acknowledgement --List of Abbreviations --Introduction --Trademark Rights and Their Rationales --Freedom of Expression as a Possible Limitation to Trademark Rights --Balancing the Grant and Revocation of Trademark Rights with Freedom of Expression --Balancing the Scope of Trademark Rights with Freedom of Expression --Summary and Recommendations --Bibliography --Table of Cases.

Must privacy and freedom of expression conflict? To witness recent debates in Britain, you might think so. Anything other than self-regulation by the press is met by howls of anguish from journalists across the political spectrum, to the effect that efforts to protect people's privacy will threaten press freedom, promote self-censorship and prevent the press from fulfilling its vital function of informing the public and keeping a watchful eye on the activities and antics of the powerful.[Brown, 2009, 13 January]1 Effective protections for privacy, from such a perspective, inevitably pose a threat to democratic government via the constraints that they place on the press.