Search results

One of the primary purposes of The John Marshall Journal of Computer Information Law is to focus on recent developments, on an international basis, in computer and information technology law. The themes that are developed in each issue of Volume Sixteen, present problems in computer and information technology law, and hopefully help answer questions in this dynamic field of law. The first issue of Volume Sixteen is a perspective issue on cyberspace governance, standards, and control. The lead articles of this issue discusses the challenge to develop international trademark law with regard to the Internet, Internet regulatory zoning of obscene content, Internet service providers' obligations under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, electronic commerce in Taiwan, and a commentary on NBA v. Motorola and STATS, Inc. The second issue of Volume Sixteen is a symposium issue on The Uniform Commercial Code ("U.C.C.") Proposed Article 2B. U.C.C. Proposed Article 2B is a legal framework for the licensing and transfer of rights in the intellectual property of computer technology. This issue is a detailed discussion of the problems facing the computer industry and the Proposed Article 2B drafting committee. The lead articles of this issue discusses generally, the law of the information age and the path of commercial law to cyberspace. Specifically, this issue discusses the treatment of consumers, express warranties and published information content, implied warranty of merchantability, and development contacts under the Proposed Article 2B. The third issue of Volume Sixteen is a perspective issue on privacy, information technology, and the Internet. The lead articles of this issue discusses issues of encryption and liberty on an international basis, legislation and decisions as to the control of the use of social security numbers as personal identifiers, and the mapping of legal metaphors in cyberspace. Additionally, this issue featured the bench memorandum, petitioner brief, and respondent brief on First Amendment and Freedom of Information Act issues associated with Internet blocking software in a public forum from the 1997 John Marshall National Moot Court Competition in Information Technology and Privacy Law. This issue, the fourth issue of Volume Sixteen, is a general issue that presents an array of topics. First, G. Peter Albert, Jr., an intellectual property practitioner and author of a treatise on intellectual property and information technology discusses the domain name registration system. Mr. Albert examines the dispute resolution policies of the leading proposals for the registration of domain names and proposes an alternative solution to "cybersquatting" and other trademark-related domain name issues. Keith Kupferschmid, an instrumental practitioner in Washington D.C. on intellectual property issues and the Internet discusses the fist-sale exception in view of copyrighted works on the Internet. Mr. Kupferschmid argues that the first-sale exception is not applicable to network transmissions and recommends that Congress take steps to limit the applicability of the first-sale exception, and that in order to receive the correct balance between the public's fair use of the work and a copyright owner's right to exploit is the grant of a rental right to the copyright owner is in order. Rinaldo Del Gallo, III, an intellectual property practitioner, discusses the dynamics associated with web site designers and the ownership of a web site under the guise of the work for hire doctrine and joint authorship doctrine. Caroline Uyttendaele, an associate research fellow at Katholieke Universiteit Leuven reviews and analyzes from a European point of view, the need for new free speech legislation regarding the Internet. Ms. Uyttendaele addresses the need for additional legislation protecting free speech and the relevance of the present restrictions on free speech. The student Comments in this issue discuss various important topics with regard to intellectual property and information technology issues. First, Laura McFarland-Taylor proposes adopting an internationally recognized standard of due diligence in reporting lost or stolen artworks utilizing the Internet. Second, Timothy Hofmeyer analyzes and examines the legal issues surrounding the patentability of cloned organisms, yet remains silent regarding the moral issues involved with the "hot topic" of cloning. Last, Steven Hanley on an international topic of Internet regulation, proposes that every country utilizing the Internet has a right when regulating the Internet to uphold its national values, and Internet Service Providers' shall work with each country's government to provide an Internet service that is in conjunction with each country's personal values and ideals. The Global Information Infrastructure is a dynamic medium that requires legal guidance and assistance in all stages of development. As information technology advances, the law must change with these advances. It is the hope of The John Marshall Journal of Computer & Information Law that the legal insights provided by our authors in this issue and all past and future issues help to mold the legal doctrine of computer and information technology law affecting the dynamics of the Global Information Infrastructure.

One of the primary purposes of The John Marshall Journal of Computer Information Law is to focus on recent developments, on an international basis, in computer and information technology law. The themes that are developed in each issue of Volume Sixteen, present problems in computer and information technology law, and hopefully help answer questions in this dynamic field of law. The first issue of Volume Sixteen is a perspective issue on cyberspace governance, standards, and control. The lead articles of this issue discusses the challenge to develop international trademark law with regard to the Internet, Internet regulatory zoning of obscene content, Internet service providers' obligations under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, electronic commerce in Taiwan, and a commentary on NBA v. Motorola and STATS, Inc. The second issue of Volume Sixteen is a symposium issue on The Uniform Commercial Code ("U.C.C.") Proposed Article 2B. U.C.C. Proposed Article 2B is a legal framework for the licensing and transfer of rights in the intellectual property of computer technology. This issue is a detailed discussion of the problems facing the computer industry and the Proposed Article 2B drafting committee. The lead articles of this issue discusses generally, the law of the information age and the path of commercial law to cyberspace. Specifically, this issue discusses the treatment of consumers, express warranties and published information content, implied warranty of merchantability, and development contacts under the Proposed Article 2B. The third issue of Volume Sixteen is a perspective issue on privacy, information technology, and the Internet. The lead articles of this issue discusses issues of encryption and liberty on an international basis, legislation and decisions as to the control of the use of social security numbers as personal identifiers, and the mapping of legal metaphors in cyberspace. Additionally, this issue featured the bench memorandum, petitioner brief, and respondent brief on First Amendment and Freedom of Information Act issues associated with Internet blocking software in a public forum from the 1997 John Marshall National Moot Court Competition in Information Technology and Privacy Law. This issue, the fourth issue of Volume Sixteen, is a general issue that presents an array of topics. First, G. Peter Albert, Jr., an intellectual property practitioner and author of a treatise on intellectual property and information technology discusses the domain name registration system. Mr. Albert examines the dispute resolution policies of the leading proposals for the registration of domain names and proposes an alternative solution to "cybersquatting" and other trademark-related domain name issues. Keith Kupferschmid, an instrumental practitioner in Washington D.C. on intellectual property issues and the Internet discusses the fist-sale exception in view of copyrighted works on the Internet. Mr. Kupferschmid argues that the first-sale exception is not applicable to network transmissions and recommends that Congress take steps to limit the applicability of the first-sale exception, and that in order to receive the correct balance between the public's fair use of the work and a copyright owner's right to exploit is the grant of a rental right to the copyright owner is in order. Rinaldo Del Gallo, III, an intellectual property practitioner, discusses the dynamics associated with web site designers and the ownership of a web site under the guise of the work for hire doctrine and joint authorship doctrine. Caroline Uyttendaele, an associate research fellow at Katholieke Universiteit Leuven reviews and analyzes from a European point of view, the need for new free speech legislation regarding the Internet. Ms. Uyttendaele addresses the need for additional legislation protecting free speech and the relevance of the present restrictions on free speech. The student Comments in this issue discuss various important topics with regard to intellectual property and information technology issues. First, Laura McFarland-Taylor proposes adopting an internationally recognized standard of due diligence in reporting lost or stolen artworks utilizing the Internet. Second, Timothy Hofmeyer analyzes and examines the legal issues surrounding the patentability of cloned organisms, yet remains silent regarding the moral issues involved with the "hot topic" of cloning. Last, Steven Hanley on an international topic of Internet regulation, proposes that every country utilizing the Internet has a right when regulating the Internet to uphold its national values, and Internet Service Providers' shall work with each country's government to provide an Internet service that is in conjunction with each country's personal values and ideals. The Global Information Infrastructure is a dynamic medium that requires legal guidance and assistance in all stages of development. As information technology advances, the law must change with these advances. It is the hope of The John Marshall Journal of Computer & Information Law that the legal insights provided by our authors in this issue and all past and future issues help to mold the legal doctrine of computer and information technology law affecting the dynamics of the Global Information Infrastructure.

The Internet, which links millions of computer networks together worldwide for the purpose of automated communication, is the forefront of communications technology. An Internet domain name, which functions as a computer user's "address" on the Internet, not only identifies individuals and organizations, but is an important commercial source designator for businesses. The Internet Network Information Center ("InterNIC") is a central resource center for Internet users that operates the Internet Domain Name System ("DNS"). InterNIC, which comprises NSI and AT&T, performs various Internet services, including NSI's Internet domain name coordination and registration. Along with the positive effects that the Internet has on businesses and consumers, conversely, a host of negative effects exist. For example, the current top-level domain name system ("TLD") which is governed by NSI's Policy Statement consistently fails to afford Internet domain name owners Fifth Amendment procedural due process as guaranteed by the Constitution. This Comment focuses on four areas of NSI's domain name registration system and Policy Statement. First, this Comment reviews Internet domain name structure, governance, registration, and disputes between trademark owners, domain name owners, and NSI. Second, this Comment analyzes the constitutional ramifications that NSI's present Policy Statement has on domain name owners. The first constitutional question addresses whether NSI is a federal-state actor which is subject to Fifth Amendment procedural due process requirements. The second constitutional question addresses whether NSI's Policy Statement affords a domain name owner Fifth Amendment procedural due process guaranteed under the Constitution. Last, this Comment offers a proposal and recommendation which will enable NSI's Policy Statement to afford Fifth Amendment procedural due process to a domain name owner.

The Internet, which links millions of computer networks together worldwide for the purpose of automated communication, is the forefront of communications technology. An Internet domain name, which functions as a computer user's "address" on the Internet, not only identifies individuals and organizations, but is an important commercial source designator for businesses. The Internet Network Information Center ("InterNIC") is a central resource center for Internet users that operates the Internet Domain Name System ("DNS"). InterNIC, which comprises NSI and AT&T, performs various Internet services, including NSI's Internet domain name coordination and registration. Along with the positive effects that the Internet has on businesses and consumers, conversely, a host of negative effects exist. For example, the current top-level domain name system ("TLD") which is governed by NSI's Policy Statement consistently fails to afford Internet domain name owners Fifth Amendment procedural due process as guaranteed by the Constitution. This Comment focuses on four areas of NSI's domain name registration system and Policy Statement. First, this Comment reviews Internet domain name structure, governance, registration, and disputes between trademark owners, domain name owners, and NSI. Second, this Comment analyzes the constitutional ramifications that NSI's present Policy Statement has on domain name owners. The first constitutional question addresses whether NSI is a federal-state actor which is subject to Fifth Amendment procedural due process requirements. The second constitutional question addresses whether NSI's Policy Statement affords a domain name owner Fifth Amendment procedural due process guaranteed under the Constitution. Last, this Comment offers a proposal and recommendation which will enable NSI's Policy Statement to afford Fifth Amendment procedural due process to a domain name owner.

Many public libraries provide patrons with free public-access Internet terminals, largely for accessing information available on the World Wide Web. However, public concern exists over the ability of children who browse the Web without adult supervision to view sexually explicit materials and other inappropriate items. This concern has led to the development of various Internet filtering software programs. Some filtering programs operate by blocking access to documents containing certain words or phrases or combinations thereof. However, more common programs permit access only to documents or sites that appear in a pre-selected, "safe" database or that block access to documents that appear in an "off-limits" database. Some programs that employ the blocking method allow the user to select which categories are to be blocked, while other programs lack this customization capability. If a state enacts a law requiring installation of Internet filtering software on public-access Internet terminals in public libraries in order to protect children from patently offensive material, the constitutionality of that law may be challenged. Such a law will withstand constitutional scrutiny only if it is the least restrictive means available to further a compelling government interest. While the stateþs interest in protecting children from objectionable materials is sufficiently compelling, the method chosen may not be the least restrictive means available, as filtering software using the blocking method filters out a great deal of expression protected by the First Amendment. Also, the installation of filtering software in libraries is similar to the removal of books from a library based on their content, which has also been held to violate the First Amendment. However, libraries make daily decisions as to which materials to purchase, based largely on the content of the materials. Such decisions bear no First Amendment consequences, and filtering materials accessible over the Internet on library-owned computers can be similarly classified as a selection decision rather than as an unconstitutional removal. Finally, if the filtering software employs the blocking method and involves the creation of a database of blocked sites in an "off-limits" list, the list may be subject to disclosure under a Freedom of Information Act request. However, if applicable, an exemption to the Freedom of Information Act may preclude disclosure. Under that exemption, if the list is classified as a trade secret or if the list contains commercial or financial information obtained from a person which is privileged or confidential, then the list is exempt from disclosure.

Many public libraries provide patrons with free public-access Internet terminals, largely for accessing information available on the World Wide Web. However, public concern exists over the ability of children who browse the Web without adult supervision to view sexually explicit materials and other inappropriate items. This concern has led to the development of various Internet filtering software programs. Some filtering programs operate by blocking access to documents containing certain words or phrases or combinations thereof. However, more common programs permit access only to documents or sites that appear in a pre-selected, "safe" database or that block access to documents that appear in an "off-limits" database. Some programs that employ the blocking method allow the user to select which categories are to be blocked, while other programs lack this customization capability. If a state enacts a law requiring installation of Internet filtering software on public-access Internet terminals in public libraries in order to protect children from patently offensive material, the constitutionality of that law may be challenged. Such a law will withstand constitutional scrutiny only if it is the least restrictive means available to further a compelling government interest. While the stateþs interest in protecting children from objectionable materials is sufficiently compelling, the method chosen may not be the least restrictive means available, as filtering software using the blocking method filters out a great deal of expression protected by the First Amendment. Also, the installation of filtering software in libraries is similar to the removal of books from a library based on their content, which has also been held to violate the First Amendment. However, libraries make daily decisions as to which materials to purchase, based largely on the content of the materials. Such decisions bear no First Amendment consequences, and filtering materials accessible over the Internet on library-owned computers can be similarly classified as a selection decision rather than as an unconstitutional removal. Finally, if the filtering software employs the blocking method and involves the creation of a database of blocked sites in an "off-limits" list, the list may be subject to disclosure under a Freedom of Information Act request. However, if applicable, an exemption to the Freedom of Information Act may preclude disclosure. Under that exemption, if the list is classified as a trade secret or if the list contains commercial or financial information obtained from a person which is privileged or confidential, then the list is exempt from disclosure.