Information Technology Engineering 124 Spring 2005.

Information Technology Engineering 124 Spring 2005

Information Technology Appreciating the benefits Entertainment-games-DVDs, etc. World Wide Web and the Internet Business data E-mail and e-commerce Digital libraries Automobiles/trucks/hybrid cars, ABS brake sensors, night vision drivers

Information Technology Distance learning. Speech recognition. Simulation-air traffic. Crime fighting-crime reports, records, analysis, database fingerprints,etc. Health and medicine-ct, MRI, patient monitoring devices, microprocessors, pacemakers, distance surgery, device to control surgeons shaking, computerized gene mapping, protein modeling, telemedicine, Tools for disabled, Smart thing sensors, Reducing paper loss.

Information Technology Ethical Issues Privacy and personal information Freedom of speech in cyberspace Intellectual property Cyber crime

Information Technology Axiological issues Intellectual colonialism Related to the internet and WWW: Loss of the ability to recognize relevance Acquiring skill Loss of a sense of the reality of people and things Anonymity and nihilism

Privacy and Personal Information What is the right to privacy? Background Legal decisions supporting privacy in social and business activities were based on property rights and contracts. 1890, The Right of Privacy, by Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis, argued that privacy should be a distinct right. Courts still decide both ways.

Privacy and IT What are the privacy Issues related to IT? Freedom from intrusion of unwanted information into ones personal space There is no privacy violation if information is obtained or published with the persons consent. Spam (Junk) Unsolicited Commercial (UCE) Freedom from surveillance and improper access by computer hacking [monitoring, tracking/interception] Cookie-Encryption/Carnivore Autonomy over personal collected and disclosed to others Theft Phishing Anonymity-Discuss under 1st Amendment

Privacy and IT What are the privacy Issues related to IT? Freedom from intrusion of unwanted information into ones personal space Spam (Junk Mail)/ Unsolicited Commercial (UCE) AOL v. Cyber Promotions. AOL got injunctive relief to block incoming spam based on an infringement of their property rights (i.e. spam used AOL computers, costing the customer money and thus, giving AOL the right to say what should come across their property). Opponents of the decision argue that the 1st Amendment prohibits the government restricting our freedom of speech. AOL is not a government organization as such no right to block. Should a company like AOL be free to filter incoming mail? Do filters violate spammers freedom of speech?

Privacy and IT What are the privacy Issues related to IT? Freedom from intrusion of unwanted information into ones personal space. Spam--Solutions Filters Anti-spam laws Problem with government interference is infringement of 1st Amendment rights. Restriction on commercial spam stand a better chance of being restricted. Provisions in proposed laws: Spam must be labeled so it can be easily filtered ISPs must provide filters Spam must identify sender, include valid email address, false and misleading subject lines are prohibited and all unsolicited commercial email banned.

Privacy and Personal Information Freedom from surveillance & improper access by others [improper monitoring, tracking, hacking & interception]: Cookies--Website stores information about visitors activity (data spillage--allow advertisers to use this information or leaks due to the complexity of the software Spyware--surfing monitors, buying habits, keystroke monitors. Secondary Use of Information Sale of consumer information Computer matching-comparing databases Detecting fraud, Law enforcement

Privacy and Personal Information Freedom from surveillance & improper access by others [improper monitoring, tracking, hacking & interception]: How do we balance the need for effective law enforcement and guarantee our 4th Amendment right? Surveillance Global positioning devices-track our movement Cell phones and wireless watch bands for children Carnivore sniffs information traffic going through net. FBIs Magic Lantern program similar to Carnivore except uses a different technology. Based on key- logging program-tracks keystrokes to bypass code breaking encryption software. (Used only with a court order).

Privacy and Personal Information How do we balance the need for effective law enforcement and guarantee our 4th Amendment right? When does crime prevention become a violation of 4th Amendment Rights? Patriot Act I & II Allows easier access for government agent to use the above surveillance tools

Privacy and Personal Information Freedom from surveillance & improper access by others [improper monitoring, tracking, hacking & interception]: Encryption & Interception of Communication Uses of Encryption Authentication Digital Cash (for buying services on the Web). electronic books, songs and movies sold on the Web ; cable-television signals.

Privacy and Personal Information Freedom from surveillance & improper access by others [improper monitoring, tracking, hacking & interception]: Privacy Enhancing Technology Examples--- Anonymizer.com and Zero Knowledge to use digital money. Platform for Privacy (P3P ). Software protecting privacy and user specifies privacy level required. Businesses are getting the message and website operators do privacy audits

Privacy and Personal Information Freedom to access information Hacking versus Hacktivism. Is Hacktivism a means to safeguard human rights? [Freedom of Speech issue] the combination of hacking in the traditional sense of the term--not accepting technologies at face value, opening them up, understanding how they work beneath the surface, and exploring the limits and constraints they impose on human communications--social and political activism is a potent combination and precisely the recipe I advocate to students and use to guide my own research activities, --Professor Ronald Deibert, University of Torontos Citizens Lab

Privacy and Personal Information Autonomy over personal information collected & disclosed by others Biometics (Identification of bodily indicators such as fingerprints, iris, bone structure in the hand, etc). School IDs and civil liberties? How do you design privacy safeguards? Build them into system rather than retrofit a complex system? Guard against theft, make system trustworthy, update system without infringing on civil liberties? Phishing Email or access link containing request for data and it is fraudulent Debate over National ID Card-HR 418 and/or Standardized drivers licenses.

Privacy and Personal Information What Privacy Protection and Regulations exist? 4th Amendment-protection against intrusion Philosophical-Warren & Brandeis Free Market v. Consumer Protection view Contract Regulations (consider the cost to compliance)---Example: Childrens Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) EU---Comprehensive Privacy Directive--Processing personal data.

Privacy and Personal Information Encryption & Interception of Communication The technologies of anonymity and cryptography may be the only way to protect privacy. ---Nadine Stossen, President of the American Civil Liberties Union---

Freedom of Speech in Cyberspace First Amendment Congress shall make no law…abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press… Protection against objectionable speech, pictures, and other forms of expression of ideas and opinions Restriction are on the power of government, not individuals or private business. Supreme Ct has developed guidelines for example advocating illegal acts is (usually) and truthful advertising are protected Anonymity protected. Libel and direct, specific threats, Inciting violence, in certain circumstances, are all illegal.

Freedom of Speech in Cyberspace Regulatory Paradigm Internet is given a high standard of protection by the Courts For example the Communication Decency Act (CDA) 1996 was ruled unconstitutional even though this was an attempt to regulate pornography that would impact children. Federal Judge commented that as the most participatory form of mass speech yet developed, the Internet deserves the highest protection from government intrusion.

Freedom of Speech in Cyberspace Regulatory Paradigm Federal Election Commission (FEC) regulations restrict anonymity in the form of disclosure and financial requirements established before the Web. Anonymity on the Internet is taken advantage of for criminal and antisocial purposes. Childrens Internet Protection Act (CIPA) Child Online Protection Act (COPA) 1998 Supreme Ct found it unconstitutional Targets Internet terminals in schools and libraries that participate in certain federal programs. Filters better solution

Offensive Speech What is illegal? Obscenity is offensive and not protected by US Constitution. Criteria for obscene material 1) it depicts sexual acts whose depiction is specifically prohibited by state law, 2) it depicts these acts in a patently offensive manner, appealing to prurient interest as judged by a reasonable person using community standards, and 3) it has no serious literary, artistic, social, political, or scientific value.

Offensive Speech What is illegal? 1996, Congress passed the Child Pornography Prevention Act to extend the law against child pornography to include virtual children. Supreme Ct rules in 2002 that it violated 1st Amendment.

Censorship laws Talking about bombs No federal law against bomb information on Internet until 1999--after shootings at Columbine HS.

Freedom of Speech in Cyberspace Is Anonymity Protected? Right to express political opinion anonymously (in print) is protected. Right to anonymity by IP is protected. Providers must have good identity protection programs and must train their employees to monitor policy effectively. [Stems from sailor case AOL employee violated anonymity of customers by selling list and provider held liable].

Intellectual Property Intangible creative work protected U.S. Copyright Law (Title 17 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations ) Copyright holder has exclusive rights (life of the holder plus 70 years), with some exceptions (backup software permitted): To make copies; to produce derivative; to perform in public; to display work in public.

Intellectual Property Cheating Rising Number of Cheating Cases Being Reported At UC Berkeley Professors Aided by Improved Plagiarism-tracking Devices IT makes it easy for students to plagiarize papers posted online by copying and pasting text into documents. Tracking cheaters also easier

Intellectual Property Legislative History No Electronic Theft Act (1997 ) Act makes it a criminal offense to willfully infringe copyright by reproducing or distributing one or more copies of copyrighted works with a total value of more than $1000 within a six month period.

Intellectual Property Fair-Use Doctrine (Copyright Act of 1976) Four factors to consider in determining whether particular use is fair Commercial or non-profit educational purpose Nature of copyrighted work (creative v. factual) Amount and significance of portion used Effect of the use on the market or value of the copyrighted work Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act Extends copyright from life of the author plus 50 years, to the life of the author plus 70 years.

Intellectual Property Digital Millennium Copyright Act [DMCA] (1998) Prohibits the making, distributing, or using of tools (devices, software, or services) to circumvent technological copyright protection by copyright holders (encryption). Protects Internet Service Providers (IPSs) from liability for copyright infringement by their users. (In exchange IPS obligated to provide copyright holders with the identities of suspected infringers subject to certain safeguards

Intellectual Property Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA cont.) Content Scrambling System (CSS) or CSS-compatible open- source software known as DeCSS. CSS, (which includes both player-host mutual authentication and data encryption), is used to protect the content of DVDs from piracy and to enforce region-based viewing restrictions. DeCSS, which is open source, allows Linux-based systems to access the content of DVDs by emulating a licensed player and performing the authentication and decryption. Court ruled that distribution of the DeCSS source code violates the Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) and it is illegal to distribute CSS compatible source code, including by URL reference ("link") to the same. Another court found 1st Amendment protects the software? Inconsistent rulings!

Intellectual Property Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA cont.) Content Scrambling System (CSS) or CSS-compatible open- source software known as DeCSS. there exists a very clear distinction between human ideas expressed unambiguously and concisely in source code and the machine that exists after this source code is compiled or interpreted, and made runnable within a machine's memory. I believe that ideas expressed in this source code are Constitutionally protected speech, and that only the executible machine may be considered a "circumvention technology". --Gregory Kesden, Professor Computer Science-- Carnegie Mellon University, 15-412/Fall 2000

Intellectual Property Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA cont.) Secure Digital Music Initiative (SDMI ) Form of digital copyright protection. Case in which team of researchers found flaws in the scheme of the encryption mechanism, however, decided not to present paper with their findings for fear of DMCA lawsuit. But the contents of the paper leaked anyway. A watchdog group brought a law suit. DMCA has exception for encryption research and development but the scope is unclear and DMCA ultimately has chilling effect on research and development. Fear of prosecution could cause researchers to leave the country eroding leadership in the field.

Intellectual Property Ethical argument about copying Who owns the content ? What are the rights of the owner of the media? Can they backup their material? Who should be held liable for infringement Individual consumer? (Napster) Internet Service Provider? What are the rights of business and Universities

Intellectual Property Major Legal Decisions Sony v. Universal [Betamax Case] (1986) Allows home users to make video recordings of programs for archival and non-commercial purposes Makers of recording devices not liable if the device has substantial legal uses if some people use it to infringe on copyright laws.

Intellectual Property Major Legal Decisions Napster Issues Was copying and distribution of music by Napster illegal? Was Napster responsible? Fair Use Was it similar to Betamax case? Copying songs for personal use permissible but personal meant very limited use not trading 1000s of copies. However, it seems it was the impact on the market for the songs that justified the courts ruling.

Intellectual Property Napster s legal responsibility-Court ruled that Napster knowingly encouraged and assisted in the infringement of copyrights. Napster argued that it had legitimate uses in promoting new artists, etc who were willing to let users copy their songs. Music industry argued that Napster used technology to aid copyright infringement Court decided that Napster was different from Betamax in that Betamaxs relationship with the user stopped when they bought the machine whereas Napster interacted with customers and was therefore liable because it failed to supervise use. In addition it had an ongoing financial interest in activities.

Intellectual Property Major Legal Decisions MGM v. Grokster Twenty-eight of the world's largest entertainment companies brought the lawsuit against the makers of the Morpheus, Grokster, and KaZaA software products, posing the question of when can a distributor of a multi-purpose tool be held liable for the infringements that may be committed by end-users of the tool?

Intellectual Property Major Legal Decisions MGM v. Grokster Their theory of liability holds that Grokster and StreamCast are responsible for the software users' copyright infringement -- either because they contribute to users' infringement, or because the infringement is, in effect, their own. These two varieties of infringement are called "contributory" and "vicarious" infringement, respectively. Court is faced with deciding between competing needs: innovation and creativity and copyright laws.

Intellectual Property MGM v. Grokster difference between VCRs and the software "Time-shifting" is a classic instance of "fair use" exempt from the copyright law.

Intellectual Property MGM v. GROKER Why the stakes are potentially momentous The stakes in the case considered higher than in Sony. If the plaintiffs win, distributors of software that allows peer-to-peer file sharing will face immense damage awards that are likely to put them out of business - use of offshore servers and companies -- which are beyond the jurisdiction of U.S. courts -- as well as of anonymity -- you can't effectively hold an unknown person liable -- will mean that peer-to-peer file sharing continues. Thus, it may well be that this is, in effect, an unstoppable technology. It might also stigmatize peer-to-peer file sharing in the eyes of some - especially if the Supreme Court used stern language equating piracy to theft, and derogating peer-to-peer file sharing software as a criminal's tool.

Intellectual Property MGM v. Grokster Why the stakes are potentially momentous On the other hand, if the defendants win, the market for peer-to-peer file sharing software will probably boom. In addition, the software distributed by Grokster and StreamCast will provide a model of how to craft such software so that it passes legal muster; so those who seek to distribute similar software may simply opt to reverse- engineer the software that the Court has already blessed. The upshot of this analysis is that the Court may reach for a compromise solution. One such solution might be to require Grokster and StreamCast to police their networks for users' infringement.

Intellectual Property MGM v. Grokster. Why the stakes are potentially momentous? In sum, a win for the defendants here seems lawless - as if it would, in effect, give a Supreme Court blessing to a possible scofflaw community. But a win for the plaintiffs seems somehow un-American - allowing courts to tell companies what to do, even though the companies aren't themselves breaking the law. We don't even do this with gun manufacturers whose products are used by some to kill. Is the Supreme Court likely to mandate it for mere software distributors whose products are used by some to infringe copyright? The court has substantial freedom here Similar difficult questions arise within a theory of "vicarious" infringement. A key question is: Did the software distributor have the "right and ability" to supervise for infringement?

Intellectual Property MGM v. Grokster. How might the distributor reserve the right and ability to supervise for infringement? It might require users to agree to provide copyright registration or licenses for each use of the software. Obviously, that would be quite burdensome for the user. And doing so might only put the distributor in a worse legal position: Ironically, this test seems to suggest that the distributor will be better off if it remains ignorant of illegal uses, for then it cannot be held vicariously liable for them. Some courts might want to address this irony by saying that the distributor must reserve this right and this ability -- and thus must expose itself to a vicarious infringement claim. But arguably, a court that forced this, might be going too far.

Intellectual Property MGM v. Grokster Why the stakes are potentially momentous Given that Congress has not specifically required the inclusion of such provisions in the relevant contracts, should courts interpreting copyright law take it upon themselves to tell Grokster how to structure its software, and force it to police its own users? Or should the onus be on copyright owners to devise "lockware" that makes illegal uses of particular files impossible? Reasonable minds can differ on the answers to all these questions, I think -- and for this reason, the Supreme Court will likely feel free to make law, rather than to simply interpret it, in this crucial case. FIRST NAME:

Intellectual Property MGM v. Grokster Why the stakes are potentially momentous A key question is: Did the software distributor have the "right and ability" to supervise for infringement? We dont even do this with gun manufacturers whose products are used by some to kill. Is the Supreme Court likely to mandate it for mere software distributors whose products are used by some to infringe copyright? Reasonable minds can differ on the answers to all these questions, I think -- and for this reason, the Supreme Court will likely feel free to make law, rather than to simply interpret it, in this crucial case. FIRST NAME:

Intellectual Property Peer to Peer Benefits-allows for Open Source and enhanced research capability and collaboration Consistent with a network or ecological worldview/paradigm Downside-copyright infringement

Intellectual Property Webcasting generally refers to the streaming of audio on the Internet. It is sometimes called "Internet radio and licenses are required for each of the two copyrighted works embodied in a musical recording (underlying music and recording). DMCA allows webcaster to provide programing without obtaining individual license provided Offers non-interactive programing Primarily offer audio or other entertainment programing as opposed to selling music or promoting particular products

Information Technology Ethical Issues Cyber crime Child pornography Copyright piracy Consumer fraud Embezzlement Attacks on digital assets (computer is the target) Identity theft Identity changed (programmer to criminal) Medical records changed Life of investigator erased

Information Technology Factual Issues Privacy and personal information Freedom of speech in cyberspace Intellectual property Cyber crime Axiological Issues Colonialization of consciousness through IT. Related to On the Internet Loss of the ability to recognize relevance Acquiring skill Loss of a sense of the reality of people and things Anonymity and nihilism

Broader Impacts of IT Computers and Community Reduce face to face gathering and hurts local community resulting in isolation and eroding the family and community life. Robert Putman argues that an indicator is the number of clubs that people join--other factors at play including: modern transportation and communication (increased mobility), changes in family patterns and TV. Addiction to computers and TV Digital divide---Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility (CPRS) push for universal access.

Broader Impacts of IT Criticism of Computer Technology Unemployment and deskilling of jobs Manufacture needs Social injustice Dehumanizing Separates humans from nature Benefits big business and big government Use in schools thwarts development of social skill, human values, intellectual skills and create an ominous uniformity of knowledge consistent with corporate values.

Information Technology Axiological issues Information colonialism Peter Hershock A Buddhist Response to the Information Age Related to the Internet Loss of the ability to recognize relevance Acquiring skill Loss of a sense of the reality of people and things Anonymity and nihilism

Information Technology Axiological issues Loss of the ability to recognize relevance Limitations of hyperlinks---Web crawlers and search engines respond only to Syntax and not meaning. Failure of AI and limitation of information retrieval--- we need bodies to provide a sense of relevance that comes from background and tacit knowledge and primary knowledge. Note: Blink: The Power of Thinking without Thinking Malcolm Gladwell

Information Technology Axiological issues Loss of the ability to recognize relevance How the actual shape and movement of our bodies play a crucial role in our making sense of our world, so that loss of embodiment would lead to loss of the ability to recognize relevance.

Information Technology Axiological issues Distance Learning and Acquiring skill Every stage of skill acquisition beyond the first three requires personal involvement. Something must be risked. Professional and cultural skills passed on only by means of apprenticeship. People acquire skill by imitating the style of experts in specific domains and acquire the style of their culture in order to gain practical wisdom. Body picks up shared moods, etc.

Information Technology Axiological issues Loss of a sense of the reality of people and things--- telepresense Decartes concluded that we are only directly present to the content of our minds (not the world or even our bodies). James and Dewey argued that the continual stream of feedback we get from the world gives us a direct sense of reality.

Information Technology Axiological issues Loss of a sense of the reality of people and things--- telepresense Merleau-Ponty claims that we need our bodies to get an optimal grip on the world and to be able to grasp the parts and the whole Our physical presence in a situation gives us a sense of both our power and of our vulnerability. Risk encourages meaning

Information Technology Axiological issues Anonymity and nihilism Web turns us into anonymous spectator with nothing at risk and no commitment. Tendency for many to keep up on everything trivial. Chat rooms give us the opportunity to play at being many selves The ethical sphere (Kierkegaard) involves mature, unconditional commitments. What role does the Web play in stimulating such commitments?

Information Technology Axiological issues Related to On The Internet Anonymity and nihilism What risk do we encounter on the Net? Kierkegaard said of the present age, it transforms the task itself into an unreal feat of artifice, and reality into a theatre

Information Technology Engineering 124 Spring 2005.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Information Technology Engineering 124 Spring 2005."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback

Log in

Auth with social network:

Information Technology Engineering 124 Spring 2005.

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Information Technology Engineering 124 Spring 2005."— Presentation transcript:

Similar presentations

About project

Feedback