Freedom of the Press 2.0

Edward Lee
{"title":"Freedom of the Press 2.0","authors":"Edward Lee","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.1008877","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In today's digital age, copyright law is changing. It now attempts to regulate machines. Over the past twenty years, and particularly with the advent of the Internet, copyright holders have increasingly invoked copyright law to regulate directly - indeed, even to prohibit - the manufacture and sale of technology that facilitates the mass dissemination of expressive works. Although the concerns of copyright holders about the ease of digital copying are understandable, the expansion of copyright law to regulate - and, in some cases, to prohibit - technologies raises a troubling question. Can the government regulate under copyright law technologies that facilitate the dissemination of speech, consistent with the First Amendment? If so, are there any limits to what the government can do? Or does copyright law have constitutional carte blanche to regulate technologies, without any First Amendment scrutiny? Because copyright law, dating back to the first Copyright Act of 1790, traditionally refrained from regulating technologies directly, these questions were scarcely considered before. But, today, these questions have vital importance as copyright law and other laws proposed in service of copyright holders contemplate even greater regulation of emerging technologies that are revolutionizing the ability of individuals to create expressive content on the Internet, in the \"Web 2.0\" culture of user-created content. However, despite their importance, these questions have escaped attention in legal scholarship. This Article attempts to answer these questions by tracing the historical development of the \"freedom of the press\" that led to the Framers' inclusion of the concept in the First Amendment. My core thesis is twofold: (i) the Framers understood the freedom of the press as the freedom of the printing press - a speech technology - to be free of intrusive governmental regulation, including restrictions on technology imposed under copyright law; and (ii) today, the Sony safe harbor operates as a \"First Amendment safeguard\" within copyright law that is designed to protect the freedom of the press and the development of speech technologies. All future attempts by Congress to regulate speech technologies under copyright law must answer to the Free Press Clause or the Sony safe harbor.","PeriodicalId":337945,"journal":{"name":"Young Scholars Law","volume":"264 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2007-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"29","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Young Scholars Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.1008877","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 29

Abstract

In today's digital age, copyright law is changing. It now attempts to regulate machines. Over the past twenty years, and particularly with the advent of the Internet, copyright holders have increasingly invoked copyright law to regulate directly - indeed, even to prohibit - the manufacture and sale of technology that facilitates the mass dissemination of expressive works. Although the concerns of copyright holders about the ease of digital copying are understandable, the expansion of copyright law to regulate - and, in some cases, to prohibit - technologies raises a troubling question. Can the government regulate under copyright law technologies that facilitate the dissemination of speech, consistent with the First Amendment? If so, are there any limits to what the government can do? Or does copyright law have constitutional carte blanche to regulate technologies, without any First Amendment scrutiny? Because copyright law, dating back to the first Copyright Act of 1790, traditionally refrained from regulating technologies directly, these questions were scarcely considered before. But, today, these questions have vital importance as copyright law and other laws proposed in service of copyright holders contemplate even greater regulation of emerging technologies that are revolutionizing the ability of individuals to create expressive content on the Internet, in the "Web 2.0" culture of user-created content. However, despite their importance, these questions have escaped attention in legal scholarship. This Article attempts to answer these questions by tracing the historical development of the "freedom of the press" that led to the Framers' inclusion of the concept in the First Amendment. My core thesis is twofold: (i) the Framers understood the freedom of the press as the freedom of the printing press - a speech technology - to be free of intrusive governmental regulation, including restrictions on technology imposed under copyright law; and (ii) today, the Sony safe harbor operates as a "First Amendment safeguard" within copyright law that is designed to protect the freedom of the press and the development of speech technologies. All future attempts by Congress to regulate speech technologies under copyright law must answer to the Free Press Clause or the Sony safe harbor.
新闻自由2.0
在当今的数字时代,版权法正在发生变化。它现在试图规范机器。在过去的二十年里,特别是随着互联网的出现,版权所有者越来越多地援引版权法来直接规范——实际上,甚至禁止——制造和销售有助于表达性作品大规模传播的技术。尽管版权所有者对数字复制的便利性的担忧是可以理解的,但版权法扩大到规范——在某些情况下,甚至禁止——技术的做法提出了一个令人不安的问题。政府是否可以在版权法的框架下,根据宪法第一修正案对促进言论传播的技术进行监管?如果是这样,政府能做的有什么限制吗?或者版权法在没有任何第一修正案审查的情况下,有宪法授权来规范技术?因为版权法可以追溯到1790年的第一个版权法,传统上避免直接规范技术,这些问题以前几乎没有被考虑过。但是,今天,这些问题至关重要,因为版权法和其他为版权所有者服务的法律正在考虑对新兴技术进行更严格的监管,这些技术正在彻底改变个人在互联网上创造富有表现力的内容的能力,在用户创建内容的“Web 2.0”文化中。然而,尽管这些问题很重要,但在法学研究中却没有引起人们的注意。本文试图通过追溯“新闻自由”的历史发展来回答这些问题,这导致了制宪者将这一概念纳入第一修正案。我的核心论点是双重的:(i)制宪者将新闻自由理解为印刷自由——一种言论技术——不受政府干预的监管,包括版权法对技术的限制;(ii)今天,索尼安全港作为版权法中的“第一修正案保障”发挥作用,旨在保护新闻自由和语音技术的发展。未来,美国国会在版权法框架下对语音技术进行监管的所有尝试都必须遵守《新闻自由条款》或《索尼安全港法案》。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书