Communication Law and Policy最新文献_第9页

Emerson, Thomas I. The Affirmative Side of the First 32 Amendment, 15 Georgia L. Rev. 795 (1981) 托马斯·i·爱默生:《第32条修正案的正面》，15 Georgia L. Rev. 795 (1981)

IF 0.3

Communication Law and Policy Pub Date : 2020-07-02 DOI: 10.1080/10811680.2020.1766896

A. Kenyon

{"title":"Emerson, Thomas I. The Affirmative Side of the First 32 Amendment, 15 Georgia L. Rev. 795 (1981)","authors":"A. Kenyon","doi":"10.1080/10811680.2020.1766896","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10811680.2020.1766896","url":null,"abstract":"One of Thomas Emerson’s lasting contributions to understanding free speech is his emphasis on the system of freedom of expression, as his well-known book is titled. Free speech needs broad analysis that pays attention to supports for, as well as limitations of, speech; the freedom encompasses practices, principles and institutions as well as rights; and it is the structures underlying speech that should concern legal scholarship. The point is frequently recognized — scholarly references to a system of free speech following Emerson are common — but the positive or affirmative dimensions of Emerson’s approach are not always brought out. (The literature uses many terms for these aspects of the freedom; here I use both “affirmative,” after Emerson, and “positive,” which has currency across relevant disciplines.) While positive dimensions are evident in much of his work, they are encapsulated in “The Affirmative Side of the First Amendment.” The article is now somewhat poignant, for at least two reasons. The first is the confidence it displays in U.S. constitutional law developing and better supporting the system of public speech. While Emerson recognizes that U.S. affirmative doctrine is relatively inchoate, he sees the courts as moving toward clarifying and strengthening it: “[T]he courts are on a one-way road: to the extent that they are willing to act, the result can only be an expansion, not a restriction, of the system of freedom of expression.” In many ways, U.S. courts have not acted since then and such development has not (yet) come to pass, even as the environment in which public speech occurs has transformed. Second, the article","PeriodicalId":42622,"journal":{"name":"Communication Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10811680.2020.1766896","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47730014","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Communication Law and Policy Research in Non-Law Peer-Reviewed Journals, 2010-2019: Trends and Observations 2010-2019年非法学同行评审期刊传播法律与政策研究：趋势与观察

IF 0.3

Communication Law and Policy Pub Date : 2020-07-02 DOI: 10.1080/10811680.2020.1765615

Derigan A. Silver, Dan V. Kozlowski

引用次数: 0

Mimicking the Sacred: Advertising Parody, Religion and Freedom of Expression in the United States and France 模仿神圣:美国和法国的广告戏仿、宗教与言论自由

IF 0.3

Communication Law and Policy Pub Date : 2020-04-02 DOI: 10.1080/10811680.2020.1735191

Lyombe Eko

{"title":"Mimicking the Sacred: Advertising Parody, Religion and Freedom of Expression in the United States and France","authors":"Lyombe Eko","doi":"10.1080/10811680.2020.1735191","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10811680.2020.1735191","url":null,"abstract":"International controversies involving mass-mediated caricatures and parodies of religion provided an opportunity to compare and contrast how courts in the United States and France manage the tensions between advertising parody of religion, defamation, and freedom of expression. This article carried out a comparative analysis of the regulation of advertising parodies of religion under American and French law, using as a comparative case study two landmark cases, Hustler Magazine v. Falwell, and Association Croyances et Libértés v. Marithé et François Girbaud, decided by the Supreme Courts of the United States and France. Advertising parodies of religious icons are permissible under the copyright and free speech regimes of both countries. However, parody is not always a laughing matter. Although the legal systems of the United States and France are different in a number of respects, the outcomes of the legal disputes over advertising parodies of religion demonstrate a “similarity in difference” comparative model that explains the workings of both systems and is useful for promoting freedom of expression at the international level.","PeriodicalId":42622,"journal":{"name":"Communication Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10811680.2020.1735191","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43179836","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

International and Comparative Law as a Reverse Perspective on Communication Law 国际法与比较法：传播法的逆向视角

IF 0.3

Communication Law and Policy Pub Date : 2020-04-02 DOI: 10.1080/10811680.2020.1735184

K. Youm, A. Sanders

引用次数: 0

Freedom of Journalism in International Human Rights Law 国际人权法中的新闻自由

IF 0.3

Communication Law and Policy Pub Date : 2020-04-02 DOI: 10.1080/10811680.2020.1735188

Edward L. Carter, Rosalie C. Westenskow

{"title":"Freedom of Journalism in International Human Rights Law","authors":"Edward L. Carter, Rosalie C. Westenskow","doi":"10.1080/10811680.2020.1735188","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10811680.2020.1735188","url":null,"abstract":"Contemporary attacks of various types have prompted calls for stronger public support and legal protections for journalism. Around the world, journalism faces not only government regulation that affects editorial content but also economic and corporate pressures as well as lack of public understanding of its societal functions. In the United States, courts and even journalism organizations have been reluctant to define journalism or single it out for special protection. But international human rights law presents a possible solution. This article discusses the international human rights law provisions that protect individuals engaged in journalism. The United Nations Human Rights Committee has laid groundwork to define and protect journalism’s unique functions within the larger international law framework for freedom of expression. This groundwork includes the possibility for individual journalism rights to be distinguished from institutional media or press rights. The article contends that such a distinction has become increasingly important. The international law proportionality test could resolve concerns about defining journalism as a stand-alone fundamental right.","PeriodicalId":42622,"journal":{"name":"Communication Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-04-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10811680.2020.1735188","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45627897","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 2

Regulating Social Media Platforms: A Comparative Policy Analysis 规范社交媒体平台:比较政策分析

IF 0.3

Communication Law and Policy Pub Date : 2020-04-02 DOI: 10.1080/10811680.2020.1735194

Alex Rochefort

引用次数: 22

Crossing the Danube: A Comparative Study of Central European and American Access-to-Information Laws 跨越多瑙河：中欧和美洲信息获取法的比较研究

IF 0.3

Communication Law and Policy Pub Date : 2020-04-02 DOI: 10.1080/10811680.2020.1735192

Benjamin W. Cramer

引用次数: 0

The Google-DoubleClick Merger: Lessons From the Federal Trade Commission's Limitations on Protecting Privacy 谷歌-双击合并:从联邦贸易委员会在保护隐私方面的限制中吸取的教训

IF 0.3

Communication Law and Policy Pub Date : 2020-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/10811680.2020.1690330

Jenny S. Lee

{"title":"The Google-DoubleClick Merger: Lessons From the Federal Trade Commission's Limitations on Protecting Privacy","authors":"Jenny S. Lee","doi":"10.1080/10811680.2020.1690330","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10811680.2020.1690330","url":null,"abstract":"In the wake of Big Tech’s growing power, much attention has been directed to the Federal Trade Commission as the regulatory force for monitoring the technology industry. But scholars are largely divided on the issue of whether privacy exists within the scope of antitrust law. Using the 2008 acquisition of DoubleClick by Google as a case study, this article argues that privacy is an antitrust issue and should have been considered in the FTC’s merger review process for the ways it affected both competition and consumer welfare. The article examines the role of consumer data in fortifying Google’s barriers to entry, squashing innovation, and reducing choice in the marketplace, and considers the invasion of data privacy as an issue of consumer protection. The article argues that the foundation for evaluating privacy within the merger review already exists, as Section 5 of the FTC Act gives the Commission special responsibility to uphold these values and interpret its review process in order to keep up with a changing market structure. More than a decade later, these lessons remain relevant, as antitrust law experiences a resurgence in the United States.","PeriodicalId":42622,"journal":{"name":"Communication Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10811680.2020.1690330","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45695845","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 4

Crossing Constitutional Boundaries: Searches and Seizures of Electronic Devices at U.S. Borders 跨越宪法边界：在美国边境搜查和扣押电子设备

IF 0.3

Communication Law and Policy Pub Date : 2020-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/10811680.2019.1660556

S. Memmel

{"title":"Crossing Constitutional Boundaries: Searches and Seizures of Electronic Devices at U.S. Borders","authors":"S. Memmel","doi":"10.1080/10811680.2019.1660556","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10811680.2019.1660556","url":null,"abstract":"In an era of increased attention to border security and continued technological advances, questions have been raised regarding searches and seizures of electronic devices at U.S. borders, implicating the First and Fourth Amendments. Many of these questions remain unanswered or have been made more complicated by conflicting court rulings, legislation and policies. Meanwhile, journalists continue to be targeted by warrantless searches and seizures. This article seeks to chart the legal landscape by (1) providing key background information, (2) discussing the First Amendment angle of warrantless searches of journalists’ devices, and (3) detailing the split among federal circuit and district courts regarding the Fourth Amendment question of whether border agents need reasonable suspicion to conduct forensic searches of electronic devices. The article argues that because federal courts, executive agencies, and Congress, have failed to adequately address journalists’ and other travelers’ rights at U.S. borders, the Supreme Court of the United States and Congress must provide at least some guidance regarding important Constitutional rights. Ideally, the Court or Congress should also ensure protection for journalists and press freedom at U.S. borders.","PeriodicalId":42622,"journal":{"name":"Communication Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3,"publicationDate":"2020-01-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10811680.2019.1660556","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48563758","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

The Copyright Claims Board and the Individual Creator: Is Real Reform Possible? 版权索赔委员会和个人创作者:真正的改革可能吗?

IF 0.3

Communication Law and Policy Pub Date : 2020-01-02 DOI: 10.1080/10811680.2020.1690340

K. Olson

引用次数: 0