technology affecting people

7/31/2019 Technology Affecting People

1/64


2/64

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 brakesensors, night vision drivers


3/64

Information Technology

Distance learning.

Speech recognition.

Simulation-air traffic.

Crime fighting-crime reports, records, analysis,database fingerprints,etc.

Health and medicine-ct, MRI, patient monitoringdevices, microprocessors, pacemakers, distancesurgery, device to control surgeons shaking,computerized gene mapping, protein modeling,telemedicine,

Tools for disabled,

Smart thing sensors,

Reducing paper loss.


4/64

Information Technology Ethical Issues

Privacy and personal information

Freedom of speech in cyberspace Intellectual property

Cyber crime


5/64

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 andthings

Anonymity and nihilism


6/64



Freedom of speech in cyberspace

Intellectual property

Cyber crime


7/64

Privacy and Personal Information

What is the right to privacy?

Background

Legal decisions supporting privacy in socialand business activities were based onproperty rights and contracts.

1890, The Right of Privacy, by Samuel

Warren and Louis Brandeis, argued thatprivacy should be a distinct right. Courtsstill decide both ways.


8/64

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 isobtained 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


9/64

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 toblock incoming spam based on an infringement oftheir property rights (i.e. spam used AOL computers,costing the customer money and thus, giving AOLthe right to say what should come across theirproperty).

Opponents of the decision argue that the 1stAmendment prohibits the government restricting our

freedom of speech. AOL is not a governmentorganization as such no right to block.

Should a company like AOL be free to filter incomingmail? Do filters violate spammers freedom ofspeech?


10/64

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 of1st Amendment rights.

Restriction on commercial spam stand a better chance ofbeing 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 emailaddress, false and misleading subject lines areprohibited and all unsolicited commercial email

banned.


11/64

Privacy and Personal

InformationFreedom from surveillance & improper access

by others [improper monitoring, tracking,hacking & interception]:

Cookies--Website stores information about visitorsactivity (data spillage--allow advertisers to use thisinformation or leaks due to the complexity of thesoftware

Spyware--surfing monitors, buying habits, keystrokemonitors.

Secondary Use of Information Sale of consumer information

Computer matching-comparing databases

Detecting fraud,

Law enforcement


12/64


InformationFreedom from surveillance & improper access


How do we balance the need for effective law enforcementand 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 Carnivoreexcept uses a different technology. Based on key-logging program-tracks keystrokes to bypass codebreaking encryption software. (Used only with a courtorder).


13/64


Information How do we balance the need for effective law

enforcement and guarantee our 4thAmendment right?

When does crime prevention become aviolation of 4th Amendment Rights?

Patriot Act I & IIAllows easier access for government agent to

use the above surveillance tools


14/64


InformationFreedom 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.


15/64


Information Freedom from surveillance & improper access


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


16/64


Information Freedom to access information

Hacking versus Hacktivism. Is Hacktivism a meansto safeguard human rights? [Freedom of Speechissue]

the combination of hacking in the traditional sense of the term--notaccepting technologies at face value, opening them up, understandinghow they work beneath the surface, and exploring the limits andconstraints they impose on human communications--social andpolitical activism is a potent combination and precisely the recipe Iadvocate to students and use to guide my own research activities,

--Professor Ronald Deibert, University ofTorontos Citizens Lab


17/64


Information Autonomy over personal information collected &

disclosed by othersBiometics (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 systemrather than retrofit a complex system?

Guard against theft, make system trustworthy, update systemwithout 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 Standardizeddrivers licenses.


18/64


InformationWhat 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--Processingpersonal data.


19/64


Information Encryption & Interception of Communication

The technologies of anonymity and cryptography may be theonly way to protect privacy.

---Nadine Stossen, President of the AmericanCivil Liberties Union---


20/64




Intellectual property

Cyber crime


21/64

Freedom of Speech in

Cyberspace First Amendment

Congress shall make no lawabridging thefreedom of speech, or of the press

Protection against objectionablespeech, pictures, and otherforms of expression of ideas and opinions

Restriction are on the power of government, not individualsor 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 certaincircumstances, are all illegal.


22/64


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 toregulate pornography that would impact children. FederalJudge commented that as the most participatory form of

mass speech yet developed, the Internet deserves the highestprotection from government intrusion.


23/64


Cyberspace Regulatory Paradigm

Federal Election Commission (FEC) regulations restrictanonymity in the form of disclosure and financialrequirements established before the Web.

Anonymity on the Internet is taken advantage of for criminaland antisocial purposes.

Childrens Internet Protection Act (CIPA)

Child Online Protection Act (COPA) 1998

Supreme Ct found it unconstitutional Targets Internetterminals in schools and libraries that participate incertain federal programs.

Filters better solution


24/64

Offensive SpeechWhat 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 offensivemanner, 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.


25/64

Offensive SpeechWhat is illegal?

1996, Congress passed the Child PornographyPrevention Act to extend the law against child

pornography to include virtual children.Supreme Ct rules in 2002 that it violated 1stAmendment.


26/64

Censorship laws Talking about bombs

No federal law against bomb information on

Internet until 1999--after shootings at ColumbineHS.


27/64


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 andmust train their employees to monitor policy effectively.[Stems from sailor case AOL employee violated anonymity

of customers by selling list and provider held liable].


28/64


29/64

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 someexceptions (backup software permitted):

To make copies; to produce derivative; to perform in

public; to display work in public.


30/64

Intellectual Property Cheating

Rising Number of Cheating Cases BeingReported At UC Berkeley

Professors Aided by Improved Plagiarism-tracking Devices

IT makes it easy for students to plagiarize papers postedonline by copying and pasting text into documents.

Tracking cheaters also easier


31/64

Intellectual PropertyLegislative History

No Electronic Theft Act (1997)

Act makes it a criminal offense to willfullyinfringe copyright by reproducing or distributingone or more copies of copyrighted works with atotal value of more than $1000 within a six

month period.


32/64

Intellectual Property Fair-Use Doctrine (Copyright Act of 1976)

Four factors to consider in determining whetherparticular 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 thecopyrighted 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.


33/64

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 copyrightholders (encryption).

Protects Internet Service Providers (IPSs) fromliability for copyright infringement by their users. (In

exchange IPS obligated to provide copyrightholders with the identities of suspected infringerssubject to certain safeguards


34/64

Intellectual PropertyDigital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA cont.) Content Scrambling System (CSS) orCSS-compatible open-

source software known as DeCSS.

CSS, (which includes both player-host mutual authenticationand data encryption), is used to protect the content of DVDsfrom piracy and to enforce region-based viewing restrictions.

DeCSS, which is open source, allows Linux-based systems toaccess the content of DVDs by emulating a licensed player andperforming the authentication and decryption.

Court ruled that distribution of the DeCSS source code violatesthe Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA) and it is illegal todistribute CSS compatible source code, including by URLreference ("link") to the same.

Another court found 1st Amendment protects the software?Inconsistent rulings!


35/64

Intellectual Property

Digital Millenium Copyright Act (DMCA cont.) Content Scrambling System (CSS) orCSS-compatible open-

source software known as DeCSS.

there exists a very clear distinction between human ideas expressedunambiguously and concisely in source code and the machine thatexists after this source code is compiled or interpreted, and maderunnable within a machine's memory. I believe that ideas expressedin this source code are Constitutionally protected speech, and thatonly the executible machine may be considered a "circumventiontechnology".

--Gregory Kesden, Professor Computer Science-- CarnegieMellon University, 15-412/Fall 2000


36/64


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 DMCAlawsuit. But the contents of the paper leaked anyway. Awatchdog group brought a law suit.

DMCA has exception for encryption research and development

but the scope is unclear and DMCA ultimately has chilling effecton research and development. Fear of prosecution could causeresearchers to leave the country eroding leadership in the field.


37/64

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


38/64

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 hassubstantial legal uses if some people use it to infringe oncopyright laws.


39/64


Napster Issues

Was copying and distribution of music by Napsterillegal?

Was Napster responsible?

Fair Use

Was it similar to Betamax case? Copying songs for

personal use permissible but personal meant verylimited use not trading 1000s of copies.

However, it seems it was the impact on the market forthe songs that justified the courts ruling.


40/64


Napster s legal responsibility-Court ruled that Napsterknowingly encouraged and assisted in the infringement of

copyrights.

Napster argued that it had legitimate uses in promoting newartists, etc who were willing to let users copy their songs.

Music industry argued that Napster used technology to aidcopyright infringement

Court decided that Napster was different from Betamax in that

Betamaxs relationship with the user stopped when they boughtthe machine whereas Napster interacted with customers andwas therefore liable because it failed to supervise use.

In addition it had an ongoing financial interest in activities.


41/64


MGM v. Grokster

Twenty-eight of the world's largestentertainment companies brought thelawsuit against the makers of the Morpheus,Grokster, and KaZaA software products,

posing the question of when can adistributor of a multi-purpose tool be heldliable for the infringements that may becommitted by end-users of the tool?


42/64


MGM v. Grokster Their theory of liability holds that Grokster and

StreamCast are responsible for the software users'copyright infringement -- either because theycontribute to users' infringement, or because theinfringement is, in effect, their own. These twovarieties of infringement are called "contributory"and "vicarious" infringement, respectively.

Court is faced with deciding between competingneeds: innovation and creativity and copyrightlaws.


43/64

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.


44/64


MGM v. GROKERWhy 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 personliable -- will mean that peer-to-peer file sharing continues. Thus, it may well be thatthis is, in effect, an unstoppable technology.

It might also stigmatize peer-to-peer file sharing in the eyes of some - especially ifthe Supreme Court used stern language equating piracy to theft, and derogating

peer-to-peer file sharing software as a criminal's tool.


45/64


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 willprovide 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 compromisesolution. One such solution might be to require Grokster and StreamCast topolice their networks for users' infringement.


46/64

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 companieswhat 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 bysome to kill. Is the Supreme Court likely to mandate it for mere softwaredistributors 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 keyquestion is: Did the software distributor have the "right and ability" to supervisefor infringement?


47/64

Intellectual Property MGM v. Grokster .

How might the distributor reserve the right and ability to supervise forinfringement? It might require users to agree to provide copyright registration or

licenses for each use of the software. Obviously, that would be quiteburdensome 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 remainsignorant 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 mustreserve this right and this ability -- and thus must expose itself to a vicariousinfringement claim. But arguably, a court that forced this, might be going too far.


48/64


Why the stakes are potentially momentous

Given that Congress has not specifically required the inclusion of suchprovisions in the relevant contracts, should courts interpreting copyrightlaw take it upon themselves to tell Grokster how to structure itssoftware, and force it to police its own users? Or should the onus be oncopyright owners to devise "lockware" that makes illegal uses ofparticular files impossible?

Reasonable minds can differ on the answers to all these questions, Ithink -- and for this reason, the Supreme Court will likely feel free tomake law, rather than to simply interpret it, in this crucial case.

FIRST NAME:


49/64


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 distributorswhose 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:


50/64

Intellectual Property Peer to Peer

Benefits-allows for Open Source and enhancedresearch capability and collaboration

Consistent with a network or ecologicalworldview/paradigm

Downside-copyright infringement


51/64

Intellectual Property Webcasting generally refers to the streaming of audio on the

Internet. It is sometimes called "Internet radio and licenses arerequired for each of the two copyrighted works embodied in amusical recording (underlying music and recording).

DMCA allows webcaster to provide programing withoutobtaining individual license provided Offers non-interactive programing

Primarily offer audio or other entertainment programing as opposed toselling music or promoting particular products


52/64



Freedom of speech in cyberspace Intellectual property

Cyber crime


53/64


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


54/64


Factual Issues Privacy and personal information


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



55/64

Broader Impacts of IT

Computers and Community

Reduce face to face gathering and hurts localcommunity 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 (increasedmobility), changes in family patterns and TV.

Addiction to computers and TV Digital divide---Computer Professionals for Social

Responsibility (CPRS) push for universal access.


56/64

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 ominousuniformity of knowledge consistent with corporatevalues.


57/64


Axiological issues Information colonialism

Peter Hershock A Buddhist Response to theInformation Age

Related to the Internet

Loss of the ability to recognize relevance

Acquiring skill

Loss of a sense of the reality of people andthings



58/64


Axiological issues Loss of the ability to recognize relevance

Limitations of hyperlinks---Web crawlers and searchengines respond only to Syntax and not meaning.

Failure of AI and limitation of information retrieval---we need bodies to provide a sense of relevance thatcomes from background and tacit knowledge andprimary knowledge.

Note: Blink: The Power of Thinking without ThinkingMalcolmGladwell


59/64


Axiological issues Loss of the ability to recognize relevance

How the actual shape and movement of our bodiesplay a crucial role in our making sense of our world,so that loss of embodiment would lead to loss of theability to recognize relevance.


60/64


Axiological issues Distance Learning and Acquiring skill

Every stage of skill acquisition beyond the first threerequires personal involvement. Something must berisked. Professional and cultural skills passed ononly by means of apprenticeship.

People acquire skill by imitating the style of expertsin specific domains and acquire the style of their

culture in order to gain practical wisdom. Body picks up shared moods, etc.


61/64


Axiological issues Loss of a sense of the reality of people and things---

telepresense

Decartes concluded that we are only directly presentto the content of our minds (not the world or even ourbodies).

James and Dewey argued that the continual stream offeedback we get from the world gives us a direct

sense of reality.


62/64


Axiological issues Loss of a sense of the reality of people and things---

telepresense

Merleau-Ponty claims that we need our bodies to getan optimal grip on the world and to be able to graspthe parts and the whole

Our physical presence in a situation gives us a senseof bothour power and of our vulnerability.

Risk encourages meaning


63/64


Axiological issues Anonymity and nihilism

Web turns us into anonymous spectator with nothingat risk and no commitment. Tendency for many tokeep up on everything trivial. Chat rooms give us theopportunity to play at being many selves

The ethical sphere (Kierkegaard) involves mature,unconditional commitments. What role does the Web

play in stimulating such commitments?


64/64


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, andreality into a theatre

technology affecting people

Documents