Global technology meets local environment: State attempts to control Internet content

Asia.com: Asia Encounters the Internet

Volumn , Issue , 2003, Pages 83-96

  Penfold, Carolyn ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES   (Australia)

^b BAKER AND MCKENZIE LLP   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84906615788     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.4324/9780203563229     Document Type: Chapter

References (34)

1. Alston, R. (2000) "The government's regulatory framework for Internet content," University of New South Wales Law Journal Forum, Internet Content Control, 6, 1.
2. Ang, P.H. (1997) "How countries are regulating Internet content." Online. Available HTTP: http://cad.ntu-kpi.kiev.ua/events/inet97/B1/B1_3.HTM (current as of January 21, 2003).
3. Anil, S. (2001) "Re-visiting the Singapore Internet code of practice," Journal of Information, Law and Technology, 2.
4. Australian Broadcasting Authority (ABA) (1996) "Investigation into the content of on-line services," Report to the Minister for Communications and the Arts, Sydney: ABA.
5. Australian Capital Television Pty Limited v The Commonwealth (1992) 177 CLR 106 at 182, per Dawson J.
6. Barlow, J.P. (1996) Declaration of Independence in Cyberspace. Online. Available HTTP: http://www.eff.org/Publications/John_Perry_Barlow/barlow_0296.declaration (current as of January 21, 2003).
7. Barron, S. (2000) "Myanmar works hard to keep the Internet out," New York Times, July 14.
8. Bohorquez, F.A. (1999) "The price of PICS: the privatization of Internet censorship," New York Law School Law Review, 43: 523.
9. Coroneos, P. (2000) "Internet content control in Australia: attempting the impossible?" UNSWLJ Forum, Internet Content Control, 6, 1.
10. Davidson, A.D. (1998) "I want my censored MTV," Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 31: 97.
11. Dickie, J. (1998) "Classification and community attitudes," Research Paper no. 5, Centre for Media, Communications and Information Technology Law, Law School, University of Melbourne.
12. Ellis, E. (2001) "Hot potato: the Singapore government should leave Sintercom alone," Time Singapore, July 17. Online. Available HTTP: http://www.singapore- window.org/sw01/010717ti.htm (current as of January 21, 2003).
13. Ellis, E. (2002) "Tech talk: Sintercom no more," Time Asia, July 24. Online. Available HTTP: http://www.time.com/time/asia/digital/column/0,9754,171971,00.html (current as of January 21, 2003).
14. Gibbons, L.J. (1997) "No regulation, government regulation, or self-regulation:social enforcement or social contracting for governance in Cyberspace," Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy, 6: 475.
15. Goldsmith, J.L. (1998) "Against cyberanarchy," University of Chicago Law Review, 65: 1199.
16. Graham, I. (1999) The Net Labelling Delusion: Saviour or Devil? Online. Available HTTP: http://libertus.net/liberty/label.html#Sindex (current as of January 21, 2003).
17. Internet Industry Association (IIA) (1999) Internet Industry Codes of Practice. Online. Available HTTP: http://www.iia.net.au/codes.html (current as of January 21, 2003).
18. Johnson, D. and Post, D. (1996) "Law and borders - the rise of law in Cyberspace," Stanford Law Review, 48: 1367.
19. Kalathil, S. and Boas, T. (2001) "The Internet and state control in authoritarian regimes: China, Cuba and the counterrevolution," Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, Global Policy Program, no. 21.
20. Lange v Australian Broadcasting Corporation (1997) 189 CLR 520.
21. Lessig, L. and Resnick, P. (1999) "Zoning speech on the Internet: a legal and technical model." Online. Available HTTP: http://cyberlaw.stanford.edu/lessig/ content/articles/(current as of January 21, 2003).
22. Liang, C. (2001) "Red light, green light: has China achieved its goals through the 2000 Internet regulations?" Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 34: 1417.
23. LICRA et UEJF vs. Yahoo! Inc and Yahoo France (2000) Tribunal de Grande Instance de Paris (Superior Court of Paris), November 20. Online. Available HTTP: http://www.gigalaw.com/library/france-yahoo-2000-11-20-lapres.html (current as of January 21, 2003).
24. McRea, P., Smart, B. and Andrews, M. (1998) Blocking Content on the Internet: A Technical Perspective, CSIRO.
25. Miles, J. (2000) "Can governments control the Internet?" BBC News. Online. Available HTTP: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/623339.stm (current as of January 21, 2003).
26. Penfold, C. (2001) "Australia's Internet content regulation in the international context," Computers and Law, 45.
27. Reno vs. ACLU 117 S Ct 2329 (1997) (USA).
28. Rozario, C. (1999) Director, Public Affairs Division, Singapore Ministry of Home Affairs, quoted in Straits Times, January 28.
29. Singapore Broadcasting Authority (SBA) (2002a) Internet Code of Practice. Online. Available HTTP: http://www.sba.gov.sg/sba/i_codenpractice.jsp (current as of January 21, 2003).
30. Singapore Broadcasting Authority (SBA) (2002b) Internet Industry Guidelines. Online. Available HTTP:http://www.sba.gov.sg/sba/i_guidelines.jsp (current as of January 21, 2003).
31. Singapore Broadcasting Authority (SBA) (2002c) Registration of Internet Class Licences. Online. Available HTTP:http://www.sba.gov.sg/sba/i_register.jsp (current as of January 21, 2003).
32. The Economist (2000) "Vive la liberte!," November 25.
33. W3C (World Wide Web Consortium) (n.d.) "Platform for Internet content selection." Online. Available HTTP: http://www.w3.org/PICS/ (accessed July 1, 2002).
34. Xinhuashe (Xinhua News Agency) (2000) "Measures for managing Internet information services." Online. Available HTTP: http://www.chinaepulse.com/ html/regulation.html (current as of Jaunary 21, 2003).