Rapid technological advancement is changing the way that political parties, voters, and media platforms engage with each other. This along with cultural change has led to an emerging era of disinformation and misinformation driven by both domestic and foreign actors. Political deepfakes, videos created through the use of artificial intelligence, allow individuals to rapidly create fake videos indistinguishable from true content. These videos have the capacity to undermine voter trust and could alter electoral outcomes. Regulating disinformation however raises significant free speech concerns, as well as questions about where liability should fall. In particular, holding large technology and media platforms accountable for content could lead to unintended chilling effects around freedom of expression, harming rather than protecting democratic institutions. Proposed regulations should therefore be carefully analysed through the framework of the implied freedom of political communication, ensuring that any new laws are proportionate and tailored to the threat they seek to prevent. This article analyses how current Australian law interacts with political deepfakes and proposes two targeted amendments to our federal electoral regulations to reduce the threat they pose to elections.
{"title":"Disinformation, Deepfakes and Democracies: The Need for Legislative Reform","authors":"Andrew Ray","doi":"10.53637/dels2700","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53637/dels2700","url":null,"abstract":"Rapid technological advancement is changing the way that political parties, voters, and media platforms engage with each other. This along with cultural change has led to an emerging era of disinformation and misinformation driven by both domestic and foreign actors. Political deepfakes, videos created through the use of artificial intelligence, allow individuals to rapidly create fake videos indistinguishable from true content. These videos have the capacity to undermine voter trust and could alter electoral outcomes. Regulating disinformation however raises significant free speech concerns, as well as questions about where liability should fall. In particular, holding large technology and media platforms accountable for content could lead to unintended chilling effects around freedom of expression, harming rather than protecting democratic institutions. Proposed regulations should therefore be carefully analysed through the framework of the implied freedom of political communication, ensuring that any new laws are proportionate and tailored to the threat they seek to prevent. This article analyses how current Australian law interacts with political deepfakes and proposes two targeted amendments to our federal electoral regulations to reduce the threat they pose to elections.","PeriodicalId":45951,"journal":{"name":"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42560956","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}
Lisa Archbold, Damian Clifford, Moira Paterson, M. Richardson, N. Witzleb
The advertising technology industry, known as ‘adtech’, is a complicated network of organisations and individuals that collect, aggregate and deal with large amounts of personal data. As children engage with digital networks for many aspects of their lives, they are increasingly exposed to adtech practices. Depending on their age, children may have less knowledge of the commercial digital environment and less maturity in their decision-making processes than adults have. Their limited resilience in the face of adtech’s onslaught offers a particularly stark illustration of why it is problematic to look to ‘consent’ as the exclusive or predominant mechanism to control the use of consumer data in the digital ecosystem. This article examines the problems arising from adtech’s data practices and makes recommendations on how to strengthen the agency and control exercised by children and protect their best interests in the context of adtech.
{"title":"Adtech and Children’s Data Rights","authors":"Lisa Archbold, Damian Clifford, Moira Paterson, M. Richardson, N. Witzleb","doi":"10.53637/pjps3138","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53637/pjps3138","url":null,"abstract":"The advertising technology industry, known as ‘adtech’, is a complicated network of organisations and individuals that collect, aggregate and deal with large amounts of personal data. As children engage with digital networks for many aspects of their lives, they are increasingly exposed to adtech practices. Depending on their age, children may have less knowledge of the commercial digital environment and less maturity in their decision-making processes than adults have. Their limited resilience in the face of adtech’s onslaught offers a particularly stark illustration of why it is problematic to look to ‘consent’ as the exclusive or predominant mechanism to control the use of consumer data in the digital ecosystem. This article examines the problems arising from adtech’s data practices and makes recommendations on how to strengthen the agency and control exercised by children and protect their best interests in the context of adtech.","PeriodicalId":45951,"journal":{"name":"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41731530","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}
The notion of ‘markets’ occupies a prominent yet ambiguous position in copyright discourse. When the term is raised, the copyright owner’s market tends to be taken as its implicit meaning, perpetuating an assumption that the market needs to be protected solely to preserve incentives to create. This dominant narrative overshadows an important dimension of copyright markets – disseminative competition, which is characterised by rival disseminators competing for inputs (copyright content) and audiences (copyright consumers). With the aid of competition law principles, this article distinguishes competition for dissemination of content from competition for the creation of content. It underscores the importance of dissemination markets to a well-functioning copyright system and shows how certain copyright doctrines substantively impact on disseminative competition. In reframing contemporary understandings of copyright markets, this article highlights the biases in copyright infringement analysis that may favour incumbent content disseminators to the detriment of a vibrant and innovative digital economy.
{"title":"Reconceptualising Copyright Markets: Disseminative Competition as a Key Functional Dimension","authors":"Cheryl Foong","doi":"10.53637/reji4336","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53637/reji4336","url":null,"abstract":"The notion of ‘markets’ occupies a prominent yet ambiguous position in copyright discourse. When the term is raised, the copyright owner’s market tends to be taken as its implicit meaning, perpetuating an assumption that the market needs to be protected solely to preserve incentives to create. This dominant narrative overshadows an important dimension of copyright markets – disseminative competition, which is characterised by rival disseminators competing for inputs (copyright content) and audiences (copyright consumers). With the aid of competition law principles, this article distinguishes competition for dissemination of content from competition for the creation of content. It underscores the importance of dissemination markets to a well-functioning copyright system and shows how certain copyright doctrines substantively impact on disseminative competition. In reframing contemporary understandings of copyright markets, this article highlights the biases in copyright infringement analysis that may favour incumbent content disseminators to the detriment of a vibrant and innovative digital economy.","PeriodicalId":45951,"journal":{"name":"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48032668","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}
The death of Minneapolis man, George Floyd, at the hands (or, knee) of a police officer in May 2020 appears to have set a nation, indeed the world, alight with outrage at ongoing, systemic racism and brutality by police officers. Body worn camera (‘BWC’) footage from officers attending this incident provides strong evidence of the circumstances of Mr Floyd’s death. In this article, we draw on criminological research and analyses of legislation in Australia and a number of international jurisdictions, to argue there is a need for improved regulation of BWCs. Despite incurring the substantial cost of deploying this technology, governments are relinquishing control of it to law enforcement agencies who, in turn, draft policies that maximise police discretion and protection while minimising the consequences of non-compliance. For governments to realise their objectives for BWCs, we argue there is a need for greater regulation to ensure BWCs are utilised effectively.
{"title":"‘Every Move You Make … Every Word You Say’: Regulating Police Body Worn Cameras","authors":"Robyn Blewer, Ron Behlau","doi":"10.53637/ckfl3988","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53637/ckfl3988","url":null,"abstract":"The death of Minneapolis man, George Floyd, at the hands (or, knee) of a police officer in May 2020 appears to have set a nation, indeed the world, alight with outrage at ongoing, systemic racism and brutality by police officers. Body worn camera (‘BWC’) footage from officers attending this incident provides strong evidence of the circumstances of Mr Floyd’s death. In this article, we draw on criminological research and analyses of legislation in Australia and a number of international jurisdictions, to argue there is a need for improved regulation of BWCs. Despite incurring the substantial cost of deploying this technology, governments are relinquishing control of it to law enforcement agencies who, in turn, draft policies that maximise police discretion and protection while minimising the consequences of non-compliance. For governments to realise their objectives for BWCs, we argue there is a need for greater regulation to ensure BWCs are utilised effectively.","PeriodicalId":45951,"journal":{"name":"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47577846","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}
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission is among several national competition regulators that have recently expressed concerns about the inability of existing merger law to address competition issues that arise from acquisitions of digital start-ups. The unique characteristics of rapidly evolving digital markets present unprecedented challenges for traditional merger regimes that rely on predictions of future market conditions to justify intervention. This article argues that Australian merger law is unable to adequately address the uncertain risks presented by acquisitions of nascent competitors in digital markets. It further argues that traditional rule-based merger regimes are unable to properly navigate conditions of extreme uncertainty. An alternative regulatory model that is explored in detail is experimentalist governance, which promises to allow regulators and firms to respond to radical uncertainty by recursively crafting solutions to problems that emerge in dynamic digital markets over time.
澳大利亚竞争与消费者委员会（Australian Competition and Consumer Commission）是最近对现有合并法无法解决收购数字初创企业所产生的竞争问题表示担忧的几个国家竞争监管机构之一。快速发展的数字市场的独特特征给传统的合并制度带来了前所未有的挑战，这些制度依赖于对未来市场状况的预测来证明干预的合理性。本文认为，澳大利亚的合并法无法充分解决数字市场中收购新生竞争对手所带来的不确定性风险。它进一步认为，传统的基于规则的合并制度无法正确应对极端不确定性的条件。另一种正在详细探索的监管模式是实验主义治理，它承诺允许监管机构和企业通过递归地制定解决方案来应对动态数字市场中随着时间的推移出现的问题，从而应对根本的不确定性。
{"title":"Managing Nascent Digital Competition: An Assessment of Australian Merger Law under Conditions of Radical Uncertainty","authors":"Joshua Sinn","doi":"10.53637/bpkh7535","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53637/bpkh7535","url":null,"abstract":"The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission is among several national competition regulators that have recently expressed concerns about the inability of existing merger law to address competition issues that arise from acquisitions of digital start-ups. The unique characteristics of rapidly evolving digital markets present unprecedented challenges for traditional merger regimes that rely on predictions of future market conditions to justify intervention. This article argues that Australian merger law is unable to adequately address the uncertain risks presented by acquisitions of nascent competitors in digital markets. It further argues that traditional rule-based merger regimes are unable to properly navigate conditions of extreme uncertainty. An alternative regulatory model that is explored in detail is experimentalist governance, which promises to allow regulators and firms to respond to radical uncertainty by recursively crafting solutions to problems that emerge in dynamic digital markets over time.","PeriodicalId":45951,"journal":{"name":"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41969217","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}
Law reform bodies frequently express a commitment to evidence-based law and policy recommendations. They also readily endorse the importance of the transparency and democratization of their processes. They do not, however, connect these two goals of evidence-based policy and transparency. This stands in contrast to the ongoing revolution in several fields of research towards open science and synthesis, which envisions transparency and open access as a means to improve the reliability of science. In this article, we suggest that several recent concerns and controversies surrounding evidence-based law reform, such as allegations of bias among officials, can be addressed through open science and synthesis. We include a novel study of 22 research syntheses commissioned by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, finding uneven adoption of even the most basic transparency measures. We end with five proposals that advance transparent evidence-based law reform, including law reform bodies requiring that commissioned reports follow basic reporting guidelines and greater disciplinary diversity among law reform staff.
{"title":"Where is the evidence in evidence-based law reform?","authors":"J. Chin, S. Nakagawa, M. Lagisz","doi":"10.31222/osf.io/698ze","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/698ze","url":null,"abstract":"Law reform bodies frequently express a commitment to evidence-based law and policy recommendations. They also readily endorse the importance of the transparency and democratization of their processes. They do not, however, connect these two goals of evidence-based policy and transparency. This stands in contrast to the ongoing revolution in several fields of research towards open science and synthesis, which envisions transparency and open access as a means to improve the reliability of science. In this article, we suggest that several recent concerns and controversies surrounding evidence-based law reform, such as allegations of bias among officials, can be addressed through open science and synthesis. We include a novel study of 22 research syntheses commissioned by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, finding uneven adoption of even the most basic transparency measures. We end with five proposals that advance transparent evidence-based law reform, including law reform bodies requiring that commissioned reports follow basic reporting guidelines and greater disciplinary diversity among law reform staff.","PeriodicalId":45951,"journal":{"name":"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48910076","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}
The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (‘CISG’) is an international sales law treaty concluded in 1980. Given its vintage, the CISG was drafted with traditional (physical) goods trade in mind. A significant body of scholarship has addressed the CISG’s capacity to govern electronic software transactions. However, only limited commentary has explored its digital application beyond software per se. This article develops a specific legal framework for assessing the CISG’s capacity to regulate international trade in non-software data: a framework so far missing from existing scholarship. ‘To Boldly Go, Part II’, this article’s counterpart, will go on to apply this framework to non-software data trade. Collectively, these articles establish that the CISG is capable of governing not only software trade (as previously established) but also trade in non-software data: a category of trade becoming increasingly economically important.
{"title":"To Boldly Go, Part I: Developing a Specific Legal Framework for Assessing the Regulation of International Data Trade under the CISG","authors":"B. Hayward","doi":"10.53637/cbtf8485","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.53637/cbtf8485","url":null,"abstract":"The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (‘CISG’) is an international sales law treaty concluded in 1980. Given its vintage, the CISG was drafted with traditional (physical) goods trade in mind. A significant body of scholarship has addressed the CISG’s capacity to govern electronic software transactions. However, only limited commentary has explored its digital application beyond software per se. This article develops a specific legal framework for assessing the CISG’s capacity to regulate international trade in non-software data: a framework so far missing from existing scholarship. ‘To Boldly Go, Part II’, this article’s counterpart, will go on to apply this framework to non-software data trade. Collectively, these articles establish that the CISG is capable of governing not only software trade (as previously established) but also trade in non-software data: a category of trade becoming increasingly economically important.","PeriodicalId":45951,"journal":{"name":"UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES LAW JOURNAL","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2021-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48335122","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}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：