{"title":"最高法院确认嫌疑人隐私权：判决澄清，两项批评得到回应","authors":"G. Phillipson","doi":"10.1080/17577632.2022.2139568","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This Note clarifies the core finding of the Supreme Court, explains why it does not pose the threat to press freedom some media commentary has alleged, and addresses two issues arising from the complex relationship between confidentiality and privacy.","PeriodicalId":37779,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Media Law","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Supreme Court confirms suspects’ privacy rights: the judgment clarified, two criticisms answered\",\"authors\":\"G. Phillipson\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/17577632.2022.2139568\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This Note clarifies the core finding of the Supreme Court, explains why it does not pose the threat to press freedom some media commentary has alleged, and addresses two issues arising from the complex relationship between confidentiality and privacy.\",\"PeriodicalId\":37779,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Media Law\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Media Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/17577632.2022.2139568\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Media Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17577632.2022.2139568","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
Supreme Court confirms suspects’ privacy rights: the judgment clarified, two criticisms answered
ABSTRACT This Note clarifies the core finding of the Supreme Court, explains why it does not pose the threat to press freedom some media commentary has alleged, and addresses two issues arising from the complex relationship between confidentiality and privacy.
期刊介绍：
The only platform for focused, rigorous analysis of global developments in media law, this peer-reviewed journal, launched in Summer 2009, is: essential for teaching and research, essential for practice, essential for policy-making. It turns the spotlight on all those aspects of law which impinge on and shape modern media practices - from regulation and ownership, to libel law and constitutional aspects of broadcasting such as free speech and privacy, obscenity laws, copyright, piracy, and other aspects of IT law. The result is the first journal to take a serious view of law through the lens. The first issues feature articles on a wide range of topics such as: Developments in Defamation · Balancing Freedom of Expression and Privacy in the European Court of Human Rights · The Future of Public Television · Cameras in the Courtroom - Media Access to Classified Documents · Advertising Revenue v Editorial Independence · Gordon Ramsay: Obscenity Regulation Pioneer?
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
