人类耳环,人权和公共礼仪

T. Lewis
{"title":"人类耳环,人权和公共礼仪","authors":"T. Lewis","doi":"10.1080/14730980210001730421","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article argues that the use of the common law offence of outraging public decency to attack art and artists (as it was in R v. Gibson – the ‘foetus earrings’ case – in 1991) has effectively been rendered impossible by the Human Rights Act. This is the case despite the fact that the European Commission of Human Rights found there to be no breach of the article 10 right to freedom of expression in the case of Gibson itself. The HRA mandates reform of such common law provisions and will lead to more rigorous protection of the right to artistic expression by domestic courts than has hitherto been available at Strasbourg.","PeriodicalId":36418,"journal":{"name":"Interactive Entertainment Law Review","volume":"18 1","pages":"50-71"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Human Earrings, Human Rights and Public Decency\",\"authors\":\"T. Lewis\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14730980210001730421\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This article argues that the use of the common law offence of outraging public decency to attack art and artists (as it was in R v. Gibson – the ‘foetus earrings’ case – in 1991) has effectively been rendered impossible by the Human Rights Act. This is the case despite the fact that the European Commission of Human Rights found there to be no breach of the article 10 right to freedom of expression in the case of Gibson itself. The HRA mandates reform of such common law provisions and will lead to more rigorous protection of the right to artistic expression by domestic courts than has hitherto been available at Strasbourg.\",\"PeriodicalId\":36418,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Interactive Entertainment Law Review\",\"volume\":\"18 1\",\"pages\":\"50-71\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2002-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Interactive Entertainment Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14730980210001730421\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Interactive Entertainment Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14730980210001730421","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

本文认为,《人权法案》实际上已经使利用普通法中违反公共礼仪的罪行来攻击艺术和艺术家(就像1991年的R v. Gibson案——“胎儿耳环”案)变得不可能。尽管欧洲人权委员会认为在吉布森本身的案件中没有违反第10条的言论自由权,但情况仍然如此。《人权法》要求对这些普通法条款进行改革,并将导致国内法院对艺术表达权的保护比迄今为止在斯特拉斯堡所能提供的更为严格。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Human Earrings, Human Rights and Public Decency
This article argues that the use of the common law offence of outraging public decency to attack art and artists (as it was in R v. Gibson – the ‘foetus earrings’ case – in 1991) has effectively been rendered impossible by the Human Rights Act. This is the case despite the fact that the European Commission of Human Rights found there to be no breach of the article 10 right to freedom of expression in the case of Gibson itself. The HRA mandates reform of such common law provisions and will lead to more rigorous protection of the right to artistic expression by domestic courts than has hitherto been available at Strasbourg.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
1
期刊最新文献
Artificial Intelligence and evolving issues under US copyright and patent law EULAs: Flexible tools of governance or instruments of authoritarianism? Are streaming rights the new broadcasting rights of the 21st century? A comparative review on the specific case of esport competitions Mr. Feige, I don’t feel so good … Copyright ownership, creators’ rights, and the Marvel Cinematic Universe Dark clouds gather – The development of cloud gaming, and competition agencies’ efforts to enable it on mobile app stores
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1