Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Dow Jones v Gutnick: the Internet honeymoon is over. What's next?

By Graham Young - posted Friday, 17 January 2003


But so what? It is a fundamental illusion of our times that we can live a life without danger, and compared to the risks that publishers and writers used to face in the past, the risks we take today are comfortable.

What is to be done? The Internet is a wonderful invention. It lowers the barriers of entry so that anyone, even a middle-aged ex-political apparatchik with a laptop in a two-bedroom unit in Coorparoo, can assemble and publish a significant source of alternative opinion. It functions as a beacon, making the light of the freedoms that we enjoy shine even more brightly than it has ever before. In some ways it is the most potent weapon we have in the war against terrorism, bringing knowledge, information, wisdom and analysis where before there was very little.

So, I think that now is the time to start negotiating an international treaty on the Internet - whether under UN auspices or not probably doesn't matter. It should probably fairly closely follow the US laws, or the implied right of free speech propounded by the High Court in Theophanous, and it should be limited to politics.

Advertisement

The crux of any treaty should be that it gives immunity from prosecution to anyone who publishes in accordance with its guidelines. The strength of it should be that it designates the courts where the publisher and writer live as having the right to adjudicate. This may be inconvenient for some dissidents, but it will mean that, unlike most UN or international treaties, there will be a defined and workable system for enforcing the treaty. It also makes it more likely to win the signatures it needs to be effective as it would not involves a loss of domestic sovereignty.

Of course, such a treaty couldn't deal with all the issues that publishers have to face. Nor should it. There will still be issues like local laws on contempt of court, product regulations, tortious liability for negligence etc. that publishers will have to deal with, case by case. Weigh that up against the massive savings that Internet publishing has made - no printing presses, warehouses, delivery vans, returns, receptionists etc - and it seems like a small price to pay.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. All


Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Graham Young is chief editor and the publisher of On Line Opinion. He is executive director of the Australian Institute for Progress, an Australian think tank based in Brisbane, and the publisher of On Line Opinion.

Other articles by this Author

All articles by Graham Young
Related Links
Crikey!
Dow Jones v Gutnick decision
Photo of Graham Young
Article Tools
Comment Comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy