Internet Usage and Internet Content Regulation by the Government in Australia - Coursework Example

Internet Law Name: Student ID: Course: Institution: Tutor: Internet Law Introduction Internet has brought with it multiple positive and negative effects since its inception up to now. With the developments in the field of information and communication technology, internet has offered a new platform for communication and information sharing, doing business, advertising, activism, entertainment and social interaction. This is pegged on its ability to process commands through real time basis and its ubiquitous nature. However, internet in itself has brought numerous challenges in relation to information integrity. Information/ system security is an important factor in internet computing especially for those sites and online databases that carry critical and confidential information about security of financial details of a person or organisation and even just normal data that one can hack and use for impersonation. The other concern has been the content relayed over the internet. Some people take advantage of the borderless reach of internet and lack of licensing before publishing unlike in mainstream media to publish materials that are offensive and unethical (Fong, 2003, p.147). This paper seeks to answer certain question relating to internet usage and internet content regulation by the government and specifically internet usage in Australia. The first question explores how far has the Australian government followed “light-touch” model of self-regulation of internet, which has been the principal approach of governments in the UK and US? In this question, the paper examines “light-touch” concepts in Australia in relation to practices in other country. The second question will examine the concept of does “information want to be free?” This will be more of a theoretical discourse borrowing from different literature. The last section of this paper will explore a more ethical angle of internet use by answering the question of “do internet users with "nothing to hide" have nothing to fear from the government surveillance?” The Far Australian Government Has Followed “Light-Touch” Model of Self-Regulation of Internet Internet provides an avenue to numerous economic social and political activities. This is because it offers a platform for hosting information in the servers and allowing for access by others through remote computing or through local or wide area network platform (Fong, 2003, p.148). Information communication technology is emerging as one of the critical economic mainstay of a country due to the shift in concepts of doing business from restricted geographical location that demands physical presence to a more ubiquitous approach that is done on real time basis (Fong, 2003, p.149). Moreover, there are various information systems that are supported through internet networked systems. These include payment and money transfers in banks and registration details of a person among others. The main legal framework that governs ethics, privacy and data handling on the internet platform is the cybercrime Act of 2001, but also there are other supporting legislations like information disclosure Act of 1999, Apart from the positive aspects of the internet, due to the ubiquity of the internet, internet can be used as a source of destruction. One can use internet to spread malice, hate massages and sabotage an individual, organisation or the government. Apart from just using the internet for wrong reasons, due to the vulnerability of these systems, there are those who are competent to break into other peoples’ servers and access their confidential information. This illegal access of information then can be used in detrimental manner (Fong, 2003, p.149). Globally, internet laws are formulated to regulate unethical use of internet by internet service providers (ISP), those who have legal domain names or those who have been sub hosted, in addition, internet laws are formulated to provide provisions of how to deal with those who intentionally breach security systems of online databases and servers. The main aim of the internet laws especially in relation to usage is to promote internet growth while ensuring political stability, safeguarding of social values and racial and religious co-existence. Ethical use of internet can be attained through regulation, industry self-regulation and public education (Australian Government, the treasury task force on industry self regulation). Internet is a universal medium and thus, its regulation need a concerted effort from the government, the public and internet service providers. In relation to content transfer and display, Australia being a liberal society, the government has never had any intention of blocking any single website, even though the Commonwealth Government and state governments have the legal and technical means to do so. Internet forms a unique kind of media that combines text, video, animation and sound (Multimedia). Apart from the later, internet remains as one of the mass media forum that has not been subjected to discretionary licensing like other mainstream media outlets. For one to publish in a website, he does not need government’s permission to do so as in the case of print and broadcast media. Moreover, internet has offered a new paradigm for enhancement of democratic space and criticism. However, it has also led to misuse by certain dissents and uncouth characters. A light touch policy is an approach that allows the internet industry a free hand. In this case the approach the government takes is of restraint free of coercion. In another view, the government only acts as a regulator and views things from a distance, whereby relevant authority like police monitor the usage of internet. However this does not mean a total non involvement or laissez fare approach, when the needs arise they can intervene, especially when certain crime is being committed (Laboy, Landry, Shtern, 2010, p.233). The instance that the government can intervene under light touch policy is when people use internet to circulation of images of a child undergoing sexual abuse. According to Green (2010, p.48), light touch regulation means that those in the industry concerned engage in self regulation under a watchful eye of a given statutory regulatory authority. Green (2010, p.48) posits that a statutory body is an organisation set up by government to regulate an industry. This body also draws it s members from the industry and the consumer of that product. She further notes that self regulation means that the system requires no intervention beyond the consumer, the service provider and the industry body unless the consumer is unhappy with response in which a complaint is handled. Australia being a market economy, the underlying principle under this concept is to encourage ethical usage of internet rather than stifling of its growth (Green, 2010, p.49). While this kind of approach in Australia is good, at a time it suffers because it waits for one to complain before an action is taken (Green, 2010, p.49). This can allow people to circulate questionable contents that are damaging. However, among the western nations, Australia is labelled as one with restrictive internet policies in terms of blocked internet (Green, 2010, p.50). This phenomenon was heightened in 2007 when Labour Party wanted to implement universal ISP level filtering of contents (Green, 2010, p.49). In Australian context, light touch concept is modelled to allow industry bodies like Internet Industry Association to formulate codes of practice and minimum standards that each member has an obligation of meeting. The members to this group are drawn from Internet Service Providers and other industries with Australian connection. The overall statutory body mandated to follow and implement these standards is the Australian Communication and Media Authority (ACMA). The premise for this kind of self regulation is that Industry Association is obliged to pursue complaints levelled by the public, and if they are incapable, then ACMA is forced to intervene. Even in the case of non Australian company that has a server outside the country if they are found displaying offending materials, the law allows for the server to be blocked (Green, 2010, p.49). Does "Information want to be Free"? One thing that differentiates human beings and the rest of other species is the ability to collect raw data, critically analyse it and then present a consumable idea. Ideas can be both constructive and destructive. It is this information that allows ideas to flow within the society or an organisation. Apart from idea flow, information is critical ingredient for innovation, benchmarking and change (Clarke, 2001, 126). The idea of innovation and change applies at all level of the society. This can be at political level through revolution. Information is relayed within the society in different mediums and formats. There are classified information that should be kept as secret, there are general information for general public consumption and lastly, there are specific information for certain sector. This section aims to answer the question of information wanting to be free. In this case information being free is seen as flow of information from the author to the recipient from one point to another without much control or limiting in-terms of review, patenting, copyrighting and filtering. The next paradigm that this question is answered is in terms of the costs of getting information (Clarke, 2012; Stewart, 1985 cited in Wilson, 2007, p.2). Over the years, the dominant means that have been used communicate or relay information is the print media and electronic media. These platforms fall under highly regulated sector where their contents are scrutinised both at internal level by the editors, at the industry level and by the oversight authority. Apart from the above, information has been relayed through written and printed academic works in books and journals among others. Other mediums have been through forums where people brainstorm over concepts, problems, challenges, opportunities and phenomenon. In addition, information has been relayed through recorded formats like videos that then can be listened to later. However, of last few decades a new powerful platform of sourcing and distributing information has emerged. This new platform is the internet or the World Wide Web (Patton, 1980, p. 70, 71 & 72). The powerfulness of this medium is based on its real time nature, ability for remote computing, ability to store voluminous contents that can integrate video, stand still picture, sound and animations and its ubiquity. Some of the information displayed in net is copyrighted and thus, displayed with author’s permission, some are pirated while some are just knowledge for the general public who are in need of it and thus, no restrictions. Information can be availed in two formats. The first is through critical thinking and scientific research. Lipman (2003, p.26; Kahneman, Lovallo and Sibony, 2011, p.52) posits that reflection is thinking that that is aware of its own assumptions and implications as well as being conscious of the reason and evidence that supports this or that conclusion. Moreover, he notes that this thinking paradigm takes in to account methodology, its own procedures, its own perspective and point of view. In scientific research, from research problem and existing literature one engage in a process of collecting data and then analysing it through scientifically accepted formats. He/ she then present an empirically analysed solution that can stand test of time (Patton, 1980, p. 41). While there is no hope for perfect research due to dynamics of the world, this approach contributes to knowledge building and explanation of phenomenon. Depending on the authors of these works, they can avail it for free or charge for the access of their information. These works at a time are copyrighted and patented. Thus, they can work against information being free by placing restrictions in terms of cost, access and mode of use. The other format that information can be availed is when one reports certain facts from a reliable source. This can be in essay format, reporting on the real situation on the ground, government or business policies and when one expresses what he thinks in abstract or in refined format. This is the most common source of information. In internet platform, this is the most common information availed. In relation to ethical use of internet, this is normally one of the sources of misuse and abuse where people can post unwanted articles. However, it is also in this format that people have used to saw seed of democracy and revolution. Apart from the later, it can also be used to fast spread information about a happening within a short time and also in countries that the mainstream media is stifled. This kind of information can be formulated through critical thinking or intuitive thinking. Intuitive thinking is one which is done unconsciously. Moreover, information is availed through ones experience in real life issues. This can be documented oral. The supporters of information want to be free view it in a libertarian approach. One observation that supports the notion that information wants to get free relates to the cost of acquiring it. Over the recent years with the development of word wide web, acquisition cost of information has drastically gone down. The cost has gone down in relation to global reach, high number of volumes that can access without any single charge (Wilson, 2007, p.3 and 4). Presently, there are information posted in websites about governments, academics, institutions and individuals. One only need a computer or phone and internet connection to access this information. Apart from the above, the rate of propagation of information in the websites is higher since the same information can be posted in numerous sites. Thus, this means that information has been highly liberated and is able to flow from one point to another with least cost. An example is the blog where people are able to share information in a rapid manner. One can share video, music and text files (Wilson, 2007). Further, instances of social media platforms like face book and tweeter where a post or tweet by individual can be seen in multiples by other people on the same platform. Apart from the flow and viewing, information wanting to be free can be seen in the ability of one viewing and adapting it for his or her use (Wagner, 2003, p.998). One group that has contributed to the slogan of information wanting to be free are hackers like wiki leaks that try to avail critical information for free (levy, 2010, p.384). Wagner (2003, p.997) notes that the option that refutes the need for information wanting to be free is the view of information as a resource, and resource value can be measured in monetary terms. This is why some people, group and institutions patent their works, copyright their materials or require login details. This is because of what is termed as information is power and it can transform ones life. In addition information is seen as intellectual capital. In conclusion, information is a critical part of any society, organisation, government and business. Information aids in the smooth flow of ideas from one point to another. Information should be treated as an important resource at any level. Plainly speaking were it not for the flow of information, the current development and civilisation we are seeing would have not been possible. However, there is the concern of information wanting to be free. Depending at certain levels, information should be free while at certain levels information should be paid for (Wagner, 2003, p.1033). The general argument for information being free is that it is an important avenue of enlightening the mass and reducing ignorance. For instance when the government has launched a new programme or legislation and needs an input through participatory approach, then the information should be given for free. However, information that is critical for competitive advantage should not be free. This is because someone has invested in collecting certain data and analysed them to a consumable bits. This is a massive investment and time consuming process that should be rewarded. Do internet users with "nothing to hide" have nothing to fear from the government surveillance? Over the years governments have tried to monitor the communication flow within the internet. With the emergence of threats like terrorism, and criminal acts like swindling the case for surveillance is strengthened moreover, surveillance can be used to reduce cases of social vices. However, this has not gone well with liberty campaigners who see it as to the privacy of law abiding citizens. Internet has both positive and negative sides. In the first instance, Internet user who is law abiding has nothing to hide from the government. This is true because the person will be actually operating within the known frameworks of the law. Moreover, every law abiding citizen would like to be safe rather than suffer consequences of terrorism and thus, have nothing to fear (Halliday, 2012). However, the concern arises when even if the person is law abiding, the kind of exposure he is likely to get in relation to this. This is because privacy is not all about hiding bad things but keeping even your good secrets. The other concern that is raised in relation to surveillance is that it can be used to victimise people who might have good ideas. This can be exploited when the government of the day does not tolerate criticism. Moreover, this can lead to death of civil societies who keep government of their toes. In addition the clamour for constant change might be reduced because even a slight communication on the incompetency of the government will not be taken lightly. The third concern in relation to this is the cost of implementation. This is a massive engagement that requires huge capital outlay for it to be implemented (Halliday, 2012). As noted in 2007, when the labour party tried to introduce stringent measures in Australia, internet usage is likely to go down, yet the reason for this should be to encourage the usage (Green, 2010, p.49). The different kinds of surveillance are like rebuilding an autocratic society and police state that does not embraces criticism like in China, Iran and Saudi Arabia. The other reason that can be used to discredit this surveillance approach is the psychological view to crime. Some people knowingly decide to engage in crime. While the surveillance is a good reactionary approach, it is not a proactive and problem based solution. One argument that supports this kind of above approach is the economic theory of crime or neo classical theory of crime that shows that one has got free will to engage or not to engage in crime. In this line of argument, factors like offender motivations, economic outcomes and economic process are considered. In a rational mind of a criminal, if the benefits outweigh punishment, probably he will engage in that activity, and thus, in the process engaging in reflective thinking (Hall, 2007, p.7). So if one decides to commit crime he will and if one decides not to engage in crime he won’t thus, the Australian government should devise proactive measures like reducing social disorganization. References Australian Government, the treasury task force on industry self regulation. Appendix C- Regulatory framework for industry codes in Australia. Retrieved on 14th April 2012 from: http://www.treasury.gov.au/documents/1123/HTML/docshell.asp?URL=appc.asp Clarke, R. (2012). Information wants to be free. Retrieved on 14th April 2012 from: http://www.rogerclarke.com/II/IWtbF.html Clarke, S. (2001). Information systems strategic management: an integrated approach. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge Fong, M. W. L. In the virtual world in Khosrow-pour, M. ed. (2003). Information technology and organization: trends, issues, challenges and solutions. Hershey, PA: Idea Group Publishing Green, L. (2010).The internet: an introduction to new media. Oxford, UK: Berg Hall, Aric (2007). Socio-economic theories of crime. Retrieved on April 14th 2012 from: http://www.arichall.com/academic/papers/hs8373-paper.pdf. Halliday, J. (2nd April, 2012). Internet companies warn over the government email surveillance plans. The Guardian. Retrieved on 14th 2012 from: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/apr/02/internet-companies-warn-government- email-surveillance Kahneman, Daniel, Dan Lovallo, and Olivier Sibony (2011). The Big Idea: ‘Before you make that big decision...’ Harvard Business Review. Laboy, M., Landry, N. and Shtern, J. (2010). Digital solidarities, communication policy and multi-stakeholder governance: the legacy of the world summit on the information society. New York: Peter Lang Publishers Levy, S. (2010). Hackers: heroes of the computer revolution-25th anniversary edition. Sebastopol, CA: O’Reilly Media Lipman, M. (2003). Thinking in education second edition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Patton, M. A. 1980. Qualitative evaluation and research methods. Newbury Park, Carlifornia: Sage Publications Wagner, R. P. (2003). Information wants to be free. Columbia Law Review. Vol. 103, pp. 995- 1034 Wilson, F. (2007). Does information want to be free? SIAA industry information summit. Retrieved on 14th April 2012 from: http://www.usv.com/siaa%20keynote%201-29-07.pdf Read More