The emergence of global digital networks, such as the Internet, and digital technologies that enhance human abilities to access, store, manipulate, and transmit vast amounts of information has brought with it a host of new legal issues that lawyers preparing to practice in the 21st century will need to understand and address. Although many are trying to "map" existing legal concepts onto problems arising in cyberspace, this strategy sometimes doesn't work. In some cases, it is necessary to go back to first principles to understand how to accomplish the purposes of existing law in digital networked environments. The course will explore specific problems in applying law to cyberspace in areas such as intellectual property, privacy, content control, and the bounds of jurisdiction.

Students with familiarity with the Internet and its resources or with backgrounds in some of the substantive fields explored in this course are especially welcome, but there are no formal prerequisites. (Some students might appreciate a tutorial on Copyright law.)

READING: Software and Internet Law is the casebook in which many readings for the course can be found. Supplemental readings are available in photocopied readers.

GRADING: Grades for the course will be based on a take home exam. Follow this link to
get last year's take home exam. http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/%7Epam/courses/cyberlaw02/cybexam01.pdf

August 19   Introduction to the Course

• David R. Johnson & David G. Post, And How Shall the Net Be Governed? A Meditation on the Relative Virtues of Decentralized, Emergent Law (casebook at 1069-1079), available at http://www.cli.org/emdraft.html

August 21   Exercise of Jurisdiction in Commercial Disputes

• Cybersell, Inc. v. Cybersell, Inc., 130 F.3d 414 (9th Cir. 1997) (casebook at 775-84)
• Zippo Mfg. Co. v. Zippo Dot Com, Inc., 952 F.2d 1119 (W.D. Pa. 1997) (casebook at 784-97)
• ALS Scan v. Digital Service Consultants, 2002 US App LEXIS 11745 (4th Cir. 2002), http://pacer.ca4.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/getopn.pl?OPINION=011812.P

Recommended:

• Michael Geist, Is There a There There? Toward Greater Certainty for Internet Jurisdiction, 16 Berkeley Technology Law Journal 1 (Fall 2001), available at http://aix1.uottawa.ca/~geist/geistjurisdiction-us.pdf

August 26    Jurisdiction As to Tortious or Criminal Acts on the Internet

• Bochan v. LaFontaine, 68 F.Supp.2d 692 (E.D. Va. 1999), http://pub.bna.com/lw/19990622/1749.htm
• Pavlovich v. Superior Court of Santa Clara Co. & DVD-CCA, CA Supreme Court
  rev'd, (Nov. 25, 2002) http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S100809.PDF
  Pavlovich v. Superior Court of Santa Clara Co. & DVD-CCA, 91 Cal. App.4^th 409 (Cal. Ct. Ap. 2001), http://www.eff.org/Cases/DVDCCA_case/20010807_pavlovich_appelate_ruling.html
  Cal. Ct. Ap. November 25, 2002,http://www.courtinfo.ca.gov/opinions/documents/S100809.PDF
  
• United States v. Kammersell, 196 F.3d 1137 (10th Cir, 1999) (criminal jurisdiction), http://www.kscourts.org/ca10/cases/1999/11/98-4177.htm

  August 28    Jurisdictional Conflicts When National Laws Differ

  • League Against Racism and Antisemitism v. Yahoo! Inc., County Court of Paris (2000), http://www.cdt.org/speech/international/001120yahoofrance.pdf
  • Yahoo!, Inc. v. League Against Racism and Antisemitism, 169 F.Supp.2d 1181 (N.D. Cal. 2001), http://www.cdt.org/jurisdiction/011107judgement.pdf

  Recommended:

  • Joel Reidenberg, The Yahoo Case and the International Democratization of the Internet , Fordham Law and Economics Research Paper No.11, April 2001 http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=267148
  • The American Bar Association's Internet Jurisdiction Project, A Report on Global Jurisdictional Issues Created by the Internet, ABA, 2000, http://www.abanet.org/buslaw/cyber/initiatives/proj-documentation.html

  September 4     Legal Regulation of "Indecent" Speech in Cyberspace

  • Reno v. ACLU, 117 S.Ct. 2329 (1997) (casebook at 932-53). Full opinion at http://www.ciec.org/SC_appeal/opinion.shtml
  • Ashcroft v. ACLU, 122 S. Ct. 1700 (2002), http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-1293.ZS.html

  Recommended:

  • Lawrence Lessig, The Law of the Horse, 113 Harv. L. Rev. 501 (1999) http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/works/lessig/finalhls.pdf

  September 9       Virtual Sex and Virtual Violence on the Internet

  • Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, 122 S. Ct. 1389 (2002) http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/00-795.ZS.html
  • Julian Dibble, A Rape in Cyberspace, The Village Voice, December 23, 1993, http://www.levity.com/julian/bungle_vv.html

  September 11    More on Virtual Sex and Virtual Violence on the Internet

  • Planned Parenthood v. American Coalition of Life Activists, 290 F.3d 1058 (9th Cir. 2002), http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ca9/newopinions.nsf/0F569EF00290007188256BC0005876E6/$file/9935320ebcorrected.pdf?openelement
    
  • U.S. v. Alkahbaz 104 F.3d 1492 (6th Cir. 1997), http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=6th&navby=case&no=970036p

  September 16     Legal Ramifications of Filtering Technologies

  • Mainstream Loudon v. Loudon County Library, 24 F. Supp. 552 (E.D. Va. 1998), http://www.tomwbell.com/NetLaw/Ch04/Loudoun.html
  • American Library Ass’n, Inc. v. United States, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9537 (E.D. Penn. 2002), http://news.findlaw.com/wp/docs/ala/cipa53102opn.pdf (skim pp. 1-34, read pp. 35-47 for this class)

  Recommended:

  • Mark S. Nadel, The First Amendment's Limitations on the Use of Internet Filtering in Public and School Libraries: What Content Can Librarians Exclude?, 78 Tex. L. Rev. 1117 (2000), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?ABSTRACT_ID=230834

  September 18    Government Mandates of Filtering Software

  • American Library Ass’n, Inc. v. United States, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9537 (E.D. Penn. 2002), http://news.findlaw.com/wp/docs/ala/cipa53102opn.pdf(read pp. 47-65 for this class)

  Recommended:

  • Jonathan Weinberg, Rating the Net, 19 Hastings Comm. & Ent. L. J. 453 (1997), http://www.law.wayne.edu/weinberg/rating.htm
  • Jonathan Zittrain and Benjamin Edelman, Documentation of Internet Filtering Worldwide, http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/filtering/

  September 23    Intermediary Liability for Harmful Speech on the Internet

  • Zeran v. America OnLine, Inc., 129 F.3d 327 (4th Cir. 1997) (casebook at 921-28)
  • Blumenthal v. Drudge, 992 F. Supp. 44 (D.D.C. 1998) (casebook at 928-32)
  • Kathleen R. v. City of Livermore, 87 Cal.App. 4th 684 (2001), www.techlawjournal.com/courts/kathleenr/20010306op.asp

  Recommended:

  • Susan Friewald, Comparative Institutional Analysis in Cyberspace: The Case of Intermediary Liability for Defamation, 14 Harv. J. L.& Tech. 569 (2001)

  September 25    Unmasking Anonymous Speech on the Internet

  • Doe v. 2TheMart.com Inc., 140 F.Supp.2d 1088 (W.D. Wash. 2001), http://eon.law.harvard.edu/stjohns/2themart.html
  • ACLU of Georgia v. Miller, 977 F. Supp. 1228 (N.D. Ga. 1997) (striking down state law forbidding anonymous or pseudonymous communications), http://www.aclu.org/court/aclugavmiller.html
  • McVeigh v. Cohen, 983 F. Supp. 215 (D.D.C. 1998) (casebook at 1003-07)

  September 30   Limitations of existing legal protections for online privacy
  Class on Sep 30 is cancelled, but will be made up on Oct 2: 1:55p-3:10p
  

  • PHARMATRAK, Inc. Privacy Litigation, -- F. Supp.2d - (D. Mass. 2002)
    United States District Court for Massachusetts
  • Smyth v. Pillsbury Co., 914 F. Supp. 97 (E.D. Pa. 1996)
    United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania
  • Konop v. Hawaiian Airlines, Inc., 2002 U.S. App. LEXIS 17586 (9th Cir. 2002)
    United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
    

    Recommended:

    • A. Michael Froomkin, Cyberspace and Privacy: A New Legal Paradigm? The Death of Privacy?, 52 Stan. L. Rev. 1461 (2000), http://www.law.miami.edu/~froomkin/articles/privacy-deathof.pdf

• Platform for Privacy Preferences, http://www.w3.org/P3P/brochure.html
• Electronic Privacy Information Center and Junkbusters, Pretty Poor Privacy: An Assessment of P3P and Internet Privacy (June 2000), http://www.epic.org/reports/prettypoorprivacy.html
• S. 197, Spyware Control and Privacy Protection Act of 2001, available at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:S.197:
• S. 2201, Online Personal Privacy Act, available at
  http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c107:S.2201:
• Ian Goldberg, David Wagner and Eric Brewer, Privacy-enhancing Technologies for the Internet, http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/~daw/papers/privacy-compcon97-www/privacy-html.html
• FTC Report on Online Privacy, Fair Information Practice Principles, http://www.ftc.gov/reports/privacy3/fairinfo.htm#Fair%20Information%20Practice%20Principles

  Recommended:

  • Pamela Samuelson, Privacy as Intellectual Property?, 52 Stanford L. Rev. 1125 (2000), available at http://www.sims.berkeley.edu/~pam/papers.html
  • Jerry Kang, Information Privacy in Cyberspace Transactions, 50 Stan. L. Rev. 1193 (1998), http://www1.law.ucla.edu/~kang/Scholarship/Kang_Cprivacy.pdf
  • The Web Bug FAQ, by Richard M. Smith (Nov. 11, 1999), http://www.eff.org/pub/Privacy/Profiling_cookies_webbugs/web_bug.html

October 7      Why Regulating Spam is Difficult

• CompuServ, Inc. v. Cyberpromotions, Inc., 962 F. Supp. 1015 (S.D. Ohio 1997) (casebook at 959-70)
• State v. Heckel, 24 P.3d 404 (Wash., 2001), http://www.spamlaws.com/cases/heckel.html
• David Post, Of Blackholes and Decentralized Lawmaking in Cyberspace, 2 Vand. J. Ent. L. & Prac. 70 (2000), http://www.temple.edu/lawschool/dpost/blackhole.html

October 9    Trespass As a Way to Control Unwanted Activities on the Internet

• eBay v. Bidder's Edge, 100 F.Supp.2d 1058 (C.D. Cal. 2000), http://pub.bna.com/lw/21200.htm
• Intel Corp. v. Hamidi, 15 I.E.R. Cases (BNA) 464 (Cal. Sup. Ct. 1999), http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/msvh/hamidi/tentativesjruling.html

Recommended:

• Dan L. Burk, The Trouble With Trespass, 4 J. Small & Emerg. Bus. L. 27 (2000), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?ABSTRACT_ID=223513

October 14    Copyright in Cyberspace: Why Digital Makes a Difference

• National Research Council, The Digital Dilemma: Intellectual Property Rights in the Information Age, Chapter 1, http://bob.nap.edu/html/digital_dilemma/ch1.html (web only)
• Pamela Samuelson, Copyright Grab, 4.01 WIRED 135 (1996), http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/4.01/white.paper.html
• Playboy Enterprises v. Webbworld, 991 F. Supp. 543 (N.D. Tex. 1997) (casebook at 859-72)

Recommended:

• John Perry Barlow, The Economy of Ideas, 2.03 WIRED 84 (1994), http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/2.03/economy.ideas.html
• Intellectual Property and the National Information Infrastructure: Report of the Working Group on Intellectual Property Rights (Sept. 1995), available at http://www.uspto.gov/web/offices/com/doc/ipnii/
• WIPO Copyright Treaty, available at www.jus.uio.no/lm/wipo.copyright.treaty.1996/doc.html
• Jessica Litman, Digital Copyright (2001)
• Paul Edward Geller, From Patchwork to Network: Strategies for International Intellectual Property in Flux, 31 Vand. J. Transn'l L. 553 (1998), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?abstract_id=185868

October 16    Liability of Intermediaries for Copyright Infringement

• Religious Technology Center v. Netcom, 907 F. Supp. 1361 (N.D. Cal. 1995) (casebook at 872-91)
• ALS Scan v. Remarq Communities, Inc., 239 F.3d 619 (4th Cir. 2001), http://pub.bna.com/eclr/001351.htm
• Stoner v. eBay, Inc., 2000 WL 1705637 (Cal. Super. 2000) (unpublished), http://www.2000law.com/article_429.htm

Recommended:

• Alfred C. Yen, Internet Service Provider Liability for Subscriber Copyright Infringement, Enterprise Liability and the First Amendment, 88 Geo. L. J. 1833 (2000), available at http://papers.ssrn.com/paper.taf?abstract_id=236478
• Rosa Julia-Barcelo, On-line Intermediary Liability Issues : Comparing E.U. and U.S. Legal Frameworks, 22 Eur. Intell. Prop. Rev. 105 (2000)

October 21 & October 23   This is "flyback week" at the law school, so we will not meet.

October 28   Liability of Search Engines for Copyright Infringement

• Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corp., 280 F.3d 934 (9^th Cir. 2002), http://www.eff.org/IP/Linking/Kelly_v_Arriba_Soft/20020206_9th_cir_decision.pdf
• Kelly v. Arriba Soft Corp, - order for supplemental briefing, Oct 2002 (9th Cir.)
  
• EFF Brief Amicus Curiae, http://www.eff.org/IP/Linking/Kelly_v_Arriba_Soft/20020227_eff_amicus_brief.html
• Maureen O’Rourke, Fencing Cyberspace: Drawing Borders in a Virtual World, 82 Minn. L. Rev. 609 (1998)(casebook at 912-20)
  
  Recommended:
  
• Arista Records v. MP3Board

October 30    Peer to Peer File Sharing of Digital Music in Cyberspace

• A & M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc, 239 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2001) http://www.nyls.edu/samuels/copyright/beyond/cases/napster.html
• Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, Inc. v. Grokster complaint, http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/MGM_v_Grokster/20011002_mgm_v_grokster_complaint.pdf
• Damien Cave, File Sharing: Innocent Until Proven Guilty, Salon.com (2002), http://salon.com/tech/feature/2002/06/13/liebowitz/index.html (web only)

Recommended:

• Fred von Lohmann, Peer-to-Peer File Sharing and Copyright Law after Napster, http://www.eff.org/IP/P2P/20010227_p2p_copyright_white_paper.html
• Stan Liebowitz, Policing Pirates in the Networked Age, Cato Institute (2002), http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-438es.html
• Aimster Copyright Litigation,
  http://www.g2news.com/TrialDossier/MadsterRuling.htm

  November 4   Response To Peer to Peer File Sharing of Digital Music in Cyberspace

  • Declan McCullagh, Could Hollywood Hack Your PC?, CNET News.com (2002),
  • http://news.com.com/2102-1023-945923.html (web only)
  • Rep. Howard Berman, Speech on Solutions to Peer to Peer Piracy (2002), http://www.house.gov/berman/p2p062502.html
  • H.R. 5211. To amend title 17, United States Code, to limit the liability of copyright owners for protecting their works on peer-to-peer networks, available at http://www.politechbot.com/docs/berman.coble.p2p.final.072502.pdf
  • Music Online Competition Act, HR 2724, 107th Cong., 1st Sess. (2001),
    http://www.theorator.com/bills107/hr2724.html

November 6   Challenging Technology Providers Who Enable Private Copying and Sharing of Television Programming

• Paramount Pictures v. ReplayTV Complaint (2001), http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/Paramount_v_ReplayTV/20011031_complaint.html
• Newmark v. Turner Complaint (2002), http://www.eff.org/IP/Video/Newmark_v_Turner/20020606_complaint.html

November 11   Challenging Technology Providers Who Enable Private Game-Playing

• Davidson & Associates, Inc. v. Internet Gateway, Inc. Complaint, http://www.eff.org/IP/Emulation/Blizzard_v_bnetd/20020416_blizzard_1am_complaint.pdf

November 13   The Rising Use of Technical Measures to Protect Digital Content

• Commission of the European Communities, Commission Staff Working Paper on Digital Rights, http://europa.eu.int/information_society/topics/multi/digital_rights/doc/drm_workingdoc.pdf
• EFF's comments on the BPDG final report:
  http://bpdg.blogs.eff.org/archives/000116.html
  
  Recommended:
• Electronic Privacy Information Center, Digital Rights Management and Privacy, http://www.epic.org/privacy/drm/
• The NSF Middleware Initiative and Digital Rights Management Workshop,
  http://www.ait.utk.edu/drmworkshop/resources.htm
• Ross Anderson’s FAQ on the Trusted Computing Platform Alliance and Palladium, http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~rja14/tcpa-faq.html
• Seth Schoen's TCPA and Pd notes
  http://vitanuova.loyalty.org/2002-07-03.html
  http://vitanuova.loyalty.org/2002-07-05.html
  http://vitanuova.loyalty.org/2002-10-16.html
• Content Protection Status Report:
  http://judiciary.senate.gov/special/content_protection.pdf
• Hollywood wants to plug the analog hole:
  http://bpdg.blogs.eff.org/archives/000113.html#000113

  November 18   Legal Rules to Protect Technical Measures for Digital Content

  • Universal City Studios v. Reimerdes, 111 F. Supp. 2d 294 (S.D.N.Y. 2000), http://eon.law.harvard.edu/openlaw/DVD/NY/trial/op.html, aff’d, 273 F.3d 429 (2d Cir. 2001)
  • Pamela Samuelson, Intellectual Property and the Digital Economy: Why the Anti-Circumvention Regulations Need to Be Revised, 14 Berkeley Tech. L.J. 519 (1999) (casebook at 892-902)

  Recommended:

  • Gallery of CSS Descramblers, http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/DeCSS/Gallery/index.html
    
  • Yochai Benkler, Free as the Air to Common Use: First Amendment Constraints on Enclosure of the Public Domain, 74 N.Y.U. Law Review 354 (1999), http://www.nyu.edu/pages/lawreview/74/2/benkler.pdf
  • Kamiel Koelman, A Hard Nut to Crack: Legal Protection of Technical Measures, European Intellectual Property Review 272 (June 2000), http://www.ivir.nl/publications/koelman/hardnut.html

  November 20   Legislative Proposals To Mandate Technical Measures to Protect Digital Content

  • S. 2048: Consumer Broadband and Digital Television Promotion Act, http://www.eff.org/IP/SSSCA_CBDTPA/20020321_s2048_cbdtpa_bill.pdf
  • Testimony of Michael Eisner, http://www.senate.gov/~commerce/hearings/022802eisner.pdf
  • Testimony of Les Vadasz, http://www.senate.gov/~commerce/hearings/022802vasdasz.pdf
  • Bruce Schneier, The Futility of Digital Copy Prevention, http://www.counterpane.com/crypto-gram-0105.html#3

  November 25      The Collision of Trademarks and Domain Names in Cyberspace

  • Panavision Int'l, L.P. v. Toeppen, 141 F.3d 1316 (9th Cir. 1998) (casebook at 799-809)
  • Avery-Dennison Corp. v. Sumpton, 189 F.3d 868 (9th Cir. 1999) (casebook at 810-20)
  • Planned Parenthood v. Bucci, 152 F.3d. 920 (2d Cir. 1998) (casebook at 821-34)

  December 2    Further Collisions of Trademarks and Domain Names in Cyberspace

  • Brookfield Communications, Inc. v. West Coast Entertainment Corp., 174 F.3d 1036 (9^th Cir. 1999)(casebook at 835-46)
  • Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Welles, 7 F. Supp.2d 1098 (S.D. Cal. 1998) (casebook at 846-54)
  • Playboy Enterprises, Inc. v. Excite, Inc., 55 F. Supp.2d 1070 (C.D. Cal. 1999)(casebook at 854-59)
  • The Anti-Cybersquatting Consumer Protection Act , 15 U.S.C. § 1125(d), http://www.lclark.edu/~loren/cyberlaw01/1125d.pdf

  December 4   ICANN and the UDRP

  • ICANN, Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy, http://www.icann.org/udrp/udrp-policy-24oct99.htm
  • Milton Mueller, Success by Default: A New Profile of Domain Name Trademark Disputes Under ICANN’s UDRP , http://dcc.syr.edu/markle/markle-report-final.pdf

  Recommended:

  • Michael Geist, Fair.com? An Examination of the Allegations of Systemic Unfairness in the ICANN UDRP, http://aix1.uottawa.ca/~geist/geistudrp.pdf
  back to top

  ---

  USEFUL SITES

  American Civil Liberties Union, http://www.aclu.org

  Center For Democracy and Technology, http://www.cdt.org

  Chilling Effects Project, http://www.chillingeffects.org

  Creative Commons, http://www.creativecommons.org

  Cyberspacelaw, http://www.cyberspacelaw.org

  DigitalConsumer.org, http://www.digitalconsumer.org

  Electronic Frontier Foundation, http://www.eff.org

  Electronic Privacy Information Center, http://www.epic.org

  European Commission Information Society Project Office, http://www.ispo.cec.be

  Global Internet Liberty Campaign, http://www.gilc.org/

  Information Technology Association of America, http://www.itaa.org

  Internet Corporation for Assigned Names And Numbers, http://www.icann.org

  ICANN Watch, http://www.icannwatch.org

  Junkbusters, http://www.junkbusters.com

  Politechbot, http://www.politechbot.com/

  Progressive Policy Institute, http://www.ppionline.org/

  Public Knowledge, http://www.publicknowledge.org

  Recording Industry Association of America, http://www.riaa.org

  Tech Law Journal, http://techlawjournal.com/

  World Wide Web Consortium, http://www.w3c.org

  back to top