Fluent Essays

1. From the chapters we covered in this second full week of the class (Chapters 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12), pick any ONE chapter and report why you feel that chapter was particularly important or unimportant in the context of this course and topic. Please explain in moderate detail (two pages).2. As an overview, please report on what you got out of this class, what you wish you got but didnt, and your ideas for improving this class. Again, please report in moderate detail (two pages)no need for cover page, references, citations 4 pages yar___steinmetz05.pdf yar___steinmetz07.pdf yar___steinmetz10.pdf yar___steinmetz11.pdf Unformatted Attachment Preview Cybercrime and Society, Third Edition © Majid Yar & Kevin F. Steinmetz Chapter 5 Virtual ‘pirates’ Discussion • What is intellectual property and what kinds of forms does it take? 3 Introduction • Traditional concepts of “property” – Internet – transmission of information • Increasingly common kind of virtual property – intellectual property (IP) – E.g. books, computer software, musical recordings, motion pictures – Massive increase in theft of such IPs (intellectual property theft; copyright theft; piracy) – Reported losses in billions 4 Overview of intellectual property, copyright and piracy • Defining piracy, intellectual property and copyright • Intellectual property (IP): proprietary rights over forms of “intangibles” – E.g. patents, trademarks, trade secrets, copyright, etc. • Copyright: the holder’s rights over a particular form of original expression – E.g. writing, music, paintings, computer software, etc. – Understanding copyright: buying a CD 5 Scope and scale of piracy activity • Copyright issues – “near-epidemic” levels – International Chambers of Commerce (ICC) – $710 to $917 billion lost in counterfeiting and piracy between 2013 and 2015 • Music – Billions lost in file sharing – Additional effects include o Decline in investment in new artists o Decline in the release of new music o Loss of employment 6 Scope and scale of piracy activity – Updated business models: digital downloads and streaming • Motion pictures – $25 billion lost annually – Online pirated movies – 23.8\% of global Internet bandwidth – Illicit subscription television series • Computer software – More than half of software installed on systems was unlicensed in 2016 7 Scope and scale of piracy activity – $52.24 billion in losses – Includes unauthorized duplication/dissemination of video games • Book publishing – Rising demand for free online access to copyrighted books – Sci-Hub and academic research 8 The history and growth of internet piracy • Expansion of the Internet, itself – Today – 4.05 billion users worldwide – The growth and take-downs of file-sharing – Increasingly decentralized and fragmented • Advantages of the Internet and accessing copyrighted content – Bypasses the cost of making content – Distribution of content is rapid – Allows unlimited copies to be made – Bypasses border controls and affords users with anonymity 9 The history and growth of internet piracy • One of the earliest examples of digital piracy – the Homebrew Computer Club (HBCC) in the 1970s – Leaked copy of BASIC interpreter – Piracy or simply sharing information? • 1990s – bulletin board systems (BBSs), Usenet/newsgroups, file transfer protocol (FTP), Internet relay chat (IRC) • 1999 – advent of Napster – Peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharing of music until its shutdown in 2001 10 The history and growth of internet piracy • Problems with trying to shutdown file-sharing efforts – Decentralization (e.g. BitTorrent) • Content industries on the offensive – 2003–2008: Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) took action against ~30,000 individuals – BSA and the “No Piracy” program – Anti-piracy educational campaigns 11 The history and growth of internet piracy • Technological approaches to protect copyrighted material – Activation codes – “Digital rights management” (DRM) – Bypass: “craking” • Employing measures to avoid detection – Virtual private networks (VPNs) – A return to Usenet (deemed most effective) – Filelocker services 12 The history and growth of internet piracy • In the age of streaming services – “Stream-ripping” – conversion of streaming data into files stored locally • Piracy services switching to the dark web 13 Who are the pirates? • The ubiquity of piracy – 2011 study – 47\% of computer users pirated software all/most of the time – Music, video games, and other software (“softlifting”) – Inverse relationship between age and piracy propensity • Key motivations – Desire to try out content and criminal strain theory – “Information wants to be free” (Brand & Herron, 1984) – Disdain for current business models – Money-making venture 14 Discussion • How might we explain the high levels of involvement in such practices by young people? 15 Development of anti-piracy initiatives: • Criminalization of piracy – Historically tackled through civil means o Low prosecutions even with provisions due to a range of factors – Two forms of criminalization o Using existing criminal sanctions • Formation of industry organizations (e.g. FACT and ACE) • Notable prosecutions 16 Development of anti-piracy initiatives: o Incorporation of additional provisions • Enhanced Copyright Act of 1956 • No Electronic Theft Act of 1997 • The DMCA, TRIPS, and ACTA • Legal regulation for content control – Holding ISPs liable for breeches by their customers o UK – The Digital Economy Act (DEA) o France – HADOPI o U.S. – SOPA and PROTECT IP 17 Development of anti-piracy initiatives: • Policing, enforcement and piracy – Proliferation of anti-piracy organizations – Creation of specialist liaisons to prosecute copyright theft • Anti-piracy education campaigns – Particular focus on younger individuals – School programs of the 1990s and 2000s o E.g. FACE, SIAA, and BSA o Warning the children and parents (legal repercussions) 18 Development of anti-piracy initiatives: • Organizations creating advertising campaigns – E.g. “Knock-Off Nigel” (Parkes, 2012) – Attempt to stigmatize copyright infringement 19 Discussion • Whose interests does the criminalization of copying serve? • Is there a case for decriminalizing piracy? 20 Thinking critically about piracy statistics • The law as a social construction reflecting power dynamics • Current statistics – product of inferences open to challenge • Major inquiries – Estimates extrapolated from detection and conviction rates – Attempts to quantify the scope and scale of the problem – Reliance on partial industry sources 21 Thinking critically about intellectual property rights • The counterarguments to the “demonization of piracy” – “Property rights” as something natural and unquestionable – Assertion of a straightforward equivalence between tangible and intangible properties – Actors will be materially harmed by piracy • Questioning claims of harmfulness and whose interests 22 Cybercrime and Society, Third Edition © Majid Yar & Kevin F. Steinmetz Chapter 7 Illegal, harmful and offensive content online Introduction • The Internet (positive): a powerful medium for free speech and open communication – Political and social value of the Internet • The Internet (negative): online content that may be illegal, or deemed offensive and harmful to individuals, communities, or the social fabric • Examination of two forms of online content – Discriminatory “hate speech” content – Representations of sexually offensive content (e.g. “hardcore” and violent pornography) 3 Discussion • Why does the Internet offer advantages to those wishing to propagate hateful ideas and ideologies? 4 Thinking about “hate speech” • Emergence of “hate speech” in recent decades in various historical and political contexts – Germany and the political and cultural trauma of Nazism and anti-Semitism – UK and post-war immigration from British Commonwealth countries – French and the migration from colonial countries in North Africa – U.S. and the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s 5 Thinking about “hate speech” • In total, hate speech can be understood as speech which denigrates a person or group in a way that promotes violence or otherwise creates a hostile environment on the basis of a variety of characteristics 6 Thinking about “hate speech” • Universal legal and institutional action against hate speech – challenging – E.g. Western countries and debates over regulation of language • Harms from hate speech can be understood in two ways: – To incite and condone acts of violence and discrimination against target populations – View that hate speech is intrinsically harmful to target populations 7 Understanding the harms of hate speech • Its ability to incite and condone acts of violence and discrimination against target populations • U.S. law – Punishable if threats of violence express intent to commit an act of violence against an individual or group • UK law – The Race Relations Act (1965), the Public Order Act (1986), and the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act (2005) 8 Understanding the harms of hate speech • View that hate speech is intrinsically harmful to target populations – Undermining of selfhood and violations of human dignity – Feelings of fear, intimidation, and being threatened 9 Forms of hate speech – Websites • Websites established by organized political groups – Typically far right, white supremacist/neo-Nazi orientations – Rise of the “Alt-Right” (hateful towards Blacks, Jews, Muslims, women, LGBTQ+, etc.) – Notable online hate website – Stormfront • What is deemed “hateful content”? • Proliferation of current hate websites and groups – From marginal to mainstream sources 10 Forms of hate speech – Websites • Advantages to hate groups – Cost-effective means of communication – Affords speakers reduced risks of identification and prosecution – Bypasses the difficulties of finding conventional venues – Tailor messages to audiences open to be influenced • Capturing the attention of young people – E.g. “Pepe the Frog” or “Sad Frog” meme 11 Forms of hate speech – E-mail and social media • Threats over e-mail – E.g. Richard Machado, the “Asian hater” – Emotional damage of victims • Social media and the meme culture – E.g. Elliot Rodger and his YouTube video – “Incel” culture • Social media – important medium for dissemination of hate speech 12 Forms of hate speech – Social media • Dissemination of online anti-Muslim hate speech – Basis: Muslims threaten the way of life of non-Muslims – Source: mostly far right groups – E.g. Facebook groups • Dissemination of anti-Semitic/anti-Jewish hate speech – Forms of hate speech o Expressions of hatred o Anti-Semitic symbols o Calls for violence 13 Legal, policing and political challenges • Criminalization of hate speech – controversial • Notable challenges in censoring hate speech – Difficulty in defining what is “hateful” or “discriminatory” – Safeguarding the Internet’s free expression o The “answer to bad speech is more speech” (Doctorow, 2008, p. 2) – Global nature of the Internet – Variation in transnational hate crime laws o E.g. various European hate groups relocating their websites 14 Legal, policing and political challenges • U.S. hate sites and free speech – The First Amendment and its exception: serious and imminent threat of violence against identifiable persons, or directly incites others – The U.S. largely, however, is somewhat of a “safe haven” 15 Legal, policing and political challenges • Online culture and “trolling” – Making annoying or disruptive online comments/behaviors (Mantilla, 2015) – Related to “flaming” (Mantilla, 2015) – Reached maturity through 4chan and Reddit – The nature and grey area of trolling (e.g. Anonymous and Scientology) • Case study: Andrew Auernheimer 16 Growth and popularity of Internet porn • Earliest of explicit imagery – “Venus of Willendorf” • Growth of the commercialization of sexual images – Print → photography → motion pictures (accessibility) • Growth in the West – E.g. Playboy, Penthouse, and Hustler • Technological catalyst: video tape, cable, and Internet • Pornography as a billion-dollar industry 17 Growth and popularity of Internet porn • Two reasons why porn is a prominent online feature – Consistent feature of human culture – Development alongside technological advancements • Distribution of porn in the 1970s and 1980s – Massively enhanced with the expansion of the Internet • Critical role of Internet pornographers as profit-making entrepreneurs – Pioneers of early e-commerce technology • The sheer enormity of online pornography 18 Discussion • Should fantasy representations of “sexual violence” be criminalized, or ought they be recognized as a legitimate form of sexual self-expression? 19 Legal issues relating to Internet porn • General issue – definitional and moral questions • Criminological issue – boundary between porn and obscenity • Defining obscenity in the age of the Internet – Intention to deprave and corrupt – Potential definitional issues • The banning of “extreme” pornography – Challenges in achieving a social consensus 20 Legal issues relating to Internet porn • U.S. – obscene, indecent, and offensive speech – Link between porn and sexual violence • Attempts to remove First Amendment protection for indecent and offensive speech – failed – Obscene material and the Miller test – Difficulties of establishing “community standards” online • Legal pluralism and transnational definitions of obscenity – E.g. Saudi Arabia’s Internet access 21 Legal issues relating to Internet porn • Fear of children being exposed to adult content – “The Great Cyberporn panic of 1996” (Zimmer & Hunter, 1999, p. 11) – Demographics of individuals searching for content • Legislative attempts – U.S. – Communications Decency Act (CDA) o Criminalization of the involvement in obscene or indecent imagery of children o Shot down by U.S. Supreme Court o Successful legislation – Children’s Internet Protection Act (CIPA) in 2003 22 Legal issues relating to Internet porn • Overall failure of statutory regulation → voluntary regulation • Commercial availability of filtering packages – Criticisms o Vary in quality o Tendency to “over-filter” o Ineffective in filtering alternatives (e.g. P2P file sharing) • UK’s Digital Economy Act of 2017 – Critiques and challenges 23 Cybercrime and Society, Third Edition © Majid Yar & Kevin F. Steinmetz Chapter 10 Policing the internet Introduction • The police – a central element in the response to cybercrime – Criticisms and challenges • Formal and informal organization and control – “Pluralization” or “fragmentation” of policing • Focus on the wide range of policing activities and their challenges 3 Discussion • What are some factors that may limit public police responses to cybercrime? 4 Public policing and the cybercrime problem • Expectations of the role of the police – Prevent crimes – Maintain public order – Detect and investigate crimes – Source of public information, advice and reassurance • In short – increasing demands and limited resources • Specialized tasks of computer forensics – Challenges requiring extensive time, resources, and expertise 5 Public policing and the cybercrime problem • Expectations: police should investigate an entire range of internet-based offenses • Reality: resources target those offenses deemed most serious in terms of scale and harm – The “de minimis trap” (Wall, 2007, p. 161) – Focus of police resources determined by “hierarchies of standing” (Yar, 2013, p. 494) • Additional obstacles: officers’ lack of understanding and knowledge, and the established culture and ethos of policing 6 Public policing and the cybercrime problem • Increased law enforcement capacity to deal with cybercrime – UK – development of specialized units or shared across units • Birth of the National Hi-Tech Crime Unit (NHTCU) in 2001 in the UK – Later absorbed by the Serious and Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) – 2009 – the Police Central e-crime Unit (PCeU) – All housed under the National Cybercrime Unit (NCU) 7 Public policing and the cybercrime problem • Specialized units in the U.S. – Exists, but unevenly distributed at state, local, and federal levels – Likelihood of having specialized units – Federal level – split between NWC3, FBI, and DHS 8 Public policing and the cybercrime problem • Canadian enforcement – Lead by the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) including their Integrated Technological Crime Units (ITCUs) and Technical Investigation Services (TIS) • Australian enforcement – Investigations under the Australian Federal Police (AFP) and its cybercrime operations team • Countries also employ standardized training programs – E.g. the Law Enforcement Cyber Center in the U.S. – E.g. “Good Practice Guide for Digital Evidence” in the UK 9 Public policing and the cybercrime problem • Most challenging to law enforcement – transnational nature of Internet – Poses issues when traditional enforcement strategies are used • Growth of cross-police and cross-jurisdictional cooperation – Epitome of transnational police cooperation – child pornography 10 Public policing and the cybercrime problem • Challenges – Linguistic diversity – Variations in policing cultures – Asymmetries of resources and levels of expertise – Legal pluralism and statutory variations • Remedy attempts via treaties, conventions and agencies 11 Digital forensics • Digital data as evidence in criminal cases • “The collecting, analysing and reporting on digital data in a way that is legally admissible” (www.forensiccontrol.com) • Challenges and procedures – Preserving and not altering evidence; “Faraday bags” – Copying the data as to not alter the original • Increasing importance for law enforcement – Use of multiple tools (e.g. Child pornography – RedLight scanner) – The idea – to allow law enforcement to do their job efficiently 12 Discussion • What are some ways that non-state actors are involved in policing the Internet? 13 Pluralized policing • Wide range of quasi-state and non-state actors in policing • Greater part of Internet policing – private sectors • Culture of the Internet tended to favor self-regulation – Communal forms of formal and informal social controls – Dispersed mechanisms rather than “top-down” state control • Clinton Administration and the creation of the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) – Testament to the multi-party character of Internet regulation 14 Pluralized policing • Internet content regulation – highly contested – Fears of state censorship and the defence of free speech • The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) in 1990 – To preserve free speech online and to combat censorship via litigation • Electronic Privacy Information Centre (EPIC) in 1994 – Protection of user privacies and civil liberties online • Rise of Internet-based crime = growth in extra-state actors 15 Pluralized policing: Child pornography • Considerable attention in monitoring the Internet • Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) in 1996 (UK) – Involvement of many state and private actors – To combat child pornography – Establishment of “hotlines” – “Blacklisting” of websites and “hash list” of illicit images • Controversy – E.g. IWF and Wikipedia’s “The Scorpions” page – Questions of private policing vs. public accountability 16 Pluralized policing: Hate speech and IP • Groups combating hate speech – Even more so for anti-Muslim content post-9/11 – E.g. the Simon Wiesenthal Centre monitoring anti-Semitic websites • Strategies organizations use – Exposing hate speech online – Pressuring ISPs to remove content – Mounting legal chall ... Purchase answer to see full attachment