Правовые справочные документы 20 страница
[1527] Similar instruments can be found in other Council of Europe Convention. For example Article 10 of the Convention on the Laundering, Search, Seizure and Confiscation of the Proceeds from Crime and Article 28 of the Criminal Law Convention on Corruption. The Council of Europe Conventions are available at: http://www.coe.int.
[1528] See Explanatory Report to the Convention on Cybercrime, No. 262.
[1529] Regarding the 24/7 network points of contact see below: Chapter 6.3.8.
[1530] See Explanatory Report to the Convention on Cybercrime, No. 265: "Initially, direct transmission between such authorities is speedier and more efficient than transmission through diplomatic channels. In addition, the establishment of an active central authority serves an important function in ensuring that both incoming and outgoing requests are diligently pursued, that advice is provided to foreign law enforcement partners on how best to satisfy legal requirements in the requested Party, and that particularly urgent or sensitive requests are dealt with properly."
[1531] See Explanatory Report to the Convention on Cybercrime, No. 268.
[1532] See Explanatory Report to the Convention on Cybercrime, No. 269. "Such a situation could arise if, upon balancing the important interests involved in the particular case (on the one hand, public interests, including the sound administration of justice and, on the other hand, privacy interests), furnishing the specific data sought by the requesting Party would raise difficulties so fundamental as to be considered by the requested Party to fall within the essential interests ground of refusal."
[1533] See Explanatory Report to the Convention on Cybercrime, No. 269.
[1534] See above: Chapter 6.2.
[1535] The most important instruments established by the Convention on Cybercrime are: Expedited preservation of stored computer data (Art. 16), Expedited preservation and partial disclosure of traffic data (Art. 17), Production order (Art. 18), Search and seizure of stored computer data (Art. 19), Real-time collection of traffic data (Art. 20), Interception of content data (Art. 21).
[1536] National Sovereignty is a fundamental principle in International Law. See Roth, State Sovereignty, International Legality, and Moral Disagreement, 2005, page 1, available at: http://www.law.uga.edu/intl/roth.pdf.
[1537] An exemption is Art. 32 Convention on Cybercrime - See below. Regarding the concerns related to this instrument see: Report of the 2nd Meeting of the Cybercrime Convention Committee, T-CY (2007) 03, page 2: " [...]Russian Federation (had a positive approach towards the Convention but further consideration would have to be given to Article 32b in particular in the light of experience gained from the use of this Article).
|
|
|
[1538] See above: Chapter 6.2.4.
'556 See above: Chapter 6.2.4.
[1540] See above: Chapter 6.2.7.
[1541] See above: Chapter 6.2.6.
[1542] See above: Chapter 6.2.9.
[1543] See above: Chapter 6.2.410.
[1544] See Explanatory Report to the Convention on Cybercrime, No. 293.
[1545] "The drafters ultimately determined that it was not yet possible to prepare a comprehensive, legally binding regime regulating this area. In part, this was due to a lack of concrete experience with such situations to date; and, in part, this was due to an understanding that the proper solution often turned on the precise circumstances of the individual case, thereby making it difficult to formulate general rules." See Explanatory Report to the Convention on Cybercrime, No. 293.
[1546] See below in this chapter.
[1547] See Explanatory Report to the Convention on Cybercrime, No. 293.
1565 Report of the 2nd Meeting of the Cybercrime Convention Committee, T-CY (2007) 03, page 2.
[1549] In this context it is necessary to point out a difference between Art. 32 and Art. 18. Unlike Art. 18 Art. 32 does not enable the foreign law enforcement agency to order the submission of the relevant data. It can only seek for permission.
[1550] The need to speed up the process of international cooperation is pointed out in the Explanatory Report. See Explanatory Report to the Convention on Cybercrime, No. 256: "Computer data is highly volatile. By a few keystrokes or by operation of automatic programs, it may be deleted, rendering it impossible to trace a crime to its perpetrator or destroying critical proof of guilt. Some forms of computer data are stored for only short periods of time before being deleted. In other cases, significant harm to persons or property may take place if evidence is not gathered rapidly. In such urgent cases, not only the request, but the response as well should be made in an expedited manner. The objective of Paragraph 3 is therefore to facilitate acceleration of the process of obtaining mutual assistance so that critical information or evidence is not lost because it has been deleted before a request for assistance could be prepared, transmitted and responded to."
|
|
|
'568 See above: Chapter 6.2.4.
[1552] The availability 24 hours a day and 7 days a week is especially important with regard to international dimension of Cybercrime as requests can potentially come from any time zone in the world. Regarding the international dimension of Cybercrime and the related challenges see above: Chapter 3.2.6.
[1553] See Explanatory Report to the Convention on Cybercrime, No. 298.
[1554] Regarding the activities of the G8 in the fight against Cybercrime see above: Chapter 5.1.1. For more information on the 24/7 Network see: See Sussmann, The Critical Challenges from International High-Tech and Computer-related Crime at the Millennium, Duke Journal of Comparative & International Law, 1999, Vol 9, page 484, available at: http://www.g7.utoronto.ca/scholar/sussmann/duke_article_pdf.pdf.
[1555] See above: Chapter 3.2.10.
[1556] See above: Chapter 3.2.6.
[1557] Regarding the question which authorities should be authorised to order the preservation of data see above: Chapter 6.2.4.
[1558] Explanatory Report to the Convention on Cybercrime, No. 301.
1576 Report of the 2nd Meeting of the Cybercrime Convention Committee, T-CY (2007) 03, page 5 (35).
[1560] The Stanford Draft International Convention (CISAC) was developed as a follow up to a conference hosted in Stanford University in the United States in 1999. The text of the Convention is published in: The Transnational Dimension of Cyber Crime and Terror, page 249 et seq., available at: http://media.hoover.org/documents/0817999825_249.pdf; For more information see: Goodman/Brenner, The Emerging Consensus on Criminal Conduct in Cyberspace, UCLA Journal of Law and Technology, Vol. 6, Issue 1, 2002, page 70, available at:
http://www.lawtechjournal.com/articles/2002/03_020625_goodmanbrenner.pdf; Sofaer, Toward an International Convention on Cyber in Seymour/Goodman, The Transnational Dimension of Cyber Crime and Terror, page 225, available at: http://media.hoover.org/documents/0817999825_221.pdf; ABA International Guide to Combating Cybercrime, 2002, page 78.
|
|
|
[1561] See Sofaer/Goodman/Cuellar/Drozdova and others, A Proposal for an International Convention on Cyber Crime and Terrorism, 2000, available at: http://www.iwar.org.uk/law/resources/cybercrime/stanford/cisac-draft.htm.
[1562] See Sofaer/Goodman/Cuellar/Drozdova and others, A Proposal for an International Convention on Cyber Crime and Terrorism, 2000, available at: http://www.iwar.org.uk/law/resources/cybercrime/stanford/cisac-draft.htm.
[1563] Regarding the network architecture and the consequences with regard to the involvement of service providers see: Black, Internet Architecture: An Introduction to IP Protocols, 2000; Zuckerman/McLaughlin, Introduction to Internet Architecture and Institutions, 2003, available at: http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/digitaldemocracy/internetarchitecture.html.
[1564] See in this context: Sellers, Legal Update to: Shifting the Burden to Internet Service Providers: The Validity of Subpoena Power under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Oklahoma Journal of Law and Technology, 8a, 2004, available at: http://www.okjolt.org/pdf/2004okjoltrev8a.pdf.
[1565] National Sovereignty is a fundamental principle in International Law. See Roth, State Sovereignty, International Legality, and Moral Disagreement, 2005, page 1, available at: http://www.law.uga.edu/intl/roth.pdf.
[1566] For an introduction into the discussion see: Elkin-Koren, Making Technology Visible: Liability of Internet Service Providers for Peer-to-Peer Traffic, Journal of Legislation and Public Policy, Volume 9, 2005, page 15 et seq. - available at http://www.law.nyu.edu/journals/legislation/articles/current_issue/NYL102.pdf
[1567] In the decision Recording Industry Association Of America v. Charter Communications, Inc. the United States Court of Appeals for the eighth circuit described (by referring to House Report No. 105-551(II) at 23 (1998)) the function of the United States DMCA by pointing out the balance. In the opinion of the court the DMCA has "two important priorities: promoting the continued growth and development of electronic commerce and protecting intellectual property rights."
|
|
|
[1568] Regarding the History of the DMCA and the Pre-DMCA case law in the United States see: Ciske, For Now, ISPs must stand and deliver: An analysis of In re Recording Industry Association of America vs. Verizon Internet Services, Virginia Journal of Law and Technology, Vol. 8, 2003, available at: http://www.vjolt.net/vol8/issue2/v8i2_a09-Ciske.pdf; Salow, Liability Immunity for Internet Service Providers - How is it working?, Journal of Technology Law and Policy, Vol. 6, Issue 1, 2001, available at: http://grove.ufl.edu/~techlaw/vol6/issue1/pearlman.html.
[1569] Regarding the DMCA impact on the liability of Internet Service Provider see: Unni, Internet Service Provider's Liability for Copyright Infringement - How to Clear the Misty Indian Perspective, 8 RICH. J.L. & TECH. 13, 2001 - available at: http://www.richmond.edu/jolt/v8i2/article1.html; Manekshaw, Liability of ISPs: Immunity from Liability under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and the Communications Decency Act, Computer Law Review and Technology Journal, Vol. 10, 2005, page 101 et seqq., available at: http://www.smu.edu/csr/articles/2005/Fall/SMC103.pdf; Elkin-Koren, Making Technology Visible: Liability of Internet Service Providers for Peer-to-Peer Traffic, Journal of Legislation and Public Policy, Volume 9, 2005, page 15 et seq., available at http://www.law.nyu.edu/journals/legislation/articles/current_issue/NYL102.pdf; Schwartz, Thinking outside the Pandora's box: Why the DMCA is unconstitutional under Article I, § 8 of the United States Constitution, Journal of Technology
Law and Policy, Vol. 10, Issue 1, available at: http://grove.ufl.edu/~techlaw/vol10/issue1/schwartz.html.
[1570] Regarding the application of the DMCA to Search Engines see: Walker, Application of the DMCA Safe Harbor Provisions to Search Engines, Virginia Journal of Law and Technology, Vol. 9, 2004, available at: http://www.vjolt.net/vol9/issue1/v9i1_a02-Walker.pdf.
[1571] 1 7 U.S.C. § 512(a)
1:589 17 U.S.C. § 512(b)
[1573] Regarding the Communication Decency Act see: Manekshaw, Liability of ISPs: Immunity from Liability under the Digital
Millennium Copyright Act and the Communications Decency Act, Computer Law Review and Technology Journal, Vol. 10, 2005, page 101 et seqq., available at: http://www.smu.edu/csr/articles/2005/Fall/SMC103.pdf;
[1574] Directive 2000/31/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2000 on certain legal aspects of information society services, in particular electronic commerce, in the Internal Market ('Directive on electronic commerce') Official Journal L 178, 17/07/2000 P. 0001 - 0016. For a comparative law analysis of the United States and European Union E-Commerce Regulations (including the EU E-Commerce Directive) see: Pappas, Comparative U.S. & EU Approaches To E-Commerce Regulation: Jurisdiction, Electronic Contracts, Electronic Signatures And Taxation, Denver Journal of International Law and Policy, Vol 31, 2003, pae 325 et seqq., available at: http://www.law.du.edu/ilj/online_issues_folder/pappas.7.15.03.pdf
[1575] See Lindholm/Maennel, Computer Law Review International 2000, 65.
1:593 Art. 12 - Art. 15 EU E-Commerce Directive.
[1577] With the number of different services covered the E-Commerce Directive aims for a broader regulation than 17 U.S.C. § 517(a). Regarding 17 U.S.C. § 517(a) see above:
[1578] See Art. 12 paragraph 3 E-Commerce Directive.
[1579] The provision was implemented by the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act). Regarding the DMCA impact on the liability of Internet Service Provider see: Unni, Internet Service Provider's Liability for Copyright Infringement - How to Clear the Misty Indian Perspective, 8 RICH. J.L. & TECH. 13, 2001 - available at: http://www.richmond.edu/jolt/v8i2/article1.html; Manekshaw, Liability of ISPs: Immunity from Liability under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and the Communications Decency Act, Computer Law Review and Technology Journal, Vol. 10, 2005, page 101 et seqq., available at: http://www.smu.edu/csr/articles/2005/Fall/SMC103.pdf; Elkin-Koren, Making Technology Visible: Liability of Internet Service Providers for Peer-to-Peer Traffic, Journal of Legislation and Public Policy, Volume 9, 2005, page 15 et seq. - available at http://www.law.nyu.edu/journals/legislation/articles/current_issue/NYL102.pdf
[1580] With regard to the traditional caching as well as active caching see: Naumenko, Benefits of Active Caching in the WWW, available at: http://lcawww.epfl.ch/Publications/Naumenko/Naumenko99.pdf.
[1581] For more information on Proxy Servers see: Luotonen, Web Proxy Servers, 1997.
[1582] The provision was implemented by the DMCA (Digital Millennium Copyright Act). Regarding the DMCA impact on the liability of Internet Service Provider see: Unni, Internet Service Provider's Liability for Copyright Infringement - How to Clear the Misty Indian Perspective, 8 RICH. J.L. & TECH. 13, 2001 - available at: http://www.richmond.edu/jolt/v8i2/article1.html; Manekshaw, Liability of ISPs: Immunity from Liability under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and the Communications Decency Act, Computer Law Review and Technology Journal, Vol. 10, 2005, page 101 et seqq., available at: http://www.smu.edu/csr/articles/2005/Fall/SMC103.pdf; Elkin-Koren, Making Technology Visible: Liability of Internet Service Providers for Peer-to-Peer Traffic, Journal of Legislation and Public Policy, Volume 9, 2005, page 15 et seq., available at http://www.law.nyu.edu/journals/legislation/articles/current_issue/NYL102.pdf
161,0 See above: Chapter 6.4.4.
[1584] Regarding the impact of free webspace on criminal investigations see: Evers, Blogging sites harbouring cybercriminals, CNET News, 26.07.2005, available at http://news.zdnet.co.uk/security/0,1000000189,39210633,00.htm.
[1585] This procedure is called "notice and takedown"
[1586] The hosting provider is quite often in a difficult situation. On the one hand side he needs to react immediately to avoid liability - on the other hand side he has certain obligations with regard to his customers. If he removes legal information that was just on first sight illegal, this could lead to claims for indemnity.
[1587] By enabling their customers to offer products they provide the necessary storage capacity for the required information.
[1588] Spindler, Multimedia und Recht 1999, page 204.
[1589] Art. 21 - Re-examination
1. Before 17 July 2003, and thereafter every two years, the Commission shall submit to the European Parliament, the Council and the Economic and Social Committee a report on the application of this Directive, accompanied, where necessary, by proposals for adapting it to legal, technical and economic developments in the field of information society services, in particular with respect to crime prevention, the protection of minors, consumer protection and to the proper functioning of the internal market.
2. In examining the need for an adaptation of this Directive, the report shall in particular analyse the need for proposals concerning the liability of providers of hyperlinks and location tool services, 'notice and take down' procedures and the attribution of liability following the taking down of content. The report shall also analyse the need for additional conditions for the exemption from liability, provided for in Articles 12 and 13, in the light of technical developments, and the possibility of applying the internal market principles to unsolicited commercial communications by electronic mail.
161)7 Freytag, Computer und Recht 2000, page 604; Spindler, Multimedia und Recht 2002, page 497.
[1591] Austria, Spain and Portugal. See Report of the application of the Directive on electronic commerce - COM (2003) 702, page 7.
[1592] See report of the application of the Directive on electronic commerce - COM (2003) 702, page 15.
[1593] Introna/Nissenbaum, Sharping the Web: Why the politics of search engines matters, Page 5. Available at: http://www.nyu.edu/projects/nissenbaum/papers/searchengines.pdf
[1594] Austria, Spain and Portugal. See report of the application of the Directive on electronic commerce - COM (2003) 702, page 7.
[1595] See report of the application of the Directive on electronic commerce - COM (2003) 702, page 15.
[1596] Ley de Servicios de la Sociedad de la Information y de Comercio Electronico (LSSICE) - Artfculo 17. Responsabilidad de los prestadores de servicios que faciliten enlaces a conteni-dos o instrumentas de busqueda (Spain)
1. Los prestadores de servicios de la sociedad de la information que faciliten enlaces a otros contenidos o incluyan en los suyos directorios o instrumentas de busqueda de contenidos no seran responsables por la information a la que dirijan a los destinatarios de sus servicios, siempre que: Da) No tengan conocimiento efectivo de que la actividad o la information a la que remiten o recomiendan es ilicita o de que lesiona bienes o derechos de un tercero susceptibles de indemnizacion, o Db) si lo tienen, actuen con diligentia para suprimir o inutilizar el enlace correspondiente. Se entendera que el prestador de servicios tiene el conocimiento efectivo a que se refiere la letra a) cuando un organo competente haya declarado la ilicitud de los datos, ordenado su retirada o que se imposibilite el acceso a los mismos, o se hubiera declarado la existencia de la lesion, y el prestador conociera la correspondiente resolucion, sin perjuicio de los procedimientos de deteccion y retirada de contenidos que los prestadores apliquen en virtud de acuerdos voluntarios y de otros medios de conocimiento efectivo que pudieran establecerse.
2. La exencion de responsabilidad establecida en el apartado primero no operara en el supuesto de que el destinatario del servicio actue bajo la direccion, autoridad o control del prestador que facilite la localizacion de esos contenidos.
[1597] Ausschluss der Verantwortlichkeit bei Suchmaschinen
§ 14. (1) Ein Diensteanbieter, der Nutzern eine Suchmaschine oder andere elektronische Hilfsmittel zur Suche nach fremden Informationen bereitstellt, ist für die abgefragten Informationen nicht verantwortlich, sofern er
1.die Übermittlung der abgefragten Informationen nicht veranlasst,
2. den Empfänger der abgefragten Informationen nicht auswählt und
3. die abgefragten Informationen weder auswählt noch verändert.
(2) Abs. 1 ist nicht anzuwenden, wenn die Person, von der die abgefragten Informationen stammen, dem Diensteanbieter untersteht oder von ihm beaufsichtigt wird.
[1598] Council of Europe Convention on Cybercrime, available at: http://conventions.coe.int/Treaty/EN/Treaties/Html/185.htm
[1599] Commonwealth Model Law on Computer and Computer Related Crime, available at: http://www.thecommonwealth.org/shared_asp_files/uploadedfiles/%7BDA109CD2-5204-4FAB-AA77- 86970A639B05%7D_Computer%20Crime.pdf
[1600] Draft Stanford Convention, available at: http://www.stanford.edu/~gwilson/Transnatl.Dimension.Cyber.Crime.2001.p.249.pdf
Дата добавления: 2015-12-19; просмотров: 9; Мы поможем в написании вашей работы! |
Мы поможем в написании ваших работ!