Trolling is a cyber-crime, and if you are caught for it, you cannot run away by saying that it is your opinion.
I can imagine Iceland becoming a good place to run a controversial Web site. But... Iceland may find itself forced to defend controversial speech.
Google is in an amazing position to be the target of tons of lawsuits that will set precedent for many important things for us on the Internet.
The Internet is a free and open platform. Everyone has the right to speak. However, compliance with the law is the bottom line that no one should violate.
If you happen to start a new country in the 1990s, you have the advantage of drafting new laws with the knowledge that the Internet is out there.
There is a certain belief that so long as something is published in cyberspace there is no need to respect the laws of contempt or libel. This is mistaken.
You take out an injunction against somebody or some organisation and immediately news of that injunction and the people involved and the story behind the injunction is in a legal-free world on Twitter and the Internet. It's pointless.
The Internet was invented in an age when our entire approach to regulation has been extremely lax, and so you'd think, 'OK, there might be a law on the books that governs how these corporations can handle our data.'
Congress will pass a law restricting public comment on the Internet to individuals who have spent a minimum of one hour actually accomplishing a specific task while on line.
We need to make Net Neutrality the law. We need to elect a Congress that will make it a priority to keep this important principal intact - and insure equal and open access to the Internet for all.
Trade on the Internet is becoming very widespread. The problem is our laws have not caught up with electronic commerce.
Content zips around the Internet thanks to code - programming code. And code is subject to intellectual property laws.
The First Amendment protects the Internet.
Here is one iron law of the Internet: a social network's emphasis on monetizing its product is directly proportional to its users' loss of privacy.
When you think of Napster, you think of music. But the first thing that struck me was that this was an important case not only for the music industry but for the whole Internet.
With respect to the Internet and emails, this does not apply to U.S. citizens and it does not apply to people living in the United States.
Unfortunately, changing forms of Internet communication are quickly outpacing laws and technology designed to allow for the lawful intercept of communication content.
