Document Actions

Citation and metadata

Recommended citation

María Rún Bjarnadóttir, Does the Internet Limit Human Rights Protection? The Case of Revenge Porn, 7 (2017) JIPITEC 204 para 1.

Download Citation

Endnote

%0 Journal Article
%T Does the Internet Limit Human Rights Protection? The Case of Revenge Porn
%A Bjarnadóttir, María Rún
%J JIPITEC
%D 2017
%V 7
%N 3
%@ 2190-3387
%F bjarnadóttir2017
%X With the enhanced distribution possibilities internet brings, online revenge porn has gained spotlight, as reports show that the act can cause serious consequences for victims. Research and reported cases have led to criticism of states lack of legal and executive means to protect victims, not least due to jurisdictional issues. Framing the matter within states responsibility to protect rights under Article 8 of the ECHR, presents the issue of possible breach of human rights obligations of states bound by the Convention. A number of domestic calls for criminalisation of posting of revenge porn have been replied with arguments for freedom of expression, worries that such means will contribute to a fragmented internet, and of a slippery slope of state interference. Further, as revenge porn touches upon the balancing between competing human rights, the possible result of outsourcing human rights assessment to private entities becomes a point of discussion in the paper.
%L 340
%K Article 8 ECHR
%K Human rights
%K freedom of expression
%K internet jurisdiction
%K revenge porn
%U http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-45099
%P 204-215

Download

Bibtex

@Article{bjarnadóttir2017,
  author = 	"Bjarnad{\'o}ttir, Mar{\'i}a R{\'u}n",
  title = 	"Does the Internet Limit Human Rights Protection? The Case of Revenge Porn",
  journal = 	"JIPITEC",
  year = 	"2017",
  volume = 	"7",
  number = 	"3",
  pages = 	"204--215",
  keywords = 	"Article 8 ECHR; Human rights; freedom of expression; internet jurisdiction; revenge porn",
  abstract = 	"With the enhanced distribution possibilities internet brings, online revenge porn has gained spotlight, as reports show that the act can cause serious consequences for victims. Research and reported cases have led to criticism of states lack of legal and executive means to protect victims, not least due to jurisdictional issues. Framing the matter within states responsibility to protect rights under Article 8 of the ECHR, presents the issue of possible breach of human rights obligations of states bound by the Convention. A number of domestic calls for criminalisation of posting of revenge porn have been replied with arguments for freedom of expression, worries that such means will contribute to a fragmented internet, and of a slippery slope of state interference. Further, as revenge porn touches upon the balancing between competing human rights, the possible result of outsourcing human rights assessment to private entities becomes a point of discussion in the paper.",
  issn = 	"2190-3387",
  url = 	"http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-45099"
}

Download

RIS

TY  - JOUR
AU  - Bjarnadóttir, María Rún
PY  - 2017
DA  - 2017//
TI  - Does the Internet Limit Human Rights Protection? The Case of Revenge Porn
JO  - JIPITEC
SP  - 204
EP  - 215
VL  - 7
IS  - 3
KW  - Article 8 ECHR
KW  - Human rights
KW  - freedom of expression
KW  - internet jurisdiction
KW  - revenge porn
AB  - With the enhanced distribution possibilities internet brings, online revenge porn has gained spotlight, as reports show that the act can cause serious consequences for victims. Research and reported cases have led to criticism of states lack of legal and executive means to protect victims, not least due to jurisdictional issues. Framing the matter within states responsibility to protect rights under Article 8 of the ECHR, presents the issue of possible breach of human rights obligations of states bound by the Convention. A number of domestic calls for criminalisation of posting of revenge porn have been replied with arguments for freedom of expression, worries that such means will contribute to a fragmented internet, and of a slippery slope of state interference. Further, as revenge porn touches upon the balancing between competing human rights, the possible result of outsourcing human rights assessment to private entities becomes a point of discussion in the paper.
SN  - 2190-3387
UR  - http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-45099
ID  - bjarnadóttir2017
ER  - 
Download

Wordbib

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<b:Sources SelectedStyle="" xmlns:b="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography"  xmlns="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/officeDocument/2006/bibliography" >
<b:Source>
<b:Tag>bjarnadóttir2017</b:Tag>
<b:SourceType>ArticleInAPeriodical</b:SourceType>
<b:Year>2017</b:Year>
<b:PeriodicalTitle>JIPITEC</b:PeriodicalTitle>
<b:Volume>7</b:Volume>
<b:Issue>3</b:Issue>
<b:Url>http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-45099</b:Url>
<b:Pages>204-215</b:Pages>
<b:Author>
<b:Author><b:NameList>
<b:Person><b:Last>Bjarnadóttir</b:Last><b:First>María Rún</b:First></b:Person>
</b:NameList></b:Author>
</b:Author>
<b:Title>Does the Internet Limit Human Rights Protection? The Case of Revenge Porn</b:Title>
<b:Comments>With the enhanced distribution possibilities internet brings, online revenge porn has gained spotlight, as reports show that the act can cause serious consequences for victims. Research and reported cases have led to criticism of states lack of legal and executive means to protect victims, not least due to jurisdictional issues. Framing the matter within states responsibility to protect rights under Article 8 of the ECHR, presents the issue of possible breach of human rights obligations of states bound by the Convention. A number of domestic calls for criminalisation of posting of revenge porn have been replied with arguments for freedom of expression, worries that such means will contribute to a fragmented internet, and of a slippery slope of state interference. Further, as revenge porn touches upon the balancing between competing human rights, the possible result of outsourcing human rights assessment to private entities becomes a point of discussion in the paper.</b:Comments>
</b:Source>
</b:Sources>
Download

ISI

PT Journal
AU Bjarnadóttir, M
TI Does the Internet Limit Human Rights Protection? The Case of Revenge Porn
SO JIPITEC
PY 2017
BP 204
EP 215
VL 7
IS 3
DE Article 8 ECHR; Human rights; freedom of expression; internet jurisdiction; revenge porn
AB With the enhanced distribution possibilities internet brings, online revenge porn has gained spotlight, as reports show that the act can cause serious consequences for victims. Research and reported cases have led to criticism of states lack of legal and executive means to protect victims, not least due to jurisdictional issues. Framing the matter within states responsibility to protect rights under Article 8 of the ECHR, presents the issue of possible breach of human rights obligations of states bound by the Convention. A number of domestic calls for criminalisation of posting of revenge porn have been replied with arguments for freedom of expression, worries that such means will contribute to a fragmented internet, and of a slippery slope of state interference. Further, as revenge porn touches upon the balancing between competing human rights, the possible result of outsourcing human rights assessment to private entities becomes a point of discussion in the paper.
ER

Download

Mods

<mods>
  <titleInfo>
    <title>Does the Internet Limit Human Rights Protection? The Case of Revenge Porn</title>
  </titleInfo>
  <name type="personal">
    <namePart type="family">Bjarnadóttir</namePart>
    <namePart type="given">María Rún</namePart>
  </name>
  <abstract>With the enhanced distribution possibilities internet brings, online revenge porn has gained spotlight, as reports show that the act can cause serious consequences for victims. Research and reported cases have led to criticism of states lack of legal and executive means to protect victims, not least due to jurisdictional issues. Framing the matter within states responsibility to protect rights under Article 8 of the ECHR, presents the issue of possible breach of human rights obligations of states bound by the Convention. A number of domestic calls for criminalisation of posting of revenge porn have been replied with arguments for freedom of expression, worries that such means will contribute to a fragmented internet, and of a slippery slope of state interference. Further, as revenge porn touches upon the balancing between competing human rights, the possible result of outsourcing human rights assessment to private entities becomes a point of discussion in the paper.</abstract>
  <subject>
    <topic>Article 8 ECHR</topic>
    <topic>Human rights</topic>
    <topic>freedom of expression</topic>
    <topic>internet jurisdiction</topic>
    <topic>revenge porn</topic>
  </subject>
  <classification authority="ddc">340</classification>
  <relatedItem type="host">
    <genre authority="marcgt">periodical</genre>
    <genre>academic journal</genre>
    <titleInfo>
      <title>JIPITEC</title>
    </titleInfo>
    <part>
      <detail type="volume">
        <number>7</number>
      </detail>
      <detail type="issue">
        <number>3</number>
      </detail>
      <date>2017</date>
      <extent unit="page">
        <start>204</start>
        <end>215</end>
      </extent>
    </part>
  </relatedItem>
  <identifier type="issn">2190-3387</identifier>
  <identifier type="urn">urn:nbn:de:0009-29-45099</identifier>
  <identifier type="uri">http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:0009-29-45099</identifier>
  <identifier type="citekey">bjarnadóttir2017</identifier>
</mods>
Download

Full Metadata

JIPITEC – Journal of Intellectual Property, Information Technology and E-Commerce Law

Artikelsuche
erweiterte Artikelsuche
Newsletter
Subscribe to our newsletter
Follow Us
twitter