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 204-215Download
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. ERDownload
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
| Bibliographic Citation | Journal of intellectual property, information technology and electronic commerce law 7 (2017) 3 |
|---|---|
| Title |
Does the Internet Limit Human Rights Protection? The Case of Revenge Porn (eng) |
| Author | María Rún Bjarnadóttir |
| Language | eng |
| 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. |
| Subject | Article 8 ECHR, Human rights, freedom of expression, internet jurisdiction, revenge porn |
| DDC | 340 |
| Rights | DPPL |
| URN: | urn:nbn:de:0009-29-45099 |
