The EFF
is in my Property textbook!
"Problems: ... 3. A major Internet search engine begins refusing to list web pages that criticize the third-world labor practices of the conglomerate that owns the search engine. The group that maintains the pages complains that this violates their rights to free speech; they argue that since nearly all Internet users locate web pages using a few major search engines, these engines are the equivalent of a public square or a modern shopping mall. The group is also worried that if the search engine is allowed to exclude anything it chooses from its database, their group may have difficulty getting its message to the public. The search engine company responds that a search engine is private property: the company can choose to make accessible whatever information it wants, and it must have this right if it is to exclude pages containing pornography from its database. The company also argues that storing information is expensive, and it must be able to exclude at will to prevent its database from growing too large. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit organization that promotes free speech on the Internet, proposes legislation prohibiting search engines from refusing to include any web page in their database if the pages' owner requests inclusion. If you were a member of the legislature, how would you vote and why?" - Joseph W. Singer, Property Law: Rules, Policies, and Practices (4th ed.), pp. 163-4.
This amuses me on more levels than I can possibly name. Tonight's whole assignment has just been Lloyd v. Tanner and PruneYard (and thus Marsh and Logan Valley) and stuff like that. Best. Reading assignment. Ever. Oh, it'll be fun when we get to this in class.
"Problems: ... 3. A major Internet search engine begins refusing to list web pages that criticize the third-world labor practices of the conglomerate that owns the search engine. The group that maintains the pages complains that this violates their rights to free speech; they argue that since nearly all Internet users locate web pages using a few major search engines, these engines are the equivalent of a public square or a modern shopping mall. The group is also worried that if the search engine is allowed to exclude anything it chooses from its database, their group may have difficulty getting its message to the public. The search engine company responds that a search engine is private property: the company can choose to make accessible whatever information it wants, and it must have this right if it is to exclude pages containing pornography from its database. The company also argues that storing information is expensive, and it must be able to exclude at will to prevent its database from growing too large. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit organization that promotes free speech on the Internet, proposes legislation prohibiting search engines from refusing to include any web page in their database if the pages' owner requests inclusion. If you were a member of the legislature, how would you vote and why?" - Joseph W. Singer, Property Law: Rules, Policies, and Practices (4th ed.), pp. 163-4.
This amuses me on more levels than I can possibly name. Tonight's whole assignment has just been Lloyd v. Tanner and PruneYard (and thus Marsh and Logan Valley) and stuff like that. Best. Reading assignment. Ever. Oh, it'll be fun when we get to this in class.