Předmět Freedom of Speech and New Technology (MVV122K)

Na serveru studentino.cz naleznete nejrůznější studijní materiály: zápisky z přednášek nebo cvičení, vzorové testy, seminární práce, domácí úkoly a další z předmětu MVV122K - Freedom of Speech and New Technology, Právnická fakulta, Masarykova univerzita (MU).

Materiál	Typ	Datum	Počet stažení

Cíl

At the end of the course, students should:Be familiar with the major cases decided by the United States courts involving how different technologies impact upon freedom of speech;Understand how American courts interpret basic constitutional protections such as freedom of speech;Be able to explain how constitutional law is developed by American courts;Be able to compare American free speech jurisprudence with European and Czech jurisprudence;Know how to read American case law and apply it in new contexts;Have a better understanding how to research and interpret American law;Feel more comfortable working with American law and the English language.

Osnova

Class II. The Right of Access to the Press, Movies, the Airwaves, Cable Television and the InternetA. Newspapers and Traditional Public ForaMiami Herald Publishing Company v. Tornillo, 418 U.S. 241 (1974)Lehman v. Shaker Heights, 418 U.S. 298 (1974)Pacific Gas & Electric Co. v. Public Utilities Commission, 475 U.S. 1 (1986)B. MoviesJoseph Burstyn, Inc. v. Wilson, 343 U.S. 495 (1952)Class IIC. The Airwaves – Radio and TelevisionRed Lion Broadcasting v. FCC, 395 U.S. 367 (1969)CBS v. Democratic National Committee, 412 U.S. 94 (1973)Arkansas Educational Television v. Forbes, 523 U.S. 666 (1998)D. Cable TelevisionTurner Broadcasting v. FCC, 512 U.S. 622 (1994)Class IIIE. The InternetReno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U.S. 844 (1997)Fair Housing Council v. roomates.com, LLC, 521 F.3d 1157 (9th Cir. 2008)II. Regulating Content: National Security, Pornography, Indecent Speech, and Hate SpeechA. National Security MattersNew York Times v. United States (The Pentagon Papers Case), 403 U.S. 713 (1971)Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, 130 S.Ct. 2705 (2010)Class IVB. Pornography and Indecent SpeechMiller v. California, 414 U.S. 881 (1973)FC C v. Pacifica Foundation, 438 U.S. 726 (1978)Sable Communications v. FCC, 492 U.S. 115 (1989)Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition, 535 U.S. 234 (2002)Class V Ashcroft v. American Civil Liberties Union, 535 U.S. 564 (2002)United States v. Thomas, 74 F.3d 701 (6th Cir. 1996)United States v. Stevens, 130 S.Ct. 1577 (2010)Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Ass’n, 74 F.3d 701 (6th Cir. 1996)Class VIC. Hate SpeechR.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377 (1992)Snyder v. Phelps, 131 S.Ct. 1207 (2011)III. Copyright Law, Artistic Freedom, and Academic and Scientific ResearchHarper & Row, Publishers v. Nation Enterprises, 471 US 539 (1985)Eldred v. Ashcroft, 537 US 186 (2003)Golan v. Holder, 132 S.Ct. 873 (2012)

Literatura

Study materials will be handed over to the students before and during the course

Garant

JUDr. Jiří Valdhans, Ph.D.

Vyučující

Prof. Michael Paul SengJUDr. Jiří Valdhans, Ph.D.