Referenties boek
ICT en recht

Op deze pagina vind je de referenties van hoofdstuk 2 van het boek ICT & Recht, van auteur Arnoud Engelfriet. 

Meer info en aanschaffen

Referenties hoofdstuk 2
Internet: de drukpers van de informatiemaatschappij

  1. J.C. Ramo, ‘Winner take all’, Time Magazine 1996, 148/13, p. 63.
  2. A. Ciolli, ‘Chilling Effects: The Communications Decency Act and the Online Marketplace of Ideas’, Univresity of Miami Law Review 2008, 63, p. 137.
  3. D.C. Nunziato, ‘The Death of the Public Forum in Cyberspace’, Berkeley Technology Law Journal 2005, 20/2, p. 1115-1119. 
  4. E.L. Eisenstein, The Printing Press as an Agent of Change, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 1980; Zie ook C.F.J. Schriks, Het Kopijrecht. 16de tot 19de eeuw, Zutphen: Walburg Pers 2004.
  5. R. Chartier, The Order of Books: Readers, Authors, and Libraries in Europe Between the 14th and 18th centuries, Stanford: Stanford University Press 1994.
  6. D.V. Coornhert, Synode over Gewetensvrijheid. Een nauwgezet onderzoek in de vergadering gehouden in het jaar 1582 te Vrijburgh, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press 2008. 
  7. B. Brooke, ‘Fact-Checking Won’t Save Us From Fake News’, FiveThrityEight 4 januari 2017.
  8. A.J. Nieuwenhuis, Persvrijheid en persbeleid, Amsterdan: Cramwinckel 1991.
  9. S. Ingber, ‘The Marketplace of Ideas: A Legitimizing Myth’, Duke Law Journal 1994, 1, p. 1-91.
  10. EHRM 7 december 1976, nr. 5493/72 (Handyside).
  11. J.T. Metcalf, ‘Obscenity Prosecutions in Cyberspace: The Miller Test Cannot “Go Where No [Porn] Has Done Before”’, Washington University Law Review 1996, 74/2, p. 481–523.
  12. H. Wijfjes, De radio. Een cultuurgeschiedenis, Amsterdam: Boom uitgevers 2019.
  13. A.J. Bottomley, Sound streams. A cultural history of radio-internet convergence, Michigan: University of Michigan Press 2020.
  14. D. Czitrom, ‘Dialectical Tensions in the American Media Past and Present’, in: P. Buhle (red.), Popular culture in America, Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press 1987.
  15. T. Jordan, ‘A genealogy of hacking’, Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies 2017, 23/5, p. 528-544.
  16. O. de Wit, ‘Techniek als cultuurverschijnsel. De transistorradio, Philips en Hilversum in de periode 1950-1970’, Tijdschrift voor Mediageschiedenis 2001, 4/1, p. 87-107.
  17. V.C.A. Crone, De kwetsbare kijker. Een Culturele Ceschiedenis van Televisie in Nederland, Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press 2007.
  18. O.M. Fiss, ‘Free speech and social structure’,Iowa Law Review 1985, 71, p.1405-1425.
  19. L. G. Roberts, ‘The evolution of packet switching’, Proceedings of the IEEE 1978, 66/11, p. 1307-1313.
  20. V.G. Cerf & E. Cain, ‘The DoD internet architecture model’, Computer Networks 1976, 7/5, p. 307-318.
  21. B. Bueger & T. Liebetrau. ‘Protecting hidden infrastructure: The security politics of the global submarine data cable network’ Contemporary Security Policy 2021, 42/3, p. 391-413.
  22. C. J. Hamelink, The Politics of World Communication. A Human Rights Perspective, London: Sage 1994.
  23. Jean d’Arcy, ‘An ascending progression’, in: D. Fisher & L.S. Harms (red.), The Right to Communicate: a New Human Right, Dublin: Boole Press 1983, p. 21-26. 
  24. N. Lucchi, Freedom of Expression and the Right of Access to the Internet. A New Fundamental Right?, Routledge: Routledge Handbook of Media Law 2013, p. 170-186.
  25. L. Corredoira, ‘Communication Rights in an Internet-Based Society. Why Is the Principle of Universality So Important?’, in: L. Corredoira, I.B. Mallén, R.C. Presuel (red.) The Handbook of Communication Rights, Law, and Ethics: Seeking Universality, Equality, Freedom and Dignity, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons 2021.
  26. EHRM 18 december 2012, NJ 2014, nr. 320, p. 4086-4087 (Yildirim / Turkije). Zie ook EHRM 12 december 2015, nr. 48226/10 en 14027/11 (Cengiz and Others v. Turkey).
  27. E.M., Guizzo, The essential message: Claude Shannon and the making of information theory (diss. Massachusetts Institute of Technology), Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology 2003.
  28. EHRM 8 juli 1986, nr. 9815/82, (Lingens v. Austria). 
  29. M. Skala, B. Bonfield & M.F. Torpey, ‘Enforcing Copyright’, Library Journal 2008, 133/3, p. 28-30.
  30. A.J. Liebling, The Wayward Pressman, New York: Doubleday & Company 1947, p. 265.
  31. J. Barata, ‘The different concepts of free expression and its link with democracy, the public sphere and other concepts’, in: M. Price, S. Verhulst, L. Morgan (red.), Routledge Handbook of Media Law, Londen: Routledge 2013, p. 125-138. 
  32. R.V. Bettig, & J.L. Hall, Big media, big money. Cultural texts and political economics, Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers 2012.
  33. HR 18 januari 2008, ECLI:NL:HR:2008:BB3210 (Van Gasteren/Hemelrijk). 
  34. EHRM 12 december 2015, nr. 48226/10 en 14027/11 (Cengiz and Others v. Turkey).
  35. EHRM 13 juni 2017, nr. 58781/13 (Arnarson v. Iceland).
  36. E. Schwartz, Netactivism. How citizens use the Internet, Sepastopol: Songline Studios 1996. 
  37. EHRM 10 maart 2009, NJ 2010, 109, m.n.t E.J. Dommering (Times Newspapers/United Kingdom).
  38. EHRM 16 juli 2013, nr. 33846/07 (Wegrzynowski).
  39. Raad van State 8 september 2010, ECLI:NL:RVS:2010:BN6172; Rb Amsterdam 19 februari 2010, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2010:BL5458; Rechtbank Amsterdam 31 maart 2010, ECLI:NL:RBAMS:2010:BM4462.
  40. HvJ EU 13 mei 2014, ECLI:EU:C:2014:317 (Costeja vs. Google)
  41. EHRM 18 December 2012, nr. 3111/10 (Ahmet Yildirim v. Turkey).
  42. G. Gosztonyi, ‘The European Court of Human Rights: Internet Access as a Means of Receiving and Imparting Information and Ideas’, International Comparative Jurisprudence 2020, 6/2. 
  43. HR 20 november 1987, ECLI:NL:HR:1987:AD0056, NJ 1988, 311: “[als iemand] weet of behoort te weten dat de eigenaar of gebruiker van dat stadion of terrein voor die uitzending geen toestemming heeft gegeven, [hij] jegens [die eigenaar/gebruiker] onrechtmatig handelt”. HR 23 mei 2003, ECLI:NL:HR::2003:AF4607, NJ 2003, 494: “De clubs hebben uit hoofde van hun eigendoms- of gebruiksrecht van het stadion of het terrein in beginsel de vrijheid om aan hun toestemming tot het betreden ervan beperkingen te verbinden, ook met het oog op het tot stand brengen van radio- en/of televisieuitzendingen.”
  44. ERHM 6 mei 2003, nr. 44306/98 (Appleby).
  45. D. Reijerman, ‘KPN past deep packet inspection toe op mobiel internetverkeer’, 12 mei 2011,
  46. Art. 7.4a Telecommunciatiewet.
  47. J.P. Sluijs, ‘From Competition to Freedom of Expression: Introducing Article 10 ECHR in the European Network Neutrality Debate’, Human Rights Law Review 2012, 12/3, p. 509-554.
  48. Artikel 4 van Verordening (EU) 2015/2120 van het Europees Parlement en de Raad van 25 november 2015 tot vaststelling van maatregelen betreffende open-internettoegang. 
  49. E. van Couvering, ‘The History of the Internet Search Engine: Navigational Media and the Traffic Commodity’, Information Science and Knowledge Management Book Series 2008, 14, p. 177-206.
  50. J.V.J. van Hoboken, Search Engine Freedom: On the Implications of the Right to Freedom of Expression for the Legal Governance of Web Search Engines, Deventer: Kluwer Law International 2012.
  51. C.D. Nunziato, ‘The Death of the public forum in Cyberspace’, Berkeley Technology Law Journal 2005, 20, p. 1115.
  52. E.J. Rader & R. Gray, ‘Understanding User Beliefs About Algorithmic Curation in the Facebook News Feed’, Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems 2015, p. 173-182.
  53. Jack M. Balkin, ‘Digital Speech and Democratic Culture: A Theory of Freedom of Expression for the Information Society’, New York University Law Review 2004, 79/1, p. 22.
  54. P. Seargeant & C. Tagg, ‘Social Media and the Future of Open Debate: a User-Oriented Approach to Facebook’s Filter Bubble Conundrum’, Discourse, Context & Media 2019, 27, p. 41-48.
  55. F.J. Zuiderveen Borgesius e.a., ‘Should we worry about filter bubbles?’, Internet Policy Review (2016), 5/1.
  56. M. Chong, ‘Analyzing Political Information Network of the U.S. Partisan Public on Twitter’, in: G. Chowdhury, J. McLeod, V. Gillet & P. Willett (red.), Transforming Digital Worlds iConference 2018,Springer 2018, p. 453–463. 
  57. R. Fletcher & R.K. Nielsen, ‘Are People Incidentally Exposed to News on Social Media? A Comparative Analysis’, New Media & Society 2018, 20/7, p. 2450–2468. 
  58. A. Bruns, ‘Filter bubble’, Internet Policy Review 2019, 8/4.
  59. P.L. Parcu, ‘New digital threats to media pluralism in the information age’, Competition and regulation in network industries 2020, 21/2, p. 91-109.
  60. M.A. DeVito, ‘From editors to algorithms: A values-based approach to understanding story selection in the Facebook news feed’, Digital journalism 2017, 5/6, p. 753-773.
  61. N. Helberger, ‘Challenging Diversity-Social Media Platforms and a New Conception of Media Diversity’, Digital Dominance. The Power of Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Apple 2018, p. 153-175.
  62. J. Grimmelmann, ‘Some Skepticism About Search Neutrality’, in: B. Szoka & A. Marcus (red.), The Next Digital Decade: Essays on the Future of the Internet, ed. Berin Szoka and Adam Marcus, Washington D.C.: TechFreedom 2010, p. 435-459.
  63. S. Eskens, N. Helberger & J. Moeller, ‘Challenged by news personalisation: five perspectives on the right to receive information’, Journal of Media Law 2017, 9/2, p. 259-284.
  64. N. Helberger, ‘On the democratic role of news recommenders’, Digital Journalism 2019, 7/8 p. 993-1012.
  65. Zie bijv. D.C. Nunziato, ‘The Marketplace of Ideas Online’, Notre Dame Law Review 2018, 94, p. 1519.
  66. A.L.J. JANSSENS & A.J. NIEUWENHUIS, Uitingsdelicten, Kluwer: Deventer 2019.
  67. E. Portnoy, Broodje Aap. De folklore van de Post-Industriële Samenleving, Amsterdam: Uitgeverij De Harmonie 1978. 
  68. E. Hunt, ‘What is Fake News? How to Spot it and what you can do to stop it’, The Guardian 17 December 2016. 
  69. S. Oxenham, ‘I was a Macedonian fake news writer’, BBC News 29 mei 2019.
  70. H. Allcott & M. Gentzkow, ‘Social Media and Fake News in the 2016 Election’, Journal of Economic Perspectives 2017, 31/2, p. 211-36.
  71. EHRM 7 december 1976, nr. 5493/72, r.o. 49 (Handyside); EHRM 23 april 1992, NJ 1994, 10.
  72. A. Arsht & D. Etcovitch, ‘The human cost of online content moderation’, Harvard Journal of Law and Technology 2018.
  73. R. Gorwa, R. Binns & C. Katzenbach, ‘Algorithmic content moderation: Technical and political challenges in the automation of platform governance’, Big Data & Society 2020, 7/1.
  74. L. Solomon, ‘Fair users or content abusers? The Automatic Flagging of Non-Infringing Videos by Content ID on YouTube’, Hofstra Law Review 2015, 44, p. 237.

Referenties andere hoofdstukken

Hoofdstuk 1

Hoofdstuk 2 (u bevindt zich op deze pagina)

Hoofdstuk 3

Hoofdstuk 4