Sección de bibliografía sobre los temas que interesan a la cultura pirata. Si encontráis algún libro, revista, blog, página web, servidor de noticias o lo que sea que merezca figurar en esta sección no dejéis de notificárnoslo!
Solov, Daniel J. 2011 Nothing to Hide. The false tradeoff between privacy and security New Haven & London, Yale UP
De la introducción:
I have written this book for a general audience, avoiding legal jargon and wonky policy analysis. I’ve presented more detailed policy proposals in my law review articles, but for this book, I focus on the general arguments and principles rather than technical minutiae. Of course, the details are important, but even more important are the basic concepts and themes of the debate. I hope that this book will put to rest certain arguments so that the debate can move ahead in more fruitful ways.
Although I have focused primarily on American law, the arguments and ideas in the debate are universal. Despite a few differences, the law in many countries operates similarly to American law, and it often uses the same techniques to regulate government information gathering. The arguments and policy recommendations I propose in this book are meant to be relevant not just in the United States but also in other nations whose lawmakers are struggling with these important issues.
PART I: Values: How We Should Assess and Balance the Values of Privacy and Security
2 The Nothing-to-Hide Argument 21
3 The All-or-Nothing Fallacy 33
4 The Danger of Deference 38
5 Why Privacy Isn’t Merely an Individual Right 47
PART II: Times of Crisis: How the Law Should Address Matters of National Security
6 The Pendulum Argument 55
7 The National-Security Argument 62
8 The Problem with Dissolving the Crime-Espionage Distinction 71
9 The War-Powers Argument and the Rule of Law 81
PART III: Constitutional Rights: How the Constitution Should Protect Privacy
10 The Fourth Amendment and the Secrecy Paradigm 93
11 The Third Party Doctrine and Digital Dossiers 102
12 The Failure of Looking for a Reasonable Expectation of Privacy 111
13 The Suspicionless-Searches Argument 123
14 Should We Keep the Exclusionary Rule? 134
15 The First Amendment as Criminal Procedure 146
PART IV: New Technologies: How the Law Should Cope with Changing Technology
16 Will Repealing the Patriot Act Restore Our Privacy? 155
17 The Law-and-Technology Problem and the Leave-It-to-the-Legislature Argument 164
18 Video Surveillance and the No-Privacy-in-Public Argument 174
19 Should the Government Engage in Data Mining? 182
20 The Luddite Argument, the Titanic Phenomenon, and the Fix-a-Problem Strategy 199
21 Conclusion 207
Choucri, Nazli 2012 Cyberpolitics in International Relations Cambridge (Massachusetts)/ London, The MIT Press
De la introducción:
This book asks several questions. How can we take explicit account of cyberspace in the analysis of international relations and world politics? What are the notable patterns of cyber access and participation worldwide? What new types of international conflicts and contentions arise from activities in cyberspace? What are the new modes of international collaboration? What are alternative cyber futures? In sum, how do we address the new imperatives for international relations theory that emerge from the construction of cyberspace? Historically, the social sciences were formed into disciplines by first separating humans from nature and then separating various aspects of human activities for knowledge development. This strategy allowed detailed and focused inquiry into one sphere of human activity while ignoring others, a practice that contributed to the rapid advance of knowledge. Empirical evidence subsequently compelled us to expand beyond discrete areas to appreciate society-nature connections. In recent years, we have also become increasingly cognizant of the importance of multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary perspectives.
Boon, Marcus 2010 In praise of copying Cambridge (Massachusetts)/ London, The MIT Press
De la introducción:
This book grew out of the observation that copying is pervasive in contemporary culture, yet at the same time subject to laws, restrictions, and attitudes that suggest that it is wrong, and shouldn’t be happening. On the one hand, many of the most visible aspects ofcontemporary culture—the art of Takashi Murakami or Elizabeth Peyton, electronic music ranging from hip-hop and techno to dubstep and mashups, BitTorrent and other digital networks of distribution, software tools like Google Earth or Photoshop, social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter, movies like Borat or Slumdog Millionaire (all no doubt hopelessly out of date by the time you read this)—rely explicitly on something we call “copying.” Indeed, many of the most vibrant aspects of contemporary culture indicate an obsession with the act of copying and the production of copies, and it seems that we find real insight into what human beings and the universe are like through thinking about how and what we copy. On the other hand, every time we install a new piece of software, listen to music, or watch a movie, we encounter the world of copyright and intellectual-property law, and the set of restrictions that have been placed around our access to and use of objects, processes, and ideas produced by the act of copying. Simultaneously, as our ability to make copies expands at both the macro (geophysics and the manipulation of global weather systems) and micro (nanotechnology and the fabrication and replication of matter from the atom up) levels, these same laws are used by corporations to appropriate, copy, and sell increasingly large parts of what was once the “public domain.”
I have been teaching a course on copying at York University in Toronto for the past two years. The university is a place that is truly saturated with copies and copying. In large lecture courses, the students come to class dressed up in chaotic but well-defined subcultural fashions, which they can read almost instantaneously on each other (and on me). They move through a maze of corporate branding which controls everything from drinking water to the bathroom walls. They are encouraged to learn through the act of repeating information, quoting, appending citations, in the traditional academic way; but with access to the Internet, to computers that can copy, replicate, and multiply text at extraordinary speed, they are also exhorted not to imitate too much, not to plagiarize, and to always acknowledge sources. They are ordered not to copy—but they are equally aware that they will be punished if they do not imitate the teacher enough!
Students today live in a culture of downloads, filesharing, networks in which information, data, music, images can be exchanged almost instantaneously. When I talked to them about such things, I was surprised to find how ambivalent most of them felt about it all. I expected them to be proud or excited by the things they spend most of their lives doing, able to celebrate the value of the incredible tools at their disposal. Like our broader society, though, they seem thoroughly confused or conflicted about this state of affairs—and about talking about it with a professor whose role, in their eyes, is to maintain the law, which says that it is all wrong (except when it’s right). Thus, they live in a constant state of vague, unarticulated guilt or duplicity, filesharing, downloading MP3s, imitating styles, yet also grudgingly accepting the arguments against what they are doing, which are based on important but unexamined concepts like property, ownership, originality, authenticity—concepts which have been given very particular meanings by states and corporations at the beginning of the twenty-first century.
I know that people reading this book will expect to find here an ethics of copying—but from the outset, I would like to call such a desire into question. Can we really identify an area of human activity outside copying which would make it possible for us to choose or decide whether to copy or not? I will argue that there is no such area, that we are always entangled in the dynamics of mimesis, and I write “in praise of copying” as an affirmation of copying rather than as an ethics. The word “copyright” (nearly 3.8 billion hits on Google) itselfsounds a little desperate, as though one had to actually suture thewords “copy” and “right” together in order for them to associate consistently. Just to put that number in perspective, “freedom” gets only 315 million Google hits and “truth” 312 million—a factor often less than “copyright.” Even “sex” gets only 876 million hits, incase you’re wondering. Don’t you think that the concept of “copyright”is a little overdetermined?
Dutton, William H. and Paul W. Jeffreys 2010 World Wide Research. Reshaping the Sciences and Humanities Cambridge (Massachusetts)/ London, The MIT Press
De la introducción:
A revolution is under way in the technologies being developed to support research across all disciplines. It is often cloaked in technical terminology—an alphabet soup of acronyms and obscure articles in specialized conference proceedings. However, its results might fundamentally transform the ways researchers go about their work, just as innovations such as the mobile phone, the Internet, the World Wide Web, and email have altered how we carry out our everyday lives. The consequences of the rise in increasingly powerful and versatile computer- based and networked systems for research—what this book calls “e- research”—will generate waves well beyond the laboratory or the ivory tower because they are more generally changing how we know what we know.
Our edited volume offers authoritative and accessible insights to the nature of this new set of technologies, how these technologies are being applied, and with what consequences in a variety of fi elds. It explains why major public and private investments are being made in e- research and how they promise to shape the quality of research that underpins policy and practice that are affecting how we work and socialize, as well as how we make once- in- a- lifetime decisions on climate change, medical treatments, urban design, and other strategic issues. The success or failure of e- research is not predetermined, but it is likely to be an assorted mix of some spectacular failures, many incremental improvements, and some as yet undreamed of major successes, much like the creation of the Internet and Web from earlier phases.