media,” though this court does “not generally
cover defamation”)
62
against a blogger who
posted a cartoon of Sarney. Even after Alcilene
Cavalcante deleted the cartoon as requested by
the court, the ISP that hosted her blog
(http://www.uol.com.br) proceeded to remove
the blog without a court directive to do so. Sarney
also filed to sue Cavalcante’s sister Alcineia, who
divulged details of the case on her blog. Again,
without any court order, the ISP also removed
Alcineia Cavalcante’s blog. 63
Privacy and confidentiality
The judiciary also continues to play an active role
in parsing the scope of privacy rights and confidentiality of data by experimenting with filtering
orders. For example, in 2005 a court in Brazil
ordered the daily newspaper Folha Online to
remove from its Web site 165 URLs that detailed
how Brasil Telecom allegedly used a Canadian
consulting company to spy on its competitor
Telecom Italia. On trial for the abuses alleged in
these articles, Brasil Telecom requested that the
judge issue a writ against Folha Online. The articles were published in print a year before the
takedown writ was issued, but the Web site was
held to have violated the confidentiality of a judicial investigation. 64 However, after protests, the
judge reduced the number of pages to be
blocked the next day. 65
The Brazilian judiciary has also engaged
with Google over the privacy concerns regarding
sexual content that appeared on its video-sharing
site YouTube in 2005. After a Brazilian model and
her boyfriend sued YouTube for hosting a sexually explicit video they claimed violated their right to
privacy, Google agreed to take down the video,
but it continued to be put back online by users. In
January 2007 a São Paulo judge ordered
telecommunications companies to block
YouTube until the video was removed from the
Web site. Several ISPs, including Brasil Telecom,
announced their intention to comply with the
court ruling. 66 Days later, the judge revoked his
order and lifted the ban on the entire site.
67
Security and political speech
With the exception of Cuba, there has been no
reported technical filtering of content relating to
security or political speech. Since it established
its first full-time Internet connection in 1996, 68 the
Cuban government has combined access
restrictions with severe penalties for illegal
uses—including violations such as counter-revolutionary writing 69 —to deter free expression
online.
70
Regulation outlaws Internet use “in violation of Cuban society’s moral principles or the
country’s laws,” as well as e-mail messages that
“jeopardize national security.” 71 Moreover, the
government restricts Internet use by having all
legal Cuban Internet traffic pass through staterun ISPs, which use software to detect politically
dissident information, and requires ID and registration for Internet use. 72 E-mail messages are
monitored prior to being sent or delivered.
73
Copyright
Many countries in Latin America, including
Argentina and Brazil, have attempted to shore up
intellectual property rights (IPR) protections by
drafting and updating laws and ratifying international agreements such as the World Intellectual
Property Organization (WIPO) Copyright Treaty.
Other countries, such as Chile and Mexico, have
been criticized for having antiquated or weak
laws that fail to meet international threshold
requirements set by the UN and WIPO. 74 Uneven
regulation of IPR is often coupled with a level of
enforcement characterized as insufficient or anemic. 75 For example, one of the objectives of the
U.S. government in signing a free trade agreement with Chile was to improve protection
against piracy for U.S. copyright and trademark
holders. 76 As a proposed replacement for the
North American Free Trade Agreement, the Free
Trade Agreements of the Americas (FTAA) would
include every country in Central America, South
Regional Overviews
201
cover defamation”)
62
against a blogger who
posted a cartoon of Sarney. Even after Alcilene
Cavalcante deleted the cartoon as requested by
the court, the ISP that hosted her blog
(http://www.uol.com.br) proceeded to remove
the blog without a court directive to do so. Sarney
also filed to sue Cavalcante’s sister Alcineia, who
divulged details of the case on her blog. Again,
without any court order, the ISP also removed
Alcineia Cavalcante’s blog. 63
Privacy and confidentiality
The judiciary also continues to play an active role
in parsing the scope of privacy rights and confidentiality of data by experimenting with filtering
orders. For example, in 2005 a court in Brazil
ordered the daily newspaper Folha Online to
remove from its Web site 165 URLs that detailed
how Brasil Telecom allegedly used a Canadian
consulting company to spy on its competitor
Telecom Italia. On trial for the abuses alleged in
these articles, Brasil Telecom requested that the
judge issue a writ against Folha Online. The articles were published in print a year before the
takedown writ was issued, but the Web site was
held to have violated the confidentiality of a judicial investigation. 64 However, after protests, the
judge reduced the number of pages to be
blocked the next day. 65
The Brazilian judiciary has also engaged
with Google over the privacy concerns regarding
sexual content that appeared on its video-sharing
site YouTube in 2005. After a Brazilian model and
her boyfriend sued YouTube for hosting a sexually explicit video they claimed violated their right to
privacy, Google agreed to take down the video,
but it continued to be put back online by users. In
January 2007 a São Paulo judge ordered
telecommunications companies to block
YouTube until the video was removed from the
Web site. Several ISPs, including Brasil Telecom,
announced their intention to comply with the
court ruling. 66 Days later, the judge revoked his
order and lifted the ban on the entire site.
67
Security and political speech
With the exception of Cuba, there has been no
reported technical filtering of content relating to
security or political speech. Since it established
its first full-time Internet connection in 1996, 68 the
Cuban government has combined access
restrictions with severe penalties for illegal
uses—including violations such as counter-revolutionary writing 69 —to deter free expression
online.
70
Regulation outlaws Internet use “in violation of Cuban society’s moral principles or the
country’s laws,” as well as e-mail messages that
“jeopardize national security.” 71 Moreover, the
government restricts Internet use by having all
legal Cuban Internet traffic pass through staterun ISPs, which use software to detect politically
dissident information, and requires ID and registration for Internet use. 72 E-mail messages are
monitored prior to being sent or delivered.
73
Copyright
Many countries in Latin America, including
Argentina and Brazil, have attempted to shore up
intellectual property rights (IPR) protections by
drafting and updating laws and ratifying international agreements such as the World Intellectual
Property Organization (WIPO) Copyright Treaty.
Other countries, such as Chile and Mexico, have
been criticized for having antiquated or weak
laws that fail to meet international threshold
requirements set by the UN and WIPO. 74 Uneven
regulation of IPR is often coupled with a level of
enforcement characterized as insufficient or anemic. 75 For example, one of the objectives of the
U.S. government in signing a free trade agreement with Chile was to improve protection
against piracy for U.S. copyright and trademark
holders. 76 As a proposed replacement for the
North American Free Trade Agreement, the Free
Trade Agreements of the Americas (FTAA) would
include every country in Central America, South
Regional Overviews
201