KaydedilenlerDerginizi ekleyin

Dergiler / Sosyoekonomi / 2012 / Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 18

Expectation of Privacy in Cyberspace: The Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution and an Evaluation of the Turkish Case

İlker PEKGÖZLÜ
Mustafa ÖKTEM
Sayfa
—
Yayın Tarihi
2012-09-01
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

It also presents the current state of the privacy of private life and the privacy of communication in the Turkish judicial system.

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Privacy in cyberspace is becoming a dispute issue for the criminal justice system.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Initially, we should determine what kind of cyberspace we desire, and then, we can choose a legal platform to get this online environment.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:It also presents the current state of the privacy of private life and the privacy of communication in the Turkish judicial system.
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

Privacy in cyberspace is becoming a dispute issue for the criminal justice system. Initially, we should determine what kind of cyberspace we desire, and then, we can choose a legal platform to get this online environment. Because policing in cyberspace is an inevitable need, the question of what extent the law can protect individuals’ expectation of privacy in cyberspace has become an important problem. This study initially explains the legal descriptions of privacy, expectation of privacy, and cyberspace. Then, it discusses the expectation of privacy in cyberspace based on the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. It also presents the current state of the privacy of private life and the privacy of communication in the Turkish judicial system.

Abstract

Privacy in cyberspace is becoming a dispute issue for the criminal justice system. Initially, we should determine what kind of cyberspace we desire, and then, we can choose a legal platform to get this online environment. Because policing in cyberspace is an inevitable need, the question of what extent the law can protect individuals’ expectation of privacy in cyberspace has become an important problem. This study initially explains the legal descriptions of privacy, expectation of privacy, and cyberspace. Then, it discusses the expectation of privacy in cyberspace based on the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. It also presents the current state of the privacy of private life and the privacy of communication in the Turkish judicial system.

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

PEKGÖZLÜ, İ., ÖKTEM, M. (2012). Expectation of Privacy in Cyberspace: The Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution and an Evaluation of the Turkish Case. Sosyoekonomi, Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 18. https://ajindex.com/articles/139571

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (15)

  1. American Civil Liberties Union v. Reno, 929 F.Supp. 824, E.D.Pa. (1996).
  2. Ferrera G.R., S.D. Lichtenstein, M.E.K. Reder, R. August, and W.T. Schiano (2001), CyberLaw: Your Rights in Cyberspace, Mason, OH: Thomson Learning. Froomkin, A.M. (2003), “Habermas @Discourse.net: Toward a Critical Theory of Cyberspace”, 116 Harv. L. Rev., 749-78.
  3. Garner, B.A. (2004), Black’s Law Dictionary, 8th edition. USA: Thomson-West. Gleason, D.H. and L. Friedman (2004), “Toward an Accessible Conception of Cyberspace”, 28 Vt. L. Rev., 299-320.
  4. Grosso, A. (1994), “The National Information Infrastructure”, 41 Fed. B. News & J., 481, 485-86.
  5. Harvard Law Review Association (1997), “Keeping Secrets in Cyberspace: Establishing Fourth Amendment Protection for Internet Communication”, 110 Harv. L. Rev., 1591- 1608. Hoffa v. United States, 385 U.S. 293, 300–03 (1966). Horton v. California, 496 U.S. 128, 133 & n.5. (1990).
  6. Hunter, D. (2003), “Cyberspace as Place and the Tragedy of the Digital Anticommons”, 91 Cal. L. Rev., 439-519.
  7. Katyal, S.K. (2003), “The New Surveillance”, 54 Case W. Res. L. Rev., 297. Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967).
  8. Kerr, O.S. (2001), “The Fourth Amendment in Cyberspace: Can Encryption Create a 'Reasonable Expectation of Privacy?'”, 33 Conn. L. Rev., 503-533.
  9. Kerr, O.S. (2010), “Applying the Fourth Amendment to the Internet: A General Approach”, 62 Stan. L. Rev., 1005. Kyllo v. United States, 533 U.S. 27 (2001).
  10. Lessig, L. (1996), “Reading the Constitution in Cyberspace”, 45 Emory L.J., 869-91. McKamey v. Roach, 55 F.3d 1236, 1239 (6th Cir. 1995). Oliver v. United States, 466 U.S. 170, 179 (1984). Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 466 (1928). Payton v. New York, 445 U.S. 573, 589 (1980). Regulation for Implementing the Information Access Right Law (2004), Order Number: 2004/7189, 19.4.2004. Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 219 (1973).
  11. Seidman, L.M. (1995), “The Problems with Privacy's Problem”, 93 Mich. L. Rev., 1079-1086.
  12. Sergent, R.S. (1995), “A Fourth Amendment Model for Computer Networks and Data Privacy”, 81 Va. L. Rev., 1181-1226.
  13. Swire, P.P. (2009), “Review of Christopher Slobogin’s Book (Privacy at Risk: The New Government Surveillance and the Fourth Amendment, University of Chicago Press 2007): Proportionality for High-Tech Searches”, Ohio State Journal of Criminal Law 6, 751–63.
  14. T.C. Anayasa Mahkemesi (2011), The Constitution of the Republic of Turkey,, 28.02. 2011.
  15. TÜSEV (2011), Turkish Civil Code,, 28.02. 2011. Tyler v. Berodt