Stokes, Michael --- "Editorial" [1999] JlLawInfoSci 7; (1999) 10(2) Journal of Law, Information and Science 151

• Editorial

Editorial

This issue contains the rest of the entries in the Journal of Law and Information Science Research or Scholarly Article Competition. The Editor would again like to congratulate the competitors on the high standard of their entries and to thank all who helped make the competition a success. The articles provide a good sample of the wide range of legal problems to which information technology gives rise.

The first article by Gaye Middleton considers whether there should be patent protection for internet technology, in particular for new ways of doing business and for internet software. The paper examines the history of attempts to patent these types of inventions, especially in the US, before considering the position in Europe and Australia. It then examines the arguments for and against allowing internet inventions to be patented, concluding that most objections to allowing them to be patented arise from criticisms of the patent system itself rather than from problems peculiar to internet inventions. Hence it argues that the appropriate solution to problems arising from internet patents is to reform the patent system rather than to deny patent protection to internet inventions.

John Bahrij looks at some of the problems in the telecommunications industry created by the trend from government monopolies to active competition in a more deregulated market in Australia, the United States and the European Union. In particular, he focuses on universal service obligations; ie that is the obligations to provide everyone with reasonable access to telecommunications services. These obligations pose a conundrum for policy makers because they are in many ways inconsistent with the free market ideas driving telecommunications reform, but are seen as essential because access to telecommunications services including the internet is both a precondition of economic growth and essential to enable individuals to improve the quality of their life.

‘E-mail and Privacy at Work’ by Jim Tealby considers whether the law should give privacy protection to email at work. The paper concentrates on one situation; that is where an employer looks at the email of an employee at work to provide a defence for a possible action by the employee for unfair dismissal. The paper considers the current legal position and codes adopted under schemes of self-regulation and argues that they give little protection to the employee’s interest in the privacy of his or her email. Hence, it concludes that we need legislation protecting the privacy of employee email in the private sector.

Judith Bannister in her article considers the extent to which compilations and data bases should be given copyright protection. Copyright protection is only given to works which are ’original’. However, the level of originality required for copyright protection is low, especially in the area of compilations and databases. It may be that little originality is required because of the public interest in access to information in a useable form. Bannister argues that in an age of electronic databases, such a low level limits rather than facilitates public access to such information. She suggests that databases should no longer be given copyright protection but that we should develop a new more appropriate type of protection for compilations and databases which no longer qualify for copyright.

The final article in the issue, by Clark, Cho and Hoyle, was not an entry in the competition. It looks at the legal aftermath of the Y2K bug, which, although it did not give rise to the disasters which many people expected, could give rise to considerable litigation. The paper analyses the nature of the legal problems arising from Y2K, and looks at the litigation to which it has given rise, especially in the US. It contains a brief discussion of the legal principles which are relevant to Y2K cases and concludes that for the most part, the Y2k problem has not given rise to new legal issues. The article finishes with a list of the cases which have already been brought in the US and a summary of the issues which those cases raise.

The issue ends with short reviews of three books, Legal Practice in the Digital Age, The Digital University: Reinventing the Academy and Understanding Electronic Day Trading.

Michael Stokes

Editor