AustLII Home | Databases | WorldLII | Search | Feedback

Journal of Law, Information and Science

Journal of Law, Information and Science (JLIS)
You are here:  AustLII >> Databases >> Journal of Law, Information and Science >> 2005 >> [2005] JlLawInfoSci 1

Database Search | Name Search | Recent Articles | Noteup | LawCite | Help

Stokes, Michael --- "Editorial" [2005] JlLawInfoSci 1; (2005) 16 Journal of Law, Information and Science 7

EDITORIAL

I am pleased to be able to write the editorial for the first issue of the relaunched journal, the Journal of Law, Information and Science. Over the years, the Journal of Law and Information Science has had dedicated support from contributors, referees, editorial board members, administrative staff at the University of Tasmania Law School and others, both in Australia and overseas. It has been a pleasure to work with everyone and, as editor, I have been grateful for the support which I have received. I am especially grateful for the work of Associate Professor Dianne Nicol of the University of Tasmania law School, the Assistant Editor. Without her expertise and input, my task as editor would have been much more difficult.

After consultation with the editorial board and others, we decided to expand the area of interest of the journal to include law and science as well as law and IT and to relaunch it as the Journal of Law, Information and Science. The name was chosen to indicate that we are not making a complete break with the past but intend to retain a focus on law and IT as a major area of interest. We have expanded the area of interest because developments in areas such as biotechnology and the genetic modification of organisms are giving rise to as many complex and varied legal issues as is law and IT. We hope that the expansion will also appeal to a wider audience and increase the pool of potential contributors. In the past it has been difficult to obtain sufficient copy of a high standard to maintain the quality and the regularity of the journal. We are hoping that we will have no further difficulties in these areas and that we will be able to publish a high standard journal with issues appearing on a more regular basis.

We have been able to recruit an excellent editorial board and I would like to thank all the new members as well as existing members for agreeing to be involved in the journal. I am looking forward to working with everyone. I would also like to thank the contributors and referees for this issue. Your contribution is most important as without it there could be no journal.

The first article in this issue, ‘The New Conquistadors: Patent Law and Expressed Sequence Tags’ by Matthew Rimmer, analyses recent litigation over patent law and expressed sequence tags (ESTs). In the case of In re Fisher, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit engaged in judicial consideration of the revised utility guidelines of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). In this matter, the agricultural biotechnology company Monsanto sought to patent ESTs in maize plants. The majority of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit supported the position of the USPTO, and rejected the patent application on the grounds of utility. The split decision highlighted institutional tensions over the appropriate thresholds for patent criteria – such as novelty, non-obviousness, and utility and will have significant ramifications for gene patents. The litigation raised larger questions about the definition of research tools, the incremental nature of scientific progress, and the role of patent law in innovation policy. The article suggests that the USPTO utility guidelines need to be reinforced by a tougher application of the standards of novelty and non-obviousness in respect of gene patents.

Restrictions imposed on informing speech as a response to the threat of terrorism raise serious concerns. The development of the corpus of knowledge, especially scientific knowledge relies on the free flow of information. Since the terrorist attacks of September 11 and the subsequent anthrax attacks in the US, the issue of censorship of scientific information has been subject to debate in both government and scientific circles. ‘Science or Security: The Future of the Free Flow of Scientific Information in the Age of Terror’ by Geoff Holland analyses the effects on the dissemination of knowledge-based information arising from the censoring of scholarly scientific journals, and considers the point at which a balance can be found between scientific freedom and national security. The article considers alternatives to the implementation of a regime of censorship that could be tailored to limit the burden imposed on research in any trade off between scientific progress and national security.

Phishing, a form of identity theft, starts with an email and can result in the theft of confidential information, identities, bank account details and funds and more. Phishing can be defined as the criminal creation and use of emails and websites – which are designed to look like emails and websites of well-known legitimate businesses, financial institutions, and government agencies – in order to deceive Internet users into disclosing their bank and financial account information or other personal data such as usernames and passwords. The phisher uses the information obtained to commit fraud. ‘Phish to Fry: Responding to the Phishing Problem’ by Peter Black deals with how phishing attacks are responding to increased public awareness about the problem by adopting more sophisticated techniques, considers the various strategies, both legal and technological, that can be utilised to combat phishing, evaluates the effectiveness of these various strategies and examines which is best equipped to combat phishing. The article concludes that the most effective strategies in limiting the effects of phishing are technological innovation and community awareness rather than the creation of new offences.

Unprecedented changes in technology, infrastructure and services within the broadcasting, telecommunications and information technology sectors are challenging the continuing efficacy of media laws. In November 2006, the Government passed legislation designed to address a variety of issues relating to digital broadcasting and to give effect to its longstanding policy of reform of media ownership laws. ‘Meeting the Digital Challenge – The Need to Extend the Parameters of Reform’ by Niloufer Selvadurai examines the November 2006 reforms in relation to digital media, and considers the extent to which they address the present weaknesses of the Australian regulatory framework. It considers the operation of the multi-channelling reforms, the HDTV requirements and anti-siphoning arrangements as well as the measures to transfer the power to allocate new commercial licences from the industry regulator, the Australian Communications and Media Authority (the ACMA), to the Government. The article argues that, whilst the November 2006 reforms succeed in rectifying all the problems addressed, the package of laws is myopic in its scope and vision. What is required is a media industry wide analysis of the operation of the existing laws and the consideration of a new regulatory framework that regulates on the basis of the nature and characteristics of the service rather than on the basis of increasingly artificial sector-specific distinctions between ‘broadcasting’ and ‘telecommunications’ operations.

‘Future Trends in Legal Research and Scholarship: Implications of the Establishment of a Cyberinfrastructure for E-Research’, a note by former editor Eugene Clark, argues that we are entering a new age of e-research in the social sciences. In this new environment, legal research needs to be less doctrinal, more interdisciplinary and team-based and more involved with computation, computer modelling and large scale data collection and analysis. Artificial social labs in universities will be replaced by ‘web experimentation’ using huge data sets of ‘real-life’ data taken straight from the net. As a result, social science research must increasingly take into account knowledge management, recording keeping, records management and geographic information systems. In an Information Age where intellectual property is the ‘new gold’, legal issues loom larger than ever and ‘documentation’ of research is becoming more important. These developments portend a redefinition of how we in the social sciences and law conduct research, with whom and the nature of the research we conduct.

Michael Stokes

Editor


AustLII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback
URL: http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/journals/JlLawInfoSci/2005/1.html