<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.2/basic/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/">
<channel rdf:about="http://www.inderscience.com/current_issue_rss/index.php?journal=ijlse">
<title>Most recent issue published online for the International Journal of Liability and Scientific Enquiry.</title>
<description>International Journal of Liability and Scientific Enquiry</description>
<link>http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=88&amp;year=2011&amp;vol=4&amp;issue=4</link>
<dc:publisher>Inderscience Publishers Ltd</dc:publisher>
<dc:language>en-uk</dc:language>
<prism:publicationName>International Journal of Liability and Scientific Enquiry</prism:publicationName>
<prism:issn>1741-6426</prism:issn>
<prism:eIssn>1741-6434</prism:eIssn>
<prism:copyright>&#169; 2011 Inderscience Publishers Ltd</prism:copyright>
<prism:rightsAgent>editor@inderscience.com</prism:rightsAgent>
<image rdf:resource="https://www.inderscience.com/images/files/coverImgs/ijlse_scoverijlse.jpg" />
<items>
<rdf:Seq>
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJLSE.2011.044086" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJLSE.2011.044087" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJLSE.2011.044088" />
<rdf:li rdf:resource="http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJLSE.2011.044089" />
</rdf:Seq>
</items>
</channel>
<image rdf:about="https://www.inderscience.com/images/files/coverImgs/ijlse_scoverijlse.jpg">
<title>International Journal of Liability and Scientific Enquiry</title>
<url>https://www.inderscience.com/images/files/coverImgs/ijlse_scoverijlse.jpg</url>
<link>http://www.inderscience.com/browse/index.php?journalID=88&amp;year=2011&amp;vol=4&amp;issue=4</link>
</image>
<item rdf:about="http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJLSE.2011.044086">
<title>The war on Facebook&#58; privacy on social networks</title>
<link>http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=44086</link>
<description>In the past seven years, Facebook has been constantly reviewing its privacy policy, with regards to the information it shares about its users and the information users share online. Like in any social network, Facebook users are at great risk when using the platform. This paper will analyse Facebook&#39;s &#39;Privacy&#39; settings and the implications to its users. It will depict problems with the platform, specifically privacy options that were eliminated. The paper will also analyse the legal implications of deficient privacy policies in the social network business model &#40;which thrives on &#39;connections&#39;&#41;. It will also provide recommendations for CEO Mark Zuckerberg regarding changes to the privacy settings and the visibility of these settings on his site. There have been various attempts to regulate internet privacy through complaints against Facebook, both in Canada and the USA. The current regulatory framework for the social network is inadequate and the recommendations put forth in this paper are needed to address an important lacuna in this regulatory area of privacy online.                                                                             </description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=44086"><b>The war on Facebook&#58; privacy on social networks</b></A><br />Jan Andr&#233; Blackburn&#45;Cabrera<br /><i>International Journal of Liability and Scientific Enquiry, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2011) pp. 281 - 304</i><br />In the past seven years, Facebook has been constantly reviewing its privacy policy, with regards to the information it shares about its users and the information users share online. Like in any social network, Facebook users are at great risk when using the platform. This paper will analyse Facebook&#39;s &#39;Privacy&#39; settings and the implications to its users. It will depict problems with the platform, specifically privacy options that were eliminated. The paper will also analyse the legal implications of deficient privacy policies in the social network business model &#40;which thrives on &#39;connections&#39;&#41;. It will also provide recommendations for CEO Mark Zuckerberg regarding changes to the privacy settings and the visibility of these settings on his site. There have been various attempts to regulate internet privacy through complaints against Facebook, both in Canada and the USA. The current regulatory framework for the social network is inadequate and the recommendations put forth in this paper are needed to address an important lacuna in this regulatory area of privacy online.                                                                             </p>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:identifier>10.1504/IJLSE.2011.044086</dc:identifier>
<dc:source>International Journal of Liability and Scientific Enquiry, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2011) pp. 281 - 304</dc:source>
<dc:creator>Jan Andr&#233; Blackburn&#45;Cabrera</dc:creator>
<dc:contributor>Fauteux Hall, 57 Louis Pasteur St., Ottawa, Ontario K1N 6N5, Canada</dc:contributor>
<dc:subject>Facebook</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>social media</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>internet</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>world wide web</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>blogs</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>blogging</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>social networking</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>networks</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>privacy settings</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>privacy policies</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Mark Zuckerberg</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>information sharing</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>information users</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>virtual communities</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>web based communities</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>online communities</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>e&#45;communities</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>electronic communities</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>web platforms</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>risk</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>privacy options</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>legal implications</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>business models</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>connections</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>settings visibility</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>internet regulation</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Canada</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>USA</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>United States</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>regulatory frameworks</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>liability</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>scientific enquiry.</dc:subject>
<dc:date>2011-12-08T23:20:50-05:00</dc:date>
<prism:volume>4</prism:volume>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:startingPage>281</prism:startingPage>
<prism:endingPage>304</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2011-12-08T23:20:50-05:00</prism:publicationDate>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJLSE.2011.044087">
<title>Risky &#40;legal&#41; business&#58; HIV and criminal culpability in Victoria</title>
<link>http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=44087</link>
<description>This article examines HIV transmission jurisprudence in the Australian state of Victoria. It details the development of criminal legislation to respond to the issue of HIV and the application of these offences to prosecute charges of HIV transmission in Victoria. It also outlines the case law in Victoria. The article questions the juridical handling of consensual sexuality and HIV risk, within broader frameworks of moral panics about the Other. Same&#45;sex desiring and African men have been the central characters within successful HIV transmission prosecutions, which attribute liability for infectivity within antiquated epidemiological narratives. In those narratives, gay communities and the African nation were positioned as original and perpetuating sources of infections. Medico&#45;scientific discourses have since identified some behaviours as more risky for infection. Infectivity has also been measured as haphazard and random. However, crimino&#45;legal narratives of HIV still rely on hydraulic and definitive conceptualisations of transmission, combined with panics about other racial and sexual bodies.                                                                                         </description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=44087"><b>Risky &#40;legal&#41; business&#58; HIV and criminal culpability in Victoria</b></A><br />Annette Houlihan<br /><i>International Journal of Liability and Scientific Enquiry, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2011) pp. 305 - 327</i><br />This article examines HIV transmission jurisprudence in the Australian state of Victoria. It details the development of criminal legislation to respond to the issue of HIV and the application of these offences to prosecute charges of HIV transmission in Victoria. It also outlines the case law in Victoria. The article questions the juridical handling of consensual sexuality and HIV risk, within broader frameworks of moral panics about the Other. Same&#45;sex desiring and African men have been the central characters within successful HIV transmission prosecutions, which attribute liability for infectivity within antiquated epidemiological narratives. In those narratives, gay communities and the African nation were positioned as original and perpetuating sources of infections. Medico&#45;scientific discourses have since identified some behaviours as more risky for infection. Infectivity has also been measured as haphazard and random. However, crimino&#45;legal narratives of HIV still rely on hydraulic and definitive conceptualisations of transmission, combined with panics about other racial and sexual bodies.                                                                                         </p>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:identifier>10.1504/IJLSE.2011.044087</dc:identifier>
<dc:source>International Journal of Liability and Scientific Enquiry, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2011) pp. 305 - 327</dc:source>
<dc:creator>Annette Houlihan</dc:creator>
<dc:contributor>Socio&#45;Legal Research Centre, Griffith University, 170 Kessels Road, Nathan, Queensland 4111, Australia</dc:contributor>
<dc:subject>criminal law</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>human immunodeficiency virus</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>HIV transmission</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>criminal culpability</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Victoria</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Australia</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>jurisprudence</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>criminal legislation</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>laws</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>prosecutions</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>case law</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>consensual sexuality</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>HIV risks</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>moral panics</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>other</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>otherness</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>same&#45;sex desires</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>men</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Africa</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>epidemiological narratives</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>epidemiology</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>gay communities</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>homosexuals</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>homosexuality</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>infections</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>infection sources</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>medico&#45;scientific discourses</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>risky behaviour</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>haphazard infectivity</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>random infectivity</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>crimino&#45;legal narratives</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>hydraulic conceptualisations</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>definitive conceptualisations</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>racial bodies</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>sexual bodies</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>race</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>liability</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>scientific enquiry.</dc:subject>
<dc:date>2011-12-08T23:20:50-05:00</dc:date>
<prism:volume>4</prism:volume>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:startingPage>305</prism:startingPage>
<prism:endingPage>327</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2011-12-08T23:20:50-05:00</prism:publicationDate>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJLSE.2011.044088">
<title>Image rights   a right worth having&#63;</title>
<link>http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=44088</link>
<description>We are currently living in an age where celebrity endorsements have become part of the norm. For celebrities such as David Beckham, Kim Kardashian and Cheryl Cole, product endorsements are a significant source of income. However there are situations where the celebrities&#39; images have been used to promote products or services that they have not authorised. There are some states which do offer legal protection for personas in the form of image rights, while other states do not. This then begs the question as to whether there needs to be a universal image right and if so what type of right should it be. Since image rights encompass both personality and property rights, this paper proposes that image rights should be treated as a sui generis right. The paper will reach this conclusion by examining the current treatment of image rights in both common and civil law jurisdictions.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=44088"><b>Image rights   a right worth having&#63;</b></A><br />Selma Jaber<br /><i>International Journal of Liability and Scientific Enquiry, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2011) pp. 328 - 357</i><br />We are currently living in an age where celebrity endorsements have become part of the norm. For celebrities such as David Beckham, Kim Kardashian and Cheryl Cole, product endorsements are a significant source of income. However there are situations where the celebrities&#39; images have been used to promote products or services that they have not authorised. There are some states which do offer legal protection for personas in the form of image rights, while other states do not. This then begs the question as to whether there needs to be a universal image right and if so what type of right should it be. Since image rights encompass both personality and property rights, this paper proposes that image rights should be treated as a sui generis right. The paper will reach this conclusion by examining the current treatment of image rights in both common and civil law jurisdictions.</p>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:identifier>10.1504/IJLSE.2011.044088</dc:identifier>
<dc:source>International Journal of Liability and Scientific Enquiry, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2011) pp. 328 - 357</dc:source>
<dc:creator>Selma Jaber</dc:creator>
<dc:contributor>Faculty of Law, University of Toronto, 84 Queen&#39;s Park, Toronto, Ontario, M5S 2C5, Canada</dc:contributor>
<dc:subject>property rights</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>personality rights</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>France</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Germany</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Canada</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>USA</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>United States</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>personas</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>sui generis rights</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>privacy</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>publicity</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>celebrity endorsements</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>commercial goodwill</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>image rights</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>images</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>imagery</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>celebrities</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>David Beckham</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Kim Kardashian</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Cheryl Cole</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>product endorsements</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>income sources</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>product promotion</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>services promotion</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>legal protection</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>universal rights</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>common law</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>civil law</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>jurisdictions</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>civil liability</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>scientific enquiry.</dc:subject>
<dc:date>2011-12-08T23:20:50-05:00</dc:date>
<prism:volume>4</prism:volume>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:startingPage>328</prism:startingPage>
<prism:endingPage>357</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2011-12-08T23:20:50-05:00</prism:publicationDate>
</item>
<item rdf:about="http://dx.doi.org/10.1504/IJLSE.2011.044089">
<title>Documentary credit and fraud&#58; the approach of the English and Jordanian Court</title>
<link>http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=44089</link>
<description>This article shall attempt to cover the subject of the principle of autonomy and the fraud exception rule from all legal angles. An attempt will also be made to analyse any legal principles with reference to documentary credit fraud. Included will be how laws and rules have been applied in previous case studies of fraud involving documentary credit contracts. Both the English and Jordanian justice system and courts will be analysed and examined to uncover any comparative scientific issues and how they may be overcome. Lastly, as there are few cases to study and compare within the Jordanian justice system, and as there are no relevant authorities to discuss the subject with, the case studies from English judiciary have been utilised to assist in the construction of this article.</description>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.inderscience.com/link.php?id=44089"><b>Documentary credit and fraud&#58; the approach of the English and Jordanian Court</b></A><br />Ahmed Adnan Al&#45;Nuemat<br /><i>International Journal of Liability and Scientific Enquiry, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2011) pp. 358 - 370</i><br />This article shall attempt to cover the subject of the principle of autonomy and the fraud exception rule from all legal angles. An attempt will also be made to analyse any legal principles with reference to documentary credit fraud. Included will be how laws and rules have been applied in previous case studies of fraud involving documentary credit contracts. Both the English and Jordanian justice system and courts will be analysed and examined to uncover any comparative scientific issues and how they may be overcome. Lastly, as there are few cases to study and compare within the Jordanian justice system, and as there are no relevant authorities to discuss the subject with, the case studies from English judiciary have been utilised to assist in the construction of this article.</p>]]></content:encoded>
<dc:identifier>10.1504/IJLSE.2011.044089</dc:identifier>
<dc:source>International Journal of Liability and Scientific Enquiry, Vol. 4, No. 4 (2011) pp. 358 - 370</dc:source>
<dc:creator>Ahmed Adnan Al&#45;Nuemat</dc:creator>
<dc:contributor>Al&#45;Balqa Applied University, P.O. Box 69, Amman, 11821, Jordan</dc:contributor>
<dc:subject>documentary credits</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>common law</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Jordanian courts</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Jordan</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>English courts</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>England</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>UK</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>United Kingdom</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>autonomy</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>fraud exception rule</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>legal principles</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>laws</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>legal rules</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>contracts</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>justice systems</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Chester Sztejn</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Henry Schroder Banking Corporation</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>USA</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>United States</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>United City Merchants</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Montrod</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Grundkotter Fleischvertriebs</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Royal Bank of Canada</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Vitrorefueros</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>Banco Continental</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>liability</dc:subject>
<dc:subject>scientific enquiry.</dc:subject>
<dc:date>2011-12-08T23:20:50-05:00</dc:date>
<prism:volume>4</prism:volume>
<prism:number>4</prism:number>
<prism:startingPage>358</prism:startingPage>
<prism:endingPage>370</prism:endingPage>
<prism:publicationDate>2011-12-08T23:20:50-05:00</prism:publicationDate>
</item>
</rdf:RDF>

