Semester.ly

Johns Hopkins University | EN.660.311

Law and the Internet

3.0

credits

Average Course Rating

(4.03)

Sometimes called “Cyber law,” this course uses the case study method to examine some of the most significant and compelling legal aspects, issues, and concerns involved with operating a business enterprise in an Internet environment. Some of the issues likely to be covered include jurisdiction, resolution of online disputes, trademarks, copyright, licenses, privacy, defamation, obscenity, the application of traditional concepts of tort liability to an Internet context, computer crime, information security, taxation, international considerations, and an analysis of other recent litigation and/or statutes. Pre-requisite of EN.660.205 or EN.660.308 or by permission of instructor. Note: not open to students who have taken EN.660.306 Law and the Internet. No audits.

Fall 2012

(4.19)

Fall 2014

(4.64)

Spring 2013

(3.86)

Spring 2014

(3.68)

Spring 2015

(3.79)

Fall 2012

Professor: Douglas Sandhaus

(4.19)

Students said the best parts of this course were the interesting lectures and the professor’s enthusiasm for the subject. They also liked going over case studies to learn about practical applications of the material. They did not like the evening time slot and the long lectures. Overal , students real y enjoyed the professor and recommended the course as a good overview of internet law and intellectual property.

Fall 2014

Professor: EN.660.332.01-02

(4.64)

Students enjoyed the engaging teaching by an instructor who effectively focused on relevant and current subject matter. They thought the greatest drawback of the class was the smal number of graded assignments for the class. Students also believed the course could best be improved with a larger class size. They thought it was useful for prospective students to know that this course was an enjoyable class that provided a good general introduction to the law as well as an exploration of its more specific subject.

Spring 2013

Professor: Douglas Sandhaus

(3.86)

122The best aspects of this course included the intriguing material and the engaging instructor. One student felt that only the fundamentals were covered in the lectures. One suggestion was to replace the final paper with a group project. Another suggestion included incorporating guest lecturers. Prospective students should be sure to attend every class and take thorough notes.

Spring 2014

Professor: Mark Franceschini

(3.68)

During this course, students learned the law by reading and briefing cases, which they found to be more effective than reading the textbook alone. The lectures were interesting, and students participated in a group project that designated every member with a specific responsibility so that there was no slacking. The professor was great, and kept the class intrigued with his sense of humor and by showing videos. But, the professor’s lecture style confused many students, the midterm was tricky, and at times the course lacked organization and guidance. Suggestions for improvement include: more guidance for the final project, a review session before the midterm, a transparent grading system, and clear questions on exams. Prospective students should always attend class so that they don’t fal behind.

Spring 2015

Professor: Douglas Sandhaus

(3.79)

Students enjoyed the stimulating class discussions, the real world case studies, and the knowledgeable and passionate instructor. Students felt that the midterm did not reflect information addressed in lecture and topics covered in class were not always relevant. Suggestions for improvement included having more homework assignments to enforce concepts learned in lecture and spending class time to review case studies and cover all exam relevant material. Prospective students are encouraged to read the book and cases in order to better understand lecture and participate in discussion. Additional y, many exam questions are based on information covered exclusively in the book.