-- RETURN TO TOP --
Legal Issues of Info War
- See also Copyright & Cyber Law on AWC Gateway to Internet
- See also FOIA and Privacy Resources on AWC Gateway to Internet
- See also Laws, Regulations, & Restraints on AWC Gateway to Intelligence
- Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), full text
- Overview of the Privacy Act of 1974, May 2004, Dept of Justice
- Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986
- US Code, Title 18, Part I, Chapter 119 - Wire and Electronic Communications Interception and Interception of Oral Communications
- US Code, Title 22, Chapter 18, Subchapter V - Dissemination Abroad of Information about the United States
- Public Law 80-402, United States Information and Educational Exchange Act of 1948 (Smith-Mundt Act)
- State Department International Visitor Leadership Program History
- 1948 – Representative Karl E. Mundt and Senator H. Alexander Smith marshaled a bill through Congress. Public Law 402, 80th Congress, commonly called the Smith-Mundt Act, established a statutory information agency for the first time in a period of peace with a mission to "promote a better understanding of the United States in other countries, and to increase mutual understanding" between Americans and foreigners. The Smith-Mundt Act gave full recognition to the importance of educational and cultural exchanges sponsored by the government. In recognition of the need to build up a corps of well-informed intellectuals and opinion leaders in the political and social infrastructure, the International Visitor Program was started.
- See also Schmitt analysis, one method for discussing whether a particular IO action constitutes a use of force
- An Assesment of International Legal Issues in Information Operations (local copy), DoD Office of General Counsel
- Cyberlaw Edition of The Air Force Law Review (local copy), 2009
- The Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School
- An Introduction to Legal Aspects of
Operations in Cyberspace (local copy), by Wingfield and Michael, 28 Apr 04, Naval Postgraduate School
- Legal Constraints on Information Warfare (local copy), by Shulman, a CSAT paper
- Legal Aspects of Offensive Information Operations in Space (local copy, PDF), by Wingfield, as originally posted at USAFA (local copy, DOC)
- The Center for Law and Military Operations (CLAMO)
- Operational Law Handbook (local copy), 2008 ed., International and Operational Law Department, Judge Advocate General's School, US Army, Charlottesville, VA
- Chapter 9 is on Information Operations
- Information Warfare and International Law (local copy), by Greenberg
et al, NDU
- Information Assurance: Legal, Regulatory, Policy and Organizational Considerations, Joint Chiefs of Staff, 4th Edition, August, 1999 (local copy)
- IW Cyberlaw: The Legal Issues of Information Warfare, by DiCenso, in Airpower Journal
- The International Legal Implications of Information Warfare, by Aldrich, in Airpower Journal, Fall 1996
- Legal and Practical Constraints on Information Warfare, by Kuschner
- Peacetime Foreign Data Manipulation as One Aspect of Offensive Information Warfare: Questions of Legality under the United Nations Charter Article 2 (4) (local copy, 4.5 Mb), by Bond, Naval War College, 1996
- Cyberspace Law, at FindLaw site
- Hague Convention (V) respecting the Rights and Duties of Neutral Powers and Persons in Case of War on Land. The Hague, 18 October 1907.
- Chapter 1, Article 3. Belligerents are likewise forbidden to:
- (a) Erect on the territory of a neutral Power a wireless telegraphy station or other apparatus for the purpose of communicating with belligerent forces on land or sea;
- (b) Use any installation of this kind established by them before the war on the territory of a neutral Power for purely military purposes, and which has not been opened for the service of public messages.
- Chapter 1, Article 7. A neutral Power is not called upon to prevent the export or transport, on behalf of one or other of the belligerents, of arms, munitions of war, or, in general, of anything which can be of use to an army or a fleet.
- Chapter 1, Article 8. A neutral Power is not called upon to forbid or restrict the use on behalf of the belligerents of telegraph or telephone cables or of wireless telegraphy apparatus belonging to it or to companies or private individuals.
- Chapter 1, Article 9. Every measure of restriction or prohibition taken by a neutral Power in regard to the matters referred to in Articles 7 and 8 must be impartially applied by it to both belligerents. A neutral Power must see to the same obligation being observed by companies or private individuals owning telegraph or telephone cables or wireless telegraphy apparatus.
- Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977.
- Part III : Methods and means of warfare -- Combatant and prisoner-of-war status #Section I -- Methods and means of warfare
- Article 37 - Prohibition of perfidy
- 1. It is prohibited to kill, injure or capture an adversary by resort to perfidy. Acts inviting the confidence of an adversary to lead him to believe that he is entitled to, or is obliged to accord, protection under the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, with intent to betray that confidence, shall constitute perfidy. The following acts are examples of perfidy:
- (a) the feigning of an intent to negotiate under a flag of truce or of a surrender;
- (b) the feigning of an incapacitation by wounds or sickness;
- (c) the feigning of civilian, non-combatant status; and
- (d) the feigning of protected status by the use of signs, emblems or uniforms of the United Nations or of neutral or other States not Parties to the conflict.
- 2. Ruses of war are not prohibited. Such ruses are acts which are intended to mislead an adversary or to induce him to act recklessly but which infringe no rule of international law applicable in armed conflict and which are not perfidious because they do not invite the confidence of an adversary with respect to protection under that law. The following are examples of such ruses: the use of camouflage, decoys, mock operations and misinformation.