My Online Bill of Rights--Though I'm not Convinced it's Necessary

I agree with the majority of what has been said thus far, and I think the original Bill of Rights is certainly flexible enough to adapt to evolving technologies. That being said, there are undoubtedly a number of issues that do not map very well on to the digital world from the analog world, and as time goes on, I am confident that we will see the Supreme Court decide on many cases that will shape an unwritten online Bill of Rights. I will now attempt to make what I think an online Bill of Rights should look like.

1.1 The government cannot unmask an individual’s online anonymity unless the issue is of clear public safety or the anonymous individual’s activity passes a threshold of clear maliciousness against another individual.
1.2 Copyright law may not expand any farther due to the chilling of creativity and free speech that occurs as the fair use exception get smaller.
1.3 Substantial disruption that negatively affects the school’s ability to carry out its mission to educate may be regulated.
1.4 Net neutrality is not a necessary condition by which ISPs must abide, but if they do choose to sell a product that is not “net neutral,” they must explicitly share that information with the consumer.
4.1 Computers constitute a unique personal item, and accordingly, individuals maintain a higher expectation of privacy for these items. A warrant must be obtained to search a computer for evidence of criminal activity.
4.2 The border (interior international airports included) is a unique area where security concerns demand that expectations of privacy are lower. Reasonable suspicion is a fair standard for search and seizure at the border.
5.1 The jurisdiction of the court depends upon the intended audience of the author who transmitted the digital information in an online forum.
6.1 Cameras in the courtroom transmitting live broadcasts of courtroom cases are prohibited due to the behavior-altering effects of being on camera.