Against Against Cyberanarchy (original) (raw)
Related papers
The University of Chicago Law Review, 1998
The Supreme Court's partial invalidation of the Communications Decency Act on First Amendment grounds raises the more fundamental question of whether the state can regulate cyberspace at all.' Several commentators, whom I shall call "regulation skeptics," have argued that it cannot. Some courts have also expressed skepticism. The popular and technical press are full of similar claims. The regulation skeptics make both descriptive and normative claims. On the descriptive side, they claim that the application of geographically based conceptions of legal regulation and choice of law to a-geographical cyberspace activity either makes no sense or leads to hopeless confusion. On the normative side, they argue that because cyberspace transactions occur "simultaneously and equally" in all national jurisdictions, regulation of the flow of this information by any particular national jurisdiction illegitimately produces significant negative spillover effects in other jurisdictions. They also claim that the architecture of cyberspace precludes notice of governing law that is crucial to the law's legitimacy. In contrast, they argue, cyberspace participants are much better positioned than national regulators to design comprehensive legal rules that would both internalize the costs of cyberspace activity and give proper notice to cyberspace participants. The regulation skeptics conclude from these arguments that national regulators should "defer to the self-regulatory efforts of Cyberspace participants."
… Journal of Law and …, 2009
Purpose -The purpose of this paper is to focus on existing law, the legal system and jurisprudence circling round territorial concepts. Design/methodology/approach -This paper is an opinion piece based on current and recent analysis of legal principle. Findings -After the emergence of the internet as well as cyberspace, human activities are not confined solely to the physical world. They have been extended to a very different and peculiar nonphysical world. This world is everywhere and at the same time it is nowhere; and necessarily it is difficult to prescribe rules and enforce the same regarding cyberspace for its everywhere and nowhere proposition. The elementary concept of jurisprudence e.g. title, ownership and possession, etc. cannot be considered in the way we usually understand in case of real world. However, cyberspace has to be controlled by a legal framework that involves new ideas, leading to a new challenge in existing legal philosophy exclusively based on territorial concept. Originality/value -Traditional territorial jurisprudence has to be revised in the light of cyber necessities arising out of high technological development. Moreover, certain new institutions have to be established in order to apply new principles in dispute settlement of cyber matters. This paper both identifies the need and options for the future.
Anarchy, State, and the Internet: An Essay on Law-Making in Cyberspace (article 3)
1995
Abstract {par. 1} The legal rules that will govern cyberspace are yet to be clarified. Important as those rules will be, a prior question is" who will make and enforce those rules?" Professor Post examines various" controllers," or points from which rules can issue, ranging from technical network protocols, to private organizations like universities, to Congressional statutes.
Signs and Portents in Cyberspace: The Rise of Jus Internet as a New Order in International Law
23 Fordham Intell. Prop. Media & Ent. L.J. 1311
We live in a new age of global communications. This technological age is now threatened by exaggerations that arise from fear of the unknown. What once was a free frontier of discovery has now become a source of contention. Governments around the world have continued to push toward greater surveillance in what should be an area of accessible knowledge. This recent governmental approach vis-a-vis the Internet is not only misguided, but also contrary to the values that supposedly guide democratic nations. This Article does not deny that threats exist in cyberspace, but it warns against fear-based actions that would encroach on the rights that human beings cherish. In particular, this Article observes that the regulation of the Internet must be aimed at the development of a cyberspace protected by governments, which must also maintain access to information for their citizens in light of a "world public order of human dignity," "one which approximates the optimum access by all human beings to all things they cherish."
Cyberspace: A New Threat to the Sovereignty of the State
This paper discusses one of the contemporary challenging issues—it is the challenge of e-commerce to the sovereignty of the state, where governments are unable to implement their own laws on disputed cases resulting from trans-border e-commerce interactions. The objective of the current research is to draw attention to the impact of international characteristics of e-commerce on the sovereignty of state, and to identify the factors affecting this sovereignty. The issue of the dynamicity of time and place will be taken into consideration, where activities carried out over the internet are characterized by their cross-border dimension. Based on real e-commerce case studies disputed on international level, this paper will draw on the legal perspective of cyberspace, identifying the relationship between cyberspace and state sovereignty, and outlining the mechanisms by which cyberspace could cross borders and the territory of the state despite all the precautions taken by the state to protect its sovereignty.