Borders on, or border around: The future of the internet

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

11 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This article illustrates how borders currently are being placed within the Internet through a combination of jurisdictional claims and technical developments. It makes clear that these borders are transforming the Internet from an open, and virtually global, communications network, into something that more resembles our physical world divided by borders of different kinds. It submits that, in light of the threat of such an undesirable development, we must re-examine the possibility of treating the Internet as a separate space. Such a space must be approached in a context-specific manner. In other words, we must deal with each legal issue separately. Furthermore, if states ever are to be inclined to give up their claims to regulating the Internet, alternative forms of regulation must be put in place; relying on self-regulation is not an option today. In addition, an appropriate judiciary must be put in place, and effective enforcement must be ensured.
Focusing on Internet defamation, the article highlights how a well-recognized regulatory framework is already in place through the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and that an adjudicative body exists in the United Nation's Human Rights Committee. Drawing upon these existing mechanisms, a Convention Model to regulate cross-border Internet defamation arising out of mass-communication is presented.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)343-381
Number of pages39
JournalAlbany Law Journal of Science and Technology
Volume16
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2006

Fingerprint

Internet
Civil Rights
United Nations
Defamation

Cite this

@article{0b999e3734ff449f9ffd88182383241a,
title = "Borders on, or border around: The future of the internet",
abstract = "This article illustrates how borders currently are being placed within the Internet through a combination of jurisdictional claims and technical developments. It makes clear that these borders are transforming the Internet from an open, and virtually global, communications network, into something that more resembles our physical world divided by borders of different kinds. It submits that, in light of the threat of such an undesirable development, we must re-examine the possibility of treating the Internet as a separate space. Such a space must be approached in a context-specific manner. In other words, we must deal with each legal issue separately. Furthermore, if states ever are to be inclined to give up their claims to regulating the Internet, alternative forms of regulation must be put in place; relying on self-regulation is not an option today. In addition, an appropriate judiciary must be put in place, and effective enforcement must be ensured.Focusing on Internet defamation, the article highlights how a well-recognized regulatory framework is already in place through the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and that an adjudicative body exists in the United Nation's Human Rights Committee. Drawing upon these existing mechanisms, a Convention Model to regulate cross-border Internet defamation arising out of mass-communication is presented.",
author = "Svantesson, {Dan Jerker B}",
note = "Copyright {\circledC} Albany Law School of Union University. All rights reserved. Archiving permission granted.",
year = "2006",
language = "English",
volume = "16",
pages = "343--381",
journal = "Albany Law Journal of Science & Technolog",
issn = "1059-4280",
publisher = "Students of Albany Law School of Union University",
number = "2",

}

Borders on, or border around : The future of the internet. / Svantesson, Dan Jerker B.

In: Albany Law Journal of Science and Technology, Vol. 16, No. 2, 2006, p. 343-381.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Borders on, or border around

T2 - The future of the internet

AU - Svantesson, Dan Jerker B

N1 - Copyright © Albany Law School of Union University. All rights reserved. Archiving permission granted.

PY - 2006

Y1 - 2006

N2 - This article illustrates how borders currently are being placed within the Internet through a combination of jurisdictional claims and technical developments. It makes clear that these borders are transforming the Internet from an open, and virtually global, communications network, into something that more resembles our physical world divided by borders of different kinds. It submits that, in light of the threat of such an undesirable development, we must re-examine the possibility of treating the Internet as a separate space. Such a space must be approached in a context-specific manner. In other words, we must deal with each legal issue separately. Furthermore, if states ever are to be inclined to give up their claims to regulating the Internet, alternative forms of regulation must be put in place; relying on self-regulation is not an option today. In addition, an appropriate judiciary must be put in place, and effective enforcement must be ensured.Focusing on Internet defamation, the article highlights how a well-recognized regulatory framework is already in place through the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and that an adjudicative body exists in the United Nation's Human Rights Committee. Drawing upon these existing mechanisms, a Convention Model to regulate cross-border Internet defamation arising out of mass-communication is presented.

AB - This article illustrates how borders currently are being placed within the Internet through a combination of jurisdictional claims and technical developments. It makes clear that these borders are transforming the Internet from an open, and virtually global, communications network, into something that more resembles our physical world divided by borders of different kinds. It submits that, in light of the threat of such an undesirable development, we must re-examine the possibility of treating the Internet as a separate space. Such a space must be approached in a context-specific manner. In other words, we must deal with each legal issue separately. Furthermore, if states ever are to be inclined to give up their claims to regulating the Internet, alternative forms of regulation must be put in place; relying on self-regulation is not an option today. In addition, an appropriate judiciary must be put in place, and effective enforcement must be ensured.Focusing on Internet defamation, the article highlights how a well-recognized regulatory framework is already in place through the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, and that an adjudicative body exists in the United Nation's Human Rights Committee. Drawing upon these existing mechanisms, a Convention Model to regulate cross-border Internet defamation arising out of mass-communication is presented.

M3 - Article

VL - 16

SP - 343

EP - 381

JO - Albany Law Journal of Science & Technolog

JF - Albany Law Journal of Science & Technolog

SN - 1059-4280

IS - 2

ER -