Geo-identification and the Internet: A new challenge for Australia's internet regulation

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

People interacting online may feel that they are in a different world. However,physically they are still located somewhere at a geographically identifiablelocation. Regardless of how sophisticated our presence in cyberspace becomes,this connection to physical locations will remain. Consequently, even acts carriedout in cyberspace, are carried out by persons physically within the jurisdiction ofsome government. For example, a contract entered into online, is entered into bypersons physically located within the jurisdiction of some governments. Similarly,Internet defamation cases have an offender and a victim, both of which arephysically located within the jurisdiction of some government. Thus, whileundeniably we are witnessing a decline in the significance of distance, thesignificance of location remains constant.Up until recently, it has been widely accepted that the Internet is ‘borderless’ –that is, as a medium for communication, the Internet works largely independentof geographical borders.1 However, as the Internet, and our use of it, becomesincreasingly sophisticated, geography starts playing an increasingly importantrole. For example, businesses want their advertisement to be targeted at ageographically relevant audience, when we use search-engines, we want thesearch results to be geographically relevant to us and the law placesgeographical restrictions on the distribution of content.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)155-177
Number of pages23
JournalMurdoch University Electronic Journal of Law
Volume14
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2007

Fingerprint

Internet
regulation
jurisdiction
virtual reality
search engine
offender
geography
human being
Law
communication

Cite this

@article{dcbe4a7c78fe4f35a46e52099722aa78,
title = "Geo-identification and the Internet: A new challenge for Australia's internet regulation",
abstract = "People interacting online may feel that they are in a different world. However,physically they are still located somewhere at a geographically identifiablelocation. Regardless of how sophisticated our presence in cyberspace becomes,this connection to physical locations will remain. Consequently, even acts carriedout in cyberspace, are carried out by persons physically within the jurisdiction ofsome government. For example, a contract entered into online, is entered into bypersons physically located within the jurisdiction of some governments. Similarly,Internet defamation cases have an offender and a victim, both of which arephysically located within the jurisdiction of some government. Thus, whileundeniably we are witnessing a decline in the significance of distance, thesignificance of location remains constant.Up until recently, it has been widely accepted that the Internet is ‘borderless’ –that is, as a medium for communication, the Internet works largely independentof geographical borders.1 However, as the Internet, and our use of it, becomesincreasingly sophisticated, geography starts playing an increasingly importantrole. For example, businesses want their advertisement to be targeted at ageographically relevant audience, when we use search-engines, we want thesearch results to be geographically relevant to us and the law placesgeographical restrictions on the distribution of content.",
author = "Svantesson, {Dan Jerker B}",
year = "2007",
language = "English",
volume = "14",
pages = "155--177",
journal = "Murdoch University Electronic Journal of Law",
issn = "1321-8247",
number = "2",

}

Geo-identification and the Internet : A new challenge for Australia's internet regulation. / Svantesson, Dan Jerker B.

In: Murdoch University Electronic Journal of Law, Vol. 14, No. 2, 2007, p. 155-177.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - Geo-identification and the Internet

T2 - A new challenge for Australia's internet regulation

AU - Svantesson, Dan Jerker B

PY - 2007

Y1 - 2007

N2 - People interacting online may feel that they are in a different world. However,physically they are still located somewhere at a geographically identifiablelocation. Regardless of how sophisticated our presence in cyberspace becomes,this connection to physical locations will remain. Consequently, even acts carriedout in cyberspace, are carried out by persons physically within the jurisdiction ofsome government. For example, a contract entered into online, is entered into bypersons physically located within the jurisdiction of some governments. Similarly,Internet defamation cases have an offender and a victim, both of which arephysically located within the jurisdiction of some government. Thus, whileundeniably we are witnessing a decline in the significance of distance, thesignificance of location remains constant.Up until recently, it has been widely accepted that the Internet is ‘borderless’ –that is, as a medium for communication, the Internet works largely independentof geographical borders.1 However, as the Internet, and our use of it, becomesincreasingly sophisticated, geography starts playing an increasingly importantrole. For example, businesses want their advertisement to be targeted at ageographically relevant audience, when we use search-engines, we want thesearch results to be geographically relevant to us and the law placesgeographical restrictions on the distribution of content.

AB - People interacting online may feel that they are in a different world. However,physically they are still located somewhere at a geographically identifiablelocation. Regardless of how sophisticated our presence in cyberspace becomes,this connection to physical locations will remain. Consequently, even acts carriedout in cyberspace, are carried out by persons physically within the jurisdiction ofsome government. For example, a contract entered into online, is entered into bypersons physically located within the jurisdiction of some governments. Similarly,Internet defamation cases have an offender and a victim, both of which arephysically located within the jurisdiction of some government. Thus, whileundeniably we are witnessing a decline in the significance of distance, thesignificance of location remains constant.Up until recently, it has been widely accepted that the Internet is ‘borderless’ –that is, as a medium for communication, the Internet works largely independentof geographical borders.1 However, as the Internet, and our use of it, becomesincreasingly sophisticated, geography starts playing an increasingly importantrole. For example, businesses want their advertisement to be targeted at ageographically relevant audience, when we use search-engines, we want thesearch results to be geographically relevant to us and the law placesgeographical restrictions on the distribution of content.

M3 - Article

VL - 14

SP - 155

EP - 177

JO - Murdoch University Electronic Journal of Law

JF - Murdoch University Electronic Journal of Law

SN - 1321-8247

IS - 2

ER -