Legal Frameworks for the Internet Axel Bruns [email_address] KCB202

Internet Governance Governance is complex: emerging, rapidly changing environment international reach difficult to address through national laws Differing philosophies: strong state intervention aimed at growing ICT sector possibly overly techno-centric approach reliance on market mechanisms driving developments threat of over-commercialisation of the Internet cyber-libertarianism – Net as independent entity ‘ Californian Ideology’, ignoring influence of corporate interests Example: ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers) regulates domain names (google.com) and IP addresses (10.0.0.1) private, non-profit company with government, business, and community representation in practice seen as strongly influenced by US government (Flew pp. 218-225)

Governance is complex:

emerging, rapidly changing environment

international reach difficult to address through national laws

Differing philosophies:

strong state intervention aimed at growing ICT sector

possibly overly techno-centric approach

reliance on market mechanisms driving developments

threat of over-commercialisation of the Internet

cyber-libertarianism – Net as independent entity

‘ Californian Ideology’, ignoring influence of corporate interests

Example: ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers)

regulates domain names (google.com) and IP addresses (10.0.0.1)

private, non-profit company with government, business, and community representation

in practice seen as strongly influenced by US government

(Flew pp. 218-225)

Intellectual Property Copyright: balancing public and private rights: access to knowledge vs. protection of knowledge aimed at encouraging knowledge creation: enabling creators to profit from their works protects expression of ideas, not ideas themselves especially crucial in a knowledge economy Problems: copyright increasingly restrictive: longer duration, fewer exceptions copying and distribution increasingly easier: digital forms of content significant income streams from existing copyright materials: shift from content creation to copyright exploitation in some industries decline in internal content innovation, battle with external content innovators (Flew pp. 225-228)

Copyright:

balancing public and private rights:

access to knowledge vs. protection of knowledge

aimed at encouraging knowledge creation:

enabling creators to profit from their works

protects expression of ideas, not ideas themselves

especially crucial in a knowledge economy

Problems:

copyright increasingly restrictive: longer duration, fewer exceptions

copying and distribution increasingly easier: digital forms of content

significant income streams from existing copyright materials:

shift from content creation to copyright exploitation in some industries

decline in internal content innovation, battle with external content innovators

(Flew pp. 225-228)

Chilling Effects Restrictive intellectual property regimes: gradual export from US to rest of the world: free trade agreements, TRIPS agreement, etc. countries resisting such regimes experiencing strong growth: e.g. China: generally lax IP enforcement seen as undermining innovation: limited access to / ability to use existing knowledge ‘ information feudalism’ (Drahos & Braithwaite 2002): use of IP rights to inhibit commercial competition secondary implications on user rights – e.g. TPM, DRM: technological protection mechanisms: preventing unauthorised use and copying digital rights management: limiting use to specific authorised contexts undermining existing ‘fair use’ copyright exceptions preventing consumers from legitimate uses and DIY modifications of products (Flew pp. 228-234)

Restrictive intellectual property regimes:

gradual export from US to rest of the world:

free trade agreements, TRIPS agreement, etc.

countries resisting such regimes experiencing strong growth:

e.g. China: generally lax IP enforcement

seen as undermining innovation:

limited access to / ability to use existing knowledge

‘ information feudalism’ (Drahos & Braithwaite 2002):

use of IP rights to inhibit commercial competition

secondary implications on user rights – e.g. TPM, DRM:

technological protection mechanisms: preventing unauthorised use and copying

digital rights management: limiting use to specific authorised contexts

undermining existing ‘fair use’ copyright exceptions

preventing consumers from legitimate uses and DIY modifications of products

(Flew pp. 228-234)

Emerging Alternatives Responses to governance problems: emergence of bottom-up user movements alternative copyright models: open source licences, creative commons not anti-copyright, but more rights for users than copyright ‘ new public interest’ argument (Yochai Benkler): economic and intellectual property policy in the public interest (not in the interest of corporations and industry) returning to original copyright intentions: promoting content creation and innovation as well as allowing creators to profit from their works alternative Internet governance models: as yet unclear – difficult because Internet has become so indispensable UN oversight, alternatives to ICANN, alternative Internet-style networks? (Flew pp. 236-239)

Responses to governance problems:

emergence of bottom-up user movements

alternative copyright models:

open source licences, creative commons

not anti-copyright, but more rights for users than copyright

‘ new public interest’ argument (Yochai Benkler):

economic and intellectual property policy in the public interest (not in the interest of corporations and industry)

returning to original copyright intentions: promoting content creation and innovation as well as allowing creators to profit from their works

alternative Internet governance models:

as yet unclear – difficult because Internet has become so indispensable

UN oversight, alternatives to ICANN, alternative Internet-style networks?

(Flew pp. 236-239)