| Preface |
|
v | |
| Bibliography |
|
xi | |
| Abbreviations |
|
xxv | |
|
|
|
1 | (4) |
|
|
|
1 | (1) |
|
B Notion and meaning of cyberspace |
|
|
2 | (1) |
|
C Internet governance as part of cyberspace regulation |
|
|
3 | (2) |
|
II Confrontation of traditional legal concepts with globalization |
|
|
5 | (28) |
|
A Development of international public law concepts |
|
|
5 | (8) |
|
1 Insights from Roman law |
|
|
5 | (1) |
|
a) Res nullius and res communis |
|
|
5 | (1) |
|
b) Jus naturale and jus gentium |
|
|
6 | (1) |
|
2 Nation States: sovereignty principle |
|
|
7 | (1) |
|
a) Concept of Westphalian Peace Treaty |
|
|
7 | (3) |
|
b) Challenges of borderless cyberspace |
|
|
10 | (3) |
|
B Present international public law in transition |
|
|
13 | (9) |
|
1 Relativization of territoriality principle |
|
|
13 | (1) |
|
a) Scope of territoriality principle |
|
|
13 | (1) |
|
|
|
13 | (2) |
|
|
|
15 | (1) |
|
2 Provocation by the "autonomy of cyberspace" concept |
|
|
15 | (4) |
|
3 Adequacy of analogies to other legal fields |
|
|
19 | (3) |
|
C Escape movement: soft law |
|
|
22 | (11) |
|
1 Notion and forms of self-regulation |
|
|
22 | (2) |
|
2 Legal "quality" of self-regulation |
|
|
24 | (3) |
|
3 Strengths of self-regulation |
|
|
27 | (1) |
|
4 Weaknesses of self-regulation |
|
|
28 | (1) |
|
5 Importance of self-regulation in the online world |
|
|
29 | (4) |
|
III Challenges for regulatory approaches in cyberspace |
|
|
33 | (20) |
|
A Understanding of law and regulation |
|
|
33 | (3) |
|
|
|
33 | (2) |
|
2 Regulation as a tool of the State |
|
|
35 | (1) |
|
B Traditional rationales and concepts of regulation |
|
|
36 | (4) |
|
|
|
36 | (1) |
|
2 Welfare economics theory |
|
|
37 | (1) |
|
|
|
38 | (1) |
|
4 Institutionalism theory |
|
|
38 | (1) |
|
5 Capturel cyclical theory |
|
|
39 | (1) |
|
C Social change as challenge for regulation |
|
|
40 | (13) |
|
1 Social/environmental developments and dynamic concepts |
|
|
41 | (3) |
|
2 Qualitatively improved regulatory strategies |
|
|
44 | (3) |
|
3 Flexibility of law. relative autonomy |
|
|
47 | (1) |
|
a) Theory of open systems |
|
|
47 | (1) |
|
|
|
47 | (2) |
|
c) Relative autonomy and change of law |
|
|
49 | (4) |
|
IV In search for new rule-making approaches in cyberspace |
|
|
53 | (46) |
|
|
|
53 | (10) |
|
|
|
54 | (1) |
|
a) Architecture as key element |
|
|
54 | (3) |
|
b) Influence of law and policy |
|
|
57 | (1) |
|
c) Problems of the code-based approach |
|
|
58 | (2) |
|
2 Lex informatica as alternative |
|
|
60 | (3) |
|
B Regulation through formalized standards and networks |
|
|
63 | (7) |
|
|
|
63 | (2) |
|
2 Interlinked networks approach |
|
|
65 | (3) |
|
3 Complexity structures in networks |
|
|
68 | (2) |
|
|
|
70 | (10) |
|
1 Law-making through (informal) social contract |
|
|
70 | (4) |
|
2 Informality features in law-making |
|
|
74 | (2) |
|
3 Customary Internet-ional law |
|
|
76 | (2) |
|
4 Appendix: Importance of accountability |
|
|
78 | (2) |
|
D Normativity-oriented regulatory concepts |
|
|
80 | (9) |
|
1 Philosophical background |
|
|
80 | (2) |
|
2 Hybrid economy and information society |
|
|
82 | (3) |
|
3 Democracy, participation, constitutionalism |
|
|
85 | (1) |
|
a) Concept of "civic virtue" |
|
|
85 | (2) |
|
b) Concept of "semiotic democracy" |
|
|
87 | (1) |
|
c) Concept of societal constitutionalism |
|
|
88 | (1) |
|
E Assessment of regulatory theories and of possible future perspectives |
|
|
89 | (10) |
|
1 Complexity of structured matrix |
|
|
89 | (1) |
|
2 Polycentric and sectoral regulation |
|
|
90 | (2) |
|
3 Hybrid and mesh regulation |
|
|
92 | (3) |
|
|
|
95 | (4) |
|
V Development of a "Global Cyberspace Framework" (GCF) |
|
|
99 | (62) |
|
|
|
99 | (3) |
|
B Policy parameters for cyberspace rule-making |
|
|
102 | (13) |
|
1 Political visions of rule-making |
|
|
102 | (4) |
|
2 Scope and limits of rule-making approaches |
|
|
106 | (3) |
|
3 Structured rule-making processes (multi-layer governance) |
|
|
109 | (1) |
|
a) Principles of a multi-layer approach |
|
|
109 | (1) |
|
b) Development of normative multi-layer governance principles |
|
|
110 | (1) |
|
c) Macro-legal and micro-legal level approach as alternative |
|
|
111 | (1) |
|
4 Legitimacy of cyberspace rule-making |
|
|
112 | (3) |
|
C Guiding principles of a Global Cyberspace Framework |
|
|
115 | (34) |
|
1 Formal/procedural principles of a Global Cyberspace Framework |
|
|
115 | (1) |
|
a) Need for a dynamic and flexible approach |
|
|
115 | (3) |
|
b) Need for a user-centered and community-related approach |
|
|
118 | (2) |
|
2 Identification of the relevant substantive principles of cyberspace |
|
|
120 | (6) |
|
3 Realization of multistakeholder participation |
|
|
126 | (1) |
|
|
|
127 | (2) |
|
b) Important elements of multistakeholder participation |
|
|
129 | (2) |
|
c) Multistakeholder participation in Internet governance debates |
|
|
131 | (5) |
|
4 Compliance with basic socio-legal values |
|
|
136 | (1) |
|
a) Acknowledgement of cultural diversity |
|
|
136 | (2) |
|
b) Recognition of cyberspace openness |
|
|
138 | (4) |
|
c) Implementation of corresponding technological values: neutrality and interoperability |
|
|
142 | (3) |
|
5 Implementation of structural governance principles |
|
|
145 | (1) |
|
a) Organizational management requirements |
|
|
145 | (3) |
|
b) Enforcement and dispute resolution requirements |
|
|
148 | (1) |
|
D Incorporation of a Global cyberspace framework |
|
|
149 | (12) |
|
1 Need for internationalization of policy structures |
|
|
150 | (2) |
|
2 Need for multi-layer/polycentric approach with multistakeholder participation |
|
|
152 | (2) |
|
3 Need for consensus on guiding principles |
|
|
154 | (1) |
|
a) General declaration and additional protocols |
|
|
154 | (2) |
|
b) Agreement on guiding principles |
|
|
156 | (2) |
|
c) Quality of rule-making |
|
|
158 | (1) |
|
4 Need for improved emphasis on the functions of rules |
|
|
159 | (2) |
| Index |
|
161 | |
Biežāk uzdotie jautājumi par e-grāmatām