Internet Governance and Regulation: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
How should the Internet do what it does? And what is it that the Internet does? Who should be responsible for the Internet? | How should the Internet do what it does? And what is it that the Internet does? Who should be responsible for the Internet? | ||
These are the questions behind the idea of "Internet governance," to which the different Internet stakeholders have conflicting answers - ranging from a strict regulatory scheme, like those applied to traditional communications media (like television and cell phones), to vehement opposition to any kind of formal control structures. Part of this disagreement stems from the Internet's technical nature. which suggests two ways of thinking about Internet governance: (1) control of the mechanisms comprising the technical structure and standards, and (2) regulating the substantive use of the Internet. (Under Yochai Benkler's framework, these would be the "physical infrastructure" and "logical" layers, and the "content" layer, respectively.) The Net's origins as a US Department of Defense-funded research network, and the continued heavy influence on its maintenance and development by US actors, meanwhile, have given rise to conflicting national and international dimensions to these questions | These are the questions behind the idea of "Internet governance," to which the different Internet stakeholders have conflicting answers - ranging from a strict regulatory scheme, like those applied to traditional communications media (like television and cell phones), to vehement opposition to any kind of formal control structures. Part of this disagreement stems from the Internet's technical nature. which suggests two ways of thinking about Internet governance: (1) control of the mechanisms comprising the technical structure and standards, and (2) regulating the substantive use of the Internet. (Under Yochai Benkler's framework, these would be the "physical infrastructure" and "logical" layers, and the "content" layer, respectively.) The Net's origins as a US Department of Defense-funded research network, and the continued heavy influence on its maintenance and development by US actors, meanwhile, have given rise to conflicting national and international dimensions to these questions. This topic seeks to explore through select case studies already encountered in class the issues of the Internet today, to provide a clearer picture of where Internet governance is headed in the near future, and to establish why (or even whether) it matters. | ||
Throughout this course, we have encountered many "issues at the frontier." For some of these issues, regulation may be useful (e.g. [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/iif/The_Future_of_%C2%A9_and_entertainment the Future of Copyright]), whereas for others, not as much (e.g. [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/iif/The_Future_of_News the Future of News]). But there is no distinct line separating the two categories. | Throughout this course, we have encountered many "issues at the frontier." For some of these issues, regulation may be useful (e.g. [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/iif/The_Future_of_%C2%A9_and_entertainment the Future of Copyright]), whereas for others, not as much (e.g. [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/iif/The_Future_of_News the Future of News]). But there is no distinct line separating the two categories. | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
Several theories exist on how the Internet should be governed and regulated, if at all. Below are two examples of structures that exist today to regulate the Internet, and the relative zones they seek to regulate. Are these bodies the right way to go? Do they meet the needs of today? | Several theories exist on how the Internet should be governed and regulated, if at all. Below are two examples of structures that exist today to regulate the Internet, and the relative zones they seek to regulate. Are these bodies the right way to go? Do they meet the needs of today? | ||
==Concrete Question of the Week== | ==Concrete Question of the Week== | ||
| Line 44: | Line 17: | ||
*[http://www.internetgovernance.org/people-mueller.html Milton Mueller] of Syracuse University's [http://www.internetgovernance.org/index.html Internet Governance Project]. | *[http://www.internetgovernance.org/people-mueller.html Milton Mueller] of Syracuse University's [http://www.internetgovernance.org/index.html Internet Governance Project]. | ||
==Session | ==Session Outline== | ||
The session will be designed to view the issues that we have previously considered in this class in the context of Internet regulation. The class will be divided into two parts. | The session will be designed to view the issues that we have previously considered in this class in the context of Internet regulation. The class will be divided into two parts. | ||
| Line 58: | Line 31: | ||
==Readings== | ==Readings== | ||
===Governance example: ICANN's top-level domain name ("TLD") expansion=== | |||
This summer, the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Icann Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers] (ICANN) [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/7475986.stm voted] to expand the possible [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top-level_domain top-level domain names] (TLDs) such that individuals, businesses, governments, and other entities can register TLDs composed of any combination of letters in any script, so long as they can show a "business plan and technical capacity" to back up their desired domain. Most domains will end up going to the highest bidder in an auction process. Despite ICANN's expansion of TLDs, the Department of Commerce has [http://www.ntia.doc.gov/comments/2008/ICANN_080730.html reiterated] that its management of changes to the authoritative [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNS_root_zone root zone] file (including its contracts with VeriSign and ICANN) will remain intact. | |||
*Should we be concerned about control of generic domains, like ".news" or ".shop," by a few wealthy individuals or groups? | |||
*Should we worry that ICANN is the sole body setting the standards for TLDs and resolving disputes? | |||
*Who should control the root zone file, and why? | |||
====Required Reading==== | |||
*[http://www.institut-gouvernance.org/en/analyse/fiche-analyse-265.html The Politics and Issues of Internet Governance] - an essay by Prof. Milton Mueller | *[http://www.institut-gouvernance.org/en/analyse/fiche-analyse-265.html The Politics and Issues of Internet Governance] - an essay by Prof. Milton Mueller | ||
*Prof. Mueller and JZ discussing ICANN and top-level domains (TLDs) on the Internet Governance Porject blog: | *Prof. Mueller and JZ discussing ICANN and top-level domains (TLDs) on the Internet Governance Porject blog: | ||
**[http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2007/8/6/3142881.html What Zittrain Doesn't Get] (also read the response by JZ in the comments) | **[http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2007/8/6/3142881.html What Zittrain Doesn't Get] (also read the response by JZ in the comments) | ||
**[http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2007/8/7/3145104.html Response to Professor Zittrain] (also read the comments by JZ and Prof. Mueller following the post). | **[http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2007/8/7/3145104.html Response to Professor Zittrain] (also read the comments by JZ and Prof. Mueller following the post). | ||
*[http://publius.cc/path_towards_centralization_internet_governance_under_un The Path Towards Centralization of Internet Governance Under the UN] - Part 1 of a series of three essays recently published on the Berkman Center's Publius Project. | *[http://publius.cc/path_towards_centralization_internet_governance_under_un The Path Towards Centralization of Internet Governance Under the UN] - Part 1 of a series of three essays recently published on the Berkman Center's Publius Project. | ||
**[http://publius.cc/path_towards_centralization_internet_governance_under_un_part_2 Part 2] | **[http://publius.cc/path_towards_centralization_internet_governance_under_un_part_2 Part 2] | ||
Revision as of 17:40, 12 April 2009
Precis
How should the Internet do what it does? And what is it that the Internet does? Who should be responsible for the Internet?
These are the questions behind the idea of "Internet governance," to which the different Internet stakeholders have conflicting answers - ranging from a strict regulatory scheme, like those applied to traditional communications media (like television and cell phones), to vehement opposition to any kind of formal control structures. Part of this disagreement stems from the Internet's technical nature. which suggests two ways of thinking about Internet governance: (1) control of the mechanisms comprising the technical structure and standards, and (2) regulating the substantive use of the Internet. (Under Yochai Benkler's framework, these would be the "physical infrastructure" and "logical" layers, and the "content" layer, respectively.) The Net's origins as a US Department of Defense-funded research network, and the continued heavy influence on its maintenance and development by US actors, meanwhile, have given rise to conflicting national and international dimensions to these questions. This topic seeks to explore through select case studies already encountered in class the issues of the Internet today, to provide a clearer picture of where Internet governance is headed in the near future, and to establish why (or even whether) it matters.
Throughout this course, we have encountered many "issues at the frontier." For some of these issues, regulation may be useful (e.g. the Future of Copyright), whereas for others, not as much (e.g. the Future of News). But there is no distinct line separating the two categories.
Several theories exist on how the Internet should be governed and regulated, if at all. Below are two examples of structures that exist today to regulate the Internet, and the relative zones they seek to regulate. Are these bodies the right way to go? Do they meet the needs of today?
Concrete Question of the Week
With regard to both structure and content, what issues, if any, does the Internet raise at the national and international levels that may require regulation? What alternatives are there to such regulation?
Guests
- Milton Mueller of Syracuse University's Internet Governance Project.
Session Outline
The session will be designed to view the issues that we have previously considered in this class in the context of Internet regulation. The class will be divided into two parts.
First, we will have guest speaker Milton Mueller speak to the class on Internet regulation in general, discussing how he views its accomplishment and what is the current framework. After Prof. Mueller speaks, we will have Prof. Zittrain respond to his comments, offering his own viewpoint on how he envisions Internet regulation. We hope to spur a dialog between the two professors, as well as engaging the class.
For the second half, we will examine topics we have already discussed during the course of the term from the perspective of Internet regulation. Using what Profs Mueller and Zittrain outline, we hope that we can address various complications with each viewpoint as it applies to each issue.
- Pre-class assignment: Each member of the class will be expected to submit questions based on Internet regulation on any of the topics already addressed in class for a topic that is not their own. They should submit at least 3 questions, on three different topics.
- Class Discussion: We will use the topics that generate the most number of questions to stimulate the conversation. We hope that the leaders of the topic will respond to the questions presented and stimulate a discussion amongst the class.
- Wrap Up: The class will conclude with a discussion of the issues from the larger perspective, discussing what the class thinks are the most pressing concerns and how they think we can address them.
Readings
Governance example: ICANN's top-level domain name ("TLD") expansion
This summer, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) voted to expand the possible top-level domain names (TLDs) such that individuals, businesses, governments, and other entities can register TLDs composed of any combination of letters in any script, so long as they can show a "business plan and technical capacity" to back up their desired domain. Most domains will end up going to the highest bidder in an auction process. Despite ICANN's expansion of TLDs, the Department of Commerce has reiterated that its management of changes to the authoritative root zone file (including its contracts with VeriSign and ICANN) will remain intact.
- Should we be concerned about control of generic domains, like ".news" or ".shop," by a few wealthy individuals or groups?
- Should we worry that ICANN is the sole body setting the standards for TLDs and resolving disputes?
- Who should control the root zone file, and why?
Required Reading
- The Politics and Issues of Internet Governance - an essay by Prof. Milton Mueller
- Prof. Mueller and JZ discussing ICANN and top-level domains (TLDs) on the Internet Governance Porject blog:
- What Zittrain Doesn't Get (also read the response by JZ in the comments)
- Response to Professor Zittrain (also read the comments by JZ and Prof. Mueller following the post).
- The Path Towards Centralization of Internet Governance Under the UN - Part 1 of a series of three essays recently published on the Berkman Center's Publius Project.
- Intro video from JZ's 2004 iLaw Course
Optional Reading:
- Panel discussion transcripts - from the IGF's latest meeting during Dec. 3-6, 2008 in Hyderabad.
- List of Workshops from the 2008 IGF meeting.