Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-24hb2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-28T16:42:14.561Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Toward a Network-Oriented Law of the Internet! The Necessity to Find a New Balance between Risk and Opportunity in Network Communication

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  06 March 2019

Extract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

This article looks at the reasons for the lack of a discussion on “network oriented” media and internet law. The Internet has fundamentally changed the conditions of communication. It has broken down or undermined all borders between formats, individual and mass communication, communication content, and technologies of telecommunication. As a “network of networks,” it is also a challenge for the legal system which has linked its conceptions and doctrine to those separations and borderlines.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © 2009 by German Law Journal GbR 

References

1 See Benkler, Yochai, The Wealth of Networks (2006); Clay Shirky, Here Comes Everybody: The Power of Organizing Without Organization (2009); Lawrence Lessig, Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace (2006), who describe the new logic of the internet as not only a new means of communication.Google Scholar

2 Noam, Elie, INTERCONNECTING THE NETWORK OF NETWORKS (2001).Google Scholar

3 For the ideology of this movement see the homepage of the Swedish Pirate Party which even gained access to the European Parliament, www.piratpartiet.se/international/english, last accessed on 30 August 2009.Google Scholar

4 See Zarsky, Tal Z., Law and Online Social Networks: Mapping the Challenges of User-Generated Information Flows, Fordham Intellectual Property, 18 Media and Entertainment Law Journal 741 (2008); Zarsky, Tal Z., Thinking Outside the Box: Considering Transparency, Anonymity and Pseudonymity as Overall Solutions to the Problems of Information Privacy in the Internet Society, 58 University of Miami Law Review 1301 (2004).Google Scholar

5 For a description of the project see www.bmfsfj.de/bmfsfj/generator/BMFSFJ/kinder-und-jugend,did=126134.html, last accessed on August 30, 2009.Google Scholar

6 Donnerhacke, Lutz, Die dreizehn Lügen der Zensursula (19.4.2009), www.netzpolitik.org/2009/die-dreizehn-luegen-der-zensursula/, last accessed on August 30, 2009, - “zensursula” is the nickname for the Federal Minister Ursula von der Leyen who is responsible for this law (“zensur+ursula”).Google Scholar

7 For the overestimation of the creativity in the networks of the internet see Andrew Keen, The Cult of the Amateur: How Today's Internet Is Killing Our Culture (2007); Geert Lovink, Zero Comments. Elemente Einer Kritischen Internettheorie (2008), in particular at 38; for a critique of the postmodern individuality see Andreas Reckwitz, Das Hybride Subjekt. Eine Theorie Der Subjektkulturen Von Der Burgerlichen Moderne Zur Postmoderne, 532 (2006); Charles Melman, L'Homme Sans Gravite 215 (2002).Google Scholar

8 See Taipale, Kim A., Data-Mining and Domestic Security. Connecting the Dots to Make Sense of Data, 5 Columbia Science and Technology Law Journal 1 (2003); Taipale, Kim A., Technology Security and Privacy: The Fear of Frankenstein, the Mythology of Privacy, and the Lessons of King Ludd, 7 Yale Journal of Law and Technology 123, 190 (2004).Google Scholar

9 Ladeur, Karl-Heinz, E-Bay-Bewertungssystem und staatlicher Rechtsschutz von Persönlichkeitsrechten, 10 Kommunikation & Recht 85 (2007).Google Scholar

10 See generally Hans D. Jarass & Bodo Pieroth & Bernhard Schlink, Art. 5 No. 2, in: Grundgesetz, Commentary (10th ed., 2009).Google Scholar

11 See Reports of the Federal Constitutional Court (BVerfGE) Vol. 83, 130 at 139.Google Scholar

12 Frederick Schauer, Free Speech: A Philosophical Enquiry 181 (1982).Google Scholar

13 Ekkehart Stein & GÖTZ Frank, § 38 V in: Staatrecht (20th ed., 2007); Wolfgang Hoffmann-Riem, Art. 5 No. 93 in: ALTERNATIV-KOMMENTAR ZUM GRNDGESETZ (3rd ed. 2001); still relevant Ridder, Helmut, Das Zensurverbot, 2 Archiv Für Presserecht 882 (1969); the prohibition of censorship is by the way meant to protect the author of a communication, see only Bodo Pieroth & Bernhard Schlink, Staatsrecht II (21st ed. 2007), number 665.Google Scholar

14 See only Schulz, W., § 59 No. 9 in: Beck'scher Kommentar Zum Rundfunkrecht (Hahn, Werner & Vesting, Thomas eds., 2nd ed., 2008).Google Scholar

15 Schulz, Wolfgang & Held, Thorsten, id., § 20 JMStV number 9.Google Scholar

16 Oberverwaltungsgericht Münster, 56 Neue Juristische Wochenschrift 2183 (2003); a consenting commentary by Spindler & Volkmann, 6 Multimedia Und Recht 354 (2003); see also Billmeier, Eva, Die Düsseldorfer Sperrverfügung. Ein Beispiel Für Verfassungs Und Gefahrenabwehrrechtliche Probleme Der Inhaltsregulierung In Der Informationsgellschaft 163 (2007).Google Scholar

17 Ladeur, Karl-Heinz, Der prozedurale Schutz der Medienfreiheit, 48 Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht 1 (2004).Google Scholar

18 There are some exceptions which should be mentioned Christoph Fiedler, Meinungsfreiheit in einer Vernetzten Welt (2002); see also id., Die Formale Seite der Äusserungsfreiheit. Zensurfreiheit und Äusserungsgrundrechte (1999); Karavas, Vagias, Digitale Grundrechte: Elemente einer Verfassung des Informationsflusses im Internet (2007).Google Scholar

19 See Joseph Turow & Lokman Tsui, The Hyperlinked Society: Questioning Connections in the Digital Age (2008); Ladeur, Karl-Heinz, Datenverarbeitung und Datenschutz bei neuartigen Programmfuhrern in “Virtuellen Videotheken,” 3 Multimedia und Recht 715 (2000).Google Scholar

20 For a first attempt to give an overview of the problems of privacy in the “social media” see James Grimmelmann, Facebook and the Social Dynamics of Privacy, 94 Iowa L. Rev. 4 (2009).Google Scholar

21 Bing Liu, Web Data-Mining: Exploring Hyperlinks, Contents and Usage Data (2007).Google Scholar

22 In the US eBay offers an electronic mediation procedure via “Square Trade;” www.ebay.com/services/buyandsell/disputeres.html, last accessed on August 30, 2009.Google Scholar

23 Karl-Heinz Ladeur, Die Zulässigkeit von Lehrerbewertungen im Internet, 56 Recht der Jugend und des Bildungswesens 16 (2008); the Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof) has regarded ratings of teachers as legal, see Dec. of June 23, 2009, VI ZR 196/08; for cyber-mobbing in schools in the US see Rita J. Verga, Policing their Space: The First Amendment Parameters of School Discipline of Student Cyberspeech, 23 Santa Clara Computer and High Technology Law Journal 727 (2007); with respect to the differentiation of different types of public spaces in the internet era see Jonathan Zittrain, The Future of the Internet – And How To Stop It 213 (2009), where classrooms e.g. are regarded as “private public spaces” which should not be turned into “public public spaces”; otherwise there would be a pressure to be always on “press conference behavior”.Google Scholar

24 For a European perspective see P. Bernt Hugenholtz, Copyright and Freedom of Expression in Europe, in Expanding the Boundaries of Intellectual Property: Innovation Policy for the Knowledge Society, 343, 352. (Dreyfuss, Rochelle Cooper, Zimmermann, Diane Leenheer & First, Harry, eds., 2001).Google Scholar

25 See Ladeur, Karl-Heinz, Der Auskunftsanspruch der Rechteinhaber nach § 101 n. F. UrhG und der Datenschutz – Geht der Anspruch mangels Daten ins Leere?, 105 Urheber-, Film- und Theaterrecht UFITA 443 (2009).Google Scholar

26 For communication in general see Frans Birrer, Data Mining to combat Terrorism and the Roots of Privacy Concerns, 7 Ethics and Information Technology 211 (2005).Google Scholar

27 See the overview in Mark A. Graber, Transforming Free Speech: The Ambiguos Legacy of Civil Libertarianism 144 (1991).Google Scholar

28 Harrison C. White, Identity and Control, How Social Transformations Emerge 345 (2nd ed., 2008).Google Scholar

29 Ladeur, Karl-Heinz, Datenschutz – vom Abwehrrecht zur planerischen Optimierung von Wissensnetzwerken, 24 Datenschultz und Datensicherheit 12 (2000); for a critique to “economize” data following the model of intellectual property rights, see Thilo Weichert, Die Ökonomisierung des Rechts auf informationelle Selbstbestimmung, 54 Neue Juristische Wochenschrift 1463 (2001).Google Scholar

30 Obviously there are limits to the individual decision on data but this process of self-organization might also help determine these limits.Google Scholar

31 See Ladeur, id. (UFITA…); for the UK see “Court rules against song swappers”, BBC News, 27 January 2006; for the US “Millionenstrafe im US-Filesharer-Prozess,” Heise-Online, 19 June 2009; for a new model of a flexible management of copyright see Bennett M. Lincoff, A Plan for the Future of Music Performance Rights Organizations in the Digital Age: (Dreyfus, et al., eds., id.) 167.Google Scholar

32 Ladeur, id. (UFITA).Google Scholar

33 Ladeur, Karl-Heinz, Die gemeinsame Clearing-Stelle von Rechteinhabern und Providern, 11 Kommunikation und Recht 695 (2008) (the article is based on expertise of the German music and film industry).Google Scholar

34 See Spindler, Gerald, Der Auskunftsanspruch gegen Verletzer und Dritte nach § 101 UrhG, 52 Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht 640 (2008).Google Scholar

36 Not differentiating sufficiently: Franziska Raabe, Urheberschutz im Internet und seine Einfügung in den Gesamtrechtsrahmen, 50 Zeitschrift für Urheber- und Medienrecht Zum 439, 442 (2006); the Bundesrat (the representation of the Länder) has taken a different position with respect to the necessity to make information on the identity of downloaders dependent on the decision of a judge, BT-Drs 16/5048, 53ff. 56f.Google Scholar

37 See Ponte, Lucille M., The Michigan Cyber Court: A Bold Experiment in the Development of the First Online Courthouse, 4 North Carolina Journal of Law and Technology 51 (2002) for state courts. The article refers to private self-organized cyber courts which would establish their own network-based rules which can adapt more easily to the necessity to bear in mind the law making function of communication networks in the internet, see Yannick Gabuthy, Bruno Deffains & Philippe Fenoglio, An Economic Analysis of Conflicts Resolution in Cyberspace, in INTERNET AND DIGITAL ECONOMICS, 539, 542 (Curien, Nicolas & Brousseau, Eric, eds., 2007).Google Scholar

38 For a theoretical approach to electronic agents and their legal status, see Gunther Teubner, Elektronische Agenten und Grosse Menschenaffen – Zur Ausweitung des Akteursstatus in Recht und Politik 27 Zeitschrift für rechtziologie 5 (2006).Google Scholar

39 Ladeur, id. (UFITA…).Google Scholar

40 See www.numerama.com/magazine/8657, last accessed on 30 August 2009.Google Scholar

42 Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht), 61 Neue Juristiche Wochenschrift 822 (2008).Google Scholar

43 See the comment by Eifert, Martin, Informationelle Selbstbestimmung im Internet, 28 Neue Zeitschrift für Verwaltungsrecht 521 (2008).Google Scholar

44 See for the English conception of privacy as a regime of “confidentiality” Neil M. Richards & Daniel J. Solove, Privacy's Other Path: Recovering the Law of Confidentiality, 96 Georgetown Law Journal 123 (2007) 123.Google Scholar

45 Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht), BVerfGE 85, 386.Google Scholar

46 Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht), 81 Neue Juristiche Wochenschrift 822 (2008).Google Scholar

47 See RAND Document “Beyond Al-Qeida,” 2 Vols., 2006.Google Scholar

48 Manuel Castells, The Rise of the Network Society, Vol. 1: Economy, Society And Culture (2000).Google Scholar

49 Gunther Teubner, Netzwerk Als Vertragsverbund: Virtuelle Unternehmen, Franchising, Just-in-Time In Sozialwissenschaftlicher und Juristischer Sicht 215 (2004).Google Scholar

50 Federal Constitutional Court (Bundesverfassungsgericht), 81 Neue Juristiche Wochenschrift 822 (2008).Google Scholar

51 Taipale, id. Google Scholar