The politics of internet privacy regulation in a globalised world: an examination of regulatory agencies' autonomy, politicisation, and lobbying strategies

The rapid proliferation of new information technologies has not only made internet privacy one of the most pressing issues of the contemporary area, it has also triggered new regulatory challenges because of their cross-border character. This PhD thesis examines the politics of internet privacy regulation at the global level. Existing research has largely investigated the extent to which there is no international privacy regime, when and why data protection regulations in the European Union affect member state laws and trade relations, and how interest groups shape data protection regulations in the EU. Little scholarly attention, however, has been accorded to the decision-making processes and policies produced beyond the legislative arena. Non-legislative and technical modes of policy-making are yet becoming more prominent in global politics. This research focuses on global data protection and internet privacy rules determined by leading, but little-known, internet regulatory agencies, in particular: the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, World Wide Web Consortium, Internet Engineering Task Force, and Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. It investigates three distinct but interconnected questions regarding regulatory agencies' autonomy, politicisation, and interest groups' lobbying strategies. Each of the three questions corresponds to one substantive chapter and makes distinct contributions, using separate theoretical frameworks, methods, and analyses. Taken together, the chapters provide important theoretical arguments and empirical evidence on the making of internet privacy regulation, with a special emphasis on the role of corporate interests

Protecting Freedom of Expression over the Internet: An International Approach

Writing primarily in 2013, Alan Sears examines different aspects of the international legal framework as to how freedom of expression over the Internet may be protected. Even though the Internet has largely incorporated the concept of freedom of expression from its inception, the need for such protection has become increasingly evident. States around the world have progressively cracked down on Internet speech, a trend highlighted by recent events occurring during the Arab Spring. Alan thus focuses on the Middle East when exploring how Internet governance may be shaped, and human rights and trade agreements may be utilized, in order to make sure that the freedom of expression over the Internet remains respected. He discusses the advantages and disadvantages of the different frameworks, suggests proposals for improvements, and argues for the importance of engaging with different stakeholders in decision-making processes to better meet this end

A Model of Forum Shopping, with Special Reference to Standard Setting Organizations

Owners of intellectual property or mere sponsors of an idea (e.g., authors, security issuers, sponsors of standards) often need to persuade potential buyers or adopters of the worth of their property or idea. To this purpose, they often resort to more or less independent certifiers. This paper analyzes the strategic choice of certifiers in rival and non-rival situations in a three-stage game. First, the owner/sponsor selects among potential certifiers. Certifiers differ in their degree of sympathy towards the owner/sponsor's interests relative to their concern for quality delivered to the users. Second, the certifier studies the offering and renders an opinion. The opinion consists of an endorsement (or lack thereof) and, possibly, some further demands for changes involving prices or offering characteristics. Third, the final users adopt or buy as a function of their perceived utility. In this context, the choice of certifier involves a basic trade-off: trying a tougher certifier reduces the probability of a positive opinion, but makes the users more likely to adopt the offering or willing to pay more for it in case of a positive opinion by the certifier. The paper first analyzes the sponsor's choices of certifier and design, as well as social preferences regarding these choices. More attractive standards lead to more friendly certification and fewer concessions to users. Regulation cannot improve on private choices in case of mildly attractive standards, and partial regulation reduces social welfare in case of attractive standards. Furthermore, the sponsor can costlessly delegate the design choice to the certifier when she can have her preferred choice of certifier, but must make more concessions to users than she would want to if the spectrum of certifiers is limited. The paper then extends the basic model to multiple categories of users, to the downstream presence of the sponsor, and to within-user-group network externalities. Finally, it studies strategic forum shopping by sponsors of competing standards.

Who Runs the Internet?

There is no single answer to the question of who runs the Internet. Is it the United States, often seen as the hegemon of the Internet, home to so many of the world’s leading Internet enterprises? Is it China, which erects a “Great Firewall” to assert control over the portion of the Internet available in China? Is it the European Union, which extends its power globally through its data protection regime, designating countries as “adequate” or (implicitly) “inadequate” to receive its data? Is it ICANN, the California not-for-profit organization that controls how Internet addresses are allocated? Is it the World Wide Web Consortium, which develops standards for the web’s communication’s protocols? Is it the United Nations, which periodically asserts pressure through organs like the International Telecommunications Union or through international meetings? Is it the World Trade Organization, which regulates the barriers that governments erect against international trade? Is it telecommunications providers such as AT&T and Comcast on whose wires and beams information flows? Is it Facebook, which recently connected a billion people in one day? Is it Google, where the world often begins its search for information? In reality, all of the above, and many more, can claim a share of Internet governance. This chapter will set out an overview of how the Internet is currently governed, as well as some of the key controversies in both the procedure and substance of Internet governance

Governance of Digitalization in Europe A contribution to the Exploration Shaping Digital Policy - Towards a Fair Digital Society? BertelsmannStiftung Study

Digital policy is a unique policy area. As a cross-cutting policy issue, it has an impact not only on individual areas of regulation but on almost all other policy areas as well. Aspects of digital policy such as data regimes, cybersecurity and standardization issues are relevant not only to the the future of the internet or 5G mobile communications infrastructure, but to other areas of our lives to which they are closely linked, which range from automated driving to digital assistance systems in education and healthcare to the digitalization of sectors such as agriculture and construction. Nevertheless, regulation efforts have thus far been primarily sector-specific and national in their scope. With a few exceptions, such as the EU’s controversial General Data Protection Regulation, there are few digital policy frameworks in place for Europe that defines and integrates basic principles for broad application. Instead, we face a situation in which a variety of approaches stand side by side, at times complementing each other but also – all too often – competing with each other in ways that foster inconsistencies. The development of Europe’s 5G infrastructure is illustrative of this state of affairs. Despite the presence of what were originally uniform objectives across Europe, 28 nationally distinct tendering procedures with different requirements have since emerged. As a result, we must now find ways to manage the problems associated with having three or more networks per country, high costs, a difficult debate over security and the threat of dependency on non-EU providers

Protecting Freedom of Expression over the Internet: An International Approach

Writing primarily in 2013, Alan Sears examines different aspects of the international legal framework as to how freedom of expression over the Internet may be protected. Even though the Internet has largely incorporated the concept of freedom of expression from its inception, the need for such protection has become increasingly evident. States around the world have progressively cracked down on Internet speech, a trend highlighted by recent events occurring during the Arab Spring. Alan thus focuses on the Middle East when exploring how Internet governance may be shaped, and human rights and trade agreements may be utilized, in order to make sure that the freedom of expression over the Internet remains respected. He discusses the advantages and disadvantages of the different frameworks, suggests proposals for improvements, and argues for the importance of engaging with different stakeholders in decision-making processes to better meet this end

Beyond NETmundial: The Roadmap for Institutional Improvements to the Global Internet Governance Ecosystem

Beyond NETmundial: The Roadmap for Institutional Improvements to the Global Internet Governance Ecosystem explores options for the implementation of a key section of the “NETmundial Multistakeholder Statement” that was adopted at the Global Meeting on the Future of Internet Governance (NETmundial) held on April 23rd and 24th 2014 in São Paulo, Brazil. The Roadmap section of the statement concisely sets out a series of proposed enhancements to existing mechanisms for global internet governance, as well as suggestions of possible new initiatives that the global community may wish to consider. The sixteen chapters by leading practitioners and scholars are grouped into six sections: The NETmundial Meeting; Strengthening the Internet Governance Forum; Filling the Gaps; Improving ICANN; Broader Analytical Perspectives; and Moving Forward

Finding a Formula for Brazil: Representation and Legitimacy in Internet Governance

In the summer of 2013, Edward Snowden’s extraordinary leaks about U.S. National Security Agency (NSA) surveillance destabilized the foundations of international Internet governance. Speaking at the UN General Assembly on September 24, 2013, Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff denounced NSA spying in the strongest terms, and, together with ICANN, started planning conference in Sao Paulo in April 2014 to reinvent Internet governance. This article analyses these events and tries to make sense of what they might mean for the future of global Internet governance. It begins by looking at how the Brazil-ICANN initiative alters the political alignment of actors in the world. Second, it places these developments into a longer historical context, showing how it echoes recurring attempts to develop legitimacy and principles for Internet governance. Third, it applies critical political analysis to the process of organizing and managing the summit itself, with a particular focus on legitimacy and representation. After exploring these arrangements, the paper makes prognoses about impacts and outcomes of the meeting in Brazil. The working paper is not just meant for the usual Internet policy crowd. It will attempt to use language that can be understood by communities not immersed in these issues. Academics who study related issues but not Internet governance, as well as NGOs, business-people and government officials confused by the often-obscure debates around Internet governance will hopefully find this article a starting point for future engagement

Negotiating Internet Governance

What is at stake for how the Internet continues to evolve is the preservation of its integrity as a single network. In practice, its governance is neither centralised nor unitary; it is piecemeal and fragmented, with authoritative decision-making coming from different sources simultaneously: governments, businesses, international organisations, technical and academic experts, and civil society. Historically, the conditions for their interaction were rarely defined beyond basic technical coordination, due at first to the academic freedom granted to the researchers developing the network and, later on, to the sheer impossibility of controlling mushrooming Internet initiatives. Today, the search for global norms and rules for the Internet continues, be it for cybersecurity or artificial intelligence, amid processes fostering the supremacy of national approaches or the vitality of a pluralist environment with various stakeholders represented. This book provides an incisive analysis of the emergence and evolution of global Internet governance, unpacking the complexity of more than 300 governance arrangements, influential debates and political negotiations over four decades. Highly accessible, this book breaks new ground through a wide empirical exploration and a new conceptual approach to governance enactment in global issue domains. A tripartite framework is employed for revealing power dynamics, relying on: a) an extensive database of mechanisms of governance for the Internet at the global and regional level; b) an in-depth analysis of the evolution of actors and priorities over time; and c) a key set of dominant practices observed in the Internet governance communities. It explains continuity and change in Internet-related negotiations, opening up new directions for thinking and acting in this field