Suchergebnisse

"When the prevailing system of governing divides the planet into mutually exclusive territorial monopolies of force, what institutions can govern the Internet, with its transnational scope, boundless scale, and distributed control? Given filtering/censorship by states and concerns over national cybersecurity, it is often assumed that the Internet will inevitably be subordinated to the traditional system of nation-states. In Networks and States, Milton Mueller counters this, showing how Internet governance poses novel and fascinating governance issues that give rise to a global politics and new transnational institutions. Drawing on theories of networked governance, Mueller provides a broad overview of Internet governance from the formation of ICANN to the clash at the World Summit on the Information Society (WSIS), the formation of the Internet Governance Forum, the global assault on peer-to-peer file sharing, and the rise of national-level Internet control and security concerns." "Mueller identifies four areas of conflict and coordination that are generating a global politics of Internet governance: intellectual property, cybersecurity, content regulation, and the control of critical Internet resources (domain names and IP addresses). He investigates how recent theories about networked governance and peer production can be applied to the Internet, offers case studies that illustrate the Internet's unique governance problems, and charts the historical evolution of global Internet governance institutions, including the formation of a transnational policy network around the WSIS." "Internet governance has become a source of conflict in international relations. Networks and States explores the important role that emerging transnational institutions could play in fostering global governance of communication-information policy."--BOOK JACKET

In discussing the historical origins of sovereignty, Jens Bartelson (2018, 510) wrote, "Making sense of sovereignty . . . entails making sense of its component terms—supreme authority and territory—and how these terms were forged together into a concept." The question of sovereignty in cyberspace, however, inverts this historical "forging together," as territoriality and authority are sundered in cyberspace. This paper argues that attempts to apply sovereignty to cyberspace governance are inappropriate to the domain. It develops a technically grounded definition of "cyberspace" and examines its characteristics as a distinct domain for action, conflict, and governance, while clarifying its relationship to territoriality. It reviews the literature on cyberspace and sovereignty since the early 1990s, showing the emergence of explicitly pro-sovereigntist ideas and practices in the last ten years. The cyber-sovereignty debate is linked to IR research on the historical emergence of sovereignty, demonstrating how technologies routinely change the basis of international order and challenging the presumption that territorial sovereignty is a stable and uniform principle of international organization that can be presumptively applied to the internet. The paper also links the conceptual debate over cyber-sovereignty to the real-world geopolitical struggle over the governance of the internet, showing how different conceptions of sovereignty serve the interests of different powers, notably the United States, Russia, and China. The paper explores the relevance of an alternative governance model for cyberspace based on the global commons concept. It refutes the arguments made against that model and then explains what difference it might make to governance if we conceive of cyberspace in that way.

AbstractIn discussing the historical origins of sovereignty, Jens Bartelson (2018, 510) wrote, "Making sense of sovereignty . . . entails making sense of its component terms—supreme authority and territory—and how these terms were forged together into a concept." The question of sovereignty in cyberspace, however, inverts this historical "forging together," as territoriality and authority are sundered in cyberspace. This paper argues that attempts to apply sovereignty to cyberspace governance are inappropriate to the domain. It develops a technically grounded definition of "cyberspace" and examines its characteristics as a distinct domain for action, conflict, and governance, while clarifying its relationship to territoriality. It reviews the literature on cyberspace and sovereignty since the early 1990s, showing the emergence of explicitly pro-sovereigntist ideas and practices in the last ten years. The cyber-sovereignty debate is linked to IR research on the historical emergence of sovereignty, demonstrating how technologies routinely change the basis of international order and challenging the presumption that territorial sovereignty is a stable and uniform principle of international organization that can be presumptively applied to the internet. The paper also links the conceptual debate over cyber-sovereignty to the real-world geopolitical struggle over the governance of the internet, showing how different conceptions of sovereignty serve the interests of different powers, notably the United States, Russia, and China. The paper explores the relevance of an alternative governance model for cyberspace based on the global commons concept. It refutes the arguments made against that model and then explains what difference it might make to governance if we conceive of cyberspace in that way.

An original and provocative analysis of the role of communications in the Thirty Years War and the English Revolution of 1640-1649. The years covered by the book saw the first printed new periodicals, the opening of the royal postal system to public correspondence, the monopolization of the posts by the state, and the exploitation of this communications infrastructure for surveillance and news purposes by the emerging territorial state. The book argues that all these developments were related aspects in the emergence of a currency of the word, a change in the temporal status of literate media. Printed commentary now flowed synchronously alongside the events it described creating dispersed publics and major changes in political institutions. Both the Thirty Years War and the English Revolution were simultaneous and violent reformulations of power relations among territorially dispersed political authorities.

Cover -- Guest editorial -- Digital trade in Latin America: mapping issues and approaches -- Trade regimes as a tool for cyber policy -- Externalizing Europe: the global effects of European data protection -- Data flows and national security: a conceptual framework to assess restrictions on data flows under GATS security exception -- Data flows and the digital economy: information as a mobile factor of production.