| Srl | Item |
| 1 |
ID:
116134
|
|
|
|
|
| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article discusses the evolving framework of a new branch of international public law - international Internet law (IIL), the public international law framework for Internet governance. The article presents the genesis of IIL, its principles and perspectives; tackles key challenges to this new interdisciplinary area of research, such as cyber-security, jurisdiction and privacy protection; and draws analogies between IIL and such traditional areas of international public law as environmental law, human rights law and law of the sea. The article presents current proposals of applying international environmental law due diligence standard to state responsibility for cyber-attacks and giving critical Internet resources the Common Heritage of Mankind status. The role of soft law in creating IIL is emphasized and successful examples of its exercise are presented. The article then goes on to elaborate on hard-law proposals for IIL (Internet Framework Convention including a unique multistakeholder model of participation and responsibility) and presents them as the further evolutionary path for IIL.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| 2 |
ID:
184654
|
|
|
|
|
| Summary/Abstract |
This article examines levels and patterns of legitimacy beliefs toward one of today’s most developed global multistakeholder regimes, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN). Two complementary surveys find that levels of legitimacy perceptions toward ICANN often rank alongside, and sometimes ahead of, those for other sites of global governance, both multilateral and multistakeholder. Moreover, average legitimacy beliefs toward ICANN hold consistently across stakeholder sectors, geographical regions, and social groups. However, legitimacy beliefs decline as one moves away from the core of the regime, and many elites remain unaware of ICANN. Furthermore, many participants in Internet governance express only moderate (and sometimes low) confidence in ICANN. To this extent, the regime’s legitimacy is more fragile. Extrapolation from mixed evidence around ICANN suggests that, while multistakeholder global governance is not under existential threat, its legitimacy remains somewhat tenuous.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|