Internet companies are conduits through which states can exercise their authority beyond their borders. As Chinese companies such as Huawei become more commercially dominant, they threaten the geopolitical power of the US.
News and Research articles on Amazon
Cyber attacks require distributed deterrence involving private and public actors. Can the classics of international law help?
The internet is a forum for geopolitical struggle as states wield power beyond their terrestrial territorial borders through the extraterritorial geographies of data flows. This exertion of power across multiple jurisdictions, and via the infrastructure of transnational technology companies, creates new challenges for traditional forms of regulatory governance and the protection of human rights.
This paper examines data and privacy governance by four China-based mobile applications and their international versions - including the role of the state. It also highlights the role of platforms in gatekeeping mobile app privacy standards.
Some platforms become systemically relevant in a crisis, so we need regulation that takes this into account before and during the next crisis.
This paper uses qualitative content analysis to determine what type of socio-legal order the Silk Road is, to see whether platforms like the Silk Road indeed have the revolutionary potential proclaimed by some crypto communities.
This paper is part of Transnational materialities, a special issue of Internet Policy Review guest-edited by José van Dijck and Bernhard Rieder. Introduction In March 2019, the European Commission fined Google’s parent company Alphabet Inc. 1.5 billion euro for antitrust violations in the online advertising market—the third fine in three years. In July 2018, European Commissioner Margrethe Vestager had levied a record fine of 4.3 billion euro on Google for breaching European competition rules by forcing cell phone manufacturers to pre-install a dozen of the firms’ apps when using Android—Google’s mobile operating system. And in 2016, the company was punished for unlawfully favouring Google …
Datafication (the quantification of social life) is a colonial move which perpetuates a legacy of appropriation. But how to regulate this?
Why did China’s Alibaba platform reform its enforcement practices in line with demands from the US government and US companies?
Data ethics has gained traction in policy-making. The article presents an analytical investigation of the different dimensions and actors shaping data ethics in European policy-making.
Can an algorithm fire you? Data rights of workers need to take centre place in the future of work debates. If they are not sufficiently protected, we might have to make rules more specific to the workplace.
Online stores can offer each customer a different price. This study analyses why most people find such online price discrimination unfair and unacceptable, and why they think it should be banned.
This special issue brings together the best policy-oriented papers presented at the 2017 Association of Internet Researchers (AoIR) conference in Tartu, Estonia.
Given the weakness of consent-dependent agreements in relation to profiling and prediction markets, consumer protection needs improvement.
This article distils from the various (proposals for) platform regulation operational principles that can serve as the basis for productive debate on the subject.
The rapid development of the Internet of Things - or IoT - affects the protection of privacy in profound ways. Eduardo Magrani argues in favour of a shift from privacy protection to the idea a “right to non-tracking”.
This paper demonstrates the benefit of using the concept of governmentality to understand how online behaviours are directed, constrained and framed through the management of technical resources that enact logics of power and control.
Internet governance bodies agree that improving online security is important, but disagree on what a more secure internet would look like.
This special issue on 'Regulating the sharing economy' includes five papers and an editorial which each contribute to knowledge by linking the social and economic aspects of sharing economy practices to regulatory norms and mechanisms.
This paper is part of Regulating the sharing economy, a special issue of Internet Policy Review guest-edited by Kristofer Erickson and Inge Sørensen. Disclaimer: This study was completed with the support of the German service sector union ver.di. We would like to thank the participating platforms and their communities for the opportunity to conduct a survey. We would also like to thank the jovoto platform for the implementation of an idea contest. Thanks also go to Prof. Dr. Christian Fieseler, BI Norwegian Business School and Prof. Dr. Wrona, TU Hamburg-Harburg, for their comments and reviews. Any errors remain the responsibility of the authors. Introduction and objectives Working on …