Internet intermediaries unilaterally define their terms of service (ToS) and enforce them privately by shaping the architectures of the networks and platforms under their control. Based on empirical evidence, Belli and Venturini argue that ToS and their implementation affect users’ rights.
Through a combination of actor-network theory and interpretative policy analysis, multistakeholder arrangements in internet governance are conceptualised as sites of discursive production in which heterogeneous actors engage in dynamic processes of social ordering.
Internet governance bodies agree that improving online security is important, but disagree on what a more secure internet would look like.
This special issue calls to rethink how we conceptualise both internet and governance.
As a scholar of constitutional law, of European and international law, having along the way gathered some knowledge of the workings of the internet, I am happy to present some perhaps somewhat revolutionary thoughts about governing in the future. The issue I was asked to deal with was: Governing the 21st century. Here are my thoughts about it. 1
One multi-stakeholder process is not like another, but how can we distinguish those that promote meaningful inclusion from those that don't?
This article revisits the multistakeholder approach to internet policymaking and makes a case for a new model recognising the heterogeneity of stakeholders’ interests.
"The legal systems in both the United States and in the European Union member states are simply not cut out for citizen-driven, peer-to-peer communication," argues Swedish Pirate Party member Amelia Anderdotter.