| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
 Posted: Wed Dec 28, 2005 4:00 pm Post subject: Is there a separate legal system governing the Internet? |
 |
|
Is there a separate legal system governing the Internet?
Not yet but there could be and sooner than you might think. We found links to something called the United Nations' Working Group on Internet Governance in commentary by Harvard information systems consultant Scott Badner at Network World. The comments dated Aug. 29/05 concerned the Cross-Border Betting Dispute Between Antigua and the U.S. appear with the headline, Gambling forces the question: Who controls the 'Net?. Here is an excerpt:
| Quote: | This ruling establishes that the U.S. cannot unilaterally control what people can use the Internet for, even U.S. residents using the Internet from within this country. This is certainly not going to go over well with those people in Congress or other parts of government who think the U.S. should own the Internet because "we built it."
In this case, the U.S. told the WTO that the country would comply with the organization's ruling but would not "ask Congress to weaken U.S. restrictions on Internet gambling." Seems to be a tricky balance to me. It's not just the WTO that is telling the U.S. that it cannot control the 'Net by itself. The final report of the United Nations' Working Group on Internet Governance does the same. This report will go to the World Summit on the Information Society later this year, which is likely to agree. The next few months will be interesting on the Internet governance front, and I expect to return to the topic from time to time. |
So does the 'Pulse. Please check back soon for updates.
Link to this entry using
http://www.pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=193#193.
Last edited by legal on Sun Aug 12, 2007 2:11 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Thu May 18, 2006 10:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
The Star.com
Online Version of Third-rate Corporate Trombone
Regulation near, professor says
Attributed to Canadian Press
May 18/06
| Quote: | MONTREAL—Government regulation is coming to the Internet and the $12 billion (U.S.) online gambling industry shouldn't bet on continuing unfettered into the future, a leading expert on cyber law says. Thanks to the proliferation of spam, child porn and other "evils" online, there will be an increasing demand for governments to tame the wild web, Lawrence Lessig, a Stanford law professor and founder of the university's Center for Internet and Society, told gambling proponents yesterday.
"Today it is, effectively, unregulable," Lessig told about 1,600 delegates at an online gaming industry summit in Montreal. "But it's a mistake to bet the industry on the capacity to escape government's ability to regulate." (emphasis added) |
Link to this entry using
http://www.pokerpulse.com/legal/posting.php?mode=editpost&p=212.
Last edited by legal on Sun Aug 12, 2007 2:08 pm; edited 3 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Thu May 18, 2006 11:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
See also Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School:
Not surprisingly, perhaps, our search of the phrase, 'Internet gambling' at the site yielded 215 hits May 18/06. Here are the opening paragraphs of the first two hits:
| Quote: | Gambling on the Internet: Towards a Sensible Regulatory System
By Daryl Crone
| Quote: | | Gambling on the Internet is projected to reach five to ten billion dollars annually by the year 2000. 1 The potential for far greater wagering on the Internet is staggering – real space gambling of differing varieties exceeds $500 billion per year in the United States alone. 2 While the emerging consensus among policymakers is that both purveyors and individuals who partake in Internet gambling ought to be criminally prosecuted, this essay will argue that prohibition may be futile or dangerous. Even if the government is able to prevent a wave of Internet gambling through a revision of existing statutes, it will only do so through unheard of intrusions on to individual privacy and massive consumption of prosecutorial and investigative resources. Instead, this essay will call for a more pragmatic policy on Internet gambling. Rather than making the practice illegal, the government should regulate Internet gambling through readily available means or legalize it so that the government can influence its growth. Although some commentators have called for a more deliberate approach to the regulation of Internet gambling, a rational policy must be quickly put in place in order to have the utmost influence on the development of this new industry. 3 (footnotes omitted) |
|
| Quote: | So You Think the Government Can't Regulate Internet Gambling? Don't Bet On It
By Brian L. Glassberg
| Quote: | | The Internet promises to be one of the most influential developments for society as the twenty-first century approaches. It provides instantaneous access to a wealth of information unparalleled in human history. Net users can consult sources down the street or from the farthest reaches of the globe. The rapid growth of the Net in the last decade only reinforces this idea. However, the Internet also presents unique challenges to national sovereignty, raising questions whether governments and their legal systems will be able to effectively apply regulation to sectors of society which they have traditionally regulated. |
|
Link to this entry using
http://www.pokerpulse.com/legal/posting.php?mode=editpost&p=212.
Last edited by legal on Sun Aug 12, 2007 2:02 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
legal
Site Admin
Joined: 18 Aug 2004
Posts: 510
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 12, 2007 1:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Domestic - not int'l - regulations expected to increase in e-commerce:
| Quote: | Trade Rules for the Digital Age
By Sacha Wunsch-Vincent
Report for the Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development (OECD)
November, 2006
Both papers are well written and researched, in our view.
| Quote: | From the point of view of international trade, this additional regulation and superimposition of national borders is a two-edged sword which may be sharper on the one side than the other. While additional regulations may have boosted consumer trust in electronic transactions, the increased “balkanisation” of e-commerce via domestic regulations threatens to disappoint the early hopes of a global trading environment free of any trade barriers. The ambition to achieve a legal framework supporting digital transactions, governed by consistent principles across international borders, that would lead to predictable results regardless of the jurisdiction in which a particular buyer or seller resides has not yet been achieved.
Since 1997 many international organizations have been engaged on the topic of ecommerce. There are good examples which demonstrate that cross-border cooperation can bear fruit: the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Internet Treaties, the United Nations Commission on International Trade Law (UNCITRAL) model contract law, OECD Guidelines on Cross-border Fraud, Privacy, and, for example, an OECD Anti-Spam Toolkit. And there has hardly been institutional fatigue at the international level, as demonstrated by the World Summit of the Information Society (WSIS) (see Annex Box 1), an OECD countries agreement on a Council Recommendation on Broadband Development in 2004 (see Annex Box 2) and calls for a high-level ministerial meeting on the future of the Internet in 2008. Yet despite these efforts at international policy coordination, a return to the pristine state of the Internet and the absence of national regulations governing this medium is not a realistic option. Heterogeneous and sometimes incompatible national regulations will continue to thrive. Meanwhile, the Internet has grown to be such an essential infrastructure for basic economic, security-related and social transactions that the numbers of trade-relevant rules and regulations pertaining to it will rather increase than decrease. (emphasis added) (-- pgs. 9-10) |
|
Also by the same author:
| Quote: | The Internet, cross-border trade in services, and
the GATS: lessons from US–Gambling
Abstract: The rapid development of the Internet has led to a growing electronic cross-border delivery of services. While the WTO negotiations have not caught up to the reality of such service trade, the first GATS case dealing with the Internet, namely ‘United States – Measures Affecting the Cross-Border Supply of Gambling and Betting Services’, has advanced matters. This paper distils the substantive conclusions of the case and remaining questions in relation to Internet-supplied services and certain core concepts of the GATS. Moreover, it sheds light on the case’s implications for the services negotiations under the ongoing Doha Development Agenda. It concludes that the second ever GATS case has provided an encouraging set of answers to the unresolved questions of the WTO’s Work Programme on E-Commerce, mainly confirming the applicability of GATS commitments to electronically supplied services and shaping the concept of technological neutrality. While more work or dispute settlement cases are necessary to clarify the remaining questions, the rulings have paved the way for the GATS to be a more effective discipline for cross-border (electronic) trade. The paper also explains that a ‘ chilling effect’ of the rulings on the Doha services negotiations is not warranted. |
Link to this entry using
http://pokerpulse.com/legal/viewtopic.php?p=404#404. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Memberlist 
Usergroups
Profile 
Log in to check your private messages 
Log in 
