The article introduces three of the paradigms used to analyze intemet regulation and applies them to the history of internet content control in Europe. It builds on Thomas Kuhn＇s notion of paradigms and previous work...The article introduces three of the paradigms used to analyze intemet regulation and applies them to the history of internet content control in Europe. It builds on Thomas Kuhn＇s notion of paradigms and previous works on regulatory theory, defining regulatory paradigms as a ＂shared understanding of the purpose of regulation, of the way of thinking about how regulation works, and of the set of institutional arrangements and instruments through which regulation is conducted.＂ Building on this definition, the prevalent concepts of the paradigms of intemet regulation refer to the intention, mechanisms, and the intensity of regulation. The article discusses these concepts with regard to the regulation of interact content control in Europe and analyzes three paradigm shifts that have taken place since the early days of the intemet. These paradigm shifts concern the responsiveness, differentiation, and intensity of regulation.展开更多
In view of the increasing importance of internet services for every society＇s economic, social, cultural and even political development and well-being, governments need to address fundamental questions： Who is respo...In view of the increasing importance of internet services for every society＇s economic, social, cultural and even political development and well-being, governments need to address fundamental questions： Who is responsible for setting the rules governing internet communication -- the government or economic operators？ What should the future order of public communication on the intemet look like？ Who will have rightful control over personal data and other intangible goods that can easily be reproduced and transported around the globe in the blink of an eye？ Moreover, the internet is perceived as a critical infrastructure in need of protection （e.g. from terrorist attacks） and which is, thereby, a matter of national security policy. Taking into account the regulatory principles in the European Union （EU） and China in general, we would expect that the approaches taken by European countries and in China to address issues of internet regulation could not have been more different.展开更多
文摘The article introduces three of the paradigms used to analyze intemet regulation and applies them to the history of internet content control in Europe. It builds on Thomas Kuhn＇s notion of paradigms and previous works on regulatory theory, defining regulatory paradigms as a ＂shared understanding of the purpose of regulation, of the way of thinking about how regulation works, and of the set of institutional arrangements and instruments through which regulation is conducted.＂ Building on this definition, the prevalent concepts of the paradigms of intemet regulation refer to the intention, mechanisms, and the intensity of regulation. The article discusses these concepts with regard to the regulation of interact content control in Europe and analyzes three paradigm shifts that have taken place since the early days of the intemet. These paradigm shifts concern the responsiveness, differentiation, and intensity of regulation.
文摘In view of the increasing importance of internet services for every society＇s economic, social, cultural and even political development and well-being, governments need to address fundamental questions： Who is responsible for setting the rules governing internet communication -- the government or economic operators？ What should the future order of public communication on the intemet look like？ Who will have rightful control over personal data and other intangible goods that can easily be reproduced and transported around the globe in the blink of an eye？ Moreover, the internet is perceived as a critical infrastructure in need of protection （e.g. from terrorist attacks） and which is, thereby, a matter of national security policy. Taking into account the regulatory principles in the European Union （EU） and China in general, we would expect that the approaches taken by European countries and in China to address issues of internet regulation could not have been more different.
