Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Why are the United States and the European Union failing to regulate the internet efficiently? Going beyond the bottom-up and top-down alternatives

  • Published:
European Journal of Law and Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper analyzes the different approaches for Internet regulation. We use the United States and European Union to illustrate the alternative approaches of self-regulation and government intervention. Our research suggests that both systems have serious shortcomings that could be ameliorated by the use of a mixed system for Internet regulation in which both the private and public sector have a role. The case study of privacy rights self regulation in the United States and its failure to effectively provide privacy regulation serves as our empirical evidence. We provide guidelines for both the government and the private sector in defining and enforcing privacy regulation.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adams, M. (2001). “Regulating the Net: Online Privacy and Advertising” 631 PLI/Pat 1031.

  • Ayres, I. & Braithwaite, J. (1992). Responsive Regulation, Transcending the Deregulation Debate. Oxford Socio-Legal Studies, Oxford University Press.

  • Ba, s. et al. (2000). “Small Companies in the Digital Economy” in Brynjolfsson, E. and Kahin, B., (eds) Understanding the Digital Economy, Data, Tools and Research.” The MIT Press.

  • Bakos, J. & Brynjolfsson, E. (2000). “Aggregation and Disaggregation of Information Goods: Implications for Bundling, Site Licensing and Micropayment Systems” in B. Kahin and H. Varian (eds), Internet Publishing and Beyond. The Economics of Digital Information and Intellectual Property. The MIT Press.

  • Balto, D. (2001). “Standard Setting in the 21st Century Network Economy” Computer & Internet Law 18, 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • BBBOnLine, at http://www.bbbonline.org .

  • Beck, J. (2001). “Get a grip! Regulating the Cyberspace Won’t Be Easy.” textsc10-JUN Business Today 14, 16.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bender, J. & Moohkerjee, D. (1990). “Norms, Third Party Sanctions and Cooperation.” Journal of Law, Economic and Organization 6(1), 33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benkler, Y. (2000). “Net Regulation: Taking Stock and Looking Forward.” Colorado Law Review 71, 1203, 1206–1207.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergerson, S. (2001). “E-commerce Privacy and the Black Hole of Cyberspace.” William Mitchell Law Review, 27, 1527, 1545.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berman, P. (2000). “Cyberspace and the State Action Debate: The Cultural Value of Applying Constitutional Norms to “Private” Regulation.” Colorado Law Review 71, 1263.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, D. & Davidson, S. (2001). “The Right of Privacy: International Discord and the Interface with Intellectual Property Rights.” Computer & Internet Law 18, 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cabral, L., et al. (1999). “Monopoly Pricing with Network Externalities.” International Journal of Industrial Organization 17, 199.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Camp, J. (2000). Trust and Risk in Internet Commerce. The MIT Press.

  • Carlberg, R. (2001). “The Persistence of the Dirigiste Model: Wireless Spectrum Allocation in Europe, a la Francaise.” Federal Commerce Law Journal 54, 129, 141.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C. (2004). “United States and European Union Approached to Internet Jurisdiction and Their Impact on E-commerce.” 25 University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economy and Law, 423.

  • Chuang, J. & Sirvun, M. (2000). “Network Delivery of Information Goods: Optimal Pricing of Articles and Subscriptions.” In Kahin, B. and Varian, H., (eds.) Internet Publishing and Beyond. The Economics of Digital Information and Intellectual Property. The MIT Press.

  • Cunard, J. & Coplan, J. (2001). Developments in Internet and E-Commerce Law: 2001. 678 PLI/Pat 935.

  • David, P. (2000). “Understanding Digital Technology’s Evolution and the Path of Measured Productivity Growth: Present and Future in the Mirror of the Past.” In E. and Kahin, B., (eds.) Understanding the Digital Economy, Data, Tools and Research. Brynjolfsson, The MIT Press

  • Davidson, S. & Bryant, D. (2001). “The Right of Privacy: International Discord and the Interface with Intellectual Property.” Computer & Internet Law 18, 1.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeLong, B. & Froomkin, M. (2000). “Speculative Microeconomics for Tomorrow’s Economy.” In Kahin, B. and Varian, H. (eds.) Internet Publishing and Beyond. The Economics of Digital Information and Intellectual Property. The MIT Press.

  • Devack, M. (2000). “Intellectual Property as an Investment: A Look at How ADR Relates to the European Union’s Proposal for Electronic Commerce in the Single Market.” Cardozo Online Journal Conflict Resolution 2, 57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eko, L. (2001). “Many Spiders, One Worldwide Web: Towards a Typology of Internet Regulation.” Commerce Law & Policy 6, 445, 447–48 and 451–454.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elkin-Koren, N. & Salzberger, E. (1999). Law and Economics in Cyberspace. International Review Law and Economics 19, 553, 561.

    Google Scholar 

  • Elkin-Koren, N. (1998). “Copyrights in Cyberspace – Rights Without Laws?” Chicago-Kent Law Review. 73, 1155, 1185.

    Google Scholar 

  • Federal Trade Commission (2000). Consumer Protection in the Global Electronic Marketplace. Looking Ahead, Bureau of Consumer Protection. Federal Trade Commission, at http://www.ftc.gov.

  • Fishburn, P., et al. (2000). Fixed-fee Versus Unit Pricing for Information Goods: Competition, Equilibria and Price Wars. In (Kahin, B. and Varian, H., eds.) Internet Publishing and Beyond. The Economics of Digital Information and Intellectual Property. The MIT Press.

  • Foster, W. (1997). Registering the Domain Name System. An Exercise in Global Decision Making. In B. Kahin and J. Keller (eds.) Coordinating the Internet. The MIT Press.

  • FTC, (1999). The FTC’s First Five Years. Protecting Consumers Online. FTC Report at http://www.ftc.gov.

  • Garicano, L. & Kaplan, S. (2000). “The Effects of Business-to-Business E-Commerce on Transaction Costs.” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 8017.

  • Gautier, K. (1999). “Electronic Commerce: Confronting the Legal Challenge of Building E-Dentities in Cyberspace.” Minnesota Law Review 20, 117.

    Google Scholar 

  • Geist, M. (2001). Is There a There There? Toward Greater Certainty for Internet Jurisdiction? 661 PLI/Pat 561.

  • George, B., Lynch, P., & Marsnik, S. (2001). U.S. Multinational Employers: Navigating Through the “Safe Harbor” Principles to Comply with the E.U. Data Privacy Directive. American Business Law Journal 7, 735, 747–748.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gigante, A. (1997). Domain-ia: The Growing Tension between Domain Name System and Trademark Law. In B. Kahin and J. Keller (eds.) Coordinating the Internet. The MIT Press.

  • Gillet, S. & Kajan, M. (1997). The Self-Governing Internet: Coordination by Design. In B. Kahin and J. Keller (eds.) Coordinating the Internet. The MIT Press.

  • Goldberg, I., et al. (2001). “Trust, Ethics and Privacy.” Boston University Law Review 81, 407, 422.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gould, M. (1997). Governance of the Internet: A UK Perspective. In B. Kahin and J. Keller (eds.) Coordinating the Internet. The MIT Press.

  • Hallgren, M. & McAdam, A. (1997). The Economic Efficicency of Internet Public Goods. In L. McNight and J. Bailey (eds.) Internet Economics. The MIT Press.

  • Halpern, M. & Mehrotra, A. (2000). From International Treaties to Internet Norms: The Evolution of International Trademark Disputes in the Internet Age. University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economics 21, 523.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haltinanger, J. & Jasmin, R. (2000). Measuring Digital Economy. In E. Brynjolfsson and B. Kahin (eds.) Understanding the Digital Economy, Data, Tools and Research. The MIT Press.

  • Hatch, M. (2001). The Privatization of Big Brother: Protecting Sensitive Personal Information from Commercial Interests in the 21st Century. William Mitchell Law Review 27, 1457.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hawkins, R., et al. (1999). “Toward Digital Intermediation in the Information Society.” Journal of Economic Issues XXXIII(2).

  • Heaven, C., (2001). A Proposal for Removing Road Blocks From the Information Superhighway by Using an Integrated International Approach to Internet Jurisdiction. Minnesota Journal of Global Trade 10, 373, 381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hetcher, S., (2000–2001). The Emergence of Website Privacy Norms. Michigan Telecommunications & Technology Law Review 7, 97, 106.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. & Post, D. (1997). And How Shall the Net be Governed? A Meditation on the Relative Virtues of Decentralized, Emergent Law. In B. Kahin and J. Keller (eds.) Coordinating the Internet. The MIT Press.

  • Kandor, M. (1992). “Social Norms and Community Enforcement.” Review of Economic Studies, 59(1), 63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kerr, C. & Metzger, O. (2001) Online Privacy: Changing Exceptions – Changing Rules. 632 PLI/P.

  • Kesan, J. & Shah, R. (2001). Fool Us Once Shame on You –Fool Us Twice Shame On Us: What We Can Learn From the Privatization of the Internet Backbone Network and the Domain Name System. 79:1 Washington University Law Quarterly 89.

  • Lerner, J. (2000). Small Business, Innovation and Public Policy in the Information Technology Industry. In E. Brynjolfsson and B.Kahin (eds.) Understanding the Digital Economy, Data, Tools and Research. The MIT Press.

  • Liebowitz, S. & Margolis, S. (1994). “Network Externalities: An Uncommon Tragedy.” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8(2), 133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luther, B. (2001). “Telecommunications in the 21st Century: A Commentary on the State of Online Privacy and the Efficacy of Self-Regulation.” William Mitchell Law Review. 27, 2125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Major, A. (2000). “Norms Origin and Development in Cyberspace: Models of Cybernorm Evolution.” Washington University Law Quarterly 75, 59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marsden, C. (2001). “Cyberlaw and International Political Economy: Towards Regulation of the Global Information Society.” Law Review Michigan State University Detroit College of Law 355, 369.

    Google Scholar 

  • Matwyshyn, A. (2004). “Of Nodes and Power Laws: A Network Theory Approach to Internet Jurisdiction Through Data Privacy.” Northwertern University Law Review 98, 493.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, D. et al. (1997). In B. Kahin and J. Keller (eds.) the Whose Domain?: Name Service in Adolescence. In Coordinating the Internet. The MIT Press.

  • Moulton, B. (2000). GDP and the Digital Economy: Keeping up with the Changes. In E. Brynjolfsson and B. Kahin (eds.) Understanding the Digital Economy, Data, Tools and Research. The MIT Press.

  • Nachbar, T. (2000). “Paradox and Structure: Relying on Government Regulation to Preserve the Internet’s Unregulated Character.” Minnesota Law Review 85, 215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Netanel, N. (2000). “Cyberspace 2.0+.” Texas Law Review 79, 447, 450.

    Google Scholar 

  • Netanel, N. (2000). “Cyberspace Self-Governance: A Skeptical View from Liberal Democratic Theory.” California Law Review 88, 395.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nguyen, X. (2004). “Collateralizing Privacy.” Yulane Law Review 78, 553.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, D. (1990). Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance. Cambridge University Press.

  • Ohm, P. (1999). On Regulating the Internet: Usenet, A Case Study.UCLA Law Review 46, 1941.

    Google Scholar 

  • Olson, M. (1971). The Logic of Collective Action. Public Goods and the Theory of Groups. Harvard Univ. Press.

  • Oppedahl, C. (1997). Trademark Disputes in the Assignment of Domain Names. In B. Kahin and J. Keller (eds.) Coordinating the Internet. The MIT Press.

  • Owen, M. (2001). International Ramifications of Doing Business On-line: Europe. 661 PLI/Pat 627.

  • Posner, E. (2000). Law and Social Norms. Harvard University Press.

  • Radin, M. (2000). “Humans, Computers and Binding Commitment.” Industrial Law Journal 75, 1125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reidenberg, J. (2001). E-Commerce and Trans-Atlantic Privacy. Houston Law Review 38, 717, 726.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice, D. (2000). Jurisdiction in Cyberspace: Which Law and Forum Apply to Securities Transactions on the Internet?, University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economics and Law 21, 585.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rice, D. (2001). A Cyberspace Odyssey Through U.S. and E.U. Internet Jurisdiction Over E-Commerce. 661 PLI/Pat 421.

  • Rice, D. (2004). Problems Running a Global Internet Business: Complying with Laws of Other Countries. Practising Law Institute 797, 11.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaffer, G. (2000). Globalization and Social Protection: The Impact of E.U. and International Rules in the Ratcheting Up of U.S. Privacy Standards. Yale Journal of International Law 25(1), 86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shaw, R. (1997). Internet Domain Names: Whose Domain is This? In B. Kahin, and J. Keller (eds.) Coordinating the Internet. The MIT Press.

  • Smith, M. et al. (2000). Understanding Digital Markets: Review and Assessment. In E. Brynjolfsson and B. Kahin (eds.) Understanding the Digital Economy, Data, Tools and Research. The MIT Press.

  • Soma, J., Rynerson, S. & Beall-Eder, B. An Analysis of the Use of Bilateral Agreements Between Transnational Trading Groups: The U.S./EU E-commerce Privacy Safe Harbor. Texas International Law Journal 39, 171.

  • Sovern, J. (2001). “Protecting Privacy with Deceptive Trade Practices Legislation.” Fordham Law Review 69, 1305, 1356.

    Google Scholar 

  • The U.S. Government Working Group on Electronic Commerce, 2000. Leadership for the New Millenium. Delivering on Digital Progress and Prosperity. 3rd Annual Report, U.S. Department of Commerce.

  • The White House, 1997. A Framework for Global Electronic Commerce. The White House,at http://www.ecommerce.gov/framework.htm

  • Trosow, S. (1999). “Economic Analysis and Copyright Law: Are New Models Needed in the Digital Age?” 1 Legal Reference Services Quarterly 161.

  • Truste at, http://www.truste.com/webpublishers/pub_how.html.

  • U.S. Department of Commerce Economics and Statistics Administration. National Telecommunications and Information Administration, 2000. Falling Through the Net: Toward Digital Inclusion. A Report on Americans’ Access to Technology Tools. At http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fttn00/falling.htm.

  • Varian, H. (1998). Markets for Information Goods. On file with the University of California, Berkeley.

  • Varian, H. (2000). Buying, Sharing and Renting Information Goods. University of California at Berkeley Working Paper, at http://sims.berkeley.edu//simhal.

  • Varian, H. (2000). Market Structure in the New Age. In E. Brynjolfsson and B. Kahin (eds.) Understanding the Digital Economy, Data, Tools and Research. The MIT Press.

  • Varian, H. (2000). Versioning Information Goods. In Internet Publishing and Beyond. The Economics of Digital Information and Intellectual Property, Brian Kahin & Hal R. Varian eds., The MIT Press.

  • Vulkan, N. (1999). “Economic Implications of Agent Technology and E-Commerce.” The Economic Journal 109, F67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yan, D. (2000). “Virtual Reality: Can We Ride Trademark Law to Surf Cyberspace?” Fordham Intellectual Property Media & Entertainment Law Journal 10, 773.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zinser, A. (2004). “European Data Protection Directive: The Determination of the Adequacy Requirement in International Data Transfers,” Tulane Journal of Technology and Intellectual Property 6, 171

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Program in Intellectual Property &Technology Law, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, College of Law, USA

    Jay P. Kesan (Professor & Director)

  2. Department of Economics, University of North Florida, USA

    Andres A. Gallo (Assistant Professor)

Authors
  1. Jay P. Kesan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Andres A. Gallo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jay P. Kesan.

Additional information

JEL Classification K33 · K2 · L51 · L86 · O57

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kesan, J.P., Gallo, A.A. Why are the United States and the European Union failing to regulate the internet efficiently? Going beyond the bottom-up and top-down alternatives. Eur J Law Econ 21, 237–266 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-006-7422-y

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10657-006-7422-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation