Slide 2:Roadmap I. Problems that law is struggling to solve in cyberspace Spam, Digital Media, VoIP II. Common attributes of these problems III. Modalities of regulation IV. Two proposal for making better law related to the internet

Slide 3:Is there such a thing as a Internet law? After all, we don’t teach the law of the horse. (So says Judge Easterbrook.) http://www.lessig.org/content/articles/works/finalhls.pdf

Slide 5:I. Problems: Spam is a problem. Bandwidth hogging -> slower, costlier Discourages use of net (e-mail, e-commerce) Productivity -> loss of time and money Receiver pays (but see freemail, just in inconvenience), esp. in mobile wireless (Japan e.g.) Potential for fraud, esp. phishing/spoofing Missing legitimate messages (false positives) E-mail harvesting -> privacy Viruses: propagation of open relays, etc. (80% of spam through relays) Offensive content

Slide 6:Spam is a global problem. The “Spam Kingpin” theory; but, Probably an increase in cross-border spamming Enforcement efforts have met with mixed success, since coordinating among various countries is hard. The UN is thinking about getting involved.

Slide 7:Other problems Digital Media Similar to spam in terms of the widespread disobedience. Similar also in terms of global nature of the problem. Different in terms of enforcement, to some extent. VoIP Not the Vonage kind, but the Skype kind.

Slide 8:II. Common Attributes Enormous numbers of people involved who are breaking the law. The law in this area is very complicated. Enforcement and coordination is very expensive. Each dollar figure involved is small. The Internet is global. The law-breaking takes advantage of the architecture of the Internet; so does innovation. Technologies change very fast.

Slide 9:III. Ideas for how to end spam. Law Code Markets Norms (Lessig, Code)

Slide 10:How to end spam: Law. Laws passed. 36 state laws One US federal law: CAN-SPAM Act of 2003 Plus ideas for further review: bounty hunters, do not e-mail. Laws in other countries Other laws of general applicability: anti-fraud, e.g. Enforcement coordinated. MoU between three countries to improve enforcement Bilateral MoU approach (Australia-Korea) Contracts (another form of law) executed. For Instance, require complete header information from senders Enforcement through making things bad for sender through reputation mechanisms.

Slide 11:How to end spam: Code. Code written. Filtering at the client-side (use your Eudora better) Filtering of mail server-side IETF’s MARID: Authentication (started with SPF, which AOL championed; then MSFT introduced Caller ID for e-mail, for which it is holding patents) (but MARID shuttered on 9/22/04) Domain Keys: Authentication using keys (encryption) based upon domain names: Yahoo! (could add another level of security by using a certificate authority) Technically complementary. Think of it as two conversations: one at SMTP conversation level; one at the header level Blacklisting (ISPs subscribe to a blacklist from a private organization) ISPs slowing down passage of high-volume messages.

Slide 12:How to end spam: Markets. Market-based solutions Spam has an economic cost. “E-postage idea”: added transaction costs. Computational speed costs approach. Bonded Sender

Slide 13:How to end spam: Norms. Norms So far, they’ve failed almost completely. Ordinarily, it means “user education”. But see the “blinking 12:00” problem. What if we were to flip the default – instead of connecting in cyberspace to anyone, what if you were to connect only to those whom you have reason to trust? The idea is to create an internet on which we are accountable to one another. How far could that get you?

Slide 14:IV. Proposals: 1. Ordering. Norms. Start with norms. Defer to the peer production of governance if at all possible. Seek to let the wisdom of crowds prevail (cf. google.) Markets. Next, seek to solve through offerings in the markets that support sound, sustainable norms – that give people the chance to “go legit.” Code. Use technology solutions where there is insurance that the public can participate. Law. The law is a backstop for the worst cases, like fraud. The government should ensure that consumers are protected against market actors – to promote competition and choice. Rarely is a technology-specific law a good idea, especially when the technology is moving at such a fast rate of development (and if you pass such a long, adopt a medium-term outlook). Internet law generally is too complex already, with too many unintended consequences.

Slide 15:Proposals: 2. Coordination. Coordination is increasingly important: as between technologists and law-makers, with a meaningful voice for civil servants; and, as between decision-makers in different countries.

Slide 16:Internet Law Makes us get more serious about “international law” at a time of increasing isolation of Americans in the world. Make us think about how technical people, and ordinary people, ought to fit into decision-making in an increasingly complicated world. Makes us think about how democratic systems can work to protect the public interest, when the problems are extremely complex, broadly distributed, and cut across cultures and boundaries of nearly all types. Makes us rethink our values embedded in current law – and about the very role of government in a rapidly changing environment.

Slide 17: International Law

Slide 18: Coordinated Systems

Slide 19: Values

Slide 20: Democracy