Document Type
Book Chapter
Publication Date
2010
Keywords
Tech Freedom, digital, FTC, FCC, IIRC, regulatory, Comcast, BitTorrent, blocking
Abstract
All is not well in the land of online self-regulation. However competently internet intermediaries police their sites, nagging questions will remain about their fairness and objectivity in doing so. Is Comcast blocking BitTorrent to stop infringement, to manage traffic, or to decrease access to content that competes with its own for viewers? How much digital due process does Google need to give a site it accuses of harboring malware? If Facebook censors a video of war carnage, is that a token of respect for the wounded or one more reflexive effort of a major company to ingratiate itself with the Washington establishment?
Questions like these will persist, and erode the legitimacy of intermediary self-policing, as long as key operations of leading companies are shrouded in secrecy. Administrators must develop an institutional competence for continually monitoring rapidly-changing business practices. A trusted advisory council charged with assisting the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) could help courts and agencies adjudicate controversies concerning intermediary practices. An Internet Intermediary Regulatory Council (IIRC) would spur the development of expertise necessary to understand whether companies’ controversial decisions are socially responsible or purely self-interested. Monitoring is a prerequisite for assuring a level playing field online.
Publication Citation
Pasquale, Frank A., Trusting (and Verifying) Online Intermediaries' Policing, in The Next Digital Decade, Essay on the Future of the Internet, 347 (Berin Szoka, Adam Marcus, eds., 2010).
Disciplines
Internet Law
Digital Commons Citation
Pasquale, Frank A., Trusting (and Verifying) Online Intermediaries' Policing, in The Next Digital Decade, Essay on the Future of the Internet, 347 (Berin Szoka, Adam Marcus, eds., 2010).