This thesis examines the application of traditional jurisdictional doctrines to
online activity. It analyses not only to what extent, and why, the Internet
challenges existing principles allocating regulatory competence, but the
factors which shape, and must shape, the regulatory responses to these
challenges, in an attempt to create an analytical framework within which the
search for viable solutions can begin.
The overarching argument made in this thesis is that the keys to viable future
Internet regulation are deeply embedded in past and present regulation and
that we cannot simply look for the most efficient legal solutions, regardless of
how they fit within existing laws. This would be inconsistent with the law's
basic function to answer the need for certainty and predictability. Building
upon this fundamental premise, it is further argued, and shown, that an
understanding of the public law - private law dichotomy within the existing
jurisdictional framework, as well as its deeply entrenched status, is essential
for appreciating the severity of the jurisdictional problems caused by the
Internet and actual and likely regulatory responses to them. It is argued that
this explains why both sets of rules have consistently accommodated
transnational online activity differently, giving rise to different problems -
problems which ultimately touch upon fundamental legal notions, such as
formal justice, the rule of law or obedience to law which cannot but set further
outer parameters of the search for solutions to the jurisdictional problems
triggered by the Internet.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:ADTP/218602 |
| Date | January 2002 |
| Creators | Kohl, Uta, n/a |
| Publisher | University of Canberra. Law |
| Source Sets | Australiasian Digital Theses Program |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Rights | ), Copyright Uta Kohl |
Page generated in 0.0018 seconds