Huber (Manhattan Institute for Policy Research) recounts the history of telecommunications and its regulation over the last century, arguing that the FCC should have been abolished years ago because it has protected monopolies, over priced services, curtailed free speech, and undermined privacy. He proposes that sensible telecommunications policies evolve through common law and not through government imposition of inflexible regulatory mandates. For general readers. Annotation copyrighted by Book News, Inc., Portland, OR

Although Law and Disorder in Cyberspace gets a great deal right in boldly proposing to abolish the FCC and rely on common law courts to regulate the telecosm, an untenable distinction between the process and substance of common law runs through the text. That fundamental flaw opens a rift through which creep a number of lesser errors. Peter Huber accords antitrust law, despite its reliance on legislation and inconsistency with common law proper, inexplicable deference. In an analysis aggravated by suspect claims about the history of telecommunications, he promotes mandatory interconnection at the expense of property and contract rights. Contrary to Huber's account, moreover, common law consistently excused telephone companies from any general obligation to carry their competitors' traffic. I thus suggest that we liberate telephone companies from mandatory interconnection by letting them buy back full rights to their facilities. Law and Disorder in Cyberspace mischaracterizes copyright as an agreeable child of common law. To the extent that copyright represents a response to market failure, it perhaps infringes on common law rights for good reason. But infringe it does. I thus propose that copyright retreat where common law rights suffice to encourage creative expression. Although Huber correctly diagnoses the collectivism afflicting wireless communications policy, his preferred treatment - ownership in fee simple of the spectrum - contains a dangerously high a dose of property rights. I offer the more gentle common law solution of treating rights to the spectrum like rights to trademarks. In closing, I raise a defense on Huber's behalf: Perhaps advanced telecommunications will so improve common law's processes as to correct its substantive errors. Law and Disorder in Cyberspace does not explore that somewhat speculative counterargument, however, leaving the text with troubling, if ultimately instructive, defects.

Cybersecurity, data privacy law, and the related legal implications overlap into a relevant and developing area in the legal field. However, many legal practitioners lack the foundational understanding of computer processes which are fundamental for applying existing and developing legal structures to the issue of cybersecurity and data privacy. At the same time, those who work and research in cybersecurity are often unprepared and unaware of the nuances of legal application. This book translates the fundamental building blocks of data privacy and (cyber)security law into basic knowledge that is equally accessible and educational for those working and researching in either field, those who are involved with businesses and organizations, and the general public.

There's a common belief that cyberspace cannot be regulated-that it is, in its very essence, immune from the government's (or anyone else's) control.Code argues that this belief is wrong. It is not in the nature of cyberspace to be unregulable; cyberspace has no "nature." It only has code-the software and hardware that make cyberspace what it is. That code can create a place of freedom-as the original architecture of the Net did-or a place of exquisitely oppressive control.If we miss this point, then we will miss how cyberspace is changing. Under the influence of commerce, cyberpsace is becoming a highly regulable space, where our behavior is much more tightly controlled than in real space.But that's not inevitable either. We can-we must-choose what kind of cyberspace we want and what freedoms we will guarantee. These choices are all about architecture: about what kind of code will govern cyberspace, and who will control it. In this realm, code is the most significant form of law, and it is up to lawyers, policymakers, and especially citizens to decide what values that code embodies.

Tallinn Manual 2.0 expands on the highly influential first edition by extending its coverage of the international law governing cyber operations to peacetime legal regimes. The product of a three-year follow-on project by a new group of twenty renowned international law experts, it addresses such topics as sovereignty, state responsibility, human rights, and the law of air, space, and the sea. Tallinn Manual 2.0 identifies 154 'black letter' rules governing cyber operations and provides extensive commentary on each rule. Although Tallinn Manual 2.0 represents the views of the experts in their personal capacity, the project benefitted from the unofficial input of many states and over fifty peer reviewers.

Since its original publication in 1999, this foundational book has become a classic in its field. This second edition, Code Version 2.0, updates the work and was prepared in part through a wiki, a web site allowing readers to edit the text, making this the first reader-edited revision of a popular book. Code counters the common belief that cyberspace cannot be controlled or censored. To the contrary, under the influence of commerce, cyberspace is becoming a highly regulable world where behavior will be much more tightly controlled than in real space. We can - we must - choose what kind of cyberspace we want and what freedoms it will guarantee. These choices are all about architecture: what kind of code will govern cyberspace, and who will control it. In this realm, code is the most significant form of law and it is up to lawyers, policymakers, and especially average citizens to decide what values that code embodies. Publisher: Basic Books/Perseus.

This book is the first one that comprehensively discusses cyberspace sovereignty in China, reflecting China’s clear attitude in the global Internet governance: respecting every nation’s right to independently choose a development path, cyber management modes and Internet public policies and to participate in the international cyberspace governance on an equal footing. At present, the concept of cyberspace sovereignty is still very strange to many people, so it needs to be thoroughly analyzed. This book will not only help scientific and technical workers in the field of cyberspace security, law researchers and the public understand the development of cyberspace sovereignty at home and abroad, but also serve as reference basis for the relevant decision-making and management departments in their work.