Internet regulation would undermine freedom of speech and growth

¶ … U.S. government should not regulate the Internet. One important reason is that it would go against the nations' right to freedom of speech. The government has used a number of reasons to support its quest for regulation, such as protecting children, yet it has ignored the fact that there are other methods to control harmful and illegal material online without hindering the Internet's growth and capabilities.

This paper will show that it would be impossible for any single government or nation to completely regulate the Internet, because by nature, the Internet is resistant to control and regulation.

The Internet was created by the defense-related ARPANET project, which was a communications tool for the United States government in the late 1960's linking a decentralized system of computers that could resist a nuclear attack (Copeland, et al.). Today, this tool, which was once viewed as little more than an emergency fallback system, has grown into one of the most popular methods of international communication.

The Internet is about freedom -- freedom of speech and choice. When a person logs on to the Internet, he or she can choose whether to give a real name or a pseudonym. While on the net, he or she can speak freely and find information on just about anything. There are seemingly limitless forums through which he or she can communicate. This freedom is the backbone of the Internet. However, freedom and law are always in conflict.

Due to the enormous popularity of the Internet, the United States government is now extremely concerned with how it can apply governmental functions of regulation to the Internet -- an entirely new dimension of communication.

The Problems Created by the Internet

Traditionally, governmental authority has been basically limited to its individual geographical territory (Kizza) The Internet transcends these boundaries. Therefore, one of the main problems that the Internet creates is that traditional laws used to prosecute criminals and regulate commercial transactions do not work when applied to Internet transactions.

For example, different areas tax transactions based upon where they occur. Internet transactions, which link buyers and sellers across the globe, are not regulated by any particular city, state or country (97). This raises numerous concerns regarding commerce. In addition, in the past, governments levied import taxes on international transactions, but these traditional regulations do not apply to data of commercial value that flows over the Internet.

Recent studies have shown that the federal and state government only take a minor loss in tax revenue from Internet sales. If they imposed tax regulations online, it could potentially cripple potential entrepreneurs as they strive to find a place for themselves on the Internet. Senator John McCain has introduced a bill that would permanently ban Internet sales taxes by specifically outlawing any future attempts to impose a sales tax structure on Internet sales (101). In my opinion, this legislation is the best solution regarding the issue of Internet commerce and the government's attempt to regulate it.

Addressing the Issues

Governments across the world have addressed these issues, wondering how they can come up with a way to regulate Internet content and commerce, but their solution have been lacking.

According to Ira Magaziner, U.S. Presidential Advisor on Internet Policy, "governments are ill-equipped to handle the Internet, because it changes too rapidly, it's too decentralized and too international. The digital age moves too quickly for government action." (Riley, p. 51)

However, numerous groups around the world are planning and studying ways to regulate the Internet. The U.S. government is at the forefront of these efforts.

The major problem with regulating the Internet is that this would hinder the publics right to freedom of expression and censor the Internet. The Internet is a borderless medium that does not originate in any particular place. Therefore, it is impossible to try to mandate cultural norms. The Internet should remain unregulated, providing a platform for free expression.

Reasons for Regulation

As the Internet becomes an increasingly popular method of communication, the government becomes more interested in regulating it, for a variety of reasons.

The Internet is the first medium in history that allows people all around the world to communicate their ideas at any time and place (Samoriski). The government wants to regulate the Internet because it fears lack of control over it.

The government claims that the Internet should be regulated because pornographic and hate sites need to be controlled. However, these sites are only a very small part of the Internet. In addition, there are already existing laws throughout the world that regulate these sites, enabling authorities to track, investigate, arrest and convict parties engaging in illegal Internet activities, including credit fraud, hacking, pedophilia and more (117).

Government regulation, such as blocking Web sites from harmful or illegal content is a drastic and unnecessary measure that does solve the problems presented by the Internet. Even if the regulation were successful, it would be impossible to solve the problem of sites outside the U.S. The government still continue to argues that this regulation is necessary, particularly to protect the children.

In an article published in Time magazine, critics of government regulation argued that censorship is a far less important issue than good parenting. I agree with this article and do not think that it is the government's responsibility to regulate Internet content. It is the responsibility of the parents. (Miller 76).

The government tries to manipulate the situation to use protecting children as its primary reason for regulating the Internet. For example, when it was trying to regulate Napster, government officials said, "Shawn Fanning, an 18-year-old college dropout, wrote the code that changed the world. His fate, and ours, is now in the court's hands. It is now in the government's hands to decide whether worldwide file sharing shall stay legalized"

Yet critics said that this charge was ludicrous. "Napster is not harming the industry, certainly not so much that it has to be shut down before trial" (Greenfeld 64). People around the world supported this sentiment, accusing the government of trying to regulate Napster because it was taking away from sales. Until the Internet came into existence, the U.S. government controlled most of the new communication methods.

As the Internet increases in size and capability, the government will most likely increase its efforts to regulate it. However, this will mean that the world will have to adjust its views to conform to those of the government. Government regulation is a danger to the Internet, as it will become useless as a mass communication device and a place for freedom of mind and thoughts.

The very nature of the Internet resists regulation. However, the government is tempted by the Internet's popularity, and wants to take control of it. It is unnecessary to regulate the Internet at this point and if the government did take the reigns, it will undoubtedly hinder its natural growth and development. Any restrictions would change the way the Internet is progressing, which would ultimately change its impact on society.

Solution to Internet Problem

There is no doubt in my mind that the government will find ways to regulate privacy, security, cryptography and digital signatures, to protect the privacy and security of users, but the regulation should stop there. Due to the fact that current laws already allow law enforcement to pursue and charge individuals who engage in illegal acts on the Internet, the Internet is a relatively safe place and should remain free.

Self-Regulation better solution for Internet censorship would be self-regulation of the Internet through technology. There are a variety of software systems that give parents control of Internet material. Many users in the computer industry have already accepted technology as a viable solution to regulating harmful and illegal content on the Internet.

In the past few years, Internet Service Providers (ISPs) have been used as a means to control the spread of illegal material on the Internet. ISPs across the globe have formed industry associations to try to establish codes of conduct, or at least to develop a common approach to regulation practices.

For example, the European Internet Services Providers Association (EuroISPA) was established with seven member service provider associations, representing over 400 ISPs across the European Union. Its goals include "to promote self-regulation and to influence the regulatory process on behalf of the Internet industry."

Groups like this promote a system that allows Web publishers to review and rate their online material, which can allow parents and users to screen content. This technology is a far superior solution to government regulation.

Conclusion

In today's society, the Internet is the most rapidly developing means of communication in the world. It is made up of individual computers, servers, and the telephone lines that link them. The Internet is a way for people around the world to communicate with each other instantaneously.

The Internet is currently a major example of the First Amendment: freedom of speech. On the Internet, people can say whatever they want without consequence. As a result, Congress has been contemplating new laws that would make it a crime to send "vulgar" language over the Internet.

The government desperately wants to control the Internet, and many groups have accused the government trying to use the protection of children as a blanket reason to pass laws that will enable them to regulate and censor the Internet, while banning techniques that could possibly eliminate the need for regulation.

The government should not be allowed to regulate the Internet for many reasons. First and foremost, censorship of the Internet would destroy its liberal atmosphere. Secondly, there is no need for regulation, as technical methods like encryption could be used to prevent illegal and harmful activity on the Internet. (Levy 56).

In addition, Congress, in its quest for regulation, has failed to recognize that there are no clear boundaries regarding information accessed over the Internet from international sources. Even if the U.S. government tried to regulate the Internet, it would be impossible to control information from other countries. The U.S. would be limited in technology, in comparison to other countries.

Instead of blocking sites, content providers and Internet service providers should self-regulate, and users should take advantage of filtering technologies and content rating. In order to provide some control over the Internet without completely regulating it, technology is the best solution.