For purely legitimate purposes, some skeptics advocate for the control of the internet as it has become the world’s most powerful tool, yet the least regulated. To others, the internet does not require regulation because there is no consent among users to be governed, a position I agree with. Unlike conventional areas of jurisdiction, the internet cannot have a constitution or a declaration instituted among its users as a country would do against its people.
Moreover, no one has a legitimate claim to it and, consequently, no one can claim to have authority over the internet. Indeed, questions arise on how an entity can control people’s conduct online. The French government’s attempts to control the internet were unsuccessful because of similar arguments and the failure and lack of jurisdiction. Being an integral part of the global communication network, the internet has attracted regulators claiming its lawless nature, which, arguably, should not be controlled for the lack of legal grounding of such regulations.
The nature of the internet in communication makes gatekeepers of the ubiquitous mobile and electronic communication systems seek to regulate it for the public good. Others cite cyber and electronic security and need to extend the computer law that existed before the internet and through which regulators governed electronic data interchange, cybernetics, and robotics. However, it is critical to note that the public’s attitude towards regulation then differs from today’s. Undeniably, it would be challenging to balance between regulating the internet and maintaining freedom of speech.
It is also nearly impossible to compare the opportunities that lie with internet use and the dangers posed to users – with the latter being insignificant to the former to warrant regulation. Today’s internet users are knowledgeable and know the risks they are exposed to on the internet; hence, any form of regulation cannot justify protecting them. However, despite the lack of legal grounding on ways to regulate the internet, there is a need to manage cyberspace but within the limits of speech among other freedoms to internet users.
Cyber-attacks continue to threaten lives and national security, as previously witnessed, thus, reiterating the need to protect cyberspace. An event such as the attempt to poison Florida City’s water supply by hacking into the water systems highlights the “bad actors out there” (Tidy, 2021). To effectively protect the public from such actors, entities such as the Department of Defense have been tasked with defending cyberspace through its DOD Information Network (DODIN).
The entity works with military intelligence and other private sector stakeholders to secure the physical domains and cyberspace. Indeed, the achievements made by this unit warrant their full authorization to secure the internet. Although they would not control individual actions on the internet or attempt to regulate its use, they would be in charge of securing systems, monitoring offensive cyberspace operations, and defending cyberspace operations.
In addition to the DODIN, the U.S. government created the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA), federal agency meant to protect its critical infrastructure from physical and cyber threats. The agency is more suited to protecting the internet because of its mandate and considering its specificity. From the roles allocated to these agencies, it is evident that the internet cannot be regulated per se; instead, the risks from internet use can be managed. These arguments suggest that the internet will remain a free domain – a tool for expression and communication that cannot be regulated but controlled.
The lack of a legitimate claim complicates any attempts to introduce regulations to control the internet. Despite being the pinnacle of global communications, the internet remains a free domain through which people exercise their freedom of speech, thus, any attempt to regulate it must adhere to these freedoms. However, the lack of proper regulatory structures does not stop CISA and DODIN from securing cyberspace and critical infrastructure from cyber-attacks. The nature of the internet will continue to attract regulators who cite the prevalence of lawlessness and risks from an unregulated internet.
Reference
Tidy, J. (2021). Hacker tries to poison water supply of Florida city. BBC. Web.