Internet e le sue fonti

di Giovanna De Minico

SOMMARIO: 1. Quale è il diritto giusto per Internet? - 2. Quale self-regulation per Internet? - (2.1 Una self-regulation pura? - 2.2 Oppure la co-regulation?) - 3. La self-regulation è al servizio del bene comune? - 4. Il Legislatore della self-regulation. - 5. Gli attributi dell’eteronomia di Internet. - 6. Quale relazione tra eteronomia e self-regulation in Internet? - (6.1 La lezione americana sul rapporto tra eteronomia e autoregolazione in rete). - 7. La tensione tra l’essere e il dover essere.

Which is the better regulation for the Internet? Binding or spontaneous? Homogeneous or territorially differentiated? Narrow or as large-meshed net? To respond, the Author adopts a twofold criterion: defining the objective and a pragmatic approach. The former, a bottom-up approach, enables one to design welltailored rules to the specificity of the Internet. The latter, as a purposive criterion, presupposes as solved the alternative between a network geared to the benefit of all or only a few. Entrust the regulation to the uncontrolled self-regulation shifts the balance to the benefit of private power - media companies, content providers and other net’s Giants - undermining social cohesion and territorial equilibrium. Therefore, the Author suggests to the reader a different perspective. On the one hand, it is binding to assign to the selfregulation the objectives of substantial equality and maximum expansion of individual freedoms; on the other, it is spontaneous for what concerns the methods of implementation of the goals, trying to hold together fairness and individual freedom.