The debate over whether cyberspace can or should be regulated is essentially dead. This is the conclusion being taught in law schools today. The battle between Judge Frank Easterbrook and Professor Lawrence Lessig over "laws" and "horses", infamous among cyberspace legal scholars, became irrelevant when geographically-based governments began regulating Internet related activities. However, debate over how the Internet should be regulated continues. One way of framing this debate is in terms of deciding how to regulate behavior in cyberspace. Professor Lessig postulated four kinds of constraints regulate behavior: (1) social norms, (2) markets, (3) law, and (4) architecture. This comment first argues that lawmakers must focus on using the fourth constraint-architecture-if an interconnected global, democratic society is truly an international goal. Second, this comment argues that, in focusing on architectural constraint, game theory is a uniquely appropriate tool for analyzing Internet issues and developing Internet laws.
Van N. Nguy,
Using Architectural Constraints and Game Theory to Regulate International Cyberspace Behavior,
San Diego Int'l L.J.
Available at: https://digital.sandiego.edu/ilj/vol5/iss1/12