Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment & Technology Law


Paul Przbylski

First Page



This note advances the case for an international organization to control Internet content. Part I describes the current state of affairs with respect to Internet regulation. First, this part describes briefly how the Internet works, to the extent that such a description is necessary to advance the argument presented in this note. Second, concentrating on Europe, the United States, and China, Part I describes the diverging preferences of countries regarding Internet regulation, the approaches they have taken, and the problems they have encountered due to the international nature of the Internet. Third, this part addresses the major attempt at international Internet regulation to date, the Cybercrime Treaty of 2001 and its 2003 Hate Speech Addendum. As mentioned, the United States has refused to sign the addendum and is unlikely to change its position in the future, which severely undermines any uniform international regulation. Finally, as a result of these problems, several solutions have been advanced in favor of a more flexible international regulation of the Internet. Expanding on these solutions, Part II explains why an international organization would be a more effective tool for international Internet regulation. Finally, Part III addresses possible criticisms of the approach advanced in this note. Despite certain limitations, this note concludes that an international organization would be a useful step towards an effective international regulation of Internet content.