Paper Status Tracking

Journals by Title

Journals by Subject

Contact us

	[email protected]
	3275638434

	Paper Publishing WeChat

Useful Links

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

Article

Open Access

Cyberspace: A New Threat to the Sovereignty of the State

Author(s)

Jackson Adams, Mohamad Albakajai

Full-Text PDF Download XML 4127 Views

DOI:10.17265/2328-2185/2016.06.003

Affiliation(s)

Jackson Adams, Ph.D., e-commerce, Essex Business School, University of Essex, Colchester, UK.
Mohamad Albakajai, Ph.D., e-commerce, Essex Business School, University of Essex, Colchester, UK.

ABSTRACT

This paper discusses one of the contemporary challenging issues—it is the challenge of e-commerce to the sovereignty of the state, where governments are unable to implement their own laws on disputed cases resulting from trans-border e-commerce interactions. The objective of the current research is to draw attention to the impact of international characteristics of e-commerce on the sovereignty of state, and to identify the factors affecting this sovereignty. The issue of the dynamicity of time and place will be taken into consideration, where activities carried out over the internet are characterized by their cross-border dimension. Based on real e-commerce case studies disputed on international level, this paper will draw on the legal perspective of cyberspace, identifying the relationship between cyberspace and state sovereignty, and outlining the mechanisms by which cyberspace could cross borders and the territory of the state despite all the precautions taken by the state to protect its sovereignty.

KEYWORDS

cyberspace, sovereignty, time, space, soft law

Cite this paper

References

Alonso, P. (2013). Internet, another Syrian civil war. Retrieved from http://www.slate.fr/story/69519/syrie-internet-hacking (Accessed 15 January 2015)

Bellanger, P. (2011). From sovereignty in general to digital sovereignty in particular. In Les Echos.fr, 54(30). Retrieved from http://lecercle.lesechos.fr/entreprises-marches/high-tech-medias/internet/221137239/souverainete-general-et-souverainete-numeriq (Accessed 28 February 2012)

Biegel, S. (2001). Beyond our control? Confronting the limits of our legal system in the age of cyberspace. London: MIT Press.

Bourassi. (2013). Cyberwar, how France protects itself. Retrieved from http://www.latribune.fr/entreprises-finance/industrie/aeronautiquedefense/20130111trib000742055/cyberguerre-comment-la-france-se-protege.html (Accessed 2 December 2014)

Brenkert, G. (2009). Google, human rights, and moral compromise. Journal of Business Ethics, 85, 453-478.

Chaffey, D., & Ellis-Chadwick, F. (2012). Digital marketing: Strategy, implementation and practice. London: Pearson.

Choucri, N., & Clark, D. (2013). Who controls cyberspace? Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 69(5), 21-31.

Cohen-Almagor, R. (2012). Freedom of expression, internet responsibility, and business ethics: The Yahoo Saga and its implications. J Bus Ethics, 106, 353-365.

Cruquenaire, A., & Lazaro, C. (2013). The law applicable to international contracts concluded via Internet: The Rome convention. Retrieved from http://www.crid.be/pdf/public/4049.pdf (Accessed 17 November 2014)

Deibert, R., Rohozinski, R., & Crete-Nishihata, M. (2012). Cyclones in cyberspace: Information shaping and denial in the 2008 Russia-Georgia war. Security Dialogue, 43(1), 3-24.

Duplessis, I. (2007). Vertigo and soft law, doctrinal reactions in international law. Quebec Journal of International Law, Special Issue (Hors-série), 245-268. Retrieved from http://www.crimt.org/PDF/hs07_duplessis.pdf (Accessed 02 February 2014)

Gendron, A. (2013). Cyber threats and multiplier effects: Canada at risk. Canadian Foreign Policy Journal, 19(2), 178-198.

Grabosky, P. (2004). The global dimension of cybercrime. Global Crime, 6(1), 146-157.

Grewlic, K. (1999). Good governance in the age of cyberspace. The Journal of Policy, Regulation and Strategy for Telecommunications, 1(3), 264-270.

Grosso, A. (2001). Domis of sovereignty. Communications of the ACM, 44(3), 102-104.

Hartnett, S. (2011). Google and the “Twisted Cyber Spy” Affair: US-Chinese communication in an Age of Globalization. Quarterly Journal of Speech, 97(4), 411-434.

Hassan, R. (2003). Network Time and the new knowledge epoch. Time & Society, 12(2/3), 225-241.

Hassan, R. (2009). Empires of speed: Time and the acceleration of politics and society. Leiden: Brill.

Hedley, S. (2003). Nations, markets and other imaginary places: Who makes the law in cyberspace? Information & Communications Technology Law, 12(3), 215-224.

Jacquot, F., & Weitzel, B. (2001). Litigations regulation. The Legal Guide of Electronics Traders (Version Préliminaire), 204-243. Retrieved from https://lexum.com/sites/default/files/publications/2001-guide-juridique-commercant-electronique.pdf (Accessed 5 June 3013)

Kobrin, S. (1997). Electronic cash and the end of national markets. Global Issues, 2(4), 38.

Kohl, U. (2007). Jurisdiction and the Internet: A study of regulatory competence over online activity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Kucklich, J. (2009). Virtual worlds and their discontents precarious sovereignty, governmentality, and the ideology of play. Games and Culture, 4(4), 340-352.

Laguerre, M. (2004). Virtual time, in information. Communication & Society, 7(2), 223-247.

Lee, H., & Sawyer, S. (2010). Conceptualizing time, space and computing for work and organizing. Time Society, 9, 293-316.

Levy, M. (23 May 2000). French Court says Yahoo broke racial law. New York Times, p. 4. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2000/05/23/business/french-court-says-yahoo-broke-racial-law.html

Lewis, J. (2010). Sovereignty and the role of government in cyberspace. The Brown Journal of World Affairs, 16(2), 55-65.

Lin, H. (2012). A virtual necessity: Some modest steps toward greater cybersecurity. Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, 68(5), 75-87.

Maljean-Dubois, S. (2003). Enforcement of international environmental law. Retrieved from http://www.peacepalacelibrary.nl/ebooks/files/337934460.pdf (Accessed 18 March 2014)

Matusitz, J. (2008). Cyberterrorism: Postmodern state of chaos. Information Security Journal: A Global Perspective, 17, 179-187.

Matusitz, J. (2014). Intercultural perspectives on cyberspace: An updated examination. Journal of Human Behaviour in the Social Environment, 24(7), 713-724.

McGuffin, C., & Mitchell, A. (2014). On domains: Cyber and the practice of warfare. International Journal, 69(3), 394-412.

Mihalache, A. (2002). The Cyber Space—Time continuum: Meaning and metaphor. The Information Society, 18, 293-301.

Placid, R., & Wynekoop, J. (2011). Tracking the footprints of anonymous defamation in cyberspace: A review of law and technology. Journal of Information Privacy and Security, 7(1), 3-24.

Sarr, M. (2012). Soft law and electronic commerce. Jurisdoctoria, 8, 49-73. Retrieved from http://www.jurisdoctoria.net/pdf/numero8/NUMERO_8.pdf (Accessed 24 August 2014)

Schneider, G. (2013). E-Business (10th ed.). London: Course Technology, Cengage Learning.

Schultz, T. (2004). Online dispute resolution: Challenges for contemporary justice. Kluwer Law International.

Sheldon, J. (2014). Geopolitics and cyber power: Why geography still matters, in American foreign policy interests. The Journal of the National Committee on American Foreign Policy, 36(5), 286-293.

Tan, J. (2012). Business under threat, technology under attack, ethics under fire: The experience of Google in China. J Bus Ethics, 110, 469-479.

Thrift, N. (2006). Space. Theory Culture Society, 23, 139-146.

Wynn, E., & Katz, J. (1997). Hyperbole over cyberspace: Self-presentation and social boundaries in internet home pages and discourse. The Information Society, 13, 297-327.