Referenties boek
ICT en recht

Op deze pagina vind je de referenties van hoofdstuk 6 van het boek ICT & Recht, van auteur Arnoud Engelfriet. 

Meer info en aanschaffen

Referenties hoofdstuk 6
Internet governance en handhaving   

1.    K. Spaink, ‘De Pentagon-affaire’, Follow the Money 2020. 
2.    J. Palfrey, ‘Four phases of internet regulation’, Social Research: An International Quarterly 2010/77(3), p. 981-996.
3.    W. Gibson, Neuromancer, New York: Ace Books 1984, p. 69 
4.    N. Wiener, Cybernetics: Or Control and Communication in the Animal and the Machine, Cambridge: The M.I.T. Press 1985
5.    L. Strate, ‘The varieties of cyberspace: Problems in definition and delimitation’, Western Journal of Communication 1999/63, afl. 3, p. 382-83.
6.    J.P. Barlow, ‘A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace’, Duke Law & Technology Review 2019/18-1, p. 5-7.
7.    P. Elmer-Dewitt, ‘First Nation in Cyberspace’, Time International 1993/49.
8.    E.J. Dommering, 'Het auteursrecht spoelt weg door het elektronisch vergiet. Enige gedachten over de naderende crisis van het auteursrecht', Computerrecht 1994/3, p. 109.
9.    R. Ensafi, P. Winter, A. Mueen, J.R. Crandall, ‘Analyzing the Great Firewall of China Over Space and Time’, Proc. Priv. Enhancing Technol. 2015/1, p. 61-76.
10.    V. Stocker, G. Smaragdakis, W. Lehr, S. Bauer, ‘The growing complexity of content delivery networks: Challenges and implications for the Internet ecosystem’ Telecommunications Policy 2017/41(10), p. 1003-1016.
11.    S.M. Besen, M.A. Israel, ‘The evolution of Internet interconnection from hierarchy to “Mesh”: Implications for government regulation', Information Economics and Policy 2013/25(4), p. 235-245. 
12.    J. Pohle, L. Van Audenhove, ‘Post-Snowden internet policy: between public outrage, resistance and policy change’, Media and Communication 2017/5(1), p. 1-6. 
13.    R. Slayton, ‘Framing computer security and privacy: the 1960s and 1970s’, SIGCAS Comput. Soc. 2016/46.3, p. 45-54. 
14.    P. Becker, Development of Surveillance Technology and Risk of Abuse of Economic Information STOA, European Parliament. p. 12, 2020.
15.    E. Ruis, Spionnennest 1914-1918: Spionage vanuit Nederland in België, Duitsland en Engeland, Driebergen: Just Publishers 2012. 
16.    H. Haufler, Codebreakers’ Victory: How the Allied Cryptographers Won World War II, New York: Open Road Media 2014.
17.    B. Jacobs, ‘Maximator: European signals intelligence cooperation, from a Dutch perspective’, Intelligence and National Security 2020/35.5, p. 659-668. 
18.    A. Benschop, ‘Toezicht op internet — Grootschalig afluisteren en de surveillancestaat’, in: A. Benschop, ‘Eigenaardigheden van Cyberspace’, Amsterdam: Het SocioSite project 2013. 
19.    M. Rudner, ‘Britain Betwixt and between: UK SIGINT Alliance Strategy’s Transatlantic and European Connections’, Intelligence and National Security 2004/19(4), p. 571-609. 
20.    M.E. Smid, D.K. Branstad, ‘Data encryption standard: past and future’, Proceedings of the IEEE 1988/76.5, p. 550-559. 
21.    C. Jarvis, Crypto Wars: The Fight for Privacy in the Digital Age: a Political History of Digital Encryption, Boca Raton: CRC Press 2020. 
22.    J.H. Ellis, ‘The history of non-secret encryption’, Cryptologia 1999/23(3), p. 267-273..
23.    Y. Yasuhara, ‘The Myth of Free Trade: The Origins of COCOM 1945-1950’, The Japanese Journal of American Studies 1991/4, p. 127-148.
24.    K.A. Dursht, ‘From containment to cooperation: collective action and the Wassenaar arrangement’, Cardozo L. Rev. 1997/19, p. 1079. 
25.    J.F. Dooley, History of cryptography and cryptanalysis: Codes, Ciphers, and their algorithms, New York: Springer 2018. 
26.    R. Slayton, ‘Framing computer security and privacy: the 1960s and 1970s’, SIGCAS Comput. Soc. 2016/46.3, p. 45-54. 
27.    A. Judmayer, N. Stifter, K. Krombholz, E. Weippl, History of Cryptographic Currencies. In Blocks and Chains: Introduction to Bitcoin, Cryptocurrencies, and Their Consensus Mechanisms, Cham: Springer International Publishing 2017, p. 15-18.
28.    P. Zimmermann, PGP Source Code and Internals, Cambridge: M.I.T. Press 1995.
29.    M. Blaze, ‘Key escrow from a safe distance: looking back at the clipper chip’, In: Proceedings of the 27th Annual Computer Security Applications Conference, New York: Association for Computing Machinery 2011, p. 317-321.
30.    V. Pednekar-Magal, P. Shields, ‘The State and Telecom Surveillance Policy: The Clipper Chip Initiative’, Communication Law and Policy 2003/8(4), p. 429-464. 
31.    J.V. Van Hoboken, ‘Privacy and security in the cloud: Some realism about technical solutions to transnational surveillance in the post-Snowden era’, Me. L. Rev. 2013/66, p. 487. 
32.    M. Watney, ‘Law enforcement access to end-to-end encrypted social media communications’, In: 7th European Conference on Social Media ECSM, ACI 2020, p. 322. 
33.    S.D. Meinrath, S. Vitka, ‘Crypto war II’, Critical Studies in Media Communication 2014/31(2), p. 123-128. 
34.    M. Schulze, ‘Clipper meets Apple vs. FBI: A comparison of the cryptography discourses from 1993 and 2006’, Media and Communication 2017/5(1), p. 54-62. 
35.    W. Diffie, S. Landau, Privacy on the line: The politics of wiretapping and encryption, Cambridge: The M.I.T. Press 2010, p. 496. 
36.    B.J. Koops, E. Kosta, ‘Looking for some light through the lens of “cryptowar” history: Policy options for law enforcement authorities against “going dark”’, Computer Law & Security Review 2018/34(4), p. 890-900.  
37.    M. Meints, ‘The relationship between data protection legislation and information security related standards’, in: S. Fischer-Hübner, P. Duquenoy, A. Zuccato, L. Martucci, The Future of Identity in the Information Society, Boston: Springer 2008, p. 254-267.
38.    C. J. Bennett, C.D. Raab, 'The Governance of Privacy: Policy Instruments in Global Perspective', London: Routledge 2006.
39.    L. Determann, ‘Electronic Form Over Substance: eSignature Laws Need Upgrades’, Hastings LJ 2020/72, p. 1385.
40.    S.R.P. Bastiaans, M.T. Spuijbroek, C. Michielsen, ‘Elektronische identificatie en ondertekening conform eIDAS’, Computerrecht 2019/174.
41.    L.A.R. Siemerink, ‘Zwaardmacht en het grens-overschrijdende Internet’, Computerrecht 2000, p. 239.
42.    C. Conings, J.J. Oerlemans, ‘Van een netwerkzoeking naar online doorzoeking: grenzeloos of grensverleggend?’, Computerrecht 2013/5.
43.    S.J. de Vries, J.W. van den Hurk, ‘De Hackbevoegdheid’, in: S.J. de Vries, J.W. van den Hurk, (red.), Onderzoek aan digitale-gegevensdragers. Een technische en juridische verkenning, PWS nr. 15, Wolters Kluwer 2021. 
44.    Rechtbank Dordrecht 8 september 1998, Informatierecht/AMI 1999, p. 7-12
(KPN/Kapitol), Rechtbank Utrecht 27 februari 2003, Computerrecht 2003/3 (Holland Casino/Paramount).
45.    Verordening (EU) 1215/2012 (Brussel I-bis)
46.    Verordening (EU) 593/2008 (Rome I)
47.    Verordening (EU) 864/2007 (Rome II)
48.    G. van Calster, ‘Internet en rechterlijke bevoegdheid onder het Brussel I-regime’, Computerrecht 2015/42. 
49.    HvJ EU 7 december 2010, C-585/08, (Peter Pammer v. Reederei Karl Schlüter GmbH & Co. KG). en HvJ EU, 7 december 2010, C-144/09 (Hotel Alpenhof) 
50.    HvJ EU 7 maart 1995, C-68/93 (Fiona Shevill).
51.    HvJ EU 25 oktober 2011, C-509/09 (eDate). Zie ook HvJ EU 17 oktober 2017, C-94/16, ECLI:EU:C:2017:766, RBP 2018/1, NJ 2018/25 (Bolagsupplysningen en Ilsjan).
52.    J. Devenney, M. Kenny, European consumer protection: theory and practice, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press 2012. 
53.    SIDN, ‘Geschillenregeling voor .nl-domeinnamen’, NJB 2008, 325
54.    B.W. Schermer, A.R. Lodder, ‘Internet Governance’, in: S. van der Hof, A.R. Lodder, G.J. Zwenne, (red.), Recht en Computer, Wolters Kluwer 2014. 
55.    E.J. Koops, A.M.B. Lips, ‘Wie reguleert het internet? Horizontalisering en rechtsmacht bij de technische regulering van het internet’, In: Zeven essays over informatietechnologie en recht, SDU uitgevers 2003, p. 261-315.
56.    S. Santoso, A. Kuehn, A. Helweh, ‘Internet governance: the future of rirs and the allocation of internet number resources’, in: Proceedings of the 2012 iConference, New York: Association for Computing Machinery 2012, p. 616-617.
57.    F. Musiani, V. Schafer, ‘Global Governance: A Short History of Debates Born With the Telegraph and Popularized by the Internet’, in: G. Balbi, N. Ribeiro, V. Schafer, C. Schwarzenegger (red.), Digital Roots: Historicizing Media and Communication Concepts of the Digital Age, Boston: De Gruyter 2021, p.117 – 136.
58.    R. H. Weber, Shaping Internet governance: regulatory challenges, Cham: Springer 2010.
59.    L. DeNardis, The global war for internet governance, Londen: Yale University Press 2014.
60.    M. Becker, ‘When public principals give up control over private agents: The new independence of ICANN in internet governance’, Regulation & Governance 2019/13, afl. 4, p. 561-576.
61.    J. Wang, ‘Notice-and-Takedown Procedures in the US, the EU and China’, in: J.Wang, Regulating Hosting ISPs’ Responsibilities for Copyright Infringement: The Freedom to Operate in the US, EU and China, Cham: Springer 2018, p. 141-178.
62.    J.M. Urban, J. Karaganis, B.L. Schofield, B, ‘Notice and takedown: Online service provider and rightsholder accounts of everyday practice’, Journal, Copyright Society of the U.S.A 2017/64, p. 371-410.
63.    HvJ EU 12 juli 2011, C-324/08, ECLI:EU:C:2009:633 (L'Oréal/eBay).
64.    Hof Leeuwarden 22 mei 2012, ECLI:NL:GHLEE:2012:BW6296 (Stokke/Marktplaats).
65.    Kamerstukken II 2001/02, 28197, nr. 3, p. 48-49 (MvT).
66.    Hof Amsterdam 8 februari 2011, ECLI:NL:GHAMS:2011:BP5403
67.    EHRM 16 juni 2015, 64569/09, ECLI:CE:ECHR:2015:0616JUD006456909 (Delfi/Estland).
68.    K. Janssens, T. De Meese, ‘De aansprakelijkheid van nieuwswebsites na de Delfi- en Magyar-arresten van het EHRM: Much Ado About Nothing?’, Computerrecht 2016/46, p. 194-204.
69.    B. van der Net, ‘De civielrechtelijke aansprakelijkheid van internetproviders na de Richtlijn elektronische handel’, JAVI 2002/1, p. 10-15. Zie ook P.B. Hugenholtz, ‘Het Internet: het auteursrecht voorbij?’, Handelingen NJV 1998/1, p. 226-228.
70.    HvJ EU 27 maart 2014, C-314/02, ECLI:EU:C:2014:192 (UPC/Telekabel).
71.    HvJ EU 24 november 2011, C-70/10, ECLI:EU:C:2011:771 (Scarlet/SABAM). Zie ook N. Helberger, J. Van Hoboken, ‘(Fast)food for thoughts: de uitspraak van het Hof van Justitie in de Scarlet/Sabam-zaak’, Nederlands tijdschrift voor Europees recht 2021/2.
72.    HvJ EU 15 september 2016, C-484/14, ECLI:EU:C:2016:689 (Mc Fadden/Sony Music).
73.    J.G. Reus, ‘De ‘filterverplichting’ uit de nieuwe Auteursrechtrichtlijn’, NTER 2019, afl. 9-10. Zie ook K. Grisse, ‘After the storm—examining the final version of Article 17 of the new Directive (EU) 2019/790’, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice 2019/14, afl. 11, p. 887-899.
74.    C. Angelopoulos, M. Senftleben, P. ten Thije, ‘De reikwijdte van artikel 17 DSM-richtlijn in het licht van het verbod op algemene toezichtverplichtingen: een Odyssee’, Auteursrecht 2021/3, p. 120-142. 
75.    E. Boogert, ‘KPN: ’85 procent Hi-klanten gebruikt Whatsapp’’, 10 mei 2011.
76.    R. Bendrath, M. Mueller, ‘The end of the net as we know it? Deep packet inspection and internet governance’, New Media & Society 2011/13, afl. 7, p. 1142-1160.
77.    F. Liebana-Cabanillas, F. Muñoz-Leiva, J. Sanchez-Fernandez, ‘Payment systems in new electronic environments: consumer behavior in payment systems via SMS’, International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making 2015/14.02, p. 421-449.
78.    P. Nooren, A. Leurdijk, N. van Eijk, ‘Net neutrality and the value chain for video’, Info 2012/14, afl. 6, p. 45-58.
79.    R. Layton, ‘Net neutrality in the Netherlands: Dutch solution or Dutch disease?’, In: 24th European Regional ITS Conference, Florence 2013 (No. 88488)..
80.    A.D. Murray, ‘Regulation 2015/2120/EU Laying down Measure Concerning Open Internet Access’, In: A.D. Murray, A.R. Lodder (red.), EU Regulation of E-Commerce, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing 2017, p. 281-307.
81.    N. Wahl, F. Biltgen & J. Passer, ´Drie korte arresten over netneutraliteit’, Computerrecht 2022/6.
82.    HvJ EU 15 september 2020, ECLI:EU:C:2020:708.
83.    T. Garrett, L.E. Setenareski, L.M. Peres, L.C. Bona, E.P. Duarte, ‘A survey of Network Neutrality regulations worldwide’, Computer Law & Security Review 2022/44.
84.    C.S. Yoo, ‘The first amendment, common carriers, and public accommodations: net neutrality, digital platforms, and privacy’, Journal of Free Speech Law, 2021/1, p. 463.
85.    M.A. Jamison, ‘Net neutrality policies and regulation in the United States’, Review of Network Economics 2018/17, afl. 3, p. 151-173.
86.    C, Witteman, ‘Net neutrality from the ground up’, Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review 2022/55:65, p. 65-144. 
87.    M. Moore, ‘Tech giants and civic power’, Centre for the Study of Media, Communication and Power 2016.
88.    R. Gorwa, ‘What is platform governance?’, Information, communication & society 2019/22, afl. 6, p. 854-871.
89.    J. A. Tucker, Y. Theocharis, M.E. Roberts, P. Barberá, ‘From Liberation to Turmoil: Social Media And Democracy’, Journal of Democracy 2017/28, afl. 4, p. 46–59.
90.    D. O’Callaghan, D. Greene, M. Conway, J. Carthy, P. Cunningham, ‘Down the (White) Rabbit Hole: The Extreme Right and Online Recommender Systems’, Social Science Computer Review 2015/33, afl. 4, p. 459–478.
91.    T. Flew, F. Martin, N. Suzor, ‘Internet regulation as media policy: Rethinking the question of digital communication platform governance’, Journal of Digital Media & Policy 2019/10, afl. 1, p. 33-50.
92.    G. De Gregorio, ‘Democratising online content moderation: A constitutional framework’, Computer Law & Security Review 2020/36. Zie ook Á. Díaz, L. Hecht-Felella, ‘Double standards in social media content moderation’, Brennan Center for Justice at New York University School of Law, 2021. 
93.    R. Gorwa, R, Binns, C. Katzenbach, ‘Algorithmic content moderation: Technical and political challenges in the automation of platform governance’, Big Data & Society, 2020/7, afl. 1.
94.    T, Gillespie, ‘Regulation of and by platforms’, in: J. Burgess, A. Marwick, T. Poell (red.), The SAGE Handbook of Social Media, Londen: SAGE 2018, p. 254–78.
95.    M, Bourreau, J. Krämer, ‘Interoperability in digital markets’, SSRN Electronic journal 4181838, 2022. 
96.    G.T. Jenkins & R.W.Bing, ‘Microsoft’s Monopoly: Anti-Competitive Behavior, Predatory Tactics, And the Failure of Governmental Will’, Journal of Business & Economics Research 2007, 5-1, p. 11-16.
97.    T. Stuart, ‘Too little too late? An exploration and analysis of the inadequacies of antitrust law when regulating gafam data-driven mergers and the potential legal remedies available in the age of Big Data’, European Competition Journal 2021/17, afl. 2, p. 407-436.
98.    Alleman, J. (2021). Bork's Hoax: Antitrust and the Internet Market. In 23rd ITS Biennial Conference, Online Conference/Gothenburg 2021. Digital societies and industrial transformations: Policies, markets, and technologies in a post-Covid world (No. 238003). International Telecommunications Society (ITS).
99.    R. H. Bork, The Antitrust Paradox: A Policy at War with Itself, New York: Basic Books, 1978.
100.    K. Birch, D. T. Cochrane, ‘Big tech: Four emerging forms of digital rentiership’, Science as culture 2022/31, afl. 1, p. 44-58.
101.    M. Sawyer, ‘Monopoly capitalism in the past four decades’, Cambridge Journal of Economics 2022/46, afl. 6, p.1225-1241. 
102.    A. Manganelli, A. Nicita, ‘Understanding Market Power in the Digital Market Society’, In: Regulating Digital Markets: The European Approach, Cham: Springer International Publishing 2022, p. 107-136.
103.    N.M. Belloso, ‘Google v Commission (Google Shopping): A Case Summary’, 2015,
104.    D.F. Spulber, ‘Consumer coordination in the small and in the large: Implications for antitrust in markets with network effects’, Journal of Competition Law and Economics 2008/4, afl. 2, p. 207-262.
105.    W. Kerber, ‘Taming Tech Giants: The Neglected Interplay Between Competition Law and Data Protection (Privacy) Law’, The Antitrust Bulletin 2022/67, afl. 2, p. 280-301.
106.    M. Cappai, G. Colangelo, ‘Navigating the Platform Age: the ‘More Regulatory Approach’ to Antitrust Law in the EU and the U.S’, Stanford-Vienna TTLF Working Paper 2020/55, p. 17-18.
107.    J. Krämer, D. Schnurr, ‘Big data and digital markets contestability: Theory of harm and data access remedies’, Journal of Competition Law & Economics 2022/18, afl. 2, p. 255-322.
108.    I. Comeig, K. Klaser, L.D. Pinar, ‘The paradox of (Inter) net neutrality: An experiment on ex-ante antitrust regulation’, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 2022/175, p. 1-10.
109.    A.P. Heldt, ‘EU digital services act: The white hope of intermediary regulation’, In: T, Flew, F.R. Marting (red.), Digital Platform Regulation: Global Perspectives on Internet Governance, Cham: Springer International Publishing 2022, p. 69-84.
110.    M. Cini, P. Czulno, ‘Digital Single Market and the EU Competition Regime: An Explanation of Policy Change’, Journal of European Integration 2022/44, afl 1, p. 41-57.
111.    C. Codagnone, G. Liva, L. Gunderson, G. Misuraca, E. Rebesco, ‘Europe’s digital decade and autonomy’, 26 oktober 2021.
112.    A, Bradford, The Brussels Effect: How the European Union Rules the World, Oxford: Oxford University Press 2019. 
113.    N. Martin, F. Ebbers, ‘When Regulatory Power and Industrial Ambitions Collide: The “Brussels Effect,” Lead Markets, and the GDPR’, In: S. Schiffner, S. Ziegler, A. Q. Rodriguez (red.), Privacy Symposium 2022: Data Protection Law International Convergence and Compliance with Innovative Technologies (DPLICIT), Cham: Springer International Publishing 2022, p. 129-151.
114.    S. Backman, ‘Risk vs. threat-based cybersecurity: the case of the EU’, European Security 2023/32, p. 85-103.
115.    H. S. Scott, ‘The EU’s Digital Operational Resilience Act: Cloud Services & Financial Companies’, 7 september 2021.
116.    K. R. Ludvigsen, S. Nagaraja, ‘The Opportunity to Regulate Cybersecurity in the EU (and the World): Recommendations for the Cybersecurity Resilience Act’, arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.13196. (2022).
117.    C. Perarnaud, R. Fanni, ‘The EU Data Act: Towards a new European data revolution?’, Centre for European Policy Studies nr. 35693.
118.    E.G. Gonzales, P. De Hert, V. Papakonstantinou, ‘The Proposed ePrivacy Regulation: The Commission‘s and the Parliament‘s Draft s at a Crossroads?’, in: D. Hallinan, R. Leenes, S. Gutwirth, P. De Hert (red.), Data Protection and Privacy. Data Protection and Democracy, Oxford: Hart Publishing, p. 267-298.

Referenties andere hoofdstukken

Hoofdstuk 5 

Hoofdstuk 6 (u bevindt zich op deze pagina)

Hoofdstuk 7 

Hoofdstuk 8