美國網(wǎng)絡(luò)中立規(guī)制研究：脈絡(luò)、實質(zhì)與啟示
發(fā)布時間：2019-05-18 11:22
【摘要】：微博、搜索引擎、拍賣網(wǎng)站、游戲、VoIP、P2P等應(yīng)用的成功之處,在于網(wǎng)絡(luò)的開放互聯(lián)支持了人們形成社交圈和創(chuàng)造內(nèi)容。然而,作為把關(guān)人的網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供商正無形地控制著在其網(wǎng)絡(luò)上的應(yīng)用和內(nèi)容。網(wǎng)絡(luò)中立規(guī)制關(guān)系著互聯(lián)網(wǎng)的未來,是21世紀(jì)傳播政策的重大挑戰(zhàn)。 網(wǎng)絡(luò)中立是個極其復(fù)雜的概念,對其準(zhǔn)確界定顯然是個難題。在內(nèi)涵上,美國學(xué)界的普遍認(rèn)識是,網(wǎng)絡(luò)中立是網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)提供商應(yīng)平等對待所有合法的內(nèi)容/應(yīng)用/設(shè)備的網(wǎng)絡(luò)接入,而不應(yīng)歧視不附屬于自己或合作方的內(nèi)容/應(yīng)用/設(shè)備的基本原則。在外延上,網(wǎng)絡(luò)中立主要關(guān)注三個重要的把關(guān)機(jī)制：阻擋、降級和優(yōu)化。網(wǎng)絡(luò)中立的思想來源在于公共傳輸、普遍服務(wù)、開放接入和技術(shù)中立。 美國網(wǎng)絡(luò)中立的規(guī)制實踐經(jīng)歷了兩個重要的變遷期：一是小布什適度規(guī)制時期,二是奧巴馬強(qiáng)度規(guī)制時期。以FCC和議員提案為聚焦點(diǎn),以歐盟為參照點(diǎn),力求從兩個不同的規(guī)制時期反映美國網(wǎng)絡(luò)中立規(guī)制的基本特征：規(guī)制理念上強(qiáng)調(diào)行政先行；規(guī)制主體上體現(xiàn)規(guī)制權(quán)威和黨派利益之間的博弈；規(guī)制目標(biāo)上注重促進(jìn)國內(nèi)市場競爭和確保全球互聯(lián)網(wǎng)主導(dǎo)權(quán)；規(guī)制手段上重在逐案判決。 美國網(wǎng)絡(luò)中立的規(guī)制實質(zhì)是深入認(rèn)識美國互聯(lián)網(wǎng)管理的重要聚焦點(diǎn)。基于傳播政治經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)的三個理論參數(shù),認(rèn)為從商品化起點(diǎn)看,流量商品化帶來分層優(yōu)化是美國網(wǎng)絡(luò)中立規(guī)制的微觀動因,整個互聯(lián)網(wǎng)絡(luò)商品化則是美國網(wǎng)絡(luò)中立規(guī)制的宏觀動因,本質(zhì)上是新自由主義經(jīng)濟(jì)運(yùn)動的產(chǎn)物；從空間化起點(diǎn)看,美國網(wǎng)絡(luò)中立規(guī)制是維護(hù)商業(yè)權(quán)力在網(wǎng)絡(luò)空間中縱橫融合的制度保障,在全球利益和本國利益上實行雙重標(biāo)準(zhǔn),是美國“互聯(lián)網(wǎng)自由”外交策略的制度設(shè)計；從結(jié)構(gòu)化起點(diǎn)看,網(wǎng)絡(luò)中立規(guī)制體現(xiàn)了美國在維護(hù)普遍接入服務(wù)上的積極努力,反映了美國各利益主體在網(wǎng)絡(luò)規(guī)制理念上不同取向的制度博弈。 美國網(wǎng)絡(luò)中立爭論是當(dāng)前支離破碎的傳播政策難以適應(yīng)媒介融合時代的結(jié)果,集中映射了互聯(lián)網(wǎng)管理的眾多糾結(jié)點(diǎn)。我國在此議題上雖然問題意識不強(qiáng),但歧視性問題不可避免存在,相關(guān)規(guī)制文本也相對缺失。美國網(wǎng)絡(luò)中立規(guī)制對我國具有重要的啟示價值,如需要處理好倫理權(quán)利與市場權(quán)力、信息自由流動和網(wǎng)絡(luò)主權(quán)安全、宏觀規(guī)制與微觀規(guī)制、事先規(guī)制與事后規(guī)制等方面的均衡。基于網(wǎng)絡(luò)層級結(jié)構(gòu),我國在網(wǎng)絡(luò)中立議題上應(yīng)從水平層面和垂直層面兩個路徑來進(jìn)行制度設(shè)計。在水平層面上,應(yīng)采納公共模式,強(qiáng)化政府規(guī)制以確保互聯(lián)互通和普遍服務(wù)；在垂直層面上,應(yīng)采納市場模式,區(qū)分合理和不合理做法以確保開放接入和創(chuàng)新活力。
[Abstract]:The success of Weibo, search engines, auction sites, games, VoIP,P2P and other applications is that the open interconnection of the Internet supports people to form social circles and create content. However, as the gatekeeper, the network service provider is invisibly controlling the application and content on its network. Network neutral regulation is related to the future of the Internet and is a major challenge of communication policy in the 21 st century. Network neutrality is an extremely complex concept, and it is obviously a difficult problem to define it accurately. In terms of connotation, it is widely recognized in American academic circles that network neutrality is that network service providers should treat all legitimate content / applications / devices equally. And should not discriminate against the basic principle that is not dependent on the content / application / equipment of oneself or the partner. In terms of extension, network neutrality mainly focuses on three important gatekeeper mechanisms: blocking, demotion and optimization. The idea of network neutrality lies in public transmission, universal service, open access and technology neutrality. The practice of network neutrality in the United States has gone through two important transition periods: one is the moderate regulation period of George W. Bush, the other is the period of Obama intensity regulation. Taking FCC and congressman's proposal as the focus and the European Union as the reference point, this paper tries to reflect the basic characteristics of American network regulation from two different regulatory periods: the concept of regulation emphasizes administration first; The main body of regulation embodies the game between regulatory authority and party interests; the goal of regulation focuses on promoting domestic market competition and ensuring global Internet dominance; and the means of regulation focus on case-by-case judgment. In essence, the regulation of network neutrality in the United States is an important focus of in-depth understanding of Internet management in the United States. Based on the three theoretical parameters of communication political economy, this paper holds that from the starting point of commercialization, the hierarchical optimization brought about by traffic commercialization is the microcosmic motivation of the regulation in American network. The commercialization of the whole Internet is the macro motivation of the regulation in the American network, and it is essentially the product of the neoliberal economic movement. From the point of view of space, the regulation of American network centralization is the institutional guarantee to safeguard the integration of commercial power in cyberspace, and the double standard in global and domestic interests, which is the system design of American "Internet freedom" diplomatic strategy. From the structural starting point, the network neutral regulation reflects the positive efforts of the United States in the maintenance of universal access services, and reflects the institutional game of different orientations of the various stakeholders in the United States in the concept of network regulation. The debate on network neutrality in the United States is the result of the current fragmented communication policy, which is difficult to adapt to the era of media integration, and focuses on mapping many points of correction in Internet management. Although the awareness of the problem is not strong in our country, the problem of discrimination inevitably exists, and the relevant regulatory texts are also relatively missing. Network neutral regulation in the United States has important enlightening value to our country, such as the need to deal with ethical rights and market power, the free flow of information and the security of network sovereignty, macro regulation and micro regulation, pre-regulation and ex post regulation, and so on. Based on the network hierarchy, the system design should be carried out from the horizontal level and the vertical level on the issue of network neutrality in our country. At the horizontal level, the public model should be adopted, and the government regulation should be strengthened to ensure connectivity and universal service; at the vertical level, the market model should be adopted to distinguish between reasonable and unreasonable practices to ensure open access and innovation vitality.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華中科技大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：G206
本文編號：2479954
[Abstract]:The success of Weibo, search engines, auction sites, games, VoIP,P2P and other applications is that the open interconnection of the Internet supports people to form social circles and create content. However, as the gatekeeper, the network service provider is invisibly controlling the application and content on its network. Network neutral regulation is related to the future of the Internet and is a major challenge of communication policy in the 21 st century. Network neutrality is an extremely complex concept, and it is obviously a difficult problem to define it accurately. In terms of connotation, it is widely recognized in American academic circles that network neutrality is that network service providers should treat all legitimate content / applications / devices equally. And should not discriminate against the basic principle that is not dependent on the content / application / equipment of oneself or the partner. In terms of extension, network neutrality mainly focuses on three important gatekeeper mechanisms: blocking, demotion and optimization. The idea of network neutrality lies in public transmission, universal service, open access and technology neutrality. The practice of network neutrality in the United States has gone through two important transition periods: one is the moderate regulation period of George W. Bush, the other is the period of Obama intensity regulation. Taking FCC and congressman's proposal as the focus and the European Union as the reference point, this paper tries to reflect the basic characteristics of American network regulation from two different regulatory periods: the concept of regulation emphasizes administration first; The main body of regulation embodies the game between regulatory authority and party interests; the goal of regulation focuses on promoting domestic market competition and ensuring global Internet dominance; and the means of regulation focus on case-by-case judgment. In essence, the regulation of network neutrality in the United States is an important focus of in-depth understanding of Internet management in the United States. Based on the three theoretical parameters of communication political economy, this paper holds that from the starting point of commercialization, the hierarchical optimization brought about by traffic commercialization is the microcosmic motivation of the regulation in American network. The commercialization of the whole Internet is the macro motivation of the regulation in the American network, and it is essentially the product of the neoliberal economic movement. From the point of view of space, the regulation of American network centralization is the institutional guarantee to safeguard the integration of commercial power in cyberspace, and the double standard in global and domestic interests, which is the system design of American "Internet freedom" diplomatic strategy. From the structural starting point, the network neutral regulation reflects the positive efforts of the United States in the maintenance of universal access services, and reflects the institutional game of different orientations of the various stakeholders in the United States in the concept of network regulation. The debate on network neutrality in the United States is the result of the current fragmented communication policy, which is difficult to adapt to the era of media integration, and focuses on mapping many points of correction in Internet management. Although the awareness of the problem is not strong in our country, the problem of discrimination inevitably exists, and the relevant regulatory texts are also relatively missing. Network neutral regulation in the United States has important enlightening value to our country, such as the need to deal with ethical rights and market power, the free flow of information and the security of network sovereignty, macro regulation and micro regulation, pre-regulation and ex post regulation, and so on. Based on the network hierarchy, the system design should be carried out from the horizontal level and the vertical level on the issue of network neutrality in our country. At the horizontal level, the public model should be adopted, and the government regulation should be strengthened to ensure connectivity and universal service; at the vertical level, the market model should be adopted to distinguish between reasonable and unreasonable practices to ensure open access and innovation vitality.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：華中科技大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2012
【分類號】：G206
【參考文獻(xiàn)】
相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條
1 羅昕;;云計算時代數(shù)字出版的優(yōu)勢、問題與對策[J];出版發(fā)行研究;2011年11期
2 翟京京;付玉輝;;網(wǎng)絡(luò)中立:塑造怎樣的互聯(lián)網(wǎng)未來?——美國“網(wǎng)絡(luò)中立”論爭的綜述與思考[J];浙江傳媒學(xué)院學(xué)報;2010年03期
3 陳洪兵;;網(wǎng)絡(luò)中立行為的可罰性探究——以P2P服務(wù)提供商的行為評價為中心[J];東北大學(xué)學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2009年03期
4 董穎;;技術(shù)中立與非中立性技術(shù)應(yīng)用——評中國P2P第一案[J];電子知識產(chǎn)權(quán);2007年04期
5 梁志文;;云計算、技術(shù)中立與版權(quán)責(zé)任[J];法學(xué);2011年03期
6 付玉輝;;美國“網(wǎng)絡(luò)中立”論爭的實質(zhì)及其影響[J];國際新聞界;2009年07期
7 白雪;;企業(yè)集中概念辨析[J];法制與社會;2007年05期
8 郭鵬;;關(guān)于技術(shù)中立原則及其反思[J];技術(shù)與創(chuàng)新管理;2010年04期
9 李暉;;國內(nèi)外寬帶普遍服務(wù)的發(fā)展[J];通信管理與技術(shù);2010年06期
10 強(qiáng)世功;;言論自由與公民宗教——從焚燒國旗案看美國自由派與保守派之爭[J];清華法學(xué);2008年01期
相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前1條
1 本報記者 曉雅 楊揚(yáng);[N];人民郵電;2011年
，本文編號：2479954
本文鏈接：http://sikaile.net/kejilunwen/sousuoyinqinglunwen/2479954.html
最近更新
教材專著
