Media governance and technology: From “code is law“ to governance constellations

Routledge Handbook of Media Law

Volumn , Issue , 2013, Pages 399-418

  Katzenbach, Christian ^a  

^a Alexander von Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84957843750     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: None     Document Type: Chapter

References (118)

1. Akrich, M. and Latour, B. (1992) ‘A summary of a convenient vocabulary for the semiotics of human and nonhuman assemblies,’ in W. E. Bijker and J. Law (eds.) Shaping Technology/Building Society, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2. Bechtold, S. (2002) Vom Urheber- zum Informationsrecht: Implikationen des Digital Rights Management, München: Beck.
3. Bechtold, S. (2003) ‘The present and future of digital rights management: Musings on emerging legal problems,’ in E. Becker, W. Buhse, D. Günnewig and N. Rump (eds.) Digital Rights Management: Technological, Economic, Legal and Political Aspects, Berlin: Springer.
4. Berger, P. L. (1981) Sociology Reinterpreted: An Essay on Method and Vocation, New York: Anchor Press/ Doubleday.
5. Berger, P. L. and Luckmann, T. (1966) The Social Construction of Reality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge, Garden City, NY: Doubleday & Comp.
6. Berker, T., Hartmann, M., Punie, Y. and Ward, K. (2006) Domestication of Media and Technology, Maidenhead: Open University Press.
7. Bevir, M. and Rhodes, R. A. W. (2006) ‘Interpretive approaches to British government and politics,’ British Politics, 1: 84-112.
8. Bijker, W. E. (1995) Of Bicycles, Bakelites, and Bulbs: Toward A Theory of Sociotechnical Change, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
9. Bijker, W. E. (2006) ‘Why and how technology matters,’ in R. E. Goodin and C. Tilly (eds.) Handbook of Contextual Political Analysis, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
10. Bijker, W. E. and Law, J. (eds.) (1992) Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
11. Bijker, W. E., Hughes, T. P. and Pinch, T. J. (eds.) (1997) The Social Construction of Technological Systems: New Directions in the Sociology and History of Technology, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
12. Blumenthal, J. V. (2005) ‘Governance—eine kritische Zwischenbilanz,’ Zeitschrift für Politikwissenschaft, 15: 1149-1180.
13. Bowker, G. C., Baker, K., Millerand, F. and Ribes. D. (2010) ‘Toward information infrastructure studies: Ways of knowing in a networked environment,’ in J. Hunsinger, L. Klastrup and M. Allen (eds.) International Handbook of Internet Research, Heidelberg: Springer.
14. Bracha, O. (2007) ‘Standing copyright law on its head? The Googlization of everything and the many faces of property,’ Texas Law Review, 85: 1299-1869.
15. Braman, S. (2004) ‘Where has media policy gone? Defining the field in the twenty-first century,’ Communication Law and Policy Communication Law and Policy, 9, 153-182.
16. Bröchler, S. (2008) ‘Governance im Lichte der sozialwissenschaftlichen Technikforschung,’ in S. Bröchler and H.-J. Lauth (eds.) Politikwissenschaftliche Perspektiven, Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
17. Brousseau, E., Marzouki, M. and Meadel, C. (2012) Governance, Regulation, and Powers on the Internet, Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
18. Brummer, C. (2010) ‘Why soft law dominates international finance—and not trade,’ Journal of International Economic Law, 13: 623-643.
19. Cammaerts, B. (2011) ‘Power dynamics in multi-stakeholder policy processes and intra-civil society networking,’ in R. Mansell and M. Raboy (eds.) The Handbook of Global Media and Communication Policy, Chicester: Wiley-Blackwell.
20. Carlsson, B., Jacobsson, S., Holmen, M. and Rickne, A. (2002) ‘Innovation systems: Analytical and methodological issues.’ Research Policy, 31: 233-245.
21. Castilla, E. J., Hwang, H., Granovetter, E. and Granovetter, M. (2000) ‘Social networks in Silicon Valley’ in C.-M. Lee (ed.) The Silicon Valley Edge: A Habitat For Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
22. Denegri-Knott, J. (2004) ‘Sinking the online “music pirates:” Foucault, power and deviance on the web,’ Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 9. Online. Available HTTP: http://jcmc.indiana.edu/vol9/issue4/denegri_knott.html (accessed 17 January 2012).
23. Deuze, M. (2012) Media Life, Boston, MA: Polity Books.
24. Dierkes, M., Hoffmann, U. and Marz, L. (1996) Visions of Technology: Social and Institutional Factors Shaping the Development of New Technologies, Frankfurt: Campus.
25. Djelic, M.-L. and Quack, S. (2003) ‘Theoretical building blocks for a research agenda linking globalization and institutions.’ in M.-L. Djelic and S. Quack (eds.) Globalization and Institutions: Redefining The Rules of the Economic Game, Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
26. Dobusch, L. (2011) ‘The digital public domain: Relevance and regulation,’ Draft paper prepared for the First Berlin Symposium on Internet and Society, 26-28 October. Online. Available HTTP: http://berlinsymposium.org/session/digital-public-domain-between-regulation-and-innovation (accessed 17 January 2012).
27. Dolata, U. (2009) ‘Technological innovations and sectoral change: Transformative capacity, adaptability, patterns of change—An analytical framework,’ Research Policy, 38: 1066-1076.
28. Dolata, U. and Werle, R. (2007) Gesellschaft und die Macht der Technik: Sozioökonomischer und institutioneller Wandel durch Technisierung, Frankfurt: Campus.
29. Donges, P. (2002) Rundfunkpolitik Zwischen Sollen, Wollen und Können: Eine Theoretische und Komparative Analyse der Politischen Steuerung des Rundfunks, Wiesbaden: Westdt. Verl.
30. Donges, P. (2007a) ‘The New Institutionalism as a theoretical foundation of media governance,’ Communications, 32: 325-330.
31. Donges, P. (2007b) Von der Medienpolitik zur Media Governance? Köln: Halem.
32. Dreier, T. (2000) ‘Urheberrecht an der schwelle des 3. jahrtausend: Einige gedanken zur zukunft des urheberrechts,’ Computer und Recht, 16(1): 45-49.
33. Dusollier, S. (1999) ‘Electrifying the fence: The legal protection of technological measures for protecting copyright,’ European Intellectual Property Review, 21(6): 285-297.
34. Dusollier, S. (2007) ‘Sharing access to intellectual property through private ordering,’ Chicago-Kent Law Review, 82: 1391-1435.
35. Elkin-Koren, N. (2004) ‘The Internet and copyright policy discourse,’ in H. Nissenbaum and M. Price (eds.) Academy and the Internet, New York: Lang.
36. Elkin-Koren, N. (2008) Governing Access to Users-Generated Content: The Changing Nature of Private Ordering in Digital Networks. Online. Available HTTP: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1321164 (accessed 17 January 2012).
37. Freeman, C. (1987) Technology, Policy, and Economic Performance: Lessons From Japan. London and New York: Pinter.
38. Fuller, M. (2008) Software Studies: A Lexicon. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
39. Geels, F. W. (2004) ‘From sectoral systems of innovation to socio-technical systems: Insights about dynamics and change from sociology and institutional theory,’ Research Policy, 33: 897-920.
40. Gersen, J. E. and Posner, E. A. (2008) ‘Soft law: Lessons from congressional practice,’ Stanford Law Review, 61: 573.
41. Giesecke, S. (2001) Von der Forschung zum Markt Innovationsstrategien und Forschungspolitik in der Biologietechnologie. Berlin: Ed. Sigma.
42. Gillespie, T. (2004) ‘Copyright and commerce: The DMCA, trusted systems, and the stabilization of distribution,’ The Information Society, 20(4): 239-254.
43. Göhler, G., Höppner, U. and De La Rosa, S. (eds.) (2009) Weiche Steuerung: Studien zur Steuerung durch diskursive Praktiken, Argumente und Symbole, Baden-Baden: Nomos.
44. Goldsmith, J. L. and Wu, T. (2006) Who Controls The Internet? Illusions of A Borderless World, New York: Oxford University Press.
45. Grassmuck, V. (2006) ‘Wissenskontrolle durch DRM: Von Überfluss zu Mangel,’ in J. Hofmann (ed.) Wissen und Eigentum, Bonn: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung.
46. Hintz, A. and Milan, S. (2011) ‘User rights for the Internet age: Communications policy according to “Netizens”’, in R. Mansell and M. Raboy (eds.) The Handbook of Global Media and Communication Policy, Chicester: Wiley-Blackwell.
47. Hjarvard, S. (2008) ‘The mediatization of society: A theory of the media as agents of social and cultural change,’ Nordicom Review, 29(2): 105-134.
48. Hofmann, J. (2007) ‘Internet governance: A regulative idea in flux,’ in R. Kumar and J. Bandamutha (eds.) Internet Governance: An Introduction, Hyderabad: The Icfai University Press.
49. Hofmann, J. (2011) Private Ordering in the Shadow of Copyright Law: Google Books as a Blueprint. Online. Available HTTP: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1898120 (accessed 17 January 2012).
50. Hughes, T. P. (1983) Networks of Power: Electrification in Western Society, 1880—1930, Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
51. Hurwitz, J. (2007) Who is WSIS; Who is IGF: The New Consensus-Based Internet Governance. Online. Available HTTP: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=954209 (accessed 17 January 2012).
52. Just, N. and Latzer, M. (2005) ‘Self- and co-regulation in the mediamatics sector: European community (EC) strategies and contributions towards a transformed statehood,’ Knowledge, Technology & Policy, 17(2): 38-62.
53. Katzenbach, C. (2011) ‘Technologies as institutions: Rethinking the role of technology in media governance constellations,’ in N. Just and M. Puppis (eds.) Trends in Communication Policy Research: New Theories, Methods & Subjects, Bristol and Chicago, IL: Intellect.
54. Kitchin, R. and Dodge, M. (2011) Code/Space: Software and Everyday Life, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
55. Knorr-Cetina, K. (1989) Die Fabrikation von Erkenntnis, Frankfurt: Suhrkamp.
56. Koelman, K. J. and Helberger, N. (2000) ‘Protection of technological measures,’ in B. Hugenholtz and K. J. Koelman (eds.) Copyright and Electronic Commerce, London: Kluwer.
57. Kooiman, J. (2003) Governing as Governance, London: Sage.
58. Krasner, S. D. (1991) ‘Global communications and national power: Life on the pareto frontier,’ World Politics, 43(3): 336-366.
59. Krotz, F. (2007) ‘The meta-process of “mediatization” as a conceptual frame,’ Global Media and Communication, 3(3): 256-260.
60. Künzler, M. (2009) Die Liberalisierung von Radio und Fernsehen: Leitbilder der Rundfunkregulierung im Ländervergleich, Konstanz: UVK.
61. Lange, S. and Schimank, U. (eds.) (2004) Governance und gesellschaftliche Integration, Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
62. Latour, B. (1987) Science in Action: How to Follow Scientists and Engineers through Society, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
63. Latour, B. (1991) ‘Technology is society made durable,’ in J. Law (ed.) A Sociology of Monsters, London: Routledge.
64. Latour, B. (1992) ‘Where are the missing masses? The sociology of a few mundane artifacts,’ in W. E. Bijker and J. Law (eds.) Shaping Technology/Building Society: Studies in Sociotechnical Change, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
65. Latour, B. (1999) Pandora’s Hope: Essays on the Reality of Science Studies, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
66. Latour, B. (2007) Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network Theory, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
67. Latour, B. and Woolgar, S. (1979) Laboratory Life: The Social Construction of Scientific Facts, London: Sage.
68. Latzer, M. (2009) ‘Convergence revisited,’ Convergence: The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies, 15(4): 411-426.
69. Law, J. (1992) ‘Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity,’ Systemic Practice and Action Research, 5: 379-393.
70. Layton, E. (1977) ‘Conditions of technological development,’ in I. Spiegel-Rosing and D. J. de Solla Price (eds.) Science, Technology, and Society, London: Sage.
71. Lessig, L. (1999) Code and Other Laws of Cyberspace, New York: Basic Books.
72. Lessig, L. (2008) Remix: Making Art and Commerce Thrive in the Hybrid Economy, London: Bloomsbury.
73. Mackenzie, A. (2006) Cutting Code: Software And Sociality, New York: Lang.
74. MacKenzie, D. A. and Wajcman, J. (1985) The Social Shaping of Technology: How the Refrigerator Got its Hum, Maidenhead: Open University Press.
75. Manovich, L. (2001) The Language of New Media, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
76. Manovich, L. (2008) ‘Software takes command,’ Manuscript, November. Online. Available HTTP: http://lab.softwarestudies.com/2008/11/softbook.html (accessed 1 October 2011).
77. Mansell, R. and Raboy, M. (eds.) (2011) The Handbook of Global Media and Communication Policy, Chicester: Wiley-Blackwell.
78. Mansell, R. and Silverstone, R. (eds.) (1996) Communication by Design: The Politics of Information and Communication Technologies, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
79. Meister, M., Schulz-Schaeffer, I., Böschen, S., Gläser, J. and Strübing, J. (eds.) (2006) ‘What comes after constructivism in science and technology studies?’ Science, Technology & Innovation Studies, Special Issue.
80. Merges, R. P. (2004) ‘A new dynamism in the public domain.’ University of Chicago Law Review, 71: 183-203.
81. Meyer, U. and Schulz-Schaeffer, I. (2006) ‘Three forms of interpretative flexibility,’ Science, Technology & Innovation Studies, 1: 25-40.
82. Nelson, R. R. (1994) ‘The co-evolution of technologies and institutions,’ in R. W. England (ed.) Evolutionary Concepts in Contemporary Economics, Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
83. O Siochru, S. and Girard, B. (2002) Global Media Governance, Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
84. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) (2005) Telecommunication Regulatory Institutional Structures and Responsibilities: Report to the Working Party on Telecommunication and Information Services Policies, OECD: Paris.
85. Orlikowski, W. J. and Iacono, C. S. (2001) ‘Research commentary: Desperately seeking the “it” in IT research—A call to theorizing the IT artifact,’ Information Systems Research, 12(2): 121-134.
86. Ortmann, G. (2010) ‘On drifting rules and standards?’ Scandinavian Journal of Management, 26(2): 204-214.
87. Padovani, C. and Pava, E. (2011) ‘Actors and interactions in global communication governance: The heuristic potential of a network approach,’ in R. Mansell and M. Raboy (eds.) The Handbook of Global Media and Communication Policy, Chicester: Wiley-Blackwell.
88. Pauly, D. (1995) ‘Anecdotes and the shifting baseline syndrome of fisheries,’ Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 10(10): 430.
89. Pentzold, C. (2010) ‘Imagining the Wikipedia community: What do Wikipedia authors mean when they write about their “community”?’ New Media & Society, 13(5): 704-721.
90. Pinch, T. J. and Bijker, W. E. (1984) ‘The social construction of facts and artefacts: Or how the sociology of science and the sociology of technology might benefit each other,’ Social Studies of Science, 14(3): 399-441.
91. Porter, M. E. (1990) The Competitive Advantage of Nations, New York: Free Press.
92. Price, M. E. (2002) Media and Sovereignty: The Global Information Revolution and its Challenge to State Power, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
93. Puppis, M. (2007) ‘Media governance as a horizontal extension of media regulation: The importance of self- and co-regulation,’ Communications, 32(3): 330-336.
94. Puppis, M. (2009) Organisationen der Medienselbstregulierung: Europäische Presseräte im Vergleich, Köln: Halem.
95. Puppis, M. (2010) ‘Media governance: A new concept for the analysis of media policy and regulation,’ Communication, Culture & Critique, 3(2): 134-149.
96. Raboy, M. and Padovani, C. (2010) ‘Mapping global media policy: Concepts, frameworks, methods,’ Communication, Culture & Critique, 3(2): 150-169.
97. Reichman, J. H. and Uhlir, P. F. (2003) ‘A contractually reconstructed research commons for scientific data in a highly protectionist intellectual property environment,’ Law and Contemporary Problems, 66: 315-462.
98. Reidenberg, J. R. (1998) ‘Lex Informatica: The formation of information policy rules through technology.’ Texas Law Review, 76(3): 553-584.
99. Röser, J. (ed.) (2007) Medien Alltag: Domestizierungsprozesse alter und neuer Medien, Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
100. Saenz-Arroyo, A., Roberts, C. M., Torre, J., Carino-Olerva, M. and Enrique-Andrada R. R. (2005) ‘Rapidly shifting environmental baselines among fishers of the Gulf of California,’ Proceedings of the Royal Biological Society, 272: 1957-1962.
101. Saldias, O. (2011) ‘Patterns of legalization in the Internet,’ Draft paper prepared for the First Berlin Symposium on Internet and Society 26-28 October. Online. Available HTTP: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1942161 (accessed 17 January 2012).
102. Sawhney, H. (2004) ‘The slide towards decentralization: Clock and computer,’ Media, Culture & Society, 26(3): 359-374.
103. Schmidt, S. K. and Werle, R. (1998) Coordinating Technology: Studies in the International Standardization of Telecommunications, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
104. Schulz, W. et al. (2011) ‘Mapping the frontiers of governance in social media,’ Draft paper prepared for the First Berlin Symposium on Internet and Society 26-28 October. Online. Available HTTP: http://hiig.de/en/events/1st-symposium-on-internet-society/governance-and-social-media/ (accessed 17 January 2012).
105. Schulz-Schaeffer, I. (2000) Sozialtheorie der Technik, Frankfurt: Campus.
106. Schuppert, G. F. (2008) ‘Governance: Auf der Suche nach Konturen eines “anerkannt uneindeutigen Begriffs,”’ in G. F. Schuppert and M. Zürn (eds.) Governance in einer sich wandelnden Welt, Wiesbaden: VS Verlag.
107. Schwartz Conan. R. (1985) ‘How the refrigerator got its hum.’ in D. A. MacKenzie and J. Wajcman (eds.) The Social Shaping of Technology: How the Refrigerator Got its Hum, Maidenhead: Open University Press.
108. Scott, W. R. (1995) Institutions and Organizations, Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
109. Silverstone, R. and Hirsch, E. (eds.) (1992) Consuming Technologies: Media and Information in Domestic Spaces, London and New York: Routledge.
110. Stone, D. (2008) ‘Global public policy, transnational policy communities, and their networks,’ Policy Studies Journal, 36(1): 19-38.
111. Thatcher, M. (2002) ‘Regulation after delegation: Independent regulatory agencies in Europe,’ Journal of European Public Policy, 9(6): 954-972.
112. Tolbert, P. S. and Zucker, L. G. (1996) ‘The institutionalization of institutional theory,’ in S. R. Clegg, C. Hardy and W. R. Nord (eds.) Handbook of Organization Studies, London: Sage.
113. Tufekci, Z. (2010) ‘Facebook: The privatization of our privates and life in the company town.’ technosociology blog. Online. Available HTTP: http://technosociology.org/?p=131 (accessed 17 J anuary 2012).
114. Walker, J. (2003) ‘The digital imprimatur: How big brother and big media can put the Internet genie back in the bottle,’ Knowledge, Technology and Policy, 16(3): 24-77.
115. Weyer, J. et al. (1997) Technik, die Gesellschaft schafft—Soziale Netzwerke als Ort der Technikgenese, Berlin: Ed. Sigma.
116. Winner, L. (1980) ‘Do artifacts have politics?’ Daedulus, 109(1): 121-136.
117. Winner, L. (1993) ‘Upon opening the black box and finding it empty: Social constructivism and the philosophy of technology,’ Science, Technology, & Human Values, 18(3): 362-378.
118. York, J. C. (2010) ‘Policing content in the quasi-public sphere,’ Bulletin of the Open Net Intitative. Online. Available HTTP: http://opennet.net/policing-content-quasi-public-sphere (accessed 10 January 2011).