美国网络中立规制研究：脉络、实质与启示
发布时间：2019-05-18 11:22
【摘要】：微博、搜索引擎、拍卖网站、游戏、VoIP、P2P等应用的成功之处,在于网络的开放互联支持了人们形成社交圈和创造内容。然而,作为把关人的网络服务提供商正无形地控制着在其网络上的应用和内容。网络中立规制关系着互联网的未来,是21世纪传播政策的重大挑战。 网络中立是个极其复杂的概念,对其准确界定显然是个难题。在内涵上,美国学界的普遍认识是,网络中立是网络服务提供商应平等对待所有合法的内容/应用/设备的网络接入,而不应歧视不附属于自己或合作方的内容/应用/设备的基本原则。在外延上,网络中立主要关注三个重要的把关机制：阻挡、降级和优化。网络中立的思想来源在于公共传输、普遍服务、开放接入和技术中立。 美国网络中立的规制实践经历了两个重要的变迁期：一是小布什适度规制时期,二是奥巴马强度规制时期。以FCC和议员提案为聚焦点,以欧盟为参照点,力求从两个不同的规制时期反映美国网络中立规制的基本特征：规制理念上强调行政先行；规制主体上体现规制权威和党派利益之间的博弈；规制目标上注重促进国内市场竞争和确保全球互联网主导权；规制手段上重在逐案判决。 美国网络中立的规制实质是深入认识美国互联网管理的重要聚焦点。基于传播政治经济学的三个理论参数,认为从商品化起点看,流量商品化带来分层优化是美国网络中立规制的微观动因,整个互联网络商品化则是美国网络中立规制的宏观动因,本质上是新自由主义经济运动的产物；从空间化起点看,美国网络中立规制是维护商业权力在网络空间中纵横融合的制度保障,在全球利益和本国利益上实行双重标准,是美国“互联网自由”外交策略的制度设计；从结构化起点看,网络中立规制体现了美国在维护普遍接入服务上的积极努力,反映了美国各利益主体在网络规制理念上不同取向的制度博弈。 美国网络中立争论是当前支离破碎的传播政策难以适应媒介融合时代的结果,集中映射了互联网管理的众多纠结点。我国在此议题上虽然问题意识不强,但歧视性问题不可避免存在,相关规制文本也相对缺失。美国网络中立规制对我国具有重要的启示价值,如需要处理好伦理权利与市场权力、信息自由流动和网络主权安全、宏观规制与微观规制、事先规制与事后规制等方面的均衡。基于网络层级结构,我国在网络中立议题上应从水平层面和垂直层面两个路径来进行制度设计。在水平层面上,应采纳公共模式,强化政府规制以确保互联互通和普遍服务；在垂直层面上,应采纳市场模式,区分合理和不合理做法以确保开放接入和创新活力。
[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.
【学位授予单位】：华中科技大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：G206
本文编号：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.
【学位授予单位】：华中科技大学
【学位级别】：博士
【学位授予年份】：2012
【分类号】：G206
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 罗昕;;云计算时代数字出版的优势、问题与对策[J];出版发行研究;2011年11期
2 翟京京;付玉辉;;网络中立:塑造怎样的互联网未来?——美国“网络中立”论争的综述与思考[J];浙江传媒学院学报;2010年03期
3 陈洪兵;;网络中立行为的可罚性探究——以P2P服务提供商的行为评价为中心[J];东北大学学报(社会科学版);2009年03期
4 董颖;;技术中立与非中立性技术应用——评中国P2P第一案[J];电子知识产权;2007年04期
5 梁志文;;云计算、技术中立与版权责任[J];法学;2011年03期
6 付玉辉;;美国“网络中立”论争的实质及其影响[J];国际新闻界;2009年07期
7 白雪;;企业集中概念辨析[J];法制与社会;2007年05期
8 郭鹏;;关于技术中立原则及其反思[J];技术与创新管理;2010年04期
9 李晖;;国内外宽带普遍服务的发展[J];通信管理与技术;2010年06期
10 强世功;;言论自由与公民宗教——从焚烧国旗案看美国自由派与保守派之争[J];清华法学;2008年01期
相关重要报纸文章 前1条
1 本报记者 晓雅 杨扬;[N];人民邮电;2011年
，本文编号：2479954
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/kejilunwen/sousuoyinqinglunwen/2479954.html
