题名

網路中立性原則和言論自由：美國法制的發展

并列篇名

The Principle of Network Neutrality and Freedom of Speech: The Development of U.S. Jurisprudence

DOI

10.6199/NTULJ.2012.41.03.01

作者

劉靜怡(Ching-Yi Liu)

关键词

網路中立性原則 ； 網路中介者 ； 編輯裁量權 ； 寬頻服務業者 ； 網路服務業者 ； 言論自由 ； 內容中立 ； 觀點差別待遇 ； 共同載具 ； network neutrality ； internet intermediaries ； editorial discretion ； broadband service providers ； internet service providers ； freedom of speech ； content-neutral ； viewpoint discrimination ； common carriers

期刊名称

臺大法學論叢

卷期/出版年月

41卷3期（2012 / 09 / 01）

页次

795 - 876

内容语文

繁體中文
中文摘要

「網路中立性」（network neutrality）原則近年來成為法學界、科技界和產業界共同關注的議題，其原因在於其不僅牽動科技發展方向和產業利益，也和法學界向來關注的民主和人權問題，無法脫離關係。對網路中立性原則持反對立場者認為，落實網路中立性原則的規範，要求網路服務業者在傳輸任何網路訊息時，都不得進行任何差別待遇，乃是侵犯了網路服務業者裁量自身是否承載特定訊息的「言論自由」權利。相對地，支持網路中立性原則者，則是認為應該在當前的通訊傳播法制中落實此一原則，因為，以網路服務業者所扮演的角色來說，對於不同的網路應用服務和內容予以差別待遇的作法，放在民主社會維護言論自由的基本架構下，是不能容忍的，諸如此類的差別待遇，其實正是侵犯了一般大眾的「資訊取得自由」，而資訊取得自由，也是言論自由裡相當重要的一環，欠缺了資訊取得自由，民主程序即無從健全發展。為了釐清上述爭議，本文將從言論自由的分析出發，探討網路中立性原則的憲法意義。本文首先說明網路中立性原則的意義、重要性及其引發的爭議重點，其次，本文將從歷史發展的角度，說明美國國會及通訊傳播主管機關FCC為了落實網路中立性原則所採取的行動，以及其司法評價為何，以做為本文以下的分析基礎。本文進而從言論自由的觀點出發，分析寬頻服務業者和網路服務業者在面對網路中立性原則及其相關規範時，提出哪些言論自由的主張來護衛自己的立場，以及這些主張在美國聯邦最高法院判決立場下，究竟應該如何解讀，以便闡明美國聯邦最高法院的判決立場，對於網路中立性原則的落實，會帶來哪些困境。接著，本文進一步從網路發展方向對於資訊自由和民主發展的角度出發，討論網路中立性原則的言論自由意涵，以及上述困境如何解決，最後則是第陸部分的結論。
英文摘要

Much of the policy debate and scholarly literature on the principle of ”Network Neutrality” (Net Neutrality) in the United States has addressed whether the Federal Communications Commission (”FCC”) has statutory authority to require Broadband Service Providers (BSPs) or Internet Service Providers (ISPs) to operate in a nondiscriminatory manner. Such analysis largely focuses on questions about jurisdiction, the scope of lawful regulation, and the balance of power between stakeholders without much thought about broader concerns such as First Amendment values. For their part, BSPs and ISPs have aggressively advocated for First Amendment speaker rights when selecting content and applications, packaging them into easily accessible and user-friendly format. This Paper focuses on the constitutional analysis and responds to the First Amendment assertions favoring the position of BSPs and ISPs. First, this Paper explains the definition of Net Neutrality, followed by a review of the regulatory history of the principle of Net Neutrality and the role played by Internet Intermediaries, such as BSPs and ISPs. Second, this Paper examines the legal rationale that supported and opposed the principle of Net Neutrality by examining relevant regulatory efforts of the FCC, legislative initiatives in Congress, and the implications of judicial decisions concerning the implementation of Net Neutrality. Third, this Paper considers what we can learn about Net Neutrality through the lens of Free Speech decisions made by the Supreme Court. This Paper concludes current telecommunication and media regulatory models and Supreme Court decisions provide inconsistent and incomplete direction on the future of Net Neutrality. The paper provides some observations as to how we shall approach the principle of Net Neutrality in the spirit of promoting First Amendment values while imposing reasonable nondiscrimination responsibilities on BSPs and ISPs.
主题分类 社會科學 > 法律學
参考文献
  1. 王以國(2010)。網路中立管制在美國與歐盟的新發展。科技法律透析，22(7)，9-15。
    連結：
  2. Lessig, L., & Resnick, P. (1999). Zoning speech on the internet: A Legal and technical model. Retrieved from http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/publications/1999/Zoning_Speech_on_the_Internet
  3. Wu, T. (2010). Network neutrality FAQ. Retrieved from http://www.timwu.org/network_neutrality.html.
  4. Ammori, M.(2005).A shadow government: Private regulation, free speech, and lessons from the Sinclair Blogstorm.Michigan Telecommunication & Technology Law Review,12,1-74.
  5. Ammori, M.(2005).Another worthy tradition: How the free speech curriculum ignores electronic media and distorts free speech doctrine.Missouri Law Review,70,59-123.
  6. Ammori, M.(2008).The Fairness Doctrine: A flawed means to attain a noble goal.Administrative Law Review,60,881-893.
  7. Ammori, M.(2009).Beyond content neutrality: Understanding content-based promotion of democratic speech.Federal Communication Law Journal,61(273),273-324.
  8. Baker, C. E.(2005).Media structure, ownership policy, and the First Amendment.Southern California Law Review,78,733-762.
  9. Baker, C. E.(1997).Giving the audience what it wants.Ohio State Law Journal,58,311-417.
  10. Baker, C. E.(2002).Media, markets, and democracy.New York:Cambridge University Press.
  11. Baker, C. E.(1994).Turner broadcasting: Content-based regulation of persons and presses.Supreme Court Review,1994,57-128.
  12. Baker, C. E.(1998).The media that citizens need.University of Pennsylvania Law Review,147(2),317-408.
  13. Balkin, J. M.(2008).Media access: A question of design.George Washington Law Review,76(4),933-951.
  14. Balkin, J. M.(1996).Media filters, the V-Chip, and the foundations of broadcast regulation.Duke Law Journal,45,1131-1175.
  15. Balkin, J. M.(2004).Digital speech and democratic culture: A Theory of freedom of expression for the information society.New York University Law Review,79(1),1-55.
  16. Balkin, J. M.(2009).The future of free expression in a digital age.Pepperdine Law Review,36,427-444.
  17. Barron, J. A.(1967).Access to the press-A new First Amendment right.Harvard Law Review,80(8),1641-1678.
  18. Barron, J. A.(1989).On understanding the First Amendment of cable: Some obstacles in the way.George Washington Law Review,57,1495-1512.
  19. Bauer, J. M.(2007).Dynamic effects of network neutrality.International Journal of Communication,1,531-547.
  20. Beard, T. R.,Ford, G. S.,Koutsky, T.,Spiwak, L. J.(2007).Network neutrality and industry structure.Hastings Communications and Entertainment Law Journal,29,149-170.
  21. Becker, G. S.,Carlton, D. W.,Sider, Hal. S.(2010).Net neutrality and consumer welfare.Journal of Competition Law & Economics,6(3),497-519.
  22. Benkler, Y.(2001).Siren songs and amish children: Autonomy, information, and law.New York University Law Review,76(1),23-113.
  23. Benkler, Y.(2006).The wealth of networks: How social production transforms markets and freedom.New Haven:Yale University Press.
  24. Benkler, Y.(2000).From consumers to users: Shifting the deeper structures of regulation toward sustainable commons and user access.Federal Communication Law Journal,52,561-579.
  25. Berman, J.,Weitzner, D. J.(1995).Abundance and user control: Renewing the democratic heart of the First Amendment in the age of interactive media.Yale Law Journal,104(7),1619-1637.
  26. Bhagwat, A.(2007).The test that ate everything: Intermediate scrutiny in First Amendment jurisprudence.University of Illinois Law Review,2007(3),783-833.
  27. Bracha, O.,Pasquale, F.(2008).Federal search commission? Access, fairness, and accountability in the law of search.Cornell Law Review,93(6),1149-1210.
  28. Burstein, M. J.(2004).Towards a new standard for First Amendment review of structural media regulation.New York Unoversity Law Review,79,1030-1069.
  29. Campbell, A. J.(1992).Publish or carriage: Approaches to analyzing the First Amendment rights of telephone companies.North Carolina Law Review,70,1071-1153.
  30. Cannon, R.(2003).The legacy of the Federal Communications Commission's computer inquiries.Federal Communication Law Journal,55,167-205.
  31. Chandler, J. A.(2007).A right to reach an audience: An approach to intermediary bias on the internet.Hofstra Law Review,35(3),1095-1137.
  32. Chen, J.(2001).The authority to regulate broadband internet access over cable.Berkeley Technology Law Journal,16,677-727.
  33. Cherry, B. A.(2006).Misusing network neutrality to eliminate common carriage threatens free speech and the postal system.Northern Kentucky Law Review,33(4),483-511.
  34. Chin, A.(1997).Making the world wide web safe for democracy: A Medium-specific First Amendment analysis.Hastings Communivation & Entertainment Law Journal,19,309-338.
  35. Cotter, T. F.(2006).Some observations on the law and economics of intermediaries.Michigan State Law Review,2006,67-82.
  36. Crandall, R. W.(2005).The remedy for the "Bottleneck Monopoly" in telecom: Isolate it, share it, or ignore it?.University of Chicago Law Review,72(1),3-25.
  37. Elices, E.(2010).Citizens united and the future of FCC Content Regulation.Hastings Communications and Entertainment Law Journal (COMM/ENT),33,51-67.
  38. Fiss, O. M.(1986).Free speech and social structure.Iowa Law Review,71,1405-1425.
  39. Fiss, O. M.(1996).Liberalism divided: Freedom of speech and the many uses of state power.Boulder:Westview Press.
  40. Fiss, O. M.(1987).Why the State?.Harvard Law Review,100,781-794.
  41. Frieden, R.(2008).Neither fish nor fowl: New strategies for selective regulation of information services.Journal on Telecommunications & High Technology Law,6,373-423.
  42. Ginsburg, J. C.(2001).Copyright and control over new technologies of dissemination.Columbia Law Review,101(7),1613-1647.
  43. Goodman, E. P.(2007).Media policy and free speech: The First Amendment at war with itself.Hofstra Law Review,35(3),1211-1262.
  44. Hazlett, T. W.(2000).Digitizing "must-carry" under Turner Broadcasting v. FCC (1997).Supreme Court Economic Review,8,141-207.
  45. Herman, B. D.(2006).Opening bottlenecks: On behalf of mandated network neutrality.Federal Communication Law Journal,59(1),103-155.
  46. Kagan, E.(1996).Private speech, public purpose: The role of governmental motive in First Amendment Doctrine.University of Chicago Law Review,63(2),413-517.
  47. Kahn, A. E.(2007).AEI-Brookings Joint Center Working PaperAEI-Brookings Joint Center Working Paper,未出版
  48. Kreimer, S. F.(2006).Censorship by proxy: The First Amendment, internet intermediaries, and the problem of the Weakest Link.University of Pennsylvania Law Review,155(11),11-101.
  49. Lemley, M. A.,Lessig, L.(2001).The end of end-to-end: Preserving the architecture of the internet in the broadband era.UCLA Law Review,48(1),925-972.
  50. Leonhardt, S.(2009).The future of "fair and balanced": The fairness doctrine, net neutrality, and the internet.Duke Law & Technology Review,8(1),1-18.
  51. Lessig, L.(1998).What things regulate speech: CDA 2.0 vs. Filtering.Jurimetrics,38,629-670.
  52. Lessig, L.(1995).The path of cyberlaw.Yale Law Journal,104(7),1743-1755.
  53. Lessig, L.(2001).The future of ideas: The fate of the commons in a connected world.New York:Random House.
  54. Lessig, L.(1999).Code and other laws of cyberspace.New York:Basic Books.
  55. Litan, R. E.,Singer, H. J.(2007).Unintended consequences of net neutrality regulation.Journal on Telecommunication & High Technology Law,5(3),533-572.
  56. Magarian, G. P.(2003).Regulating political parties under a "public rights" First Amendment.William & Mary Law Review,44(5),1939-2061.
  57. Magarian, G. P.(2005).The First Amendment, the private-public distinction, and nongovernmental suppression of wartime political debate.George Washington Law Review,73,101-173.
  58. Marsden, C. T.(2010).Net neutrality: Towards a co-regulatory solution.New York:Bloomsbury Academic.
  59. May, R. J.(2007).Net neutrality mandates: Neutering the First Amendment in the digital age.I/S: A Journal of Law and Policy for the Information Society,3(1),197-210.
  60. Mindel, J. L.,Sicker, D. C.(2006).Leveraging the EU regulatory framework to improve a layered policy model for US telecommunications markets.Telecommunication Policy,30(2),136-148.
  61. Nachbar, T. B.(2000).Paradox and structure: Relying on government regulation to preserve the internet's unregulated character.Minnisoda Law Review,85,215-317.
  62. Neuborne, B.(1994).Speech, technology, and the emergence of a tricameral media: You can't tell the players without a scorecard.Hastings Communications and Entertainment Law Journal,17,17-40.
  63. Nunziato, D. C.(2009).Virtual freedom: Net neutrality and free speech in the internet age.Stanford:Stanford Law Books.
  64. Pasquale, F.(2008).Internet nondiscrimination principles: Commercial ethics for carriers and search engines.University of Chicago Legal Forum,2008,263-299.
  65. Pasquale, F.(2010).Beyond innovation and competition: The need for qualified transparency in internet intermediaries.Northwestern University Law Review,104(1),105-173.
  66. Patterson, M. R.(2010).The future of the internet: Non-network barriers to network neutrality.Fordham Law Review,78(6),2843-2872.
  67. Peha, J. M.(2007).The benefits and risks of mandating network neutrality, and the quest for a balanced policy.International Journal of Communication,1,644-668.
  68. Pool, I. de S.(1983).Technologies of freedom.Cambridge:Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
  69. Post, D. G.(2009).In search of Jefferson's moose: Notes on the state of cyberspace.New York:Oxford University Press.
  70. Post, R. C.(1998).Constitutional domains: Democracy, community, management.Cambridge:Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
  71. Rawls, J.(1971).A theory of justice.Cambridge:Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
  72. Schauer, F.(2004).The boundaries of the First Amendment: A preliminary exploration of constitutional salience.Harvard Law Review,117(6),1765-1809.
  73. Schauer, F.(1994).Cable operators as editors: Prerogative, responsibility, and liability.Hastings Communications and Entertainment Law Journal,17,161-178.
  74. Schejter, A. M.(1999).The fairness doctrine is dead and living in Israel.Federal Communication Law Journal,51(2),281-300.
  75. Scott, B.(2007).A broad, positive view of the First Amendment.The case against media consolidation,New York:
  76. Shelanski, H. A.(2006).Antitrust law as mass media regulation: Can merger standards protect the public interest?.California Law Review,94(2),371-421.
  77. Shiffrin, S. H.(2000).Dissent, injustice, and the meanings of America.Princeton:Princeton University Press.
  78. Shiffrin, S. H.(1990).The First Amendment, democracy, and romance.Cambridge:Harvard University Press.
  79. Solum, L. B.,Chung, M.(2004).The layers principle: Internet architecture and the law.Notre Dame Law Review,79,815-948.
  80. Spulber, D. F.,Yoo, C. S.(2008).Rethinking broadband internet access.Harvard Journal of Law & Technology,22(1),1-74.
  81. Stein, B. J.(1998).Why wait? A discussion of analogy and judicial standards for the internet in light of the Supreme Court's Reno v. ACLU opinion.Saint Louis University Law Journal,42,1471-1497.
  82. Stone, G. R.(1983).Content regulation and the First Amendment.William & Mary Law Review,25(2),189-252.
  83. Stone, G. R.(1987).Content-neutral restrictions.University of Chicago Law Review,54(1),46-120.
  84. Sullivan, K. M.(1998).First Amendment intermediaries in the age of cyberspace.UCLA Law Review,45,1653-1681.
  85. Sunstein, C. R.(1995).Democracy and the problem of free speech.New York:The Free Press.
  86. Sunstein, C. R.(1995).The First Amendment in cyberspace.Yale Law Journal,104(7),1757-1804.
  87. Sunstein, C. R.(1994).A new deal for speech.Hastings Communications and Entertainment Law Journal,17,137-160.
  88. Sunstein, C. R.(2003).Why societies need dissent?.Cambridge:Harvard University Press.
  89. Szoka, B.,Thierer, A.(2009).Net neutrality, slippery slopes & high-tech mutually assured destruction, progress snapshot.Progress Snapshot,5(11),1-6.
  90. Thierer, A. T.(2004)."Net neutrality"-Digital discrimination or regulatory gamesmanship in cyberspace?.Policy Analysis,507,1-28.
  91. Travis, H.(2007).Of blogs, ebooks, and broadband: Access to digital media as a First Amendment right.Hofstra Law Review,35,1519-1582.
  92. Travis, H.(2010).The FCC's new theory of the First Amendment.Santa Clara Law Review,51(2),417-513.
  93. Tribe, L.(1999).American constitutional law.New York:Foundation Press.
  94. Tushnet, R.(2008).Power without responsibility: Intermediaries and the First Amendment.George Washington Law Review,76,986-1016.
  95. Vaidhyanathan, S.(2011).The googlization of everything (and why we should worry).Berkeley:University of California Press.
  96. van Schewick, B.(2010).Internet architecture and innovation.Cambridge:The MIT Press.
  97. van Schewick, B.(2007).Towards an economic framework for network neutrality regulation.Journal on Telecommunications & High Technology Law,5,329-392.
  98. Volokh, E.(2005).Speech as conduct: Generally applicable laws, illegal courses of conduct, "situation-altering utterances," and the uncharted zones.Cornell Law Review,90,1277-1348.
  99. Volokh, E.(1995).Cheap speech and what it will do.Yale Law Journal,104,1805-1850.
  100. Wagner, R. P.(1999).Filters and the First Amendment.Minnisoda Law Review,83,755-813.
  101. Weinberg, J.(1997).Rating the net.Hastings Communications and Entertainment Law Journal,19,453-482.
  102. Weiser, P.(2009).The future of internet regulation.U.C. Davis Law Review,43(2),529-590.
  103. Weiser, P.(2003).Toward a next generation regulatory strategy.Loyola University Chicago Law Journal,35,41-85.
  104. Werbach, K.(2010).Off the hook.Cornell Law Review,95(3),535-598.
  105. Whitt, R. S.(2004).A horizontal leap forward: Formulating a new communications public policy framework based on the network layers model.Federal Communication Law Journal,56(3),587-672.
  106. Whitt, R. S.,Schultze, S. J.(2009).The new "emergence economics" of innovation and growth, and what it means for communications policy.Journal on Telecommunication & High Technology Law,7(217),217-315.
  107. Wu, T.(2003).Network neutrality, broadband discrimination.Journal on Telecommunications & High Technology Law,2(1),141-179.
  108. Wu, T.(2004).Copyright's communications policy.Michigan Law Review,103,278-366.
  109. Wu, T.(2006).Why have a telecommunications law? Anti-discrimination norms in communications.Journal on Telecommunication & High Technology Law,5,15-46.
  110. Yemini, M.(2008).Mandated network neutrality and the First Amendment: Lessons from Turner and a new approach.Virginia Journal of Law & Technology,13(1),1-38.
  111. Yen, A.(2010).A preliminary First Amendment analysis of legislation treating news aggregation as copyright infringement.Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law,12(4),947-975.
  112. Yoo, C. S.(2005).Beyond network neutrality.Harvard Journal of Law & Technology,19,1-77.
  113. Yoo, C. S.(2006).Network neutrality and the economics of congestion.Georgetown Law Journal,94,1847-1908.
  114. Yoo, C. S.(2008).Network neutrality, consumers, and innovation.University of Chicago Legal Forum,2008,179-262.
  115. Yoo, C. S.(2002).Vertical integration and media regulation in the new economy.Yale Journal on Regulation,19(1),171-300.
  116. Yoo, C. S.(2003).The Rise and demise of the technology-specific approach to the First Amendment.Georgetown Law Journal,91,245-356.
  117. Yoo, C. S.(2004).Would mandating broadband network neutrality help or hurt competition? A comment on the end-to-end debate.Journal on Telecommunications & High Technology Law,3(1),23-68.
  118. Zittrain, J.(2008).The future of the internet and how to stop it.New Haven:Yale University Press.
  119. Zittrain, J.,Palfrey, J.(2008).Internet filtering: The politics and mechanisms of control.Access denied: The practice and policy of global internet filtering,Cambridge:
  120. 林雅惠(2007)。論寬頻網路管制政策：以「網路中立性」為中心。臺灣科技法律與政策論叢，4(3)，1-43。
  121. 夏正洵(2007)。嘉義=Chiayi，國立中正大學電訊傳播研究所=Graduate Institute of Telecommunications, National Chung Cheng University。
  122. 陳志宇(2011)。桃園=Taoyuan，元智大學資訊社會學研究所=Graduate School of Social Informatics, Yuan Tze University。
  123. 陳俊榮(2008)。新竹=Hsinchu，清華大學科技法律研究所=The Institute of Law for Science and Technology, National Tsing Hua University。
被引用次数
  1. 陳柏良(2021)。AI時代網路政治廣告之揭露義務：以美國誠信廣告法草案為中心。臺大法學論叢，50(3)，703-787。
  2. 李治安(2014)。失衡的承諾：著作權法責任避風港規範之立法政策評析。臺大法學論叢，43(1)，143-207。
  3. 林家暘(2017)。競爭秩序下的網路中立性─歐盟與德國的立法發展給予我國之啟示。臺北大學法學論叢，101，197-261。
  4. 林書立,吳志勇(2021)。網路假訊息之刑事不法研究。軍法專刊，67(6)，111-137。
  5. 葉志良(2015)。從歐美網路中立性法制發展談網路創新與管制意涵。東海大學法學研究，46，151-227。
  6. (2023)。資訊的保鮮期限？——論被遺忘權幾個待解的習題。政大法學評論，174，217-263。
print cancel