A Question of Consent in Cybernorms Governance

Abstract: Although access to the internet is increasingly recognised as a critical right, the increasing criminalisation of copyright infringements and its consequent constitutional concerns reflects not only an ever widening gap between the legislative prescriptions and the broader societal expectations but may also raise constitutional concerns that may undermine that right of access. Drawing on the premise of consent from a public choice perspective this thesis examines some aspects of these complex debates such as in advocating for government intervention. The research finds that the recent pluralistic legislative developments such as ACTA and DRD are forum shifted with the ascending IPRs rights in the on-going bilateral forum (such as the CETA) matched by increased surveillance that can be understood as issues of voter ignorance/rationalities and the rent seeking lobbying interest groups that erodes the premise of consent and ultimately the democratic legitimacy of the State. It is argued that the paradoxical neoliberal outcomes are product of lobbying and the malaise underlying political consensus. It argues for the return of ‘bottom-up’ spontaneous ordering of ‘cybernorm’ law-making as a product of human action to address these developments instead of the social construct and human design of central government institutions in understanding and addressing the normative gap.