Laws
The Virtual Nation has been self-regulated since its inception. That is, it has been ruled by consensus among its communities. Branscomb (1996) suggests that by 1995, lawyers began paying attention to the Internet as they saw it develop into a more prominent computer-mediated communication (CMC) system, duplicating communication of the real world.
Self-Governance
In the world of CMC, there are no geographical barriers. Laws based on geographic boundaries cannot be applied. A new boundary of screens and passwords that separate the virtual world and the real world emerges. When increasing new comers and unpredictable activities enter cyberspace arena, it needs its own rule sets and legal organization (Johnson and Post, 1996).
In the 11th and 12th centuries, a new group of professional merchants emerged in Europe. To carry out their business, these merchants traveled to and from states whose languages and political systems differed. A new commercial law system to deal with these merchants was invented. At a given business state, the same rules were used to govern business transactions among government officials, customers and suppliers. The rules were maintained and supported by the merchants who believed that the survival of the merchant community depended upon the adherence to the rules (Valauskas, 1996).
Johnson and Post (1996) suggest that cyberspace law reflects its special characteristics, much like a country's jurisdiction that reflects its history and culture. A study by Mashima and Hirose(1996) reveals that, in 1989, Japan's common telephone carrier was contracted for pay-per-call information services. The services were soon developed by information providers to include pornographic content. This development provoked public complaint against the telephone provider. The problem was soon dealt with by the carrier's refusal to contract with information providers intending to supply obscene content. Government officials formed an administrative body who provided the guidance for content. The Japanese self-regulatory approach in cyberspace, although effective, lacks a democratic decision-making process.
Valauskas (1996) notes that legislation passed to regulate the Internet that does not take into account the nature of the Internet and its communities is not effective. In 1996, in dealing with "cyberporn", the United States passed the Communications Decency Act (CDA) to limit the transmission or display of "indecent" materials. The CDA was considered unconstitutional and was later dropped (Mashima and Hirose, 1996).
Rule-Makers
In specific online communities, rules are contracts between users and providers (Oberding and Norderhaug, 1996). If the users do not agree with online policies established by the providers - the rule setters - the simplest way to comply is to exit and join new communities where they agree with the new rule sets (Johnson and Post, 1998).
For the Internet as a whole, Valauskas (1996) and Oberding and Norderhaug (1996) find a joint effort by technologists, lawyers, service providers, and business communities to develop official rules and norms to resolve conflicts arising from old law and new technology. Oberding and Norderhaug suggest that a group like the Internet Law Task Force - which became the Internet Law and Policy Forum (www.ilpf.org) - can serve to educate legislatures of law issues arising from new technology and its activities. This group could help avoid potentially ineffective legislation.