Evaluation of the Methods Applied by States in the Exercise of Jurisdiction over Online Services and Internet Content in the Context of International Law

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 3 Sayı: 1, 79 - 107, 26.03.2025

Alp Eren Tanyeri

Öz

The cross-border and decentralized structure of the internet has created legal and technical problems that challenge the traditional understanding of sovereignty, and states have developed various methods over time in order to exercise their sovereign jurisdictions. In the present study, these methods are analyzed in terms of their actual effects, the national legal regulations on which they are based, and the relevant norms of international law. The various approaches adopted by states in the exercise of jurisdiction over the Internet examined through a comparative approach using the examples of the United States, China, Russia and Türkiye.
Surveillance and control, content removal, filtering and access blocking methods can lead to violations of sovereignty due to their cross-border effects and also spark debates regarding human rights and freedoms. On the other hand, despite all measures, it is observed that illegality on the internet has not been sufficiently prevented. Therefore, it has been observed that states rely on their national regulations and technical capacities in the fight against illegal activities on the internet; however, international cooperation has become increasingly essential to achieving truly effective results. Finally, it has been highlighted that the current structure of national legal mechanisms and international law is inadequate to address the global impact of the Internet and that new international mechanisms need to be developed.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Internet, sovereignty, surveillance, content removal, access blocking

Çevrimiçi Hizmetler ve İnternet İçerikleri Üzerindeki Yetki İcrasında Devletlerce Başvurulan Yöntemlerin Uluslararası Hukuk Bağlamında Değerlendirilmesi

Öz

İnternetin sınır aşan ve adem-i merkeziyetçi yapısı, geleneksel egemenlik anlayışına meydan okuyan hukuki ve teknik sorunlar doğurmuş; devletler, egemenlik kaynaklı yetkilerini kullanabilmek adına zamanla birtakım yöntemler geliştirmiştir. Eldeki çalışmada, söz konusu yöntemler fiili etkileri, dayandıkları ulusal hukuk düzenlemeleri ve uluslararası hukukun ilgili normları bağlamında incelenmiştir. Devletlerin internet üzerindeki yetki kullanımına ilişkin benimsedikleri farklı yaklaşımlar ABD, Çin, Rusya ve Türkiye örnekleri üzerinden mukayeseli olarak değerlendirilmiştir.
Gözetim ve denetim, içerik kaldırma, filtreleme ve erişim engelleme yöntemleri, sınır aşan etkileriyle egemenlik ihlalini gündeme getirebilmekte, insan hak ve özgürlükleri açısından da tartışmalara yol açmaktadır. Diğer taraftan, tüm önlemlere rağmen internette hukuka aykırılığın önüne yeteri kadar geçilemediği görülmektedir. Dolayısıyla devletlerin internet ortamındaki hukuka aykırılıklarla mücadele yolunda ulusal düzenlemelerine ve teknik kapasitelerine dayandığı; ancak gerçek anlamda etkili sonuçların elde edilebilmesi için uluslararası iş birliğine duyulan ihtiyacın arttığı tespit edilmiştir. Son olarak, ulusal hukuk mekanizmalarının ve uluslararası hukukun mevcut yapısının, internetin küresel etkisine cevap vermekte yetersiz kaldığına ve yeni uluslararası mekanizmaların geliştirilmesi gerekliliğine işaret edilmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

İnternet, egemenlik, gözetim, içerik kaldırma, erişim engeli

Kaynakça

• American Civil Liberties Union, ‘Surveillance Under the USA/PATRIOT Act’ <https://www.aclu.org/documents/surveillance-under-usapatriot-act> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• Arısoy MV and Küçüksille EU, ‘Performance Comparison of TOR Hidden Service Crawlers’ (2019) 6 Bilecik Şeyh Edebali Üniversitesi Fen Bilimleri Dergisi 147
• Baran P, ‘On Distributed Communications Networks’ (The RAND Corporation 1962) R-2626
• Berners-Lee T and Fischetti M, Weaving the Web: The Original Design and Ultimate Destiny of the World Wide Web by Its Inventor (1st ed, HarperSanFrancisco 1999)
• Berners-Lee T, ‘Information Management: A Proposal’ (CERN 1989) <https://cds.cern.ch/record/369245> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• Beyer JL, Expect Us: Online Communities and Political Mobilization (Oxford University Press 2014)
• Devon County Council, ‘Fire Beacons: Warning Signals Across the Countryside’ (2000) <https://devoncc.sharepoint.com/sites/PublicDocs/Environment/Historic/Forms/AllItems.aspx?id=%2Fsites%2FPublicDocs%2FEnvironment%2FHistoric%2FSchools%2FFire%20Beacons%2Epdf&parent=%2Fsites%2FPublicDocs%2FEnvironment%2FHistoric%2FSchools&p=true&ga=1> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• Dixon M, Textbook on International Law (7th edn, Oxford University Press 2013)
• Farinho DS and Campos RR, ‘Models of Legal Liability for Social Networks: Between Germany and Portugal’ in Carlos Blanco de Morais, Gilmar Ferreira Mendes and Thomas Vesting (eds), The Rule of Law in Cyberspace (Springer 2022)
• Fuchs C and others, ‘Introduction: Internet and Surveillance’ in Christian Fuchs and others (eds), Internet and Surveillance: The Challenges of Web 2.0 and Social Media (1st edn, Routledge 2012) Griffiths J, The Great Firewall of China: How to Build and Control an Alternative Version of the Internet (2nd edn, Zed 2021)
• Güzey E, ‘AİHM Kararları Çerçevesinde Kitlelerin İstihbarat Maksatlı Gözetimi’ (2020) 30 SAVSAD Savunma ve Savaş Araştırmaları Dergisi 179
• Hauben R, ‘From the ARPANET to the Internet’ (23 Haziran 1998) <https://www.columbia.edu/~rh120/other/tcpdigest_paper.txt> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• Hillier T, Principles of Public International Law (2nd edn, Cavendish Publishing 1999)
• Huyue Zhang A, High Wire: How China Regulates Big Tech and Governs Its Economy (Oxford University Press 2024)
• Kippenberger T, ‘How Did We Get to a World Wide Web?’ (1999) 4 The Antidote 21
• Korpisaari P, ‘From Delfi to Sanchez – When Can an Online Communication Platform Be Responsible for Third-Party Comments? An Analysis of the Practice of the ECtHR and Some Reflections on the Digital Services Act’ (2022) 14 Journal of Media Law 352
• Kuczerawy A, ‘From “Notice and Takedown” to “Notice and Stay Down”: Risks and Safeguards for Freedom of Expression’ in Giancarlo Frosio (ed), The Oxford Handbook of Online Intermediary Liability (Oxford University Press 2020)
• Kumtepe CÇK, ‘Siber Uzayda Kuvvet Kullanma Yasağı ve Yasağın İstisnalarının Geçerliliğinin Tallinn Rehberi Kapsamında Değerlendirilmesi’ (2022) 53 The Turkish Yearbook of International Relations 21
• Kurt SS, ‘Uluslararası Hukukta Diplomatik Koruma’ (2020) 6 Anadolu Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 467
• Kurt T, ‘Panoptikondan Data Diktatörlüğüne: Özgürlüğün Sonu mu?’ (2023) 1 Tokat Gaziosmanpaşa Üniversitesi Hukuk Fakültesi Dergisi 137
• Lukasik S, ‘Why the Arpanet Was Built’ (2011) 33 IEEE Annals of the History of Computing 4
• Maheshwari S, McCabe D and Karni A, ‘House Passes Bill to Force TikTok Sale From Chinese Owner or Ban the App’ The New York Times (13 Mart 2024) <https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/13/technology/tiktok-ban-house-vote.html> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• Maréchal N, ‘Networked Authoritarianism and the Geopolitics of Information: Understanding Russian Internet Policy’ (2017) 5 Media and Communication 29
• Mueller ML, Ruling the Root: Internet Governance and the Taming of Cyberspace (1. paperback ed, MIT Press 2004)
• Nojeim G, ‘FISA Court Opinion Outlines FBI Abuse of Key Intelligence Surveillance Authority’ (Center for Democracy and Technology, 4 Eylül 2020) <https://cdt.org/insights/fisa-court-opinion-outlines-fbi-abuse-of-key-intelligence-surveillance-authority/> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• Öztekin A, Teori ve Uygulamada Türk İnternet Hukuku (1st edn, Seçkin Yayınclık 2021)
• Pattenden P, ‘The Byzantine Early Warning System’ (1983) 53 Byzantion 258
• Post D, ‘Governing Cyberspace: Law’ (2008) 24 Santa Clara High Technology Law Journal 883
• Rada R, ‘Writing and Reading Hypertext: An Overview’ (1989) 40 Journal of the American Society for Information Science 164
• Richter A, ‘Regulation of Social Media in Russia’ (European Audiovisual Observatory 2021)
• Roguski P, ‘Violations of Territorial Sovereignty in Cyberspace—an Intrusion-Based Approach’ in Bibi van den Berg and Dennis Broeders (eds), Governing Cyberspace: Behavior, Power, and Diplomacy (Rowman & Littlefield 2020)
• Sanders K, ‘Fact-Checking John Oliver’s Interview with Edward Snowden about NSA Surveillance’ (PolitiFact) <https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2015/apr/09/edward-snowden/fact-checking-john-olivers-interview-edward-snowde/> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• Schiavetta S and Komaitis K, ‘ICANN’s Role in Controlling Information on the Internet’ (2003) 17 International Review of Law, Computers & Technology 267
• Schmitt MN (ed), Tallinn Manual 2.0 on the International Law Applicable to Cyber Operations (Cambridge University Press 2017)
• Shaw MN, International Law (8th edn, Cambridge University Press 2017)
• Soldatov A and Borogan I, ‘Russia’s Surveillance State’ (2013) 30 World Policy Journal 23
• Staker C, ‘Jurisdiction’ in Malcolm D Evans (ed), International Law (4th edn, Oxford University Press 2014)
• Svantesson DJB, Solving the Internet Jurisdiction Puzzle (Oxford University Press 2017)
• United Nations Open-ended Working Group on Information and Communication Technologies, ‘On Spyware and Its Use by US Intelligence Services’ by Russian Federation (2024) Non-papers <https://docs-library.unoda.org/Open-Ended_Working_Group_on_Information_and_Communication_Technologies_-_(2021)/Spyware_and_its_use_by_US__intelligence_services_ENG_0.pdf> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• United States National Science Foundation, ‘Birth of the Commercial Internet’ <https://new.nsf.gov/impacts/internet> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• United States House of Representatives, Judiciary Committee, ‘USA Freedom Act’ (House Judiciary Committee Republicans, 22 Nisan 2015) <http://judiciary.house.gov/usa-freedom-act> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• Urban J and Quilter L, ‘Efficient Process or Chilling Effects - Takedown Notices under Section 512 of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’ (2006) 22 Santa Clara High Technology Law Journal 621 Wallace RMM and Martin-Ortega O, International Law (8th edn, Sweet & Maxwell 2016)
• Amerika Birleşik Devletleri, Amerikalıları Yabancı Hasım Kontrolündeki Uygulamalardan Koruma Yasası (Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act), 118th Congress, H.R.7521
• ——, Çocukların Çevrimiçi Mahremiyetinin Korunması Yasası (Children's Online Privacy Protection Act), 15 U.S. Code, §§6501-6506
• ——, Çocukların İnternetten Korunması Yasası (Children's Internet Protection Act), 47 CFR 54.520
• ——, DARPA Kurucu Direktifi (Department of Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency), US Department of Defence, Directive 5105.15, 07.02.1958
• ——, Devletlerin ve Mağdurların Çevrimiçi Seks Ticaretiyle Mücadele Etmesine İzin Yasası (Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act) ve Seks Tacirlerini Müsaadeyi Durdurma Yasası (Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act) (FOSTA-SESTA), 132 Stat. 1253 – Public Law No.115-164, 11.04.2018
• ——, Dijital Binyıl Telif Hakkı Yasası (Digital Millennium Copyright Act), 17 U.S. Code, §512
• ——, FISA Değişiklikleri (FISA Amendments), 129 Stat. 268 – Public Law No.114-23, 06.02.2015
• ——, Kolluk Kuvvetleri için İletişim Yardımı Yasası (Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act), Public Law 103-414
• ——, Sakıncalı İçeriklerin Özel Olarak Engellenmesi ve Filtrelenmesine Yönelik Koruma, (Protection for Private Blocking and Screening of Offensive Material), 47 U.S. Code, §230
• Birleşik Krallık, Çevrimiçi Güvenlik Yasası 2023 (Online Safety Act 2023), Chapter.50
• Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti Siber Güvenlik Yasası (Cybersecurity Law of the People’s Republic of China), İngilizce Çeviri: <https://digichina.stanford.edu/work/translation-cybersecurity-law-of-the-peoples-republic-of-china-effective-june-1-2017/> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• ——, Çevrimiçi Bilgi İçeriği Ekosisteminin Yönetişimine İlişkin Hükümler, Çin Siber Uzay İdaresi, 5 Numaralı Emir (Provisions on the Governance of the Online Information Content Ecosystem, Order of the Cyberspace Administration of China No.5), İngilizce Çeviri: <https://wilmap.stanford.edu/entries/provisions-governance-online-information-content-ecosystem> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• ——, Çin Halk Cumhuriyeti Kriptografi Yasası (Cryptography Law of the People’s Republic of China), İngilizce Çeviri: <https://appinchina.co/government-documents/cryptography-law-of-the-peoples-republic-of-china/> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• ——, Kamu Güvenlik Kurumları Tarafından İnternet Güvenliği Gözetim ve Denetimine İlişkin Yönetmelik (Regulations on Internet Security Supervision and Inspection by Public Security Bodies), İngilizce Çeviri: <https://digichina.stanford.edu/work/regulations-on-internet-security-supervision-and-inspection-by-public-security-bodies/> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• Hindistan, 2000 Bilgi Teknolojisi Yasası (The Information Technology Act, 2000), Act No 21 of 2000.
• Rusya Federasyonu, Bilgi, Bilgi Teknolojileri ve Bilginin Korunması Hakkında Federal Yasa (Federal Law On Information, Information Technologies and Protection of Information), The Russian Federation Federal law No. 149-FZ of 14 July 2006. <https://eais.rkn.gov.ru/docs.eng/149.pdf> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• ——, Operasyonel Arama Faaliyetleri Federal Yasası (Federal Law on Operational-Search Activities), Federal Law No.144-FZ of 12 August 1995, <https://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/acc_e/rus_e/wtaccrus58_leg_373.pdf> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• Türkiye Cumhuriyeti, 5651 sayılı İnternet Ortamında Yapılan Yayınların Düzenlenmesi ve Bu Yayınlar Yoluyla İşlenen Suçlarla Mücadele Edilmesi Hakkında Kanun, (RG 04.05.2007/26530)
• ——, 6532 sayılı Devlet İstihbarat Hizmetleri ve Millî İstihbarat Teşkilâtı Kanununda Değişiklik Yapılmasına Dair Kanun, (RG 26.04.2014/28983)
• BTK, ‘Denetleme’ <https://www.btk.gov.tr/denetleme> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• INHOPE, ‘Association of Internet Hotline Providers’ <https://www.inhope.org/EN> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• INTERPOL, ‘International Child Sexual Exploitation Database’ <https://www.interpol.int/Crimes/Crimes-against-children/International-Child-Sexual-Exploitation-database> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• IWF, ‘About Us’ <https://www.iwf.org.uk/about-us/> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• Instagram, ‘Kolluk Kuvvetlerine Yönelik Bilgiler’ <https://help.instagram.com/494561080557017> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• ‘Türkiye: Uçtan Uca Şifreleme Korunmalı’ (ARTICLE 19, 20 Nisan 2023)<https://www.article19.org/tr/resources/turkey-protect-end-to-end-encrypted-services/> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025
• X, ‘Hukuki Talep SSS’ <https://help.x.com/tr/rules-and-policies/x-legal-faqs> Erişim Tarihi: 05.02.2025