Regulation by Software
Regulation by Software
复制标题
软件调节
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
2005
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
James Grimmelmann
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
James Grimmelmann
软件既不是法律也不是建筑。这是它自己的监管方式。本说明以拉里·莱西格（Larry Lessig）著名的“代码就是法律”的表述为基础，认为莱西格将计算机软件与物理架构等同起来是错误的。尽管软件在限制行为方面类似于法律和建筑，但它具有区别于两者的特征。该说明确定了软件的四个相关属性：规则性强、可能不透明、无法忽视、容易遭受突然故障。通过评估这些特征在给定环境中的影响，人们可以决定软件是解决监管问题的好还是坏选择。第一部分将软件置于 Lessig 的关于限制个人的不同和互补监管模式的理论中。在《守则》中，他提出了四种这样的模式：法律、社会规范、市场和物质建筑。然后他认为软件是作为一种形态的物理架构的一个亚种。相反，我认为软件的三个基本特征将其确立为一种独特的形态，不应与任何其他形态混为一谈：首先，软件是自动化的。一旦由程序员启动，计算机程序就会机械地做出决定，无需进一步的人工干预。其次，软件是即时的。它不是依靠事后施加的制裁来执行其规则，而是只是防止被禁止的行为发生。第三，软件是可塑的。程序员几乎可以实现他们可以想象和精确描述的任何系统。软件就像物理架构，与法律不同，它是自动化和即时的。然而，可塑性更多地是法律体系的特征，而不是建筑体系的特征。软件的可塑性与其自动化和即时性相互作用，产生了使其与法律和物理架构区别开来的后果。在第二部分中，我将讨论这些独特的后果。任何软件监管都存在四种重复出现且可预测的模式：首先，沿着规则和标准之间的传统连续体，软件处于受规则约束的极端。其次，软件可以在不透明的情况下进行监管。通常，那些受软件监管的人可能没有合理的方法来确定禁止行为和允许行为之间的总体界限。第三，软件规则不容忽视。面临软件决策的各方最多只能采取措施撤销软件造成的后果。第四，软件比其他监管系统更加脆弱。黑客可以利用它的可塑性来对付它，它的自动化操作意味着意想不到的后果不会受到人工审查。第三部分将此分析应用于两个案例研究。它预测软件是管理在线市场（例如在线拍卖网站和电子证券交易所）谈判和交易的好方法。另一方面，它预测了使用软件限制数字媒体分发的几个陷阱。
Software is neither law nor architecture. It is its own modality of regulation. This Note builds on Larry Lessig’s famous formulation that “code is law” to argue that Lessig was wrong to equate computer software with physical architecture. Although software resembles both law and architecture in its power to constrain behavior, it has features that distinguish it from both. The Note identifies four relevant attributes of software: It is ruleish, potentially nontransparent, impossible to ignore, and vulnerable to sudden failure. By assessing the impact of these characteristics in a given context, one can decide whether software is a good or a bad choice to solve a regulatory problem.Part I situates software within Lessig’s theory of different and complementary modalities of regulation that constrain individuals. In Code, he postulates four such modalities: law, social norms, markets, and physical architecture. He then argues that software is a subspecies of physical architecture as a modality.I argue instead that three basic characteristics of software establish it as a distinct modality that should not be conflated with any of the others: First, software is automated. Once set in motion by a programmer, a computer program makes its determinations mechanically, without further human intervention. Second, software is immediate. Rather than relying on sanctions imposed after the fact to enforce its rules, it simply prevents the forbidden behavior from occurring. Third, software is plastic. Programmers can implement almost any system they can imagine and describe precisely.Software is like physical architecture and unlike law in being automated and immediate. However, plasticity is more characteristic of legal systems than of architectural ones. Software’s plasticity interacts with its automation and its immediacy to produce consequences that set it apart from both law and physical architecture.In Part II, I turn to these distinctive consequences. There are four recurring and predictable patterns present in any regulation by software: First, along the traditional continuum between rules and standards, software lies at the extreme rule-bound end. Second, software can regulate without transparency. Frequently, those regulated by software may have no reasonable way to determine the overall shape of the line between prohibited and permitted behavior. Third, software rules cannot be ignored. Parties facing a decision made by software can, at best, take steps to undo what software has wrought. Fourth, software is more fragile than other systems of regulation. Hackers can turn its plasticity against it, and its automated operation means that unintended consequences are shielded from human review.Part III applies this analysis to two case studies. It predicts that software is a good way to manage negotiations and transactions in online marketplaces such as online auction sites and electronic stock exchanges. On the other hand, it predicts several pitfalls for the use of software to restrict the distribution of digital media.