FACING UP TO INTERNET GIANTS

Mancur Olson claimed that concentrated interests win against diffuse interests even in advanced democracies. Multinational companies, for example, work well in unison to suit their interests. The rest of the public is not motivated or informed enough to resist them. In contrast, other scholars argue...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Duke journal of comparative & international law 2024-01, Vol.34 (2), p.175
Main Author: Dothan, Shai
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Access control
Analysis
Content provider
Data security
Harm principle (Ethics)
Human rights
Interest (Law)
Laws, regulations and rules
Online services
Personal information
Privacy, Right of
Social media
Truthfulness and falsehood
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Mancur Olson claimed that concentrated interests win against diffuse interests even in advanced democracies. Multinational companies, for example, work well in unison to suit their interests. The rest of the public is not motivated or informed enough to resist them. In contrast, other scholars argued that diffuse interests may be able to fight back, but only when certain conditions prevail. One of the conditions for the success of diffuse interests is the intervention of national and international courts. Courts are able to fix problems affecting diffuse interests. Courts can also indirectly empower diffuse interests by initiating deliberation to inform the public. This paper investigates the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights and the Court of Justice of the European Union. It argues that these international courts help consumers, a diffuse interest group, succeed in their struggle against internet companies, a concentrated interest group.
ISSN:1053-6736