Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Digital and Legal Divide: Silk Road, Transnational Online Policing and Southern Criminology

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The Palgrave Handbook of Criminology and the Global South

Abstract

This chapter explores transnational online policing and the global digital divides that remain wedded to national governance theories, regulatory structures and surveillance practices, largely emanating from the Global North (Carrington et al., British Journal of Criminology, 56(1), 1–20, 2015). The bulk of the world’s digital infrastructure has been developed and is physically located in, or transmitted via, hubs owned by US corporations (Price, Monthly Review, 66(3), 43–53, 2014). This chapter demonstrates how the ensuing transnational ‘information feudalism’ (Drahos and Braithwaite, Information Feudalism. Earthscan Publications, 2002) also produces a form of transnational legal feudalism that reflects power disparities between other English-speaking nations, which are played out in distinct ways through US extraterritorial policing and online surveillance. The Silk Road cryptomarket reveals the importance of Southern Criminology in understanding the transnational implications of these developments.

The authors would like to thank Dr Angela Daly for helpful comments provided on an earlier version of this chapter and Michael Wilson for his excellent research assistance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Andreas, P., & Nadelmann, E. (2006). Policing the Globe: Criminalization and Crime Control in International Relations. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bauman, Z., Bigo, D., Esteves, P., Guild, E., Jabri, V., Lyon, D., et al. (2014). After Snowden: Rethinking the impact of surveillance. International Political Sociology, 8, 121–144. https://doi.org/10.1111/ips.12048.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boister, N. (2012). An Introduction to Transnational Criminal Law. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Boister, N. (2015). Further reflections on the concept of transnational criminal law. Transnational Legal Theory, 6(1), 9–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/20414005.2015.1042232.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bojarski, K. (2015). Dealer, hacker, lawyer, spy. Modern techniques and legal boundaries of counter-cybercrime operations. The European Review of Organised Crime, 2(2), 25–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowling, B. (2011). Transnational criminology and the globalisation of harm production. In M. Bosworth & C. Hoyle (Eds.), What is Criminology? (pp. 361–379). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Bowling, B., & Sheptycki, J. (2012). Global Policing. London: Sage.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Bowling, B., & Sheptycki, J. (2015). Global policing and transnational rule with law. Transnational Legal Theory, 6(1), 141–173. https://doi.org/10.1080/20414005.2015.1042235.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brown, I. (2015). The feasibility of transatlantic privacy-protective standards for surveillance. International Journal of Law and Information Technology, 23(1), 23–40. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijlit/eau007.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carrington, K., Hogg, R., & Sozzo, M. (2015). Southern criminology. British Journal of Criminology, 56(1), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1093/bjc/azv083.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clement, A., & Obar, J. (2015). Canadian Internet ‘boomerang’ traffic and mass NSA surveillance: Responding to privacy and network sovereignty challenges. In M. Geist (Ed.), Law, Privacy and Surveillance in Canada in the Post-Snowden Era (pp. 13–44). Ottawa: University of Ottawa Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connell, R. (2007). Southern Theory: The Global Dynamics of Knowledge in Social Science. Sydney: Allen & Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dardot, P., & Laval, C. (2014). The New Way of the World: On Neoliberal Society. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Justice. (2015). Australian Man Pleads Guilty in Manhattan Federal Court To Helping Run the ‘Silk Road’ Website. US Attorney’s Office Southern District of New York, March 13. Retrieved January 23, 2017, from https://www.justice.gov/usao-sdny/pr/australian-man-pleads-guilty-manhattan-federal-court-helping-run-silk-road-website

  • Dolliver, D. S. (2015). Evaluating drug trafficking on the TOR network: Silk Road 2, the sequel. International Journal of Drug Policy, 26(11), 1113–1123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.drugpo.2015.01.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drahos, P., & Braithwaite, J. (2002). Information Feudalism. London: Earthscan Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forte, D. (2002). Analysing the difficulties in backtracking the Onion router’s traffic. Paper presented at The Digital Forensic Research Conference: 6–9 August. Syracuse, NY. Retrieved January 23, 2017, from http://dfrws.org/sites/default/files/session-files/paper-analyzing_the_difficulties_in_backtracking_the_onion_routers_traffic.pdf

  • Goldsmith, J., & Wu, T. (2006). Who Controls the Internet: Illusions of a Borderless World. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guarda, N. D. (2015). Governing the ungovernable: International relations, transnational cybercrime law, and the post-Westphalian regulatory state. Transnational Legal Theory, 6(1), 211–249. https://doi.org/10.1080/20414005.2015.1042226.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hilderbrandt, M. (2013). Extraterritorial jurisdiction to enforce in cyberspace: Bodin, Schmitt, Grotius in cyberspace. University of Toronto Law Journal, 63, 196–224.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Human Rights Committee. (2014). Communication No. 1973/2010L Views adopted by the Committee at its 112th Session (October 7–31, 2014).

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D. R., & Post, D. G. (1996). Law and borders: The rise of law in cyberspace. Stanford Law Review, 48(5), 1367–1402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kamensky, D. (2016). American peanuts v. Ukranian cigarettes: Dangers of white-collar overcriminalisation and undercriminalisation. Mississippi College Law Review, 35(1), 148–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenney, M. (2007). The architecture of drug trafficking: Network forms of organization in the Columbian cocaine trade. Global Crime, 8(3), 233–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King, I. (2004). Internationalising Internet governance: Does ICANN have a role to play? Information and Communications Technology Law, 13(3), 243–258.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lyon, D. (2015). Surveillance After Snowden. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mark, G. (2013). RICO’s extraterritoriality. American Business Law Journal, 50(3), 543–608.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J. (2013). Lost on the Silk Road: Online drug distribution and the ‘cryptomarket’. Criminology and Criminal Justice, 14(3), 351–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J. (2014). Drugs on The Dark Net: How Cryptomarkets Are Transforming the Global Trade in Illicit Drugs. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • May, T. (2012). Gary McKinnon extradition case: Home secretary’s statement. Home Office and The Rt Hon Theresa May MP, 16 October. Retrieved January 11, 2017, from https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/gary-mckinnon-extradition-case-home-secretarys-statement

  • McCoy, A. (2014). Surveillance and scandal: Weapons in an emerging array for US global power. Monthly Review, 66(3), 70–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McDonough, R. (1992). Collaring drug kingpins: International extradition and continuing criminal enterprise in United States v Levy. Journal of International Law and Trade, 16, 127–145.

    Google Scholar 

  • Medeiros, F., & Bygrave, L. (2015). Brazil’s Marco Civil da Internet: Does it live up to the hype? Computer Law and Security Review, 31, 120–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morselli, C., & Petit, K. (2007). Law enforcement disruption of a drug importation network. Global Crime, 8(2), 109–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nadelmann, E. A. (1990). Global prohibition regimes: The evolution of norms in international society. International Organization, 44(4), 479–526.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, D., & Warren, I. (2013). Global policing and the case of Kim Dotcom. International Journal for Crime, Justice and Social Democracy, 2(3), 105–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pflaum, I., & Hateley, E. (2014). A bit of a problem: National and extraterritorial regulation of virtual currency in the age of financial disintermediation. Georgetown Journal of International Law, 45, 1169–1215.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price, D. (2014). The new surveillance normal: NSA and corporate surveillance in the age of global capitalism. Monthly Review, 66(3), 43–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Purkayastha, P., & Bailey, R. (2014). US control of the Internet: Problems facing the movement to international governance. Monthly Review, 66(3), 103–127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reidenberg, J. (2002). Yahoo and democracy on the Internet. Jurimetrics, 42, 261–280.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ron, D., & Shamir, A. (2014). How did Dread Pirate Roberts acquire and protect his Bitcoin wealth? In R. Böhme, M. Brenner, T. Moore, & M. Smith (Eds.), Proceedings of the Financial Cryptography and Data Security (pp. 3–15). Rainer, Berlin: Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rousseff, D. (2013). Statement by H.E. Dilma Rousseff President of the Federative Republic of Brazil, at the opening of the general debate of the 68th session of the United Nations General Assembly. Retrieved January 11, 2017, from https://gadebate.un.org/en/68/brazil

  • Schiller, D. (2011). Geopolitical-economic conflict and network infrastructures. Chinese Journal of Communication, 4(1), 90–107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sheptycki, J. (1998). Policing, postmodernism and transnationalisation. British Journal of Criminology, 38(3), 485–503.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, J. (2007). Governing Through Crime: How the War on Crime Transformed American Democracy and Created a Culture of Fear. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Slobogin, C. (2010). Government dragnets. Law and Contemporary Problems, 73(1), 107–143.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sugden, P. (2008). You can click but you can’t hide: Copyright pirates and crime—The ‘drink or die’ prosecutions. European Intellectual Property Review, 30(6), 222–231.

    Google Scholar 

  • Svantesson, D. (2014). Sovereignty in international law—How the Internet (maybe) changed everything, but not for long. Masaryk University Journal of Law and Technology, 8(1), 137–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Svantesson, D. (2015). A new jurisprudential framework for jurisdiction: Beyond the Harvard draft. AJIL Unbound, 109, 69–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Svantesson, D., & Gerry, F. (2015). Access to extraterritorial evidence: The Microsoft cloud case and beyond. Computer Law & Security Review, 31, 478–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urbas, G. (2006). Cross-national investigation and prosecution of intellectual property crimes: The example of ‘Operation Buccaneer’. Crime, Law and Social Change, 46(4), 207–221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valverde, M. (2015). Chronotopes of Law: Jurisdiction, Scale and Governance. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren, I. (2015). Surveillance, criminal law and sovereignty. Surveillance & Society, 13(2), 300–305.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren, I., & Palmer, D. (2010). Crime risks of three-dimensional virtual environments. Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, 338, 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warren, I., & Palmer, D. (2015). Global Criminology. Sydney: Thomson Reuters.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, M., & Archick, K. (2016). US-EU Data Privacy: From Safe Harbour to Privacy Shield. Congressional Research Service.

    Google Scholar 

Cases

  • Attorney-General v Davis [2016] IEHC 497.

    Google Scholar 

  • Government of the United States of America v Love (2016) Westminster Magistrates Court, Tempia J, 16 September.

    Google Scholar 

  • Griffiths v United States of America and Another (2005) 214 ALR 665.

    Google Scholar 

  • In the Matter of a Warrant to Search a Certain E-mail Account Controlled and Maintained by Microsoft Corporation, Microsoft Corporation v United States of America (2014a) United States District Court Southern District of New York, JC Francis IV, 25 April.

    Google Scholar 

  • In the Matter of a Warrant to Search a Certain E-Mail Account Controlled and Maintained by Microsoft Corporation, Microsoft Corporation v United States of America (2014b) United States District Court Southern District of New York, Loretta A Preska, 29 August.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kotteakos et al. v United States (1946) 328 U.S. 750.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKinnon v Government of the United States of America [2008] 4 All ER 1012.

    Google Scholar 

  • Microsoft Corporation v United States of America (In the Matter of a Warrant to Search a Certain E-mail Account Controlled and Maintained by Microsoft Corporation, Microsoft Corporation v United States of America) (2016) United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Lynch, Carney and Bolden, 14 July.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulbricht v United States (2016) United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, New York (oversized appeal brief), 12 January.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v Ulbricht, a/k/a ‘Dread Pirate Roberts,’ a/k/a ‘DPR,’ a/k/a ‘Silk Road’ (2014) 31 F. Supp.3d 540.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States of America v Ulbricht, a/k/a ‘Dread Pirate Roberts,’ a/k/a ‘DPR,’ a/k/a ‘Silk Road’ (2014) US District Court for the Southern District of New York, 10 October.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States v Ulbricht, a/k/a ‘Dread Pirate Roberts,’ a/k/a ‘DPR,’ a/k/a ‘Silk Road’ (2013) US District Court for the Southern District of New York, Maas, 27 September.

    Google Scholar 

  • United States of America v Andrew Michael Jones a/k/a ‘Inigo,’ Gary Davis a/k/a ‘Libertas’ and Peter Phillip Nash a/k/a ‘Samesamebutdifferent,’ a/k/a ‘Batman73,’ a/ka/ ‘Symmetry,’ a/k/a ‘Anonumousasshit’ (2013) United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, Griesa J, 19 December.

    Google Scholar 

Legislations

Human Rights Instruments

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Law, School of Justice, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Monique Mann

  2. Deakin University, Burwood, VIC, Australia

    Ian Warren

Authors
  1. Monique Mann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ian Warren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Kerry Carrington

  2. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Russell Hogg

  3. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    John Scott

  4. National University of Litoral Santa Fe, Santa Fe, Argentina

    Máximo Sozzo

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Mann, M., Warren, I. (2018). The Digital and Legal Divide: Silk Road, Transnational Online Policing and Southern Criminology. In: Carrington, K., Hogg, R., Scott, J., Sozzo, M. (eds) The Palgrave Handbook of Criminology and the Global South. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65021-0_13

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65021-0_13

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-65020-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-65021-0

  • eBook Packages: Law and CriminologyLaw and Criminology (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation