While I would generally be against having laws to do with the internet there is something that came up a while ago with a case of sexual harassment over VR. Since there aren't any international laws regarding what happens online, would it be in our interest to put in place the framework to protect our citizens in cases such as this keeping in mind how VR and the internet are going to be a big part of our future.

Also, how would we define and or handle cyber crime (and a similar note, cyber bullying).

How you handle it is the same way it's handled now.

Responsible systems administrators will take care of the issues on their systems. Where possible taking steps to assure they cannot take place. Irresponsible system administrators only keep hold of the hardware until complaints are made to the right people and it's forcibly removed from my internet.

Cyber crime is rightly the domain of your local law enforcement, but the system administrator is far more likley to be responsive.

In the cases of bullying specifically, highlight such behaviours to the moderators - that's kind of what they're for. Making the children play nicely. But as you rightly point out - the internet is likely to be a big part of our future - people can start learning how it works. Just because someone sends you a message, you don't actually have to read it. If this is from somone that's been "abusive" before then unless you're expecting an apology then it's likely unproductive.

If you're aware of the Asgardian systems being used for crimes, then evidence as much as you are capable and report it to the law enforcement agencies in the relevant countries as you also send and email with such evidence made available to #mspokoyny#@#gmail.com# (you need to take the hashes out to make that a valid address) as you also contact the moderation staff (who should also be doing the other things, but I don't like relying on others potential for failure).

Well, right now there are no private messages on these forums, from what I can tell at least. EVERYTHING is in the public, so any harassment, sexual or otherwise, would be handled by the normal legal authorities who would normally have jurisdiction over the case.

I wasn't aware personal messenging was a particular function of internet law. I thought it was more catagorised as a service feature, and as such would more rightly merit discussions of acceptable use polices, more than law. Anything that pertains to law is likely already covered. And there's no PM functionality now but it's pegged in officially to be expecting it - tho have been expecting it for some months. This will not be intended to be publicly accessible(but likley succeptable to similar implimentation flaws as the current citizen database. so very accessible). Due to the ease of editing no sane court takes digital media so screenshots are unlikely to suffice if contested requiring full account access(Provided by systems administrators), of both accounts, to afford LEA reasonable chance to secure prosecution for anything. It's likely the AIRC team to be sidestepped here as they go straight to Hetzner with a warrent and secure physical access to the hardware as they don't appear to list specific contact details for handling by a team that would be able to provide LEA with any actual assistence.

Ultimately, there's "harassment" possible that's not actually in convention of law, where the law applies. What actually happens is the responsibility - via action or inaction - of the systems administrator.

I think the more prudent way to regulate the internet in terms of crime is to treat it as if it is not any different than any other medium of transmission, with specific laws only for technology specific differences (hacking vs breaking and entering, e.g.).

Most of the internet is in the form of public-serving privately-owned spaces, which is why these kinds of things can be easily handled through terms of service and moderation policies. By treating harassment as harassment no matter how it was conducted, it leaves the freedom for the public-at-large to deal with these issues through social means and for victims to seek redress in court when that fails.

In countries that have tried to enact special laws for the internet, I haven't seen any indication that they work better than the more conventional system, except as tools of political oppression, FWIW.

There shouldn't be such thing as an "internet law". If there is an issue, there is a TOS and a criminal law. Trying to build something new with bigger and obscure regulations as there are here today and moving towards 1984 shouldn't be the answer. As "citizens" of a nation that will only exists on a small satellite and finding a way to complete an application for a citizenship over the internet, one could assume that the person is capable of banning an another person to not get messages from a forum, email or otherwise from that particular person/user. If there is an issue of harassment, bullying maybe combined with cyber stalking, there's an app for that ... no, but there are laws against it on this planet and countries today. And if the Mars will be an option to live on, then the laws should be corrected accordingly, so future homer should take care of it later.

"Technically this forum is an entity of AIRC and runs out of Austria, so any legal issues would be have to be dealt with there. At least until Asgardia is recognized as an independent nation" - Jason Rainbow

Actually, that's not true.  Under United States Federal Law, any threats from any location which are affecting a United States Citizen constitute commerce in the location of the victim, through International Commerce, making the matter a Federal felony (18 USC 2261A).  Alternatively, in Australia and other countries (UK) anyone who is defamed may seek legal action in the court where they feel they can obtain the most damages by action and the media is visible, making several high profile libel suits filed by persons who are not even Citizens of Australia for impact to their "right to publicity" or "commercial value" of their public image in the Australian court, fairly successfully I might add.  It is also a crime, not a civil matter, meaning the publisher of the threats may be subject to jail time in addition to fines (monies to be paid regardless of costs or damages).

Cooperation of the UK, US, and Australia have led to several cases of monetary awards despite no incarceration to date.  In Mexico, if you criticize certain people, they find you on a bridge the next day (bloggers), but I would not call that entirely legal; however under Texas law an attack on a person's reputation is the same as an attack on their body or family (where such claims are not true), and self defense covers the entire scope with deadly force (it's Texas, don't blame or judge me, not a fan).

So the server being in Austria only means that an order to make changes on the server would be required from an Austrian judge, or similar International body or country with treaty to enforce (which Austria has) a foreign order (like a search and seizure, subpoena, etc).  For data gathering, these requests are fulfilled almost automatically (domesticated) in cases of International law, sovereignty, or commerce activity affecting the citizens of a foreign nation - and since the NGO is based in Germany, I know their courts will process such orders immediately for identifying information on probable cause.  I've worked with a GmbH for years, and we deal with this issue daily in crypto-voice communications services for that company and its global user base.  Germany wins only when such information is not retained, and ISPs in most countries are required to retain such records (access logs, IPs, user details) for such reports.  

The main question is, is the server host country a signatory of the Berne Convention (International Copyright and Trademark Treaty) or not?  Because most disputes arise from the core issue of threats or misuse of a "registered Citizen" name or other identifying photo or details associated, which the nations have power over (ownership) in International Commerce under Treaty.

There is no "Internet Law" - only treaties among nations and the Berne Convention governing publicity of registered identities (reputation in Corporate commerce under the Articles of Rome).