The HIIG Discussion Paper Series on Internet & Society has a interdisciplinary academic focus addressing questions about Internet and Media RegulationInternet Policy and GovernanceInternet-enabled Innovation as well as Global Constitutionalism and the Internet. All SSRN papers are also accessible via the institutes SSRN profile.

Berner, K.,  Constitutions Going Online – Internet-Related Dynamics in Constitutional Law?
(October 7, 2011). HIIG Discussion Paper Series No. 2012-09
The internet is not merely a social phenomenon, it is more than that, it is of constitutional importance. Various academic disciplines have acknowledged this innovation‘s significance and selective internet-related issues have already been discussed from a legal perspective. But while these legal discussions have remained predominantly selective, no one has recently and comprehensively focused on the interrelationship between internet-related developments and the development of constitutions, i.e. the political and legal frameworks of states and societies within states. This gap shall be closed step-by-step. By way of example, it will be discussed at the first stage how German constitutional case-law as a major instrument for keeping pace with changing social and technical conditions has responded to internet-related challenges to the German Constitution. Simultaneously, it will be illustrated how the Court’s jurisprudence has provided a framework within which the internet may operate and further develop. It will be shown that the Constitutional Court has managed to cope with the development of the internet. Nonetheless, its way of addressing internet-related challenges may provoke further criticism and questions. Hence, assessing the Court’s response will not be an end in itself but also provide the basis for further research on internet-related dynamics in constitutional law of various states.

Saldías, O.,  Patterns of Legalization in the Internet: Do We Need a Constitutional Theory for Internet Law?
(July 07, 2012). HIIG Discussion Paper Series No. 2012-08
The paper acknowledges a growing web of legal norms that regulate governance aspects of the Internet. Some of these norms are legally binding; others are closer to what some scholars call soft law. In order to take stock of these developments, I propose an explorative typology that can bring some systematic order into the plurality of Internet norms. Although my framework is not exhaustive, it already sheds some light into future challenges that we should expect. The prospective types that I provide are (a) positivation of soft law, whereby the latter enters the formalized procedures of statutory law; (b) legalization through complementarity, which refers to positive legal instruments belonging to cognate fields flanking the content of soft law; c) informal legalization, which is based on the reproduction, dissemination, and persuasiveness of legal discourses; d) conflicting legalization, a type that aims at highlighting the conflicts of laws that can arise due to the progressive legalization. The results reveal that different types of Internet norms also contain a considerable potential for mutual conflicts. Whenever this occurs, we will have to make some significant choices related to the prevalence of certain social goods over others. Since the Internet environment is not a democratic republic, we cannot resort to significant procedural rules that could ordinarily prescribe hierarchies. However, the results of my typology also seems to suggest that there is considerable room for ordering principles and values according to deliberative arrangements or public reasoning. Although research on Internet governance has provided valuable insights into actors, processes, and interests, the time seems right to focus on the proto-­‐‑legal order that is already in place. The normative question is already waiting for us: How should we deal with this nascent web of Internet laws? The paper claims that unless we shut down the Internet, we will have to engage in dialogue about the “c” word; “c” as in constitution.

Krcmar, H., Friesike, S., Bohm, M., Schildhauer, T.,  Innovation, Society and Business: Internet-Based Business Models and Their Implications
(June 27, 2012). HIIG Discussion Paper Series No. 2012-07
The term business model became popular with the rise of the Internet and electronic businesses as a means to explain how an organization works. With innovations also the way how customers interact with firms and thus with their products has changed, leading to a world, where companies compete on the basis of their business models. This is also reflected in the many facets of today’s business model, ranging from definitions and taxonomies to software supported business model design. This article gives an overview on business model research, discusses trends and suggests a research agenda of particularly interesting domains for future research.

Blind, K.,  The Internet as Enabler for New Forms of Innovation: New Challenges for Research
(October 25, 2011). HIIG Discussion Paper Series No. 2012-06
The paper analysis the role of the Internet for different types of innovation not only focusing on the traditional set of product, process, organizational and marketing innovation, but also extending to innovation in the public sector. In addition to the role of the Internet for various types of innovations, it has also implications for new forms of innovation, especially for the new paradigm of open innovation, which involves collaborative efforts of numerous partners often with a heterogeneous background. The Internet reduces geographical distance, but its moderating effect on other forms of ‘distance’ relevant for innovation success, like institutional, organizational, technological, and relational distance is also elaborated. Finally, the implications for innovation at the regional level are derived. The paper concludes with a set of research questions and an integrative approach to measure Internet-enabled innovation at the regional level.

Kreibich, R., Oertel, B., Wolk, M.,  Futures Studies and Future-Oriented Technology Analysis Principles, Methodology and Research Questions
(October 25, 2011). HIIG Discussion Paper Series No. 2012-05
Futures studies are the scientific study of possible, desirable, and probable future developments and scope for design, as well as the conditions for these in the past and in the present. Modern futures studies assume that the future is not entirely determinable and that different future developments (‘futures’) are possible and there is scope for design. They are based on the realization that there are indeed a great number of possible futures but that these are not arbitrary. The term ‘Future-oriented Technology Analysis’ refers to potent changes and challenges for futures studies at the interface of technological change with increasingly science-based innovation, attention to societal issues and concerns.

Futures Studies and Future-oriented Technology analysis are concerned with complex dynamic systems and processes and engage multiple stakeholders in participatory and interdisciplinary processes to assure distributed understanding and sustainable development.

The article discusses principles and context of Futures studies and Futures analyses methodology. It puts forward five core research lines to outline Futures studies contribution to addressing issues in the research area of Internet & Society.

Gassmann, O., Widenmayer, B., Friesike, S., Schildhauer, T.,  Opening Up Science: Towards an Agenda of Open Science in Industry and Academia
(October 25, 2011). HIIG Discussion Paper Series No. 2012-04
The shift towards open innovation has substantially changed the scientific and practical perception of corporate innovation. While scientific studies on open innovation are burgeoning, present research underlies a business-centric view that has focused on the back-end of the innovation process. The impact and implications of open innovation on academic and industrial science at the very front-end of the innovation process have so far been neglected. Our paper presents a conceptualization of open science and research as a peculiarity under the roof of open innovation. We propose four perspectives, outline current trends, and present directions for future developments.

Dobusch, L., The Digital Public Domain: Relevance and Regulation
(November 15, 2011). HIIG Discussion Paper Series No. 2012-02
This article advances a critical research approach to computational journalism. By “computational journalism” the article refers to the increasingly ubiquitous forms of algorithmic, social scientific, and mathematical forms of newswork adopted by many 21st century newsrooms and touted by many educational institutions as “the future of news.” By “critical approach,” the article endorses a research model that brackets, at least temporarily, many of the current industry concerns with the practical usability of newsroom analysis. The bulk of the article outlines a series of six lenses through which such a critical approach to computational journalism might be carried out. Four of these lenses are drawn from Schudson’s classic typology of the sociology of news — economic, political, cultural, and organizational approaches. In addition, the author adds Bordieuean field approaches and technological lenses to the mix. In each instance, the author discusses how particular approaches might need to be modified in order to study computational journalism in the digital age.

Anderson, C. W., Notes Towards an Analysis of Computational Journalism
(October 26, 2011). 
HIIG Discussion Paper Series No. 2012-01
This article advances a critical research approach to computational journalism. By “computational journalism” the article refers to the increasingly ubiquitous forms of algorithmic, social scientific, and mathematical forms of newswork adopted by many 21st century newsrooms and touted by many educational institutions as “the future of news.” By “critical approach,” the article endorses a research model that brackets, at least temporarily, many of the current industry concerns with the practical usability of newsroom analysis. The bulk of the article outlines a series of six lenses through which such a critical approach to computational journalism might be carried out. Four of these lenses are drawn from Schudson’s classic typology of the sociology of news — economic, political, cultural, and organizational approaches. In addition, the author adds Bordieuean field approaches and technological lenses to the mix. In each instance, the author discusses how particular approaches might need to be modified in order to study computational journalism in the digital age.