A methodology for internal Web ethics

The vigorous impact of the Web in time and space arises from the fact that it motivates massive creation, editing and distribution of information by Users with little knowledge. This unprecedented continuum provides novel opportunities for innovation but also puts under jeopardy its survival as a stable construct that nurtures a complex system of connections. We examine the Web as an ethics determined space by demonstrating Hayek’s theory of freedom in a three-leveled Web: technological, contextualized and economic. Our approach accounts for the co-dependence of code and values, and assumes that the Web is a self-contained system that exists in and by itself. This view of internal Web ethics directly connects the concept of freedom with issues like centralization of traffic and data control, rights on visiting log file, custom User profiles and the interplay among function, structure and morality of the Web. It is also demonstrated, in the case of Net Neutrality, that generic freedom-coercion trade-offs are incomplete in treating specific cases at work.

💡 Research Summary

The paper proposes a novel framework for understanding the Web as an internally governed ethical space, drawing on Friedrich Hayek’s theory of freedom and adapting it to three distinct layers: technological, contextual, and economic. At the technological layer, the authors argue that protocols and source code are not neutral tools but concrete embodiments of rules that simultaneously enable and constrain user behavior. This leads to the “code‑value interdependence” model, which posits that technical artifacts and normative values co‑evolve, making developers de facto ethicists whose design choices embed moral judgments directly into the infrastructure. The contextual layer examines the interaction between users and services, focusing on concrete mechanisms such as custom user profiles, access rights to server log files, and personalized content delivery. While these features enhance convenience and relevance, they also raise privacy concerns and create avenues for data monopolization, illustrating a nuanced trade‑off between individual freedom and systemic coercion. In the economic layer, the paper highlights the centralization of traffic and data as a structural threat to market competition and to the free flow of information. Centralized control can impose de‑facto gatekeeping, thereby curtailing the Hayekian notion of spontaneous order that the Web originally embodied.
To demonstrate the limits of generic freedom‑coercion analyses, the authors apply their three‑layer model to the Net Neutrality debate. They show that a simple dichotomy between “freedom” (unrestricted traffic) and “coercion” (traffic management) fails to capture the complex policy landscape where regulatory interventions aim to protect openness while network operators argue for efficient resource allocation. The paper suggests that internal ethical mechanisms—transparent traffic‑shaping protocols, user‑consent‑driven data policies, and open‑source governance structures—can reconcile these competing demands without relying on external legal mandates.
By treating the Web as a self‑contained system, the authors minimize the role of exogenous regulation and instead emphasize self‑adjusting internal processes that balance liberty with necessary constraints. This perspective reframes the conventional “regulation versus technology” binary, positioning code itself as a primary site of ethical decision‑making. The authors conclude that internal Web ethics offers a robust, adaptable framework for preserving both the freedom and the long‑term stability of the Web, suggesting that future research should focus on operationalizing code‑value interdependence and designing transparent, user‑centric governance models.