Public Law Regulation of Information Technologies in the European Union, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, the People's Republic of China and Russian Federation
( Pp. 46-53)
More about authors
Mikhail V. Vavilin
Cand. Sci. (Law), Scientific Supervisor, Assoc. Prof.; Moscow Innovation University, Assoc. Prof.; The Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration, Member of the Association of Lawyers of Russia; Member of the Expert Advisory Council, Junior Counselor of Justice
Federation Council Committee of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on Constitutional Legislation and State Building
Moscow, Russian Federation Dmitry I. Bashkin postgraduate student of the Department of Legal Disciplines, Head of the Security
ODK Engineering LLC; Moscow Innovation University
Moscow, Russian Federation; Moscow, Russian Federation
Federation Council Committee of the Federal Assembly of the Russian Federation on Constitutional Legislation and State Building
Moscow, Russian Federation Dmitry I. Bashkin postgraduate student of the Department of Legal Disciplines, Head of the Security
ODK Engineering LLC; Moscow Innovation University
Moscow, Russian Federation; Moscow, Russian Federation
Abstract:
Abstract: The purpose of this study is to analyze the legal regulation of information technology in the European Union, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, the People's Republic of China and Russian Federation. The study identified common and distinctive features of the regulation of legal relations in this area. Research methodology. The study utilized general scientific methods of analysis, synthesis, induction, and deduction, which allowed it to identify the characteristic features of the legal regulation models of information technology in the European Union, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the People's Republic of China.
A comparative legal study of international experience in the legal regulation of information technology allowed for the development of recommendations for improving the system of public administration of public relations in this area in the Russian Federation. Key Findings. The study identified key trends in the development of legal regulation of information technology in the jurisdictions reviewed. With regard to the Russian Federation, the obtained results can be used to further improve the functioning of information technology in Russian Federation.
A comparative legal study of international experience in the legal regulation of information technology allowed for the development of recommendations for improving the system of public administration of public relations in this area in the Russian Federation. Key Findings. The study identified key trends in the development of legal regulation of information technology in the jurisdictions reviewed. With regard to the Russian Federation, the obtained results can be used to further improve the functioning of information technology in Russian Federation.
How to Cite:
Vavilin, M.V., Bashkin, D.I. (2026). Public Law Regulation of Information Technologies in the European Union, the United Kingdom, the United States of America, the People's Republic of China and Russian Federation. Gaps in Russian Legislation, 19(2), 46-53. DOI: 10.33693/2072-3164-2026-19-2-46-53. EDN: BDDGGU
Reference list:
Van de Kaa G., Greeven M. Mobile telecommunication standardization in Japan, China, the United States, and Europe: a comparison of regulatory and industrial regimes // Telecommunication Systems. 2017. № 65(1). Pp. 181–192.
Lazzari A. The Protection of digital rights: A European identity issue // Cuadernos de derecho transnacional, Vol. 16. № 1. 2024. Pp. 295–318. DOI: 10.20318/cdt.2024.8425.
Lehr W., Kiessling T. 1999. Telecommunication Regulation in the United States and Europe: The Case for Centralized Authority. Pр. 1–25.
Verchenko A.L. Kitayskaya kontseptsiya soobshchestva edinoy sud by chelovechestva i diplomatiya pervogo litsa // Kitay v mirovoy i regional noy politike. Istoriya i sovremennost . T. 27. № 27. 2022. S. 71 83.EDN: LFWBGQ. DOI: 10.48647/IFES.2022.60.79.027.
Kirillovich YA.YA., Gulyaeva E.E. Implementatsiya norm mezhdunarodnogo prava, reguliruyushchikh oborot tsifrovykh valyut TSentral nykh bankov (CBDC): peredovoy opyt KNR// Vestnik uchenykh- mezhdunarodnikov. 2022. № 4 (22). S. 136 148.
Magdalinskaya YU.V. Zakon KNR o bezopasnosti dannykh: istoricheskikh fon i kratkiy analiz rezul tatov pravoprimenitel noy praktiki // Materialy XI Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno- prakticheskoy konferentsii. Gatchina. 2024. T. 8. № 3. C. 68 74.
Geller A. How Comprehensive Is Chinese Data Protection Law A Systematisation of Chinese Data Protection Law from a European Perspective // GRUR International. 2020. Vol. 69. Issue 12. Pp. 1191 1203.
Van de Kaa G., Greeven M. Mobile telecommunication standardization in Japan, China, the United States, and Europe: a comparison of regulatory and industrial regimes // Telecommunication Systems. 2017. № 65(1). Pp. 181 192.
Lazzari A. The Protection of digital rights: A European identity issue // Cuadernos de derecho transnacional, Vol. 16. № 1. 2024. Pp. 295 318. DOI: 10.20318/cdt.2024.8425.
Lehr W., Kiessling T. 1999. Telecommunication Regulation in the United States and Europe: The Case for Centralized Authority. Pr. 1 25.
Lazzari A. The Protection of digital rights: A European identity issue // Cuadernos de derecho transnacional, Vol. 16. № 1. 2024. Pp. 295–318. DOI: 10.20318/cdt.2024.8425.
Lehr W., Kiessling T. 1999. Telecommunication Regulation in the United States and Europe: The Case for Centralized Authority. Pр. 1–25.
Verchenko A.L. Kitayskaya kontseptsiya soobshchestva edinoy sud by chelovechestva i diplomatiya pervogo litsa // Kitay v mirovoy i regional noy politike. Istoriya i sovremennost . T. 27. № 27. 2022. S. 71 83.EDN: LFWBGQ. DOI: 10.48647/IFES.2022.60.79.027.
Kirillovich YA.YA., Gulyaeva E.E. Implementatsiya norm mezhdunarodnogo prava, reguliruyushchikh oborot tsifrovykh valyut TSentral nykh bankov (CBDC): peredovoy opyt KNR// Vestnik uchenykh- mezhdunarodnikov. 2022. № 4 (22). S. 136 148.
Magdalinskaya YU.V. Zakon KNR o bezopasnosti dannykh: istoricheskikh fon i kratkiy analiz rezul tatov pravoprimenitel noy praktiki // Materialy XI Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno- prakticheskoy konferentsii. Gatchina. 2024. T. 8. № 3. C. 68 74.
Geller A. How Comprehensive Is Chinese Data Protection Law A Systematisation of Chinese Data Protection Law from a European Perspective // GRUR International. 2020. Vol. 69. Issue 12. Pp. 1191 1203.
Van de Kaa G., Greeven M. Mobile telecommunication standardization in Japan, China, the United States, and Europe: a comparison of regulatory and industrial regimes // Telecommunication Systems. 2017. № 65(1). Pp. 181 192.
Lazzari A. The Protection of digital rights: A European identity issue // Cuadernos de derecho transnacional, Vol. 16. № 1. 2024. Pp. 295 318. DOI: 10.20318/cdt.2024.8425.
Lehr W., Kiessling T. 1999. Telecommunication Regulation in the United States and Europe: The Case for Centralized Authority. Pr. 1 25.
Keywords:
information technology, public law regulation, European Union, United States of America, People's Republic of China, Great Britain, Russian Federation, models of legal regulation of information technology.
