The need for cybercrime regulation on a global scale by the international law and cyber convention
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study highlights the necessity of controlling the issue of Cybercrime with International Law Principles and treaties, the legal foundation of international cybercrime legislation. The paper pursued normative behavior relying on the legislation of the European Union and countries outside of Europe. The implications of Cybercrime in cyberattack events establish a legal foundation for preventing and punishing cyber criminals wherever they occur. The perceived threats arising from cyberattack activities are grounded in known cyberattack behaviors and literature, underscoring the imminent nature of these threats. The Convention on Cybercrime, inaugurated in Budapest, Hungary, in November 2001, is recognized as a pivotal international agreement addressing Cybercrime and electronic evidence. The negotiation process included the Council of Europe, United States, Japan, Canada, and South African participants. Significantly, nations across Africa, the Americas, and the Asia/Pacific are harnessing this agreement to implement robust strategies against cybercrime. Cybercrime is a new area of international law, namely, International Criminal Law. The international community handles it because no convention has identified Cybercrime globally. It is urgent to govern Cybercrime globally, and statistics imply that the need to regulate Cybercrime under international criminal law is critical. The paper adopts a method designed to deeply understand the global legal structures related to cybercrime. The study employs a comprehensive approach, merging normative legal research to meticulously examine and interpret key legal documents such as the Budapest Convention, with a comparative legal analysis both within the European Union and globally. This analysis scrutinizes various jurisdictions, identifying best practices and discrepancies to inform a holistic understanding of cybercrime regulation. Policy analysis is conducted to critically assess existing strategies and propose innovative solutions, while technological insights are integrated to ensure legal frameworks are attuned to the rapidly evolving landscape of cyber threats. Involving a broad spectrum of stakeholders, including legal scholars and cybersecurity experts, the research offers a diverse perspective. This multifaceted approach aims to balance thorough legal scrutiny with actionable solutions, promoting robust and flexible strategies for international cybercrime regulation. The results of this comprehensive study underscore the urgent need for a global, unified legal response to combat cybercrime effectively. It concludes that the Budapest Convention marks a significant turning point, offering a foundation for international cooperation and legal harmonization in tackling cybercrimes. However, the rapid technological advancements and the evolving sophistication of cyber threats demand that this convention and other international legal instruments adapt and expand accordingly. The study highlights the importance of harmonizing legal definitions and practices across different jurisdictions, both in common law and civil law countries, cybercrime address the borderless nature of cybercrime. The necessity for enhanced collaboration between public and private sectors in cybercrime investigations is emphasized, alongside the importance of establishing ethical data collection and sharing standards.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".