SHRINKING THE INTERNET Philip A. Wells* INTRODUCTION The Internet presents unique policing challenges, but these challenges share striking similarities with those in densely popu- lated cities. Both environments are staggering in scope and size, regularly exposing citizens to strangers, unconventional norms, and deviant behavior.1 And despite their frenetic environments, both foster feelings of remoteness and anonymity.2 This sentiment, in tandem with the scale of both the Internet and large cities, inhibits the growth of social norms: informal interactions that help commu- nities self-police and shame potential criminals.3 * Philip A. Wells is 2009 graduate of the New York University School of Law and can be reached via e-mail at
[email protected]. He hopes you don't use this contact information in furtherance of a cybercrime. 1 Compare LYN H. LOFLAND, A WORLD OF STRANGERS: ORDER AND ACTION IN URBAN PUBLIC SPACE, at ix–x (1973) (“To experience the city is, among many other things, to experience anonymity. To cope with the city is, among many other things, to cope with strangers.”) with Mattathias Schwartz, Malwebolence, N.Y. TIMES, Aug. 3, 2008, § MM (Magazine), at MM24 (exploring the malicious interaction between trolls and strangers on the internet). 2 Compare LOFLAND, supra note 1, at 10 (“This is hardly an earth-shaking observa- tion. Everyone knows that cities are ‘anonymous’ sorts of places.”) with George F. du Pont, The Criminalization of True Anonymity in Cyberspace, 7 MICH. TELECOMM. & TECH. L. REV. 191, 192 (2001) (“Anonymity . is easier to attain than ever before due to the recent emergence of cyberspace.”).