Technical Legality: Law, Technology and Science Fiction Author Tranter, Kieran Published 2010 Thesis Type Thesis (PhD Doctorate) School Griffith Law School DOI https://doi.org/10.25904/1912/2422 Copyright Statement The author owns the copyright in this thesis, unless stated otherwise. Downloaded from http://hdl.handle.net/10072/366905 Griffith Research Online https://research-repository.griffith.edu.au Technical Legality: Law, Technology and Science Fiction Kieran Tranter Bachelor of Science (Griffith University) Bachelor of Laws (Hon 1) (Griffith University) Socio-Legal Research Centre, Griffith Law School, Griffith University, Queensland Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 11 May 2010 i For Sophia and Alexander ii Abstract This thesis concerns the intersections of law and technology, referred to here as ‘technical legality’. It argues that reflection on technical legality reveals the mythic of modernity. The starting point for the argument is that the orthodox framing of technology by law – the ‘law and technology enterprise’ – does not comprehend its own speculative jurisdiction – that is, it fails to realise its oracle orientation towards imagining the future. In this science fiction as the modern West’s mythform, as the repository for projections of technological futures, is recognised as both the law and technology enterprise’s wellspring and cipher. What is offered in this thesis is a more thorough exploration of technical legality through taking science fiction seriously. This seriousness results in two implications for the understanding of technical legality. The first implication is that the anxieties and fantasies that animate the calling forth of law by technology become clearer. Science fiction operates as a window into the cultural milieu that frames law-making moments. In locating law-making events – specifically the making of the Prohibition of Human Cloning Act 2002 (Cth) and the Motor Car Act 1909 (Vic) – with the clone ‘canon’ in science fiction (specifically Star Trek: Nemesis (2002)) and H.G. Wells’ scientific romances, what is offered is a much richer understanding of how the cultural framing of technology becomes law than that provided by the ‘pragmatic’ positivism of the law and technology enterprise. The second implication arises from the excess that appears at the margins of the richer analyses. Exploring technical legality through science fiction does not remain within the epistemological frame. Each of the analyses gestures towards something essential about technical legality. The law and technology enterprise is grounded on the modern myth, which is also the myth of modernity – Frankenstein. It tells a story of monstrous technology, vulnerable humanity and saving law. The analyses of the Prohibition of Human Cloning Act 2002 (Cth) and the Motor Car Act 1909 (Vic) show that this narrative is terrorised, that the saving law turns out to be the monster in disguise; that the law called forth by technology is in itself technological. In extended readings of two critically acclaimed science fictions, Frank Herbert’s Dune cycle (1965–83) and the recent television series Battlestar Galactica (2003–10), the essential commitments of technological law are exposed. Dune as technical legality makes clear that technological law is truly monstrous, for behind its positivism and sovereignty its essence is with the alchemy of death and time. Battlestar Galactica as technical legality reduces further the alchemical properties of technical law. Battlestar Galactica moves the metaphysical highlight to the essence of technology and very nearly ends with Heidegger’s demise of Being in ‘Enframing’: monstrous technology and monstrous law reveal a humanity that cannot be saved. However, at the very moment of this fall, Battlestar Galactica collapses the metaphysical frame, affirming technological Being-in-the-world over empty ordering, life over death. This free responsibility to becoming that emerges from Battlestar Galactica reunites technical legality with the mythic of modernity. The modern denial of myth, which allowed Frankenstein to narrate technical legality, has been challenged. Free responsibility to becoming means a confidence with myths; it clears the way for the telling of new stories about law and technology. iv Declaration of Originality This work has not previously been submitted for a degree or diploma in any university. To the best of my knowledge and belief, the thesis contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made in the thesis itself. Kieran Tranter 11 May 2010 v vi Contents Abstract................................................................................................................. iii Declaration of Originality .................................................................................... v Acknowledgments ................................................................................................. x 1 Technical Legality.............................................................................................. 1 1. Technical Legality and the Mythic of Modernity 1 Argument and Motifs...............................................................................................................8 Chapter Summaries................................................................................................................13 2. Science Fiction as Law and Culture 18 From Law and Literature to Law and Culture .......................................................................18 The Laws of Science Fiction .................................................................................................26 Stage I: The Law of Technology ........................................................................ 37 2 The Law and Technology Enterprise............................................................. 39 1. Lawyers on Technology 40 2. Fifty Years of the Law and Technology Enterprise 45 Sputnik...................................................................................................................................45 In Vitro Fertilisation ..............................................................................................................56 Virtual Worlds .......................................................................................................................70 3. The Occupation of Technical Legality 90 3 Speculative Jurisdiction and Mythform ........................................................ 97 1. Speculative Jurisdiction 98 Science Fiction Texts...........................................................................................................100 Science Fiction Images, Narratives and Tropes...................................................................104 Science Fiction as Meta-Emblem ........................................................................................113 2. Western Mythform 115 Science Fiction as Western Mythform.................................................................................116 Taking Science Fiction Seriously ........................................................................................130 Stage II: Law and Technology Cultures ......................................................... 135 4 Clone Hysteria and Star Trek: Nemesis........................................................ 137 1. Clone Hysteria in Australia 138 Public Culture of Clone Hysteria 1997–2002......................................................................139 Australian Law and Cloning Scholarship and the Clone Canon..........................................158 2. Anxieties of Cloning in Star Trek: Nemesis 170 Star Trek: Nemesis ..............................................................................................................170 Clone as Double...................................................................................................................173 Clone as Artefact .................................................................................................................178 Essence ................................................................................................................................183 3. Monstrous Shadows 187 2006 Amendments...............................................................................................................188 Law as Technology..............................................................................................................195 vii 5 Motor Cars and Progressive Modernism 201 1. ‘The History of the Haste-Wagons’ 203 Motor Cars 1897–1914........................................................................................................203 Motor Car Act 1909 (Vic) ...................................................................................................210 2. Explaining the Dissociation 220 Class and the Parliamentary Debates...................................................................................221 United Kingdom Template ..................................................................................................229 Lobbying by the Automobile Club of Victoria....................................................................232 3. Progressive Modernism 237 Future and Rationalism in H.G. Wells’ Scientific Romances..............................................237 Legislating for the Future ....................................................................................................246