Axel Pawlik, managing director of the Ripe NCC, writes about regulation on the net. He considers that ISPs should not take an active role in regulation, notably in relation to piracy. THey should be treated like telecom companies which list calls and that's all.
The article is definitely not a cybercrime perspective as such: there is piracy, but I think the issue of piracy is first of all an issue about what we want with copyrights; domain names attribution is looked at and again there is no incidence in criminal law for that.
However there is an interesting parallel with telephone companies when it comes to surveillance. We all know that surveillance of contents on phone conversation requires preliminary investigation: governments are not allowed to wiretap telephone conversations just to find out about illegal contents (or let's put it that way: in democracies, they are not supposed to do random wiretapping without warrant). Why should the net be treated different? Apart from the non feasibility of spying on all contents, it's nothing different and privacy is key.
Politicians should stay out of internet policing (ZDnet.co.uk, 22 July 2009)
which is obviously not what the UK Government does as it poured 10 millions pounds on monitoring.
"Gov't boosts spending on web monitoring" (ZDnet.co.uk, 13 July 2009)
whereas in France, Mr. Alain Bravo for the Assemblee Nationale (Parliament), published his report on security and digital economy to explain six scenarios, from no control apart from big firms' to too much control... http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/13/rap-info/i1670.asp