Internet Bill Of Useless Rights Proposed
from the this-is-positively-useless dept
At the big UN conference on internet governance in Greece, some are now proposing that an online bill of rights be created that would go across nations to deal with some online-specific issues. Now, it's clear that there have been problems with local jurisdictions when it comes to global issues online. We've seen it happen in cases concerning whether or not an online publication is liable under any particular country's laws -- even if it's not published there. We've seen it cases like when Yahoo was declared a war criminal in France for actions taken on its US (not French) site. So, it may sound like an intriguing idea to come up with a plan that can reach across the different nations to come to an agreement... but in practice it's likely to amount to a lot of nothing. First of all, countries that don't like it simply won't pay attention to it. Or, they'll pretend that they do. Witness yesterday's outrageous claims that China has never censored the internet. And, of course, none of that will really matter since it's not like the UN has any real say over how these countries act anyway. However, more to the point, the suggestion for such a bill of rights seems to be put forth in the spirit of getting widespread consensus over the issues -- which basically means everything will be watered down to the point of uselessness anyway. Specifically, someone who supports the idea discusses the obvious question of how you deal with a country like China that wants to censor the internet, and the response is: "There are some countries that don't respect free speech and privacy rights - and don't want to. How can we involve them?" In other words, how can we water down this bill of rights so that anyone can keep doing what they're already doing.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Simple...
In other words, how can we water down this bill of rights so that anyone can keep doing what they're already doing.
You can't.
And another problem would your more promient nations would try to get such a bill of rights written soley to their advantage. I don't see this going very far since it would take the large majority of the world to agree on it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Our (USA) government has just done exactly that, so we would likely sign on.
Oh by the way:
If they are in office vote them out - every time. ONCE AND DONE!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
A more inportant document didn't make change why w
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Good people need to stay in office
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is a good idea, it may not work, but it’s a start and creates a basic legal structure on which countries to base more sensible governance on
Although this needs to be extended to patent and intellectual property, the real legal issues in the digital globalised landscape.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Glad you guys weren't around in 1787...
So why is the Internet different? We see issues like net neutrality, and identity theft, and access networks which block competitor's services. These are real threats to the freedom we currently enjoy, and it will only get worse as governments develope futher techniques to monitor and control the network.
Wether the IBoR has teeth or not isn't as important as setting an expectation. Here is a list of rights I can think of, and I am sure very few of these are controversial...
- We, the users, own our identities via property rights, and they cannot be destroyed, created, sold, or published, or otherwise used unless we direct that activity ourselves.
- We, the users, have a right to use encryption and other privacy technologies end-to-end.
- We, the users, have a right for local Search-and-seizure and wiretap laws to apply to electronic data and communication.
- We, the users, have a right to change our service contracts and keep our identities.
- We, the users, have a right to participate thru consumption or provision of services and content.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
No way.
- We, the users, own our identities via property rights, and they cannot be destroyed, created, sold, or published, or otherwise used unless we direct that activity ourselves.
The US would never go with that. This would take away the ability of the governement and big business to sale and collect info on us behind our backs. It would pretty much make the whole "big brother" thing alot more difficult and why would they support anything that weakens their ability to monitor us and protects our rights?
[ link to this | view in thread ]