Announcing The Declaration Of Internet Freedom

from the join-the-discussion dept

Mon, Jul 2nd 2012 3:05am — Mike Masnick

A whole bunch of organizations and individuals are getting together today to launch the beginning of a process, the creation of an Internet Declaration of Freedom. We've seen how the internet has been under attack from various directions, and we recognize that it's time to make that stop. The internet is an incredible platform that we want to grow and to thrive, and thus, a very large coalition got together to produce the following document as a starting point, hoping to kick off a much larger discussion which we hope you'll join in.

We've set up our own Step2 discussion page where you can vote on the principles, discuss them, add your own ideas... whatever you'd like. You can, of course, also discuss them below in the comments. There are a number of other organizations setting up pages as well. The folks at Free Press have put up a Declaration of Internet Freedom site that lists out many of the organizations and individuals who were involved in putting this together and who are supporting the effort. There's also a subreddit and a Cheezburger page. Lots of other groups have set up action pages where you can take part as well, including EFF, Access and Free Press.

We believe that a free and open Internet can bring about a better world. But to keep the Internet free and open, we must promote these principles in every country, every industry and every community. And we believe that these freedoms will bring about more creativity, more innovation and a better society.

We are joining an international movement to defend our freedoms because we believe that they are worth fighting for.

Let’s discuss these principles — agree or disagree with them, debate them, translate them, make them your own and broaden the discussion with your community — as only the Internet can make possible.

Join us in keeping the Internet free and open.

Embed This:

In case you can't read the graphic, here's the text version:

Declaration of Internet Freedom We stand for a free and open Internet.

We support transparent and participatory processes for making Internet policy and the establishment of five basic principles:

Expression: Don't censor the Internet.

Access: Promote universal access to fast and affordable networks.

Openness: Keep the Internet an open network where everyone is free to connect, communicate, write, read, watch, speak, listen, learn, create and innovate.

Innovation: Protect the freedom to innovate and create without permission. Don’t block new technologies, and don’t punish innovators for their users' actions.

Privacy: Protect privacy and defend everyone’s ability to control how their data and devices are used.

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

Filed Under: access, declaration, free speech, freedom, innovation, internet, internet declaration of freedom, openness, privacy

139 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Alana (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 2:27am

Hell yeah.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- E. Steyns | 10COM, 2 Jul 2012 @ 8:33am
  
  Re: Hell yeah to what?
  Who is 'we'?
  What are 'we' demanding?
  Who are we demanding it from?
  Who is drawing the text?
  etc.
  
  The wordings 'Freedom Declaration' remind of famous and brave citizens' centered actions to gain (more) democratic rights.
  
  But what exactly is the above text?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 3:30am

100% yes

however, i wonder how long before the entertainment industries issue a cease and desist/take down notice? one of them, surely, is bound to try to claim the copyright on it!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 3:34am

So, it says "Privacy: Protect privacy and defend everyone�s ability to control how their data and devices are used."

I like the idea, so I click the up-arrow, and it says "Please log in or register to vote."

No thanks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- trollificus (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 3:59am
  
  Re:
  Well, anonymous, your best action towards achieving perfect online anonymity is "don't go online". Alternatively, you might take a minute to consider the difference between "privacy" and "anonymity".
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward of Esteemed Trolling (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 5:42am
    
    they are more connected.... than at first glance
    ahhh...The difference between "not knowing who you are" and "not knowing what you do".
    Both require spying on you, but why would your identity be wanted for no reason, surely it is because of "knowledge of what you do" ?
    Sometimes the ID they want, could just be your age range, it could be your sex, it could be type of interests you have, it may be your location or even your full details.
    
    The two are highly related, that's why most sites are obliged to ONLY collect anonymous data of user habits, but they still end up with an ID of you, based on details that just happen to be, not personally identifiable on the surface.
    
    Excuse for not signing up or just too Lazy ?
    
    As for....OP not signing up, it can be rightly argued that giving your personal details out, is a privacy issue.
    BUT, who would give out their real info ?
    I just think it is laziness.... couldn't be bothered..
    guerrillamail for a temp email address.
    Make up a name, password etc...
    TOR when signing up
    
    Laziness, it has to be. He can still sign up and keep relative privacy and anonymity
    
    BTW... when I say anonymity, I do not mean ALL your personal details, ip / home address / bank account balance etc...
    Your personal details can be..... the types of fonts your browser uses, the sites you visit, the comments you post, your preferences in food etc..
    
    It is the level of privacy that states your level of anonymity
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - arcan, 2 Jul 2012 @ 7:17am
      
      Re: they are more connected.... than at first glance
      i just want to know how to sign up as an individual who only represents himself...
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward of Esteemed Trolling (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 8:39am
        
        aka...an advanced lie
        If you lie, they will send the internet police after you.
        You may end up in prison for over 100 years.
        
        So... to be Legit !
        
        1) Setup a "shell organization".(a non profit unregistered organization)
        
        2) Create email account for your "shell organization"
        
        3) ?????
        
        4) Profit!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Blatant Coward (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 5:12am
  
  I don't think you get it.
  The purpose of signing is to show your support and approval as a person.
  
  If privacy is your main concern, yet you want to show approval, take one of your hands (either will do) make a fist, and extend your thumb upwards. When you feel your opinion matches your shown enthusiasm, then allow your hand to relax to do whatever you normally do with it.
  
  An audible statement such as 'Good deal' or 'That's fine by me.' is an excellent way to amplify your expression of approval. For extra privacy your audible statement should of course be coded, such as 'The blue chair is by the door.' or "�Atenci�n!".
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 8:36pm
    
    I got it just fine.
    "If privacy is your main concern, yet you want to show approval, take one of your hands (either will do) make a fist, and extend your thumb upwards."
    
    Or alternatively, I could go to the comments page on Techdirt and write exactly what I wrote. Of the two, which do you suppose would be more effective communication?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Nick Dynice (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 9:12am
  
  Re:
  It is a public declaration. An anonymous declaration is meaningless. If you do not wish to publicly declare your support of privacy then you don't believe that strongly anyway. By publicly declaring you support privacy does not mean you give up privacy in other forums. But you are probably just one of the regular AC troll anyway.
  
  "I publicly declare a right to privacy!" said the AC. No, your doing it wrong.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 3:51am

"Privacy: Protect privacy and defend everyone�s ability to control how their data and devices are used."

Yet, to sign the declaration you must give your first and last name, e mail address, organisation and position. How is that protecting privacy?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 3:57am
  
  Re:
  Also, you only have to visit Techdirt with Ghostery on and you will see just how many services are tracking you. You may want to practice what you preach, Techdirt.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - The eejit (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 4:17am
    
    Re: Re:
    Uhh, half of those are not TD things. Like Facbook Connect. Or Google Analytics. They must clkearly be profiting from piracy! OR is that privacy?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Richard (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 7:18am
    
    Re: Re: Tacking sites on TechDirt
    According to the collusion add-on for Chrome, these are the sites that seem to be tracking here:
    
    When you visit this site, the following sites are informed:
    
    googleapis.com
    google.com
    facebook.net
    flattr.com
    google-analytics.com
    reddit.com
    adtechus.com
    twitter.com
    wibiya.com
    reinvigorate.net
    scorecardresearch.com
    quantserve.com
    fac ebook.com
    gravatar.com
    feedburner.com
    fbcdn.net
    chartbeat.com
    amung.us
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Chargone (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 8:36am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Tacking sites on TechDirt
      let's see... gravatar's the user avatars, facebook, twitter, google, reddit, and probably a couple of others i'm missing are those 'share' widgits...
      
      facebook with a space? fac ebook? what?
      
      so those are ... reasonably reasonable.
      
      the rest? who knows...
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 1:38pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Tacking sites on TechDirt
      Look at all that Google spying.
      
      What a shocker.
      
      Not.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Karl (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 1:43pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Tacking sites on TechDirt
      When you visit this site, the following sites are informed:
      
      FYI, all of these things are necessary for the Wibiya Toolbar to work properly.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - STStone, 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:56pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Tacking sites on TechDirt
        Then we should keep blocking them? Because I can't think of a single website that the Wibiya Toolbar (or any other similar service) has improved.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 7:27am
    
    Re: Re:
    I use many add-ons to prevent tracking but, I really like Do Not Track -
    http://www.abine.com/dntdetail.php
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - dataGuy, 2 Jul 2012 @ 8:51am
    
    Re: Re:
    Thanks for the tip on Ghostery. I wasn't familiar with that product but I'm trying it out now....
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - weneedhelp (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 9:37am
    
    Re: Re: Ghostery
    Thanks also.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - SailingCyclops (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 9:39am
    
    Re: Tracking
    Governments are incapable and corporations are unwilling to provide any online privacy. So, you have to take personal responsibility for your own privacy. Like most everything else in life if you want it done right do it yourself!
    
    Do Not Track Plus Blocking tracking @ techdirt.com
    
    5 companies tracking you:
    5 blocked
    Google Analytics
    Wiblya
    Comscore Beacon
    Quantcast
    ChartBeat
    
    1 ad network tracking you:
    1 blocked
    Quantcast
    
    Tracking blockers, Judicious cookie controls, plus the use of an off-shore VPN, keeps my systems PRIVATE. I see little hope for any regulations or "declarations" replacing what each of us can do for ourselves. In today's climate of rapacious capitalism, where money sets the paradigm and writes the laws, looking to corporations or to governments is simply a waste of time, and will only lull you into a false sense of security.
    
    If you don't like to be tracked, don't allow it!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jim Harper (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 3:58am

I got yer 'Declaration of Internet Freedom'
I like this Declaration of Internet Freedom better. But the one I really like is the Bill of Rights. With gems like "Congress shall make no law," and, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated," I think the original Declaration of Internet Freedom is the bees knees.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike Masnick (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 4:25am
  
  Re: I got yer 'Declaration of Internet Freedom'
  I like this Declaration of Internet Freedom better. But the one I really like is the Bill of Rights. With gems like "Congress shall make no law," and, "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated," I think the original Declaration of Internet Freedom is the bees knees.
  
  Hey... finally something Jim and I disagree on. :)
  
  I actually think something like this is important for a few reasons. First, this is a global effort, not just US-based. The Bill of Rights you point to only applies to the US. Second, even with that Bill of Rights, Congress (and other governments) seem to want to treat the internet as something different. I think it's important to speak out loudly and clearly about what internet freedom means.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 4:55am
    
    Re: Re: I got yer 'Declaration of Internet Freedom'
    "finally something jim and I disagree on"
    
    It's an internet miracle!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 5:04am
      
      Re: Re: Re: I got yer 'Declaration of Internet Freedom'
      Well, Bob's already got the airing of grievances covered so now it's time for for the feats of strength...
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 5:23am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: I got yer 'Declaration of Internet Freedom'
        That's festivas, this is internet.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        weneedhelp (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 9:11am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I got yer 'Declaration of Internet Freedom'
        A Festivas for the rest of us.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - lucidrenegade (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 9:16am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: I got yer 'Declaration of Internet Freedom'
        How about "feats of stupidity" instead? Bob wins that one too.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - drew (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 7:21am
      
      Re: Re: Re: I got yer 'Declaration of Internet Freedom'
      * ahem *
      It's a miracle - on the internet (patent pending)
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 8:51am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: I got yer 'Declaration of Internet Freedom'
        Prior art beioch
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Jim Harper (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 5:10pm
    
    Re: Re: I got yer 'Declaration of Internet Freedom'
    Don't get too excited, folks. The Jim-Mike Schism is very likely to end if and when the actual meanings of the things said in this declaration translate to actual policy proposals.
    
    It's question-begging to say of the declaration that it's important to speak out about what Internet freedom means. People know no more about what Internet freedom means after reading this document than before.
    
    I view it as an attempt to reset who the authorities on Internet freedom are, from folks like the Framers of the U.S. Constitution, who produced a special and timeless plan for freedom in the U.S. (and worldwide, if others will have it) to a group of today's popular activists and thinkers. No, thanks!
    
    I really like what is in the founding charter of the U.S., even though I'm deeply dissatisfied with (and working daily on) its implementation in certain areas, such as its translation so far into the modern communications environment.
    
    In the meantime, I've enjoyed this very special airing of grievances!
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- kp, 2 Jul 2012 @ 11:11am
  
  Re: I got yer 'Declaration of Internet Freedom'
  This kind of applies to people outside of the US aswell. We don't live by your Bill of rights.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 2:47pm
    
    Re: Re: I got yer 'Declaration of Internet Freedom'
    The U.S. doesn't live by its bill of rights either.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 2:45pm
  
  Re: I got yer 'Declaration of Internet Freedom'
  Yep, it'll work every bit as well as the U.S. constitution has.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 3:59am

I agree with most of this but I have one question.

"Access: Promote universal access to fast and affordable networks."

What does this entitle? Will this universal access come about by having governments raise taxes or force companies to bring broadband into markets or areas that are not profitable for them?

It is not right to promote one freedom (internet access) by taking away another (economic choice).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- E. Zachary Knight (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 5:14am
  
  Re:
  I think it could come from a variety of sources. For one, we can stop paying out the funds from the Universal Service Fund to companies that are unwilling to service rural areas like they are supposed to. Take that money and actually fund a rural broadband company or preferably more.
  
  Or we could end the monopoly privileges of current ISPs and work toward brig real choice to places like my home city that has one DSL provider and nothing else.
  
  That is a start.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Richard (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 5:31am
  
  Re:
  What does this entitle? Will this universal access come about by having governments raise taxes or force companies to bring broadband into markets or areas that are not profitable for them?
  
  It is not right to promote one freedom (internet access) by taking away another (economic choice).
  
  You are wrong here. All social organisation removes some freedoms in order to preserve others. Without such tradeoffs there is no civilisation.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:24am
  
  Re:
  Well, I think what is meant by universal access is to be protected is the right to have internet access and thereby a refusal of three strikes and other chord-cutting schemes. Affordable is a lot harder to decipher.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Smoodle, 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:47am
    
    Re: Re:
    According to the PDF keynote last month,
    
    Senator Ron Wyden
    and
    Congressman Darrell Issa
    
    They seemed quite sincere to me.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Smoodle (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:48am
    
    Re: Re:
    According to the PDF keynote last month,
    
    Senator Ron Wyden
    and
    Congressman Darrell Issa
    
    They seemed quite sincere to me.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 7:11am
    
    Re: Re:
    Affordable is not that hard. Let the appropriate agencies know that competition is 15-25, not 1 or 3. And that means 15-25 Cable AND 15-25 DSL AND 15-25 Fiber, etc. Make the central boxes open to any provider and have them contribute to maintaining the the rest of the infrastructure as a public utility.
    
    One could argue my choice of 15-25 but I know that 1 or 3 does not work.
    
    This should apply to other areas as well, like mobile phones, Newspaper conglomerates, TV channel ownership, Radio channel ownership, etc.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Chargone (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 8:41am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      three's fine if you don't give them any particular protections and bring the hammer down on them if they start with the collusion and price fixing and such.
      
      provided that's three Small entities and you're talking per town/city, not per state/country. (and even then, i'd expect each and every one of those three to operate in other towns as well as that one, and have a Different set of competitors in those towns.)
      
      it's a matter of scale too, ya know?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Richard (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 10:12am
  
  Re:
  What does this entitle? Will this universal access come about by having governments raise taxes or force companies to bring broadband into markets or areas that are not profitable for them?
  
  Roads are provided at public expense - so it seems reasonable that wherever roads are provided so should broadband be. Broadband is probably cheaper!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward of Esteemed Trolling (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 4:00am

OT. but relevant.
"In case you can't read the graphic, here's the text version: "
I can not tell you how much I approve of this text. (I have met some really cool blind people online)
Inclusion for visually impaired people is completely neglected by the majority IRL, on the web we have the ability and tech to work around it, but a shame exists, it is not done enough.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 4:19am
  
  Re:
  It is also great for when you are reading on your phone, with images disabled to avoid hitting your bandwidth limit.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Infamous Joe (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 4:06am

Education
From reading the few comments so far, it seems we need a good old fashioned education campaign on the difference between privacy and anonymity. Sheesh.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Sarah Black (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 4:14am
  
  Re: Education
  Similar to this one?
  http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110524/00084614407/privacy-is-not-secrecy-debunking-if-youv e-got-nothing-to-hide-argument.shtml
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - The Infamous Joe (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 5:07am
    
    Re: Re: Education
    No, absolutely nothing like that.
    
    //I'll shut up now.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward of Esteemed Trolling (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:16am
  
  Education (but they have nothing to hide)
  I approve this !
  
  After putting your comment through my patented translation software
  I also read your comment as.....
  "please post a relevant video of Jacob Appelbaum (Tor)" amirite?
  
  So here I go again.....
  
  Linux.conf.au 2012 - Ballarat 2012
  Keynote Presentation - Jacob Appelbaum
  Runtime: 1hour 17minutes
  www.youtube.com/watch?v=GMN2360LM_U
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:47am
  
  Re: Education
  Being anonymous is just one way to protect your privacy.
  They may be different but they can be used together.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Zakida Paul (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 4:15am

Question
I went to the declaration site and wanted to sign it but Organisation is a required field. Why? I am not part of an organisation so I can't sign.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- The eejit (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 4:19am
  
  Re: Question
  The Public?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Zakida Paul (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 4:23am
    
    Re: Re: Question
    Good point, I shall put The Public as Organisation and Concerned Citizen as Position :)
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Michael Whitetail, 2 Jul 2012 @ 4:21am
  
  Re: Question
  We are Anonymous. We are Legion. should fit in the field just fine
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike Masnick (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 4:23am
  
  Re: Question
  I went to the declaration site and wanted to sign it but Organisation is a required field. Why? I am not part of an organisation so I can't sign.
  
  The Free Press site is only for signing up organizations. Other sites will allow you to sign as individuals... There isn't just one site at this point -- but lots of sites taking part.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Haywood (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 7:03am
    
    Re: Re: Question
    Flying the flag of the insight community, I'm surprised it is behind a reregistration wall.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Hephaestus (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 5:40am
  
  Re: Question
  If you have a blog enter that in the organization field. After all we are all citizen reporters now.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Nick Dynice (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 9:18am
  
  Re: Question
  Go back and read this part:
  
  SIGN THE DECLARATION
  
  Individuals: Go to the action pages at Access, CREDO, EFF and Free Press to add your name.
  
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Seegras (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 4:40am

I just know what some politicians will say...
This is just about so generic that every would-be censor, every internet-surveillance-perpetrator, every patent-fanboi can yell "Hell yeah" and still do the opposite.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Danny, 2 Jul 2012 @ 5:02am

Not quite Right?
Privacy: Protect privacy and defend everyone�s ability to control how their data and devices are used.

I'm sure some corporations out there will interpret 'their' incorrectly. For example I bet they believe that you can't use one of 'their' devices that you've purchased unless it's used 'their' way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 7:21am
  
  Re: Not quite Right?
  Yes, we do need to clarify if a sale is a sale or the down payment (or even full payment) on a rental. The easiest way to do this, in my mind, is to end the EULA's. Anytime the seller retains rights after the sale there is a problem created. This is creating in their minds (the manufacturers or creators) the right to control after the fact of the sale. This I believe is wrong, wrong, wrong.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Keii (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 5:06am

This got me thinking that the internet is evolving into its own country.
And THAT got me thinking of why the MPAA/RIAA and other "AA"s are so angry at Google. They can't comprehend that such a big and successful thing has no gatekeeper for them to bribe.
But Google is right there, giving you everything you need! Surely they must be the gatekeepers of the internet! But they don't play fair (accept bribes) so that makes the AAs upset. So they seem to be doing everything in their power to declare war against the internet.
Perhaps it's time for the internet to declare itself a sovereignty? (not sure if that's the correct usage/word)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 5:18am
  
  Re:
  to Keii
  
  why do you think that Congress, at least certain members of it, are constantly condemning Google? i obviously dont know, but i doubt if there is too much in the way of 'encouragement' from Google to politicians, unlike from the entertainment industries. but then consider that a good number of the execs are ex politicians, so what do you expect?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Hephaestus (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:06am
    
    Re: Re: How to heard cats.
    In the past the entertainment industry and congress had a single entity or small group of corporations to deal with. It made it easy to make deals, put pressure, and keep things under their control.
    
    Now they have this amorphous mass of 2 billion people they can not even begin to understand or control. It lacks form, has limited to no organization, and congeals into the shape of a rabid dog when poked at or for no reason at all. Like may things that can not be understood or comprehended the content types and politicians try to ignore it and place blame else where. They rationalize that since Google is the portal to the internet, they must control what is happening online.
    
    They fail to realize they are dealing with the public at large. Which is why ever effort directed at a specific corporation like Google will fail, and all attempts at keeping the public at large out of the discussion will cause greater backlash.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - The Spork (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:55am
      
      Re: Re: Re: How to heard cats.
      I agree with parent. the MAFIAA expect everyone except themselves to pay for the enforcement of their copyrights. When the public lashes out because they try to pass SOPA-style laws, they *(MAFIAA) blame "Google" when in actuality, they should be blaming THEMSELVES.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 7:41am
  
  Re:
  I have no idea how declaring the Internet a sovereign nation could/would work, but if that day ever comes, I'm changing my citizenship that same day.
  
  - (current U.S. citizen)
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Chargone (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 8:45am
    
    Re: Re:
    ehhh... there's that pesky 'physical location' aspect that means you'd always be under someone else as Well, and they'd use a lack of citizen ship to make that all sorts of suck, a lot of the time.
    
    but then, this is what the idea of dual citizenship is for.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dreddsnik, 2 Jul 2012 @ 5:39am

One speed for all.

Yes, I know, Bandwidth isn't exactly 'speed' But that's how the Lay understand it. No one should be throttled in favor of another. I'm looking at the cable companies that are starting their own streaming services.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mr. Oizo, 2 Jul 2012 @ 5:54am

What a list of hollow words
Hello, this is a list of hollow words. No cooperation will ever be 'against' this. It will always be called differently. Hollywood doesn't censor things because it 'owns' them. The state doesn't violate your privacy because you can't prove it. etcetera.

The 2 things that what would make this pamflet much more interesting are:

a- we are against software patents (let's see how many of the big companies still sign it) because they are incompatible with an open internet
b- we are against restrictions on computation.

That would make the bill worthwhile, otherwise it is a waste of time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:00am

text versions
Instead of putting text versions of graphics with in import text under the graphic the way you always do alt text (alt="[text without brackets]") into the images HTML tag that will people with text-to-speech software and text-only browser (or normal browser with images disable) and also by people hoovering or the image with their or looking at the images proprieties.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
E. Steyns, 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:01am

Who is 'we' ?
"don�t punish innovators for their users' actions." states the text above.

Is this phrase aiming at attempts from several governments, to held companies like Google or Facebook accountable for content they're publishing on their platforms, and earning money with?

Can someone make transparent who is 'we' in this text?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:04am

It's nice that Techdirt wants to pledge to follow these principles, but Ghostery is still reporting about 10 trackers on this site. So much for privacy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Marcel de Jong (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:23am
  
  Re:
  Are you the same troll as this one?
  http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20120701/22394419546/announcing-declaration-internet-freedom. shtml#c86
  
  The things tracking you are the ads on the website. It's not Techdirt doing it by themselves, nor is that isolated to Techdirt.
  
  Do you ever use Google? You do know that it keeps track of your search history? So much for privacy there.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Keii (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:48am
    
    Re: Re:
    This is sometimes annoying like if I go to search for "Hotels" and it auto-populates "Hot Nude Asian Girls"
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward of Esteemed Trolling (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 8:20am
      
      How to cope being a pervert : )
      
      --------DO NOT PANiC------
      
      --------Clear History--------
      
      ---------Clear Cache---------
      
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 10:56am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Off topic fun project:
      
      1)Go to google
      2)turn off safe search
      3) Search: Americans
      4) Search: Europeans
      5) Search: Australians
      6) Search: Africans
      7) Search: Asians
      
      Step 7 = NSFW
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:59am
    
    Re: Re:
    Techdirt and others have the option of having advertisers that don't track you.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Gwiz (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 7:38am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Techdirt and others have the option of having advertisers that don't track you.
      
      And I have the option of running NoScript or Ad Blocker or whatever and opting out.
      
      If this was something done by Techdirt everywhere I surfed at anytime you might have some sort of point. Otherwise, not so much.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 12:10pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I shouldn't have to do anything.But I do.
        My point is that it shows a disregard for the privacy of it's users.
        If I walk into Target I don't have to provide them with information about where I have been...If I go to target.com,they want to track me and if I have that disabled on my browser I can't go to their website,so I go to the competitors.
        Of course you will say that I have a choice and therefore it's OK to not respect my privacy.
        
        Mike is all about reaching out and connecting with his readers and looking for alternate revenue streams.Well?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward of Esteemed Trolling (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 8:27am
      
      I don't see where they exist.
      
      Even a "referral ID" ad, will collect stats on the page where the user came from and track that user so as combat fraud, where a user keeps clicking the same links overe and over again to fake hits.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward of Esteemed Trolling (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 7:03am
    
    Re: Re:
    no need to react, a fact is a fact, not a troll.
    An act will suit your issue better.
    
    You are not defending techdirt. (your intentions are GOOD but misplaced)
    These are features you can opt out of.
    Let people make up their own mind on the issue, after they have the facts.
    
    The way you defend techdirt is...
    Show people how to opt out of these features if THEY CHOOSE.
    
    WE can't just dismiss or "rationalize away" facts, because they are uncomfortable.
    I wish we could, willful ignorance seems like a good disorder to acquire.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Marcel de Jong (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 7:19am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      Good point, but still, I'm still a bit rattled by the Lowery troll. Perhaps a bit too paranoid.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward of Esteemed Trolling (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 8:14am
        
        Reaction can be a positive reflex;
        You are fine, shit.. it doesn't mean you are paranoid, rather, you're normal!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward of Esteemed Trolling (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:44am
  
  You have a point: Expect a few misinformed "White Knights" to come your/our way.
  
  17 scripts from 13 third party trackers.
  
  It's a fact, not opinion, so no need for "white knighting".
  It can also be argued that these trackers add features.
  But they are uncontrollable by techdirt.
  
  You can make your own opinion with the facts at hand.
  Don't shoot the messenger of facts.
  It is a sign of willful ignorance.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Paul, 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:23am

SOPA
Yo NO quiero SOPA
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:24am

so who in Congress is supporting this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Aka, 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:31am

Yes !
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:44am

Why does this feel like it's nothing more than pissing in the wind?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yoav, 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:53am

Hebrew translation
To whom it may concern: here is Hebrew translation of the declaration

http://yoavtranslationshebrewblog.blogspot.co.il/2012/07/blog-post_2.html
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 7:03am

Net Neutrality?
One thing I can think of that this is missing is keeping the net neutral. I feel like that would be an important item to state in any internet freedom discussion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Rob (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 7:29am
  
  Re: Net Neutrality?
  Yep, that was my first thought also.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
John Perry Barlow by proxy, 2 Jul 2012 @ 7:06am

A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace
the military wing...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Richard (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 7:19am

UK Postcode
Trying to sign, but it's not accepting UK Postcodes on the EFF site, nor the others.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Xell0, 2 Jul 2012 @ 7:24am

yes
yes�
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 7:31am

These lawmakers why cant they realize plenty of bad shit happens in the outside world as well. Gangs,drugs,firearms,prostitution, and a shitload more.

We work pretty hard on trying to stop drugs,murder,rape,theft,and all that other fucked up stuff with no success at all.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Spork (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 7:35am

by the way
if any of you had actually read the Declaration website, you would have noticed that you CAN sign it if you are an individual. look for the bold INDIVIDUAL instructions above the form
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Cory Janssen (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 7:46am

Access is the only one that I think is debatable. All the other principles can enshrined in law, but we don't really want the government being our ISP.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
John, 2 Jul 2012 @ 8:22am

Why would expect Congress our our Government to allow for a Declaration of Internet Freedom when they are quickly taking away our freedoms by trampling the Constitution? Just my 2 cents.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 8:29am

You have my support but no government will agree with this. The NSA is already gobbling up all phone and data transmissions they can lay their fingers on while refusing to tell us what they take because telling us would violate our privacy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Carl, 2 Jul 2012 @ 8:42am

Redundency does not an efficient worker make
Isn't it a tad redundant to write an announcement for a declaration of internet freedom? A bit like ATM machine or its PIN number.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Xygo, 2 Jul 2012 @ 8:54am

''Openness: Keep the Internet an open network where everyone is free to connect, communicate, write, read, watch, speak, listen, learn, create and innovate.''

What about sharing?! Everyone should be free to share. So that principle should read ''... , innovate and share.''
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
S, 2 Jul 2012 @ 10:00am

This is moronic
The Declaration of Independence meant something because the US was willing to go to war over it -- but you and I and everyone else know that these posturing little personages will roll over and lift one leg like the mangy dogs they are, before they'd ever actually stand up for what they supposedly believe in.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Brett Glass, 2 Jul 2012 @ 10:06am

How about actual freedom for the Internet, rather than entitlements for freeloaders?
This entire discussion forgets what the Internet is. It's a loose federation of independently owned and operated local networks that agree to exchange data with one another. From the beginning, the owner or operator each network that participates in this exchange has had the right to choose what traffic it exchanged, what kind of traffic it exchanged, and the policies that governed its own internal network.

Now, large corporations such as Google -- which have benefited from the Internet -- are seeking to wrest control of those independent networks (which are the operators' property) from them, out of sheer corporate greed. Yes, they really DO want to use the pipes for free... and to take control of the private property of the network owners who built the Net. They're masking this agenda with a claim of "civil rights" with regard to the Net, which is specious; it's private property. Consumers will benefit if they stop supporting this corporate crusade by large, unethical companies and instead support the people who are building out the Net.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 11:37am
  
  Re: How about actual freedom for the Internet, rather than entitlements for freeloaders?
  Please point us to a discussion on google taking over the foundation of the internet, as this is the first im hearing about this?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- maclypse (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 1:41pm
  
  Re: How about actual freedom for the Internet, rather than entitlements for freeloaders?
  "Now, large corporations such as Google -- which have benefited from the Internet -- are seeking to wrest control of those independent networks (which are the operators' property) from them, out of sheer corporate greed. Yes, they really DO want to use the pipes for free... and to take control of the private property of the network owners who built the Net.
  
  Horsemanure.
  
  This has been said over and over, last time I saw it, it was the telecom companies that wanted google, facebook, etc to pay a fricking "tax" for using "their" precious bandwidth for "free".
  
  Only they forgot one thing: "their" pipes are paid for by the customers. We customers pay for maintenance. We customers pay for upgrades. The bandwidth is paid for!
  
  Google do not generate data and broadcast it to customers. Customers ASK GOOGLE for data. We are using the bandwidth we bought and paid for, and we have a right to use it any way we damn well please. I'm using Google because they give me what I want, when I want it, at a price that's right. That doesn't make Google the bad guys; it makes them good at their fucking job.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 10:22pm
  
  Re: How about actual freedom for the Internet, rather than entitlements for freeloaders?
  Shouldn't you be somewhere crying for SOPA, Brett?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Adam Thierer, 2 Jul 2012 @ 11:07am

how about enforcing the real deals first
Please, no more "Declarations" and "Bill of Rights" proposals until we start honoring the originals. More on that here:

http://techliberation.com/2012/07/02/the-problem-with-the-declaration-of-internet-freedom-t he-digital-bill-of-rights
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Mike Masnick (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 12:23pm
  
  Re: how about enforcing the real deals first
  Please, no more "Declarations" and "Bill of Rights" proposals until we start honoring the originals. More on that here:
  
  I disagree, strongly, with this. First, the "originals" are US only and our existing Congress doesn't seem to think it applies to the internet.
  
  There's a reason to get behind this internet-focused one, because it actually RESPECTS the original Declaration and Bill of Rights by showing how such things should and need to apply online as well.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 11:18am

Internet Freedom Bill
First, get the US Congress to pass a bill(s) ENSURING the items above.

Second, move to a world stage.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
maclypse (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 12:04pm

Bit disturbing that the EFF seem to think of the Internet as an exclusively American network.

Thankfully the other sites realise that most of humanity is actually living on the other side of the US borders, and offer ways for everyone to sign up, as opposed to just the American minority.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 1:28pm
  
  Re:
  A Declaration of the Independence of Cyberspace
  
  by John Perry Barlow barlow@eff.org
  
  Governments of the Industrial World, you weary giants of flesh and steel, I come from Cyberspace, the new home of Mind. On behalf of the future, I ask you of the past to leave us alone. You are not welcome among us. You have no sovereignty where we gather.
  
  We have no elected government, nor are we likely to have one, so I address you with no greater authority than that with which liberty itself always speaks. I declare the global social space we are building to be naturally independent of the tyrannies you seek to impose on us. You have no moral right to rule us nor do you possess any methods of enforcement we have true reason to fear.
  
  Governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed. You have neither solicited nor received ours. We did not invite you. You do not know us, nor do you know our world. Cyberspace does not lie within your borders. Do not think that you can build it, as though it were a public construction project. You cannot. It is an act of nature and it grows itself through our collective actions.
  
  You have not engaged in our great and gathering conversation, nor did you create the wealth of our marketplaces. You do not know our culture, our ethics, or the unwritten codes that already provide our society more order than could be obtained by any of your impositions.
  
  You claim there are problems among us that you need to solve. You use this claim as an excuse to invade our precincts. Many of these problems don't exist. Where there are real conflicts, where there are wrongs, we will identify them and address them by our means. We are forming our own Social Contract . This governance will arise according to the conditions of our world, not yours. Our world is different.
  
  Cyberspace consists of transactions, relationships, and thought itself, arrayed like a standing wave in the web of our communications. Ours is a world that is both everywhere and nowhere, but it is not where bodies live.
  
  We are creating a world that all may enter without privilege or prejudice accorded by race, economic power, military force, or station of birth.
  
  We are creating a world where anyone, anywhere may express his or her beliefs, no matter how singular, without fear of being coerced into silence or conformity.
  
  Your legal concepts of property, expression, identity, movement, and context do not apply to us. They are all based on matter, and there is no matter here.
  
  Our identities have no bodies, so, unlike you, we cannot obtain order by physical coercion. We believe that from ethics, enlightened self-interest, and the commonweal, our governance will emerge . Our identities may be distributed across many of your jurisdictions. The only law that all our constituent cultures would generally recognize is the Golden Rule. We hope we will be able to build our particular solutions on that basis. But we cannot accept the solutions you are attempting to impose.
  
  In the United States, you have today created a law, the Telecommunications Reform Act, which repudiates your own Constitution and insults the dreams of Jefferson, Washington, Mill, Madison, DeToqueville, and Brandeis. These dreams must now be born anew in us.
  
  You are terrified of your own children, since they are natives in a world where you will always be immigrants. Because you fear them, you entrust your bureaucracies with the parental responsibilities you are too cowardly to confront yourselves. In our world, all the sentiments and expressions of humanity, from the debasing to the angelic, are parts of a seamless whole, the global conversation of bits. We cannot separate the air that chokes from the air upon which wings beat.
  
  In China, Germany, France, Russia, Singapore, Italy and the United States, you are trying to ward off the virus of liberty by erecting guard posts at the frontiers of Cyberspace. These may keep out the contagion for a small time, but they will not work in a world that will soon be blanketed in bit-bearing media.
  
  Your increasingly obsolete information industries would perpetuate themselves by proposing laws, in America and elsewhere, that claim to own speech itself throughout the world. These laws would declare ideas to be another industrial product, no more noble than pig iron. In our world, whatever the human mind may create can be reproduced and distributed infinitely at no cost. The global conveyance of thought no longer requires your factories to accomplish.
  
  These increasingly hostile and colonial measures place us in the same position as those previous lovers of freedom and self-determination who had to reject the authorities of distant, uninformed powers. We must declare our virtual selves immune to your sovereignty, even as we continue to consent to your rule over our bodies. We will spread ourselves across the Planet so that no one can arrest our thoughts.
  
  We will create a civilization of the Mind in Cyberspace. May it be more humane and fair than the world your governments have made before.
  
  Davos, Switzerland
  
  February 8, 1996
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - maclypse (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 1:47pm
    
    Re: Re:
    ...which all sounds very nice, but that doesn't change the fact that EFF refuses to let anyone sign that doesn't have a US zip code, which currently means less than 4.5% of the human race.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
John Q Public, 2 Jul 2012 @ 12:59pm

Wow - just wow
Expression:
What has censorship got to do with expression?
No one anywhere in the US is stifling peoples ability to express ones-self in a manner that is respectful of others.
However, you want to express your bomb making talents? I sure as hell *DO* want you to be censored over that!

Access:
As long as private companies bought and paid for the lines that run the internet, access is entirely up to them.

Openness?
I want a Ferrari too. Then my mom told me wake up and grow up.

Innovation:
You'd have a hard time finding a more stupid sentence that meant absolutely nothing.

Privacy:
It's dead dip shit. It died when you put your entire f'ing life on Facebook, Twitter, Pinterest, Instagram...etal.

This list and this post is a major step backwards for anyone wanting to take change seriously.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 1:15pm
  
  Re: Wow - just wow
  I agree.
  And if I had the money I would not only by myself a Ferrari
  but a Snazzy Senator would be parked in my garage along with a couple a Cute little Mini Congressmen in the driveway for my kids.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Howard, 2 Jul 2012 @ 2:08pm
  
  Re: Wow - just wow
  Expression:
  Define "respectful of others". Mike might feel your calling him a dip shit is disrespectful, so is that grounds to censor him? No, it's protected speech made possible by the First Amendment, part of the document Mike said this declaration is attempting to bring in line with the Internet.
  
  Access/Openness: No comment; not to be taken for tacit approval.
  
  Innovation:
  Since you have no specific complaint with this point, perhaps you don't understand it's alluding to the DMCA, secondary liability, and copyrights in general. What exactly is your complaint with this?
  
  Privacy:
  I'll half-agree with you here; this is the reason I don't register for these platforms, use a pseudonym, etc. However, what's your opinion on the right to be forgotten?
  
  As it stands, I do believe the list is toothless, vague, and hopelessly idealistic. Granted, the presentation of the list as such is perhaps necessary to make a 'catchy' graphic, but it feels lacking.
  
  It's important, however, to refrain from discounting the message for the vessel. We should all want an Internet where the rights of the users, the content providers, and the service providers are respected. We should want the laws that apply to Internet usage to be written with the medium in mind, and to be written with consideration for the aforementioned rights. If a discussion would help clarify and specify these points, and lead to action, then let's have it.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hamish, 2 Jul 2012 @ 2:19pm

Capitalisation
Please spell Internet with a capital "I". The declaration refers to _the_ Internet, not an internet (a generic interconnected network of networks).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous, 2 Jul 2012 @ 3:37pm

There should also be a clear and resolute statement that guarantees the right to Anonymity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Joe, 2 Jul 2012 @ 3:56pm

My guess is Google and Facebook do not support this because of the privacy clause.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
JustSomeGUy, 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:24pm

Spreading the word...
Hey, someone (not me, because I would have no idea where to start) should get CERN aboard on this issue. Seriously, that would turn A LOT of heads of people that have the power to really put a stop to this bull stuff. Best of luck though!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 6:38pm

empty false hollow words

Expression: Don't censor the Internet.

So you support pedophiles, snuff films, rape movies, live murders and any other thing that is illegal????

Access: Promote universal access to fast and affordable networks.

Oh yeah, this is priority, fuck clean water, clean air, health care, safe food, who needs that shit, I need high speed internet to watch porn faster.....are you really this stupid??

Openness: Keep the Internet an open network where everyone is free to connect, communicate, write, read, watch, speak, listen, learn, create and innovate.

Yes, fuck countries sovereign right to rule their own countries and make the laws for themselves, they all have to abide by the internet rules.....

Innovation: Protect the freedom to innovate and create without permission. Don�t block new technologies, and don�t punish innovators for their users' actions.

yes, no one has ANY rights to ANYTHING they create, I am not responsible for all the pedophiles here at findatenyearoldchild.xxx I am not to blame for telling them where your child is, or the prostitutes or illegal drugs, hey I am not to blame for being the one place to get the directions from, take responsibilities for your actions, if I tell you where the illegal item is to be found or bought, I should also have some blame in it

Privacy: Protect privacy and defend everyone�s ability to control how their data and devices are used.

this goes against the other internet "rights" you want, expression and openness, how can you do this?? if I have the right to control whatever I put on the internet??? proving your a fucking moron
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Evan Martin, 2 Jul 2012 @ 7:06pm

I don't think the "declaration" should include commands (or requests) to some authority (don't do this, keep that, protect this...etc), rather it should be a statement of what we agree to be true, necessary, logical and ethical. The premises seem to be on right track but the phrasing definitely fixing in that regard.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mike Martinet (profile), 2 Jul 2012 @ 8:51pm

Digital Sanity Act
I came up with this a few months ago, which I believe is relevant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 2 Jul 2012 @ 9:05pm

I would say that this is perhaps the most telling example of the freetardian mentality at work.

They try to disguise their desires by hiding them behind the duck blind of free speech and internet freedom, but at the end of the day, most of them rally for the free content.

Internet freedom is the friendly face, the you can't argue with it point similar to "think about the kids", but in the end, most aren't worried about internet freedom, just a free lunch.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mary, 2 Jul 2012 @ 10:45pm

Privacy
Before a company or website uses our "cookies" or whatever they're called, we should be notified. It should be openly displayed NOT IN THE TERMS OF SERVICE and you should be able to opt out before you automatically opt in unknowingly.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Its just me, 2 Jul 2012 @ 11:40pm

What is the different from UN's version?
I've just read this one above. The question is, what is the different from this: JOINT DECLARATION ON FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND THE INTERNET http://www.oas.org/en/iachr/expression/showarticle.asp?artID=848&lID=1
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Grouppz, 3 Jul 2012 @ 1:34am

Finally!
Agree with no. 126.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
skull, 3 Jul 2012 @ 5:03am

I agree =)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gjh33, 3 Jul 2012 @ 11:04am

Maybe a little too strong
Basically, this bill sounds alot like "let me pirate what I want." I think what it should be re worded such that things remain the same. The internet right now is fine. Some people get caught for pirating but the majority don't. This way, hollywood has something to threaten with and thus they will still make money. Basically, I'm sayinf this bill is a bit extreme. Also, to soecify the internet section: "ISPs cannot slow down or inhibit internet use based on the amount the customer pays. Internet must be one set price, no limitations, no data caps."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gjh33, 3 Jul 2012 @ 11:08am

Maybe a little too strong
Basically, this bill sounds alot like "let me pirate what I want." I think what it should be re worded such that things remain the same. The internet right now is fine. Some people get caught for pirating but the majority don't. This way, hollywood has something to threaten with and thus they will still make money. Basically, I'm sayinf this bill is a bit extreme. Also, to soecify the internet section: "ISPs cannot slow down or inhibit internet use based on the amount the customer pays. Internet must be one set price, no limitations, no data caps."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Grizwald Grim, 4 Jul 2012 @ 10:52am

Hypocrites
*WE SUPPORT A FREE AND OPEN INTERNET*
...with affordable access.

then let's support a FREE & FREE & OPEN internet....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pierre Courchesne, 4 Jul 2012 @ 6:42pm

Good initiative!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A Guy (profile), 5 Jul 2012 @ 7:59pm

Looks good in principle. Let's see what the lobbyists twist it into if/when it is ever acted upon.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
http://www.gapsecuritydirect.co.uk/, 10 Jul 2012 @ 3:53am

The principles, discuss them, add your own ideas... whatever you'd like. You can, of course, also discuss them below in the comments. There are a number of other organizations setting up pages as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oliver N, 25 Jul 2012 @ 8:31am

I don't sensor the internet but I sensor ideas that promote violence and diminish moral virtues. I believe we still need to prosecute terrorism, child pornography, etc on an open internet.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Counces (profile), 15 Sep 2012 @ 4:32pm
  
  Re:
  Totally agree with Oliver, there are several things that absolutely need moderation and prosecute.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
shauntel brooks, 20 Sep 2012 @ 1:51pm

I have been saved from death& life is disadvantaging
I have been saved by our Lord. Ism disgusted with being taken advantage of. Just got to share my experience. I hope to help someone
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
shauntel brooks, 20 Sep 2012 @ 1:54pm

I survived a 27 day coma
I want to get help and help others
[ link to this | view in chronology ]