The Wikimedia Foundation Asks The European Court Of Human Rights To Rule Against Turkey's Two-Year Block Of All Wikipedia Versions

from the probably-won't-do-much,-but-should-annoy-Gollum dept

As numerous Techdirt stories attest, the Turkish authorities -- and the country's notoriously thin-skinned President, Recep Erdogan -- are unwilling to accept even the slightest criticism of their actions, from any quarter. That has led to huge numbers of Turkish citizens being thrown in prison on the flimsiest pretexts, as well as many Internet sites being blocked in a similarly arbitrary way. Perhaps the most significant digital victim of Turkey's paranoia is Wikipedia. In April 2017, every language version of the site was blocked under a law that allows the authorities to ban access to Web sites deemed "obscene or a threat to national security". According to The Atlantic, Wikipedia was blocked because it refused to take down an article that claimed Turkey was "aligned with various terrorist organizations".

For the last two years, all Wikipedia sites have remained blocked in Turkey. Now, the Wikimedia Foundation, which hosts Wikipedia, has had enough:

Today, we proceed to the European Court of Human Rights, an international court which hears cases of human rights violations within the Council of Europe, to ask the Court to lift the more than two-year block of Wikipedia in Turkey. We are taking this action as part of our continued commitment to knowledge and freedom of expression as fundamental rights for every person.

This is not a step we have taken lightly; we are doing so only after continued and exhaustive attempts to lift the block through legal action in the Turkish courts, good faith conversations with the Turkish authorities, and campaigns to raise awareness of the block and its impact on Turkey and the rest of the world.

The Wikimedia Foundation says that the block was applied because of two articles, not one, but gives no details. In its application to the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) -- not to be confused with the better-known Court of Justice of the European Union -- it argues:

the blanket ban of Wikipedia violates fundamental freedoms, including the right to freedom of expression as guaranteed by Article 10 of the European Convention. Moreover, these freedoms have been denied to the more than 80 million people of Turkey who have been impacted most directly by the block, and to the rest of the world, which has lost the nation's rich perspectives in contributing, debating, and adding to Wikipedia's more than 50 million articles.

Even if the Wikimedia Foundation wins its case, there is not much that the ECHR can do to force Turkey to comply with a decision that the block should be lifted. It's true that Turkey is a long-standing party to the European Convention on Human Rights (pdf), and that the fundamental rights provided by the Convention are guaranteed in the Turkish Constitution. But given the track-record of the Turkish authorities of ignoring all outside calls and criticism, we can probably expect more of the same if the ECHR finds against Turkey. On the plus side, this kind of high-profile tut-tutting from arguably the top human rights court in the world would doubtless annoy Erdogan hugely, so there is that.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter, Diaspora, or Mastodon.

Filed Under: european court of human rights, human rights, recep tayyip erdogan, turkey, website blocking
Companies: wikimedia foundation, wikipedia

Quebec Looking To Force ISPs To Block Gambling Sites In Order To Protect Its Own State-Run Gambling Portal

from the there's-nothing-more-sincere-than-a-government-entity-ensuring-its-own-exist dept

Should a government body attempt to block websites for its own financial gain? [To anyone that answered "Yes," I say, "Really?"] This question doesn't seem to be troubling Quebec's government, which submitted a budget that contained the following -- all without uttering a single word like "conflict" or "interest."

In its budget released Thursday, the province said it plans to propose new legislation that would compel Internet service providers (ISPs) to block access to a list of gambling websites drawn up by Loto-Québec.

Loto-Québec, of course, is the province's own revenue stream, which allows citizens to contribute extra funds to their government via games of skill. Great stuff for those who enjoy this more voluntary form of taxation, but the internet is full of other options. And that fact makes Loto-Québec very sad. But the government is always willing to cheer itself up!

The government states its aim is to direct revenues to its own gambling website, Espacejeux, noting Loto-Québec’s revenues have fallen in recent years and stating, “it is only the online gaming market that has growth prospects.”

So, it's hoping to double its money by doubling down on blocking "illegal gambling websites." It cheerfully estimates that -- if it can just get hesitant ISPs on board -- its gambling revenues will generate $13.5 million in 2016-17 and $27 million a year after that, apparently in perpetuity.

Now, there are a lot of fallacies in play here, not the least of which is that budgeted income will always meet planned figures forever -- a conclusion made while operating in a vacuum devoid of external circumstances, perverted incentives or the foibles of the public. But it has to get ISPs to agree to enforce Loto-Quebéc's blacklist first, and so far, ISPs aren't expressing any desire to force their customers into a government-created gambling funnel.

Bram Abramson, chief legal and regulatory officer for independent ISP TekSavvy Solutions Inc., said the proposed legislation raises concerns about the neutral role of Internet providers.

“ISPs are intermediaries and we do what we do best when we act a little bit like utilities: We provide access to the Internet. We should not be put in a position of picking and choosing what people have access to,” he said in an interview Friday.

This is all customers want internet providers to be… all over the world: dumb terminals that provide them access to the Web. They don't want government filtering/blockades, throttling, ISP portals, data caps or anything else governments/ISPs have in mind for them. They want an open pipe and access to the tap. That's it.

But like all of these listed efforts, this too is being done in the [what a crock] "best interests" of Quebec's internet users.

Quebec said the website blocking measure is also aimed at improving public health because “illegal websites do not apply the same responsible gaming rules as Espacejeux. They thus pose a risk to the population, especially young people.”

Ah, yes. The "young people." Who hasn't heard numerous stories about the lasting damages inflicted on unwary youths by rogue gambling sites? Why, it's practically Grand Theft Auto meets the Adult Video Awards in there!

The only thing troubling Quebec's government is the fact that these sites are horning in on its racket. Michael Geist calls it what it is:

…[A] “remarkable and possibly illegal plan as the government seeks to censor the Internet for its own commercial gain.”

And those behind the plan to possibly illegally censor the internet to prop up the province's flagging cash cow just keep doubling down.

In an interview Friday, Quebec Finance Minister Carlos Leitao said the measures are not in place yet but he believes implementing them is “perfectly feasible.”

“This applies to gambling sites, unlicensed gambling sites,” the minister said. “So I don’t think there’s an issue of censorship.”

And again, I must say, "Really?" How does a government-ordered blacklist of sites not veer into "censorship" territory, especially when the list of targeted sites was written by a government entity with both eyes on its own bottom line?

Beyond that, blocking doesn't work and it always causes collateral damage. Blocking illegalgamblinghotspot.tu might (MIGHT!) be acceptable (if a really questionable use of government power and resources), but doing so solely to hit budget figures dreamed up by imaginative government reps isn't -- especially considering the province has no direct control over telecoms, which would mean dragging Canada's federal government into this sloppy, ill-conceived turf war.

Filed Under: canada, competition, filters, gambling, online gambling, quebec, website blocking