[bestbits] GNI report released

Thu Jan 9 14:20:32 EST 2014

Please find the Access response to the GNI Report here and copied below

https://www.accessnow.org/blog/2014/01/08/access-welcomes-the-first-round-of-gni-assessments

Access welcomes today’s report by the Global Network Initiative on its
assessments of the three founding GNI members: Google, Microsoft, and
Yahoo!. The Public Report on the Independent Assessment
Process<http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fglobalnetworkinitiative.org%2Fsites%2Fdefault%2Ffiles%2FGNI%2520Assessments%2520Public%2520Report.pdf&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNGMMZxmxlNjN463UOAnA81uq--Xzw>addresses
how the companies in question respond to government requests
“implicating freedom of expression or privacy rights” and describes the
assessment of these processes against the GNI Principles. According to the
report, all three companies were found to be in compliance with the
Principles, as per a case review by independent assessors.

We recognize the GNI’s sector-leading efforts and note their progress in
working to advance freedom of expression, privacy, and other human rights.
Today’s report is another step forward for the founding companies, and
towards realizing the promise of the GNI. However, we believe that
significant information is still missing, and that improvements must be
made before the next round of assessments.

The assessments detailed in the report represent the culmination of the
GNI’s three-phase process: The first is a self-reporting stage, while the
second looks at policies and procedures. This process is intended as an
innovative way for diverse stakeholders to monitor corporate efforts to
respect the privacy and free expression rights of users.

The Phase III assessments look at case studies of human rights risk
scenarios involving government requests that the companies have received,
and the implementation of the GNI Guiding Principles in those instances.
The case studies are a window into some of the pressing human rights issues
faced by companies on a regular basis. However, the fact that the case
studies to be reviewed were proposed by the companies themselves, from a
set of relevant instances known only by the companies, raises some
questions about the rigor of the assessment process.

Moreover, the report notes that the assessors -- KPMG,
PricewaterhouseCoopers, and Foley Hoag -- struggled to obtain all of the
necessary information about the companies’ policies and practices.
Externally, the assessors faced constraints such as legal limits on
disclosure of national security related requests and user privacy
considerations. Internally, the companies chose to withhold certain
information by asserting attorney-client privileges and claims of
protection of trade secrets (the full assessments are presented to the GNI
Board, which is made up of representatives of other, competing companies).

While the legal limits on what the companies can say about national
security-related requests they receive are well
documented<https://www.accessnow.org/blog/2013/08/30/obama-administration-continues-to-thwart-meaningful-transparency-on-nsa-sur>,
the absence of substantial discussion on this issue in this report is a
particularly critical omission, even as the GNI and its member companies
have been outspoken on the issue of mass
surveillance<https://www.accessnow.org/blog/2013/12/09/access-welcomes-internet-companies-announcement-in-fight-for-surveillance-r>
.

The GNI has made a commitment to reviewing its assessment process now that
its three founding members have gone through a full cycle (and before new
members begin the process). This review is an opportunity to institute a
more robust process in the future. Specifically, we recommend:

   - The assessors need full and unfettered access to company data and
   personnel, to the extent legally permitted;
   - Assessor recommendations should be made public for each GNI member.
   The lack of detailed recommendations broken down by company makes it
   difficult for groups outside the GNI to hold the companies accountable;
   - Non-company members of GNI should be more fully involved in the
   assessment process. In particular, the assessors must give greater
   consideration to the case studies proposed by academics, investors, and
   civil society stakeholders. These stakeholders should also be more fully
   involved in the case study selection process; and
   - The companies must transparently and publicly communicate on their
   progress implementing the recommendations, based on a public timeline, with
   appropriate consequences for non-compliance.

On the final point about transparency and public timelines: The reports’
recommendations include calls for greater human rights due diligence, more
granular transparency reporting, and improving stakeholder and user
engagement, and promise a six month timeline for doing so. This is a
welcome step. However, unless the companies publicly report the actions
they are taking to address these gaps, they can’t be effectively held
accountable to the recommendations. It’s also not clear what sanctions, if
any, the companies may face if they fail to deliver.

Overall, we see this public report as an innovative advance toward a more
transparent and accountable tech sector, and congratulate those who were
involved. We look forward to working alongside the GNI and its member
companies to further extend and defend the digital rights of users around
the world. Access will soon release a deeper analysis of the report’s
substantive recommendations to the companies.

Brett Solomon
Executive Director | Access
accessnow.org
+1 917 969 6077 | skype: brettsolomon | @accessnow
Key ID: 0x312B641A

*RightsCon Silicon Valley, March 3-5, 2014. Register interest now
<http://www.rightscon.org>!*

On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 9:55 AM, McTim <mctimconsulting at gmail.com> wrote:

> FYI,
> http://globalnetworkinitiative.org/news/gni-report-finds-google-microsoft-and-yahoo-compliant-free-expression-and-privacy-principles
>
> Enjoy,
>
> McTim
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>      bestbits at lists.bestbits.net.
> To unsubscribe or change your settings, visit:
>      http://lists.bestbits.net/wws/info/bestbits
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/bestbits/attachments/20140109/9b622b51/attachment.htm>