[governance] IGP Alert: "Net Neutrality as Global Principle for Internet Governance"

[Taran Rampersad]

This has been an issue with virtual worlds like Second Life as well.
Technology is not waiting on bureaucracy to deal with internet
governance issues.

Bertrand de La Chapelle wrote:
> What Vittorio raises below is exactly what Google is facing in Brazil
> (of all places) with its Orkut social platform abused by some members
> for illegal postings (child porn and alia).
> See :
> http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9003739
> <http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9003739>
> By the way, Orkut servers are hosted in the US, not Brazil. And Google
> finally complied, apparently after threats from the Brazilian
> authorities to close Google's activities. I suppose Rio will be an
> interesting place to discuss the issue and get the two sides of the
> story, for instance in the workshop on "Privacy in new internet
> services."
>
> Best
> B.
> On 11/7/07, *Vittorio Bertola* <vb at bertola.eu <mailto:vb at bertola.eu>>
> wrote:
>
>     Dan Krimm ha scritto:
>     > Interesting, I have not directly received the email response I
>     sent out at
>     > 13:30 pm PST, though I see from the web interface that it has
>     been posted
>     > to the list, and I see Milton's later response.
>     >
>     > Apparently some algorithm running between the listserv and my
>     email server
>     > decided that this conversation was to be filtered out (presumably as
>     > "spam"). Too many references to a certain "offensive" subject
>     matter, I
>     > guess. I don't know how many people received it.
>     >
>     > Or maybe I was just too long-winded... ;-)
>     >
>     > So, with respect to:
>     >
>     >> Ok, I've not read the paper yet, but here is the Usual
>     Question: let's
>     >> say that the government of XYZland wants to prohibit access to
>     [certain]
>     >> content to its citizens, would that be inhibited by your
>     >> definition of network neutrality?
>     >
>     > Bottom line: what Milton said.
>     >
>     > In my own words: "The distilled (if not simple) answer is that
>     laws to
>     > establish prior restraint on data transport (if that's what you
>     mean by
>     > "prohibit access") would violate net neutrality, but laws to
>     prosecute
>     > carve-outs from freedom of expression ex post ("prohibit
>     distribution")
>     > would not. Under ex post rules, common carriers are not liable for
>     > distribution of unlawful content over their platforms." [And to
>     be clear,
>     > net neutrality is a form of common carriage, which has very deep
>     roots in
>     > English Common Law.]
>
>     Would carriers be liable if they knew?
>     For example, let's say I am a carrier and one of my users hosts nazi
>     stuff on a website at home, connected through his DSL connection.
>     Someone comes and warns me about that. Should I be allowed to
>     terminate
>     the contract? Would I be liable if I do? Would I be liable if I don't?
>
>     And where do platform for user-generated content fit in your plan?
>     Would
>     Youtube be responsible for illegal videos? (I'm not thinking of IPRs,
>     rather of racist videos, violent videos etc.) At least after getting
>     proper notice? From which authority?
>
>     From one point of view I totally agree with you, ex post
>     enforcement is
>     the way to go, ex ante censorship - even when required by law - is
>     prone
>     to terrible misuse. However I wouldn't want to get to the extreme of
>     "irresponsible carriers", who refuse to cooperate in shutting down
>     malicious services. Of course you would need some due process, but
>     spam
>     and botnets and all sorts of bad stuff thrive on irresponsible
>     carriers
>     who do not feel the need to abide by their duty of good netizens.
>
>     In general, most of the world doesn't have a first amendment and
>     doesn't
>     appear to want one - actually, many citizens scream and ask their
>     governments for more ex-ante censorship of the Internet. How to
>     make the
>     two visions coexist will be a challenge.
>     --
>     vb. Vittorio Bertola - vb [a] bertola.eu <--------
>     --------> finally with a new website at http://bertola.eu/
>     <http://bertola.eu/> <--------
>     ____________________________________________________________
>     You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
>     governance at lists.cpsr.org <mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org>
>     To be removed from the list, send any message to:
>     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org
>     <mailto:governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org>
>
>     For all list information and functions, see:
>     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> ____________________
> Bertrand de La Chapelle
> Tel : +33 (0)6 11 88 33 32
>
> "Le plus beau métier des hommes, c'est d'unir les hommes" Antoine de
> Saint Exupéry
> ("there is no better mission for humans than uniting humans") 


-- 
Taran Rampersad

http://www.knowprose.com
http://www.your2ndplace.com

'Making Your Mark in Second Life: Business, Land, and Money'
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/9780596514174/

Pictures: http://www.flickr.com/photos/knowprose/

"Criticize by creating." — Michelangelo
"The present is theirs; the future, for which I really worked, is mine." - Nikola Tesla

____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, send any message to:
     governance-unsubscribe at lists.cpsr.org

For all list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance