[governance] Re: Guardian Online: Live with the WikiLeakable world or shut down the net. It's your choice

[karen banks]

hi

    in the manner the US gov
>> has exercised extra-legal authority, using its political and economic might
>> in a rather comprehensive manner,  to control global traffic flows on the
>> Internet.
>
> I would say "re-routed", not controlled.  You can still resolve
> wikileaks.org.  What used to be one webserver is now nearly 1000.  So
> what the USG has done ( inadvertently ) is actually enabled the spread
> and distribution of the material.....Ironic innit?

it is, but this is demonstrates the power of networks of bodies willing 
to mirror, and, in our experience (APC) where we have run mirroring 
initiatives to support threatened content, this is precisely what 
happened, every time..

in fact, where there was an opportunity to respond to a demand for take 
down, this possibility/likelihood was noted, by way of discouraging the 
initiator of the takedown request - it depends of course, on the power 
of the initiator (and whether the stakes are high enough)

karen

> Of course, the DDOS attacks that have made them switch to mirrors is
> not done by the USG, but by script-kiddies.
>
>
>>
>> Will IGC want to issue a statement on this?
>
>
> Who will we issue such a statement to?
>
>
>>
>> This goes to the heart of matter of why a due global process of law,
>> informed by sound political frameworks, including those of human rights, is
>> urgently required. The same process would be the place for redress in case
>> of arbitrary controls, as exercised in the present case.
>
> I just don't have the same faith that you seem to have that
> governments will sign on to give up sovereignty on these issues.
> We all saw the fights at WSIS, and that wasn't even binding!
> Will the Pakistanis agree that they can't censor youtube? Will the
> Chinese agree to dismantle the Great Firewall?  Will the USA stop
> taking seizing domains due to alleged IP violations?  I think not on
> all of the above.
>
>>
>> If this case does not prove the importance and urgency of this issue,
>> perhaps nothing ever will. Also a good opportunity for IGC to go beyond just
>> making process related statements, which often attract the cynical judgment
>
>
> Cynical or realistic?
>
>> that these views/ statements are rather self serving with unclear
>> connections to real substantive global IG issues.
>>
>
> I've never said self-serving.
>
> I think the headline is misleading, and follows the same logic those
> in IGC use when they want to give too much power to governments.  Why
> suggest to them that they can "shut down the net", we should know by
> now that they cannot (well, except for North Korea).
>
>
____________________________________________________________
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

Translate this email: http://translate.google.com/translate_t