[governance] Is This An Issue for Internet Governance/Internet Human Rights?

[Paul Lehto]

On 7/22/11, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com> wrote:

> If we aren't careful, then everything we do becomes an Internet
> Governance issue (if some aspect of the activity takes place on the
> Internet).

If we abstain from setting a protective policy, that is an internet
policy as well.  It's a style of internet governance: to abstain from
public policy in favor of private or corporate rule-setting via
contracts, terms of service, market forces, etc.

I don't know if Roland Perry would go this far, but the line to be
crossed to truly say something is "not an internet governance issue"
is to show that either

(1) the activity involved doesn't involve the internet or impact the
internet, OR

(2) the internet activity in question is beyond the legitimate power
of any actual or potential governance entity (whether public or
corporate), including being beyond any claims for the *reasonable*
extension of some existing public or corporate power.

The *full* application of presently existing human rights laws would
be a good start.  That process of course has started already.

Of course, a more general set of legal commands such as human rights
laws would arguably benefit in terms of specificity by a treaty that
explains those rights in the specific new-ish contest of the internet.
 But, in most (if not all) cases, such a specific "new" law would just
be a detailed application of pre-existing human rights laws and
principles to the area of the internet.  Thus, lawyers and judges
would say that rights laws regarding the internet already exist, even
if many or all of the specific holdings await argument and application
of the human rights laws in appropriate courts with jurisdiction over
a particular case.  Provided such a court is limiting itself to
application of a general legal right to a new context and not
over-reaching (often a debatable line here), such a court is not
making  up new law but applying existing law in a newer or somewhat
different context.

One may note that courts applying principles to new contexts are
occasionally accused of being "activist" courts and "making up" the
law.  Usually this kind of charge is made by a supporter of corporate
rights and corporate governance, who know full well that whenever the
government and/or the courts abstain from law-making or ruling in a
certain area, the power to rule that particular area thus defaults to
corporate or private powers, who make the laws applicable to it via
contracts and terms of service, and so forth.

Paul Lehto, J.D.

-- 
Paul R Lehto, J.D.
P.O. Box 1
Ishpeming, MI  49849
lehto.paul at gmail.com
906-204-4026 (cell)
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.cpsr.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.cpsr.org/lists/info/governance
To edit your profile and to find the IGC's charter, see:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/

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