[governance] Fwd: [] US, UK and Canada refuse to sign UN's internet treaty

[Roland Perry]

In message <D2DCA37D-EFCE-4F03-ADB4-2B9C6CD2EA22 at acm.org>, at 08:33:12 
on Sat, 15 Dec 2012, Avri Doria <avri at acm.org> writes

>For me one the major issues related to the security and robustness of 
>the Internet being a Member State responsibility.
>
>"
>ARTICLE 5A
>
>Security and robustness of networks
>
>41B             Member States shall individually and collectively 
>endeavour to ensure the security and robustness of international 
>telecommunication networks in order to achieve effective use thereof 
>and avoidance of technical harm thereto, as well as the harmonious 
>development of international telecommunication services offered to the 
>public.
>"
>
>First what is security at the telecommunication layer other that 
>robustness?

Security means keeping users safe, rather than robustly (strongly and 
reliably) allowing people to harm them.

Or to make an analogy, airplane security is about not letting hi-jackers 
on board, whereas robustness is the ability to land in a snowstorm, with 
only the co-pilot still conscious, and without the wheels falling off 
when you slam into the runway a little too hard.

>I also see threat in the article on spam, even though they have named 
>it euphemistically: Unsolicited bulk electronic communications
>
>"
>ARTICLE 5B
>Unsolicited bulk electronic communications
>41C             Member States should endeavour to take necessary 
>measures to prevent the propagation of unsolicited bulk electronic 
>communications and minimize its impact on international 
>telecommunication services.
>Member States are encouraged to cooperate in that sense.
>"
>True this is not as bad as unwanted Spam, which could mean anything, 
>since Spam cannot be defined without reference to content.

The anti-spam industry, and several privacy laws worldwide, have 
established beyond doubt what 'Unsolicited bulk communications' means 
for over a decade. There's no need to start new hares running.

(Meanwhile, the measures states are likely to take overlap quite a bit 
with Internet Governance, which casts a shadow across the ITRs).

Incidentally, the ITU membership has been worried about Spam for a very 
long time and the perceived lack of action for the IG establishment has 
caused bell-heads to make remarks along the lines of "if they can't even 
stop spam, what kind of mess are they making of the rest".

Shrugging and saying "Spam is someone else's problem" doesn't cut much 
ice in the wider world. And does Spam really no overlap into the world 
of ICANN - if not WHOIS(sic) supposed to be doing something?
-- 
Roland Perry

-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
You received this message as a subscriber on the list:
     governance at lists.igcaucus.org
To be removed from the list, visit:
     http://www.igcaucus.org/unsubscribing

For all other list information and functions, see:
     http://lists.igcaucus.org/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