RES: [governance] NYT opinion by Vint Cerf: Internet Access is not a HR

Vanda UOL vanda at uol.com.br
Fri Jan 6 13:35:30 EST 2012 

HI Yrjö

 

As you said, ( I agree with Avri point too) we may not misinterpret the
facility to deploy Internet to all and as such given them the right to get
free information and use the power to communicate with become a human right
itself.  Vint is right. Internet is a tool for freedom, and to make more
easily available the basic  human rights.

Best,

De: governance at lists.cpsr.org [mailto:governance at lists.cpsr.org] Em nome de
Yrjö Länsipuro
Enviada em: quinta-feira, 5 de janeiro de 2012 19:42
Para: governance at lists.cpsr.org
Assunto: RE: [governance] NYT opinion by Vint Cerf: Internet Access is not a
HR

 

Hi all,

 

At least Vint's op-ed sparked an interesting discussion on various lists.

 

IMO,  relevant human rights are formulated in UDHR, particularly in Article
19, and other comparable documents. In 1948, there was no Internet, and
"through any media" referred to whatever media there was at the time. But
today, internet is certainly the main vehicle/tool/enabler for the
implementation of these human rights,  and denial of access to the Internet
certainly equals  denial of human rights.

 

Vint mentions a couple of countries where access to the Internet has been
proclaimed a human right. Sometimes Finland is also listed among them.
However, the decision to make broadband available to all ( permanent
residences and places of business) is technically a universal service
obligation, and access is not defined as a human right as such.

 

Roland mentions internet access in jails.  It is now tried out in  Finland
in three minimum security prisons and will be extended to all (14) soon, not
as a right but as a means to help people serving their sentences to study,
to seek employment and to generally to prepare for life after prison. 

 

I agree with Avri that the most valuable point of the op-end is at the end:
technologists should focus on creating rights-enabling technologies instead
of rights-disabling ones.

 

Yrjö

 

> Date: Thu, 5 Jan 2012 12:55:24 -0500
> To: governance at lists.cpsr.org
> Subject: Re: [governance] NYT opinion by Vint Cerf: Internet Access is not
a HR
> 
> Hi,
> 
> I agree with those who beleive that Vint's Opinion piece is problematic. I
think he misses the point on several levels though I think he does make one
critical point that hits the mark.
> 
> - As some have pointed out the Internet is not technology, the Internet
may be enabled by technology but it is a whole lot more than that, most
especially it is the content one can publish and consume using the
technology. The Internet is more like the published word, than it is like a
horse. The Internet is not technology, it is not even totally shaped by
technology as the techno-policy aspects are greater in many respects than
the bit and bytes of the protocol designs and implementations. To say that
people have a right to Internet access is a lot like saying people have a
right of access to published material.
> 
> - Another point he misses is contained in: "Civil rights, after all, are
different from human rights because they are conferred upon us by law, not
intrinsic to us as human beings." While I am glad that he does not go all
the way to define where intrinsic rights come from, for all intents and
purpose Human Rights and Civil Rights are defined by the same set of basic
rights documents: the UDHR <http://www.un.org/Overview/rights.html>, the
ICCPR <http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/a_ccpr.htm> and the ICESCR
<http://www.unhchr.ch/html/menu3/b/a_cescr.htm>. To set these things as
somehow separate and coming from different origins takes us back to the
battle between Natural and Legal rights. The documents referred to above, an
UNGA resolution (soft law) and two binding treaties (binding law), sometimes
referred to as the International Bill of Human Rights, moved us beyond that
argument putting both Human and Civil rights on a legal basis. It is a
category error to place them in opposition to each other.
> 
> Unfortunately the most important point he makes is almost swallowed by the
problematic background of the paper: That technologists need to focus on the
creation of rights-enabling technology as opposed to rights-disabling
technology. This is, in my opinion the critical thing to take from this
piece, problematic aspects aside. Personally I think a lot of the technology
that has gone in enabling the Internet has indeed being rights-enabling. In
recent years, however, much has been done by technical companies to create a
great amount of rights-disabling technology. And this is the big warning I
take from the piece. Technology companies have to stop endangering people's
rights in their quest of profits and government approval.
> 
> I hope those reading this piece among the technology purveyors and
technical developers pay attention and stop creating the technology that
disables the right-enabling characteristic of the Internet. It is good that
someone as revered as he is by many in our corner of the world, should make
this sort of statement.
> 
> avri
> 
> 
> 
> On 5 Jan 2012, at 07:03, Ginger Paque wrote:
> 
> >
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/opinion/internet-access-is-not-a-human-rig
ht.html?nl=todaysheadlines
<http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/05/opinion/internet-access-is-not-a-human-ri
ght.html?nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha212> &emc=tha212
> > 
> > Interesting opinion piece from Vint Cerf. I am copy/pasting it here for
those who may not be able to access it:
> > January 4, 2012
> > Internet Access Is Not a Human Right
> > By VINTON G. CERF
> > Reston, Va.
> > 
> > FROM the streets of Tunis to Tahrir Square and beyond, protests around
the world last year were built on the Internet and the many devices that
interact with it. Though the demonstrations thrived because thousands of
people turned out to participate, they could never have happened as they did
without the ability that the Internet offers to communicate, organize and
publicize everywhere, instantaneously.
> > 
> > It is no surprise, then, that the protests have raised questions about
whether Internet access is or should be a civil or human right. The issue is
particularly acute in countries whose governments clamped down on Internet
access in an attempt to quell the protesters. In June, citing the uprisings
in the Middle East and North Africa, a report by the United Nations’ special
rapporteur went so far as to declare that the Internet had “become an
indispensable tool for realizing a range of human rights.” Over the past few
years, courts and parliaments in countries like France and Estonia have
pronounced Internet access a human right.
> > 
> > But that argument, however well meaning, misses a larger point:
technology is an enabler of rights, not a right itself. There is a high bar
for something to be considered a human right. Loosely put, it must be among
the things we as humans need in order to lead healthy, meaningful lives,
like freedom from torture or freedom of conscience. It is a mistake to place
any particular technology in this exalted category, since over time we will
end up valuing the wrong things. For example, at one time if you didn’t have
a horse it was hard to make a living. But the important right in that case
was the right to make a living, not the right to a horse. Today, if I were
granted a right to have a horse, I’m not sure where I would put it.
> > 
> > The best way to characterize human rights is to identify the outcomes
that we are trying to ensure. These include critical freedoms like freedom
of speech and freedom of access to information — and those are not
necessarily bound to any particular technology at any particular time.
Indeed, even the United Nations report, which was widely hailed as declaring
Internet access a human right, acknowledged that the Internet was valuable
as a means to an end, not as an end in itself.
> > 
> > What about the claim that Internet access is or should be a civil right?
The same reasoning above can be applied here — Internet access is always
just a tool for obtaining something else more important — though the
argument that it is a civil right is, I concede, a stronger one than that it
is a human right. Civil rights, after all, are different from human rights
because they are conferred upon us by law, not intrinsic to us as human
beings.
> > 
> > While the United States has never decreed that everyone has a “right” to
a telephone, we have come close to this with the notion of “universal
service” — the idea that telephone service (and electricity, and now
broadband Internet) must be available even in the most remote regions of the
country. When we accept this idea, we are edging into the idea of Internet
access as a civil right, because ensuring access is a policy made by the
government.
> > 
> > Yet all these philosophical arguments overlook a more fundamental issue:
the responsibility of technology creators themselves to support human and
civil rights. The Internet has introduced an enormously accessible and
egalitarian platform for creating, sharing and obtaining information on a
global scale. As a result, we have new ways to allow people to exercise
their human and civil rights.
> > 
> > In this context, engineers have not only a tremendous obligation to
empower users, but also an obligation to ensure the safety of users online.
That means, for example, protecting users from specific harms like viruses
and worms that silently invade their computers. Technologists should work
toward this end.
> > 
> > It is engineers — and our professional associations and
standards-setting bodies like the Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers — that create and maintain these new capabilities. As we seek to
advance the state of the art in technology and its use in society, we must
be conscious of our civil responsibilities in addition to our engineering
expertise.
> > 
> > Improving the Internet is just one means, albeit an important one, by
which to improve the human condition. It must be done with an appreciation
for the civil and human rights that deserve protection — without pretending
that access itself is such a right.
> > 
> > Vinton G. Cerf, a fellow at the Institute of Electrical and Electronics
Engineers, is a vice president and chief Internet evangelist for Google.
> > 
> > Ginger (Virginia) Paque
> > Diplo Foundation
> > www.diplomacy.edu/ig
> > VirginiaP at diplomacy.edu
> > 
> > Join the Diplo community IG discussions: www.diplointernetgovernance.org
> > 
> > 
> > ____________________________________________________________
> > 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
> > 
> 
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20120106/93fba3da/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
____________________________________________________________
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

More information about the Governance mailing list