[governance] Twitter to add to Balkanization of the Web

[Deirdre Williams]

Dear Roland,
I liked your distinction between the 'right to speak' and the 'right to
listen'.
I am also concerned about something practical with which the technical
people might be able to help - in the way that Vint Cerf suggested in his
original article. If content is blocked, to my understanding the user has
no way of knowing unless s/he is aware of that material from another
source. It's the same thing with 'Interception of Communications'
surveillance - unless one finds out, after the fact and from another
source, there is no way to know that it is happening. And therefore there
are no grounds to complain and to invoke the law. What we need is the
virtual equivalent of the click created when a third party picks up a
telephone receiver to eavesdrop on a conversation. Then we can complain and
the law is helpful.
The citizen needs to be empowered with knowledge of what is going on. The
danger to freedoms comes when this knowledge is withheld or concealed.
Deirdre


On 27 January 2012 05:11, Roland Perry <roland at internetpolicyagency.com>wrote:

> In message <CAD=1Ovf_Er95PUBBnsnZ21=NA_**fYt+36ZAFy-Xpep7BuMQ6mwg at mail.**
> gmail.com <NA_fYt%2B36ZAFy-Xpep7BuMQ6mwg at mail.gmail.com>>, at 22:51:50 on
> Thu, 26 Jan 2012, Paul Lehto <lehto.paul at gmail.com> writes
>
>  This relates to one big reason Google (via Vint Cerf) would oppose a
>> right to ACCESS the "Internet"
>>
>
> Isn't there a danger of confusing access to the Internet with access to
> particular content sites on the Internet?
>
>
>  -- most people naturally think of the internet as international and
>> various parties, including but not limited to Google and Twitter, and
>> putting more and more structural barriers in place to accessing the free
>> international internet
>>
>
> To use their own example, they'd respect the law in Germany, regarding
> pro-Nazi content, by withholding it from Germany rather than removing it
> from the whole world.
>
> That retains the individual's right of freedom on *speech*, but restricts
> the right to *listen* in some places (but only because of the law in that
> place).
>
> eBay has being doing this kind of thing for years - selectively
> restricting prohibited products depending on the country it's offered for
> sale. And all countries (even the USA) have things they wouldn't want you
> to tweet about.
> --
> Roland Perry
>
>
> ____________________________________________________________
> 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
>
>


-- 
“The fundamental cure for poverty is not money but knowledge" Sir William
Arthur Lewis, Nobel Prize Economics, 1979
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.igcaucus.org/pipermail/governance/attachments/20120127/3f1edde1/attachment.htm>
-------------- 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