[Chapter-delegates] Internet and Constitution

Mon Apr 25 19:46:50 PDT 2011

I was about to quote Article 19, but Veni and Philippe beat me to it.

That said, I think the UN UDHR is wonderfully worded, precisely because it does not say "the Internet." Rather, it describes the Internet.

Can anyone, for a lawyer or regulator, define what the Internet is? It is not so easy. The technical definition says that a laptop tethered over PPP over bluetooth to a mobile phone connected over IPv4 to a carrier walled garden is a real Internet connection. Only too bad it does not go beyond the ISP's network. Note that if the ISP's network crosses geographic boundaries, it may meet the UDHR's "frontierless" declaration, but certainly not its intent.

For that matter, true Internet access is an ideal that we should strive for, but should not declare defeat if we do not get it. For example, there is almost no true Internet access throughout most of the United States (no symmetric connections, no servers allowed, no fixed IP address, etc.). However, most would say that the U.S. does have Internet access.

With the current UDHR, one can make an argument for things like Network Neutrality and the right to set up a server. Saying, "Give us the Internet" allows the regulator or service provider to say, "Internet Access, $55/month. If it is on the price list, you have Internet access. Not our problem if you cannot get outside the ISP's border." That is NOT what I would hope we would get.

On Apr 25, 2011, at 5:00 PM, Veni Markovski wrote:

> Khaled,
> It is good to see that you're trying to help your country!!!
> 
> May I remind you all that you elected me as a Trustee in 2001, based
> on a platform, which included the following:
> http://veni.com/isoc-elections.html
> While this was for the UN, you could adjust it for any country.
> However, I'd argue that you shouldn't include the technology in the
> Constitution. The UN UDHR is a declaration, and as such - is the right
> place to do something like that. In the Constitution you should give
> guarantees to defend the rights of the people, and make sure there's
> no misuse. You could include something about technologies, but only in
> the preamble. Think from the perspective of time: what if 30 years ago
> they would have included fax or telex in the Constitution? Technology
> just helps (or bothers!!) freedom of access to information - that's
> where you should focus!
> 
> - start quote
> Recently (January 16th, 2001) one of our members - Victor Papazov,
> told me something, which I think is very positive.
> 
> We need to ask the United Nations for an amendment to the Universal
> Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).
> 
> ===
> Article 19 states: Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and
> expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without
> interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas
> through any media and regardless of frontiers.
> ===
> 
> We should ask the UN to consider the following 2nd paragraph:
> 
> (2) EVERY PERSON HAS THE RIGHT TO ACCESS TO THE INTERNET.
> 
> Further, in
> ====
> Article 26.
> (1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at
> least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education
> shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be
> made generally available and higher education shall be equally
> accessible to all on the basis of merit.
> (2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human
> personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and
> fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and
> friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall
> further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of
> peace.
> (3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that
> shall be given to their children.
> ====
> 
> we may ask the UN to have the following:
> 
> (4) Each school should have access to the Internet.
> 
> On 4/25/11, Khaled KOUBAA <khaled.koubaa at gmail.com> wrote:
>> All,
>> Thank you for your helpful thinking.
>> The Article 8 of our old constitution already granted the freedom of
>> expression but this has not prevented the old regime to abuse it.
>> But here is not our goal, and this is issue has already the support of
>> everyone here.
>> I don't want to compare Internet to TV/Radio or others. It has for sure
>> not the same influence on our society nor our future.
>> We think that the right to access the network ( we still not agree on
>> right wording in Arabic for it ) should be granted regardless to what
>> will using for : to express ourself, to educate, health,
>> entrepreneurship, .... or even may be spamming or DDoSing. But even if
>> he will spam people, before doing it, he as every citizen has the right
>> to access to the network. We can't censor him because we think that he
>> may one day do illegal things with the network.
>> The real rational behind that is that policy and regulations that will
>> be than built up on this "Constitutional Right" will be with a unique
>> "User Centric" focus.
>> Khaled
>> 
>>> My personal opinion - "the right to access the network" is a special case
>>> of what I think you really want, and is worded in such a way that could be
>>> very unfortunate.
>>> 
>>> Taking the second point first, in television, if I were to say that you
>>> have the right to access the TV signal, that would imply that you could
>>> receive entertainment or propaganda, but would not necessarily have the
>>> right to transmit a signal. I can think of a lot of telecommunication
>>> networks (google the phrase "walled garden") that would be very happy to
>>> grant you the right to access their content using their network, but not
>>> give you the right to generate content.
>>> 
>>> I think that what you're really looking for is a 21st-century statement of
>>> the US first amendment, which is the right to "speak" freely, with the
>>> most general possible definition of "to speak". I might state it as the
>>> "right to exchange any information with any consenting party on any topic
>>> using any communication medium".
>>> 
>>> Note that the statement of the right does not require the information
>>> exchanged to be true or lawful; the issue the US first amendment addressed
>>> was an environment in which political statements were often unlawful and
>>> of debatable validity. The important thing is not that your statement be
>>> correct; it is that you have the right to make it. Note that there is no
>>> implied right to lack of consequences - You have the right to make
>>> slanderous and libelous statements, and the party they are made about has
>>> the right to seek redress.
>>> 
>>> The word that I myself might debate in the statement above is "consenting"
>>> - I didn't have it in the first version of the statement. I added it
>>> because I don't think that a spammer or DDOSer should have the right to
>>> attack me; both I and my email providers will argue that in general
>>> abusive communications should not be protected. But "abusive" is also in
>>> the eyes of the beholder; I can imagine issues here. Maybe that comes
>>> under the same rubric as slander and libel; you have the right to send the
>>> traffic and I have the right to prevent it from reaching me.
>>> 
>>> I would suggest reading
>>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution
>>> for a review of the US First Amendment and the issues related to it.
>>> 
>>>> We appreciate any feedback and help from your side if you can share with
>>>> us other experience that you heard about or any country who is
>>>> implementing such rules in their constitution.
>>>> Many thanks,
>>>> Khaled KOUBAA
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Chapter-delegates mailing list
>>>> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
>>>> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Chapter-delegates mailing list
>> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
>> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates
>> 
> 
> -- 
> Sent from my mobile device
> _______________________________________________
> Chapter-delegates mailing list
> Chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
> https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/listinfo/chapter-delegates

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20110425/45eadc43/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3932 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20110425/45eadc43/attachment.p7s>