[Chapter-delegates] NEWS RELEASE: INET Washington, DC to Explore Surveillance, Cybersecurity, and the Future of the Internet

[CW Mail]

Good afternoon:

The notice of the  North American INET on 24 July about surveillance raises some issues which we should not let pass. 
This matter cannot be dealt with appropriately in a local context, even in the US.

This notice gives the strong impression that the American participants believe this to be essentially a local US issue, which is obviously not the case.
On the contrary, the global dimension of the surveillance that has been revealed is indeed the major source of the distrust, indeed outrage, that has recently arisen.

Secondly, the notice gives a clear indication that ISOC in the US is already distancing itself from, by comparison the quite forthright position set out in the ISOC communiqué of 12 June, which by the way, has now been endorsed by ISOC-Brasil:

http://www.internetsociety.org/news/internet-society-statement-importance-open-global-dialogue-regarding-online-privacy

Let me explain briefly some of the areas of serious disquiet:

-	instead of a clear reference to US-organised surveillance, we now have "government surveillance programs around the world"
 	In Europe we call that 'drowning the fish' or 'noyer le poisson'.

-	the notice then proceeds to ask the meeting whether "… users have to be willing to compromise?"
 	Well, no! The surveillance that has been described infringes on the rights of large numbers of individuals, many of whom are not in the United States.
	
-	The worst part of the ISOC notice for the Washington DC meeting is when they ask the participants:
 	"whether the the vision of an open, innovative Internet can persist in an environment of online surveillance and data collection".
	Well, it was my understanding in any case, that the open Internet is much more than a 'vision', rather a vibrant fact of life to be protected. 
	Furthermore, many people reading this might think that what ISOC is actually saying that this surveillance environment is a given, and that Internet users might as well put up with it.
	(That is not what the 12 June communiqué was saying. Thankyou, ISOC-Brasil.)

Clearly, this will not do. I really think that the ISOC staff in the US need to have a rapid re-think about this and - at the very least - bring the 24 July INET announcement into line with the 12 June Communiqué. I also think that the composition of the Panel should be urgently enlarged, or the event deferred, until more balanced and representative participation can be ensured.
What our friends in DC need to understand, is that this issue is as much a concern for the Internet Society outside the US, if not more so.

Regards

Christopher Wilkinson.

On 15 Jul 2013, at 20:44, Wende Cover <cover at isoc.org> wrote:


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20130718/9042a996/attachment.htm>