[Chapter-delegates] Policy Development Process (PDP): The Internet Impact Assessment Toolkit

Tue Jul 21 11:41:19 PDT 2020

Hi Richard,

Thank you for your thoughtful review. We are currently collecting all feedback and will consider this along with others' thoughts on scope after the PDP has concluded.

Best,
Katie
________________________________
From: Chapter-delegates <chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org> on behalf of Richard Hill via Chapter-delegates <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2020 12:05 PM
To: IWNConsultation <IWNConsultation at isoc.org>; chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org <chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org>
Subject: Re: [Chapter-delegates] Policy Development Process (PDP): The Internet Impact Assessment Toolkit

Here are my comments on some of the other papers.

“IIAT Introduction”: I think that it would be good to mention the worrisome trend towards concentration that we are seeing for key services such as search engines, social networks, online shopping platforms, etc. In this respect, see my review of Tim Wu’s book, at:

  http://www.boundary2.org/2018/10/richard-hill-too-big-to-be-review-of-wu-the-curse-of-bigness-antitrust-in-the-new-gilded-age/

“Data localization”: the base paper “Critical properties …” is about the network itself, at a fairly low layer. It is not obvious that the properties discussed in that paper can be automatically applied to a much higher-level concept, data, that exists outside the network itself, and that is subject to fundamental human rights and national data protection laws. I think that it is a category error to attempt to apply the critical properties of the lower layers of the network to constructs that exist well above the highest layer of the network.

Indeed, the issues related to data include personal privacy and economic considerations that are not obviously related to the network properties discussed in the “Critical properties …” paper. See for example:

  https://itforchange.net/index.php/data-localisation

  http://www.apig.ch/CWG-Internet%202017-2bis.pdf

  https://justnetcoalition.org/digital-justice-manifesto

  https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/burcukilic/big-tech-is-pushing-for-a-new-kind-of-free-trade

  https://www.opendemocracy.net/digitaliberties/renata-avila-burcu-kilic/new-digital-trade-agenda-are-we-giving-away-internet

http://datagovernance.org/report/data-and-data-intelligence-commons

https://publicservices.international/resources/publications/digital-trade-rules-and-big-tech-surrendering-public-good-to-private-power?lang=en&id=10825&showLogin=true

“Intermediary Liability”: again the base paper “Critical properties …” is about the network itself, at a fairly low layer. It is not obvious that the properties discussed in that paper can be automatically applied to a much higher-level concept, liability of publishers or passive conduits of information, that exists outside the network itself, and that is subject to fundamental human rights and national laws. I think that it is a category error to attempt to apply the critical properties of the lower layers of the network to constructs that exist well above the highest layer of the network.

While I agree that passive conduits of information should not be liable for the information (unless they have been notified that the information is illegal), I do not agree that the US CDA 230 is an appropriate way to implement that concept. On the contrary, I think that time has proven that CDS 230 is not the right approach, see:

  https://botpopuli.net/trump-and-cda-section-230-the-end-of-an-internet-exception

Best,

Richard

From: Chapter-delegates [mailto:chapter-delegates-bounces at elists.isoc.org] On Behalf Of Katie Watson Jordan via Chapter-delegates
Sent: Monday, 20 July, 2020 17:12
To: chapter-delegates at elists.isoc.org
Subject: [Chapter-delegates] Policy Development Process (PDP): The Internet Impact Assessment Toolkit

Dear colleagues,

As you know, the Internet Society launched a new project in 2020 -- the Internet Way of Networking (IWN)<http://www.internetsociety.org/issues/internet-way-of-networking/>.

For the last six months, the team has worked to identify the critical properties of the Internet Way of Networking, basically what makes the Internet ...The Internet. The objective is to create a powerful narrative that enables the Internet Society and its community of members to talk about the Internet in a consistent and cohesive way, and to provide a baseline, against which, new developments – from technology proposals to regulatory interventions - can be analyzed.

Based on these properties, the IWN team has developed a toolkit to promote a positive vision for the Internet so it can keep evolving as an innovative force for good and continue to be the incredible resource it is today. This toolkit includes the following documents, and we recommend you read them in this order:

  *   Preamble and general introduction
  *   White Paper on the Critical Properties of the Internet Way of Networking
  *   3 use-cases that illustrates how various trends and policies can be assessed against the essential properties. For the PDP, the following use-cases are included:

     *   Intermediary liability
     *   Data Localization
     *   Interconnection and Routing

The toolkit will enter a Policy Development Process (PDP) today, July 20th, and will be open for community feedback for three weeks (end date: August 10th). Ahead of this process the team also organized a webinar presentation to provide further information and context. A recording is available for your reference here: https://isoc.box.com/v/IWNpdpWebinar

Instructions:

  *   The document is available in PDF for download here: https://isoc.box.com/v/InternetWayNetworking
  *   Please send your feedback via email to: IWNConsultation at isoc.org
  *   In particular we are looking for you view on the following questions:

     *   Do these properties make sense? Is something missing in their description, and are all properties included?
     *   Is it a helpful narrative for you and your community? Does the toolkit make sense in your local/regional context?
     *   Are the use-cases clear? Is something missing in the analysis, and do they “do the job” of evaluating the impact on the properties?
     *   Do you have suggestions for improvements, or ideas for how this toolkit can be used by the Internet Society members and allies?

We believe that this toolkit will provide an important foundation for the Internet Society's future work, and strongly encourage all interested members to review the documents, provide feedback and engage in this process!

Best regards,

The IWN Team

About the Internet Society's Policy Development Process (PDP):

In 2018, ISOC established a Policy Development Process (PDP) to lead consultation of Members (Chapter/SIG leaders, Organisation Members and individual members) ahead of the publication of new policy positions. For more information, please visit: https://www.internetsociety.org/about-internet-society/policy-development-process/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20200721/e418e6bd/attachment.htm>