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

Wed Jul 22 05:50:40 PDT 2020

Here is another in-depth discussion of the complexities of data:

library.fes.de/pdf-files/iez/16034.pdf   

The first section of this paper discusses the nature of digital production
and digital economy. The next one explores the political economy of the key
resources in the digital economy – da¬ta, and digital intelligence derived
from data. The third sec¬tion looks at the public sector’s legitimate role
in the new

digital context. The final section concludes the paper by listing important
areas for engagement by public sector workers.

Best,

Richard

From: Richard Hill [mailto:rhill at hill-a.ch] 
Sent: Tuesday, 21 July, 2020 18:06
To: 'IWNConsultation at 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-ne
w-kind-of-free-trade 

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

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

https://publicservices.international/resources/publications/digital-trade-ru
les-and-big-tech-surrendering-public-good-to-private-power?lang=en
<https://publicservices.international/resources/publications/digital-trade-r
ules-and-big-tech-surrendering-public-good-to-private-power?lang=en&id=10825
&showLogin=true> &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-excep
tion 

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-p
rocess/>
https://www.internetsociety.org/about-internet-society/policy-development-pr
ocess/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://elists.isoc.org/mailman/private/chapter-delegates/attachments/20200722/1f849a88/attachment.htm>