March 2011 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

France re-writes the rules of data retention

by Blengino

France re-writes the rules of data retention When Europe introduced a <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Retention_Directive> Data Retention Directive in 2006, it struck a very very careful political and legal balance between the interests of privacy and the interests of Law Enforcement/ Government access to data. The core distinction of the laws was to impose an obligation on service providers to retain and produce traffic data relating to communications, but to exclude contents of communications. Notwithstanding this careful balance, the Directive has always been highly controversial. There has been a long debate about whether this Directive, and the balance it struck, is Constitutional under national privacy laws, and indeed, last year its German-implementation was held un-constitutional by the <http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1052&context=serge_gut wirth> German Constitutional Court. Surprisingly, very few people have noticed what just happened in France. The law ( <http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTexte.do;jsessionid=?cidTexte=JORFTEXT0 00023646013&dateTexte=&oldAction=rechJO&categorieLien=id> decree, technically) adopted a few days ago in France up-ended the careful political/legal balance of the Directive by inserting one little word: "passwords". In other words, passwords are added to the list of "traffic data" that ISPs have to retain and produce to the French police on demand. Interestingly, the version of the law that had been circulating for discussion in France for the last two years, and which was reviewed by the French privacy authority the CNIL and by industry associations, did not contain that little word "password". The word "password" was inserted at the last minute, with no public or privacy review, as far as I can tell. Stop to reflect for just a minute. Why would police want a password and what would they do with it? Well, obviously, they would use it to look at "content" of communications. In other words, a password would grant them access to all the things that the Directive explicitly chose not to subject to Data Retention in the interests of privacy. All the years of work by privacy advocates has been chucked aside, in one little word. Well, three in French: "mot de passe". I'm sure legal challenges to this French law will not be far behind. Curiously, only a few lone voices in the <http://hightech.nouvelobs.com/actualites/20110301.OBS8924/les-hebergeurs-ob liges-de-conserver-les-mots-de-passe.html> press or advocacy community seem to have noticed all this. Dal blog di Peter Fleischer: http://peterfleischer.blogspot.com/2011/03/france-re-writes-rules-of-data.ht ml

March 11, 2011

Re: [nexa] China's Facebook Syndrome

by bernardo parrella

On 11/03/11 10.08, Marco Pancini wrote: > Vi segnalo questo articolo interessante a proposito della censura vista > come una barriera alla libera circolazione delle informazioni: > http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_12/b4220029428856_page_2.htm e visto che ci siamo: domani 12 marzo e' la Giornata mondiale contro la cyber-censura, sotto l'egida di Reporters Without Borders, per confermare il "sostegno a un'unica Internet senza restrizioni e accessibile a tutti". Per l'occasione verranno anche diffusi gli ultimi dati relativi ai "Nemici della Rete". http://12mars.rsf.org/en/

March 11, 2011

China's Facebook Syndrome

by Marco Pancini

Vi segnalo questo articolo interessante a proposito della censura vista come una barriera alla libera circolazione delle informazioni: http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/11_12/b4220029428856_page_2.htm -- Marco Pancini Senior Policy Counsel - Google Chaussee d'Etterbeek 180 - 1000 Brussels - Belgium Desk: +32.(0) 28948492 - Mobile: +32.(0) 473531203 This email may be confidential or privileged. If you received this communication by mistake, please don't forward it to anyone else, please erase all copies and attachments, and please let me know that it went to the wrong person. Thanks.

March 11, 2011

World Press Freedom Day Conference: May 1-3, / Newseum, Washington DC, focusing on 21st Century Media: New Frontiers, New Barriers

by Andrea Cairola

De : Center for International Media Assistance [mailto:cima@ned.org] Envoyé : vendredi 11 mars 2011 15:46 À : Coudray, Sylvie Objet : Save the Date! World Press Freedom Day Conference: May 1-3, 2011 Having trouble viewing this email? Click here Save the Date! World Press Freedom Day May 1-3, 2011 May 1-2 | Newseum May 3 | National Press Club It is our pleasure to announce UNESCO's commemoration of World Press Freedom Day 2011 in Washington, DC, May 1-3, 2011. The theme of this year's global conference is 21st Century Media: New Frontiers, New Barriers. The event will conclude on May 3rd with the awarding of the UNESCO/Guillermo Cano World Press Freedom Prize. The provisional program of panels and events can be found on the official World Press Freedom Day 2011 website at www.wpfd2011.org. Registration will be available soon. We encourage you to register as soon as possible to guarantee a spot. World Press Freedom Day 2011 marks the 20th anniversary of the original declaration made in Windhoek, Namibia. African journalists gathered, there in 1991, proclaimed that an independent, pluralistic press is fundamental to democratic and economic development, and called upon the United Nations to designate a day dedicated to preserving this freedom. In observation, the 2011 conference will affirm fundamental principles of media freedom that now extend into the digital age. It will highlight innovative media platforms that are democratizing how people can gain and share information - rights that now more than ever must be protected as new techniques for censorship, propaganda, and surveillance emerge. Planning for this event has been a joint effort among UNESCO, the convener of the annual observance; the U.S. Department of State, as the official host; the Center for International Media Assistance at the National Endowment for Democracy; IREX; and the United Nations Foundation, as the non-governmental organization sponsors. You can find more information about generous support for the event here. Initial donors include Omidyar Network, the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, the National Press Club, Newseum, UNESCO, Google, The Washington Post Company, the Nicholas B. Ottaway Foundation, Ethics & Excellence Journalism Foundation, Pia-Maria and Stephen Norris, and the Associated Press, among others. Contact CIMA 1025 F Street NW Suite 800 Washington, DC 20004 Phone: (202) 378-9700 Fax: (202) 378-9407 E-mail: CIMA(a)ned.org More About CIMA About CIMA CIMA Report CIMA Events Tools and Resources Forward email This email was sent to s.coudray(a)unesco.org by cima(a)ned.org | Update Profile/Email Address | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy. Center for International Media Assistance | 1025 F St. NW | Suite 800 | Washington | DC | 20004

March 11, 2011

World Day Against Cyber-Censorship: Reporters Without Borders releases new “Enemies of the Internet” list

by Andrea Cairola

Per vostra informazione. ciao Andrea De : RSF Afrique / RSF Africa [mailto:afrique@rsf.org] Envoyé : vendredi 11 mars 2011 15:28 À : Ambroise Pierre Objet : (Fr/Eng/Esp/Port) Journée mondiale contre la cyber-censure : Reporters sans frontières rend publique sa nouvelle liste des pays ennemis d’Internet et des pays sous surveillance / World Day Against Cyber-Censorship: Reporters Without Borders releases. Français / English / Espanol / Portugues Embargo vendredi 11 mars, 17h00 GMT (18h00 heure de Paris) Lire le rapport complet en ligne (à partir de 17h00) : http://12mars.rsf.org/fr/#ccenemies REPORTERS WITHOUT BORDERS PRESS RELEASE 11.03.2011 World Day Against Cyber-Censorship: Reporters Without Borders releases new “Enemies of the Internet” list Dedicated website: 12mars.rsf.org Reporters Without Borders has carried out a new survey of online freedom of expression for World Day Against Cyber-Censorship on 12 March. “One in three of the world’s Internet users does not have access to an unrestricted Internet,” Reporters Without Borders secretary-general Jean-François Julliard said. “Around 60 countries censor the Internet to varying degrees and harass netizens. At least 119 people are currently in prison just for using the Internet to express their views freely. These are disturbing figures. “The Internet played a crucial role in the recent Tunisian and Egyptian revolutions but more and more governments try to manipulate online information and remove critical content. There is a greater need than ever to defend online free speech and protect cyber-dissidents. This day is also the occasion to pay tribute to the solidarity that Internet users show towards each other.” Enemies of the Internet Reporters Without Borders is releasing a 100-page report on the state of online freedom of expression in the 10 countries it has identified as “Enemies of the Internet” and the 16 countries it is keeping “under surveillance” because of their questionable Internet policies. Repressive regimes resort to all sorts of measures to control content, ranging from censorship, jailing cyber-dissidents and circulating massive amounts of propaganda online. “Tunisia and Egypt have been removed from the list of Enemies of the Internet following the fall of their governments,” Julliard added. “These countries nonetheless remain under surveillance, as does Libya. The gains of these revolutions must be consolidated and the new freedoms must be guaranteed. We have also placed three democracies – Australia, South Korea and France – under surveillance because of various measures they have taken that could have negative consequences for online free expression and Internet access.” A dedicated website for the campaign For World Day Against Cyber-Censorship, Reporters Without Borders has created a dedicated website where Internet users can download a graphic representing the defence of online free expression, view a film made for the occasion by French illustrator Joel Guenoun and consult the map of Internet black holes. Internet users are urged to circulate this information on social networks, blogs and websites that support imprisoned netizens. They may also use the graphic, which is available in a score of languages (including Chinese, Arabic, Burmese, Turkmen, Farsi and Russian) as an image for their profiles in Facebook, Twitter and other social networks. 2010 – Year of the Internet? Last year saw the Internet and social networks conclusively established as tools for protest, campaigning and circulating information. It also saw a growing tendency for traditional and new media to complement each other, as witnessed not only during the Arab Spring but also in the way WikiLeaks released the leaked US diplomatic cables in coordination with several leading international media. The Internet continues above all to be a tool, one that can be used for good ends and bad. It creates an area of freedom in the most closed countries. Its potential as a tool for circulating news and information angers dictators and renders traditional censorship methods ineffective. The Internet is used not only by dissidents but also by governments, which employ it to circulate their propaganda and to reinforce surveillance and control of the population. The Internet strategies pursued nowadays by authoritarian regimes consist not so much of outright blocking as online manipulation and propaganda. Countries such as China, Saudi Arabia and Iran continue to filter out vast amounts of content, reinforcing the filtering at times of tension, but Internet users in these countries continue to learn how to circumvent censorship. Lucie Morillon Reporters Without Borders / Reporters sans frontières Head of New Media Desk / Responsable du Bureau Nouveaux Médias tel: +33 1 44 83 84 71 Email: internet(a)rsf.org Twitter: @luciemorillon / @RSF_RWB Skype: rsfnet ------ Día Mundial contra la Cibercensura: Reporteros sin Fronteras publica su nueva lista de países enemigos de Internet La organización crea un sitio dedicado a ello: 12mars.rsf.org Con ocasión del Día Mundial contra la Cibercensura, el 12 de marzo de 2011, Reporteros sin Fronteras presenta un informe sobre la situación de la libertad de información en línea. “Uno de cada tres internautas no tiene acceso a un Internet libre. Unos sesenta países censuran la red en diversos grados o acosan a los netciudadanos. Por lo menos 119 personas están encarceladas por el simple hecho de haber usado Internet para expresarse libremente. Son sólo algunas de las cifras que dan escalofrío. Como la Web ha jugado un rol crucial en las recientes revoluciones tunecina y egipcia, cada vez más gobiernos intentan manipular la información que circula en la Red y suprimir los contenidos críticos. Hoy, más que nunca, se debe defender la libertad de expresión en línea y proteger a los ciberciudadanos. Esta jornada también es la ocasión para rendir homenaje a la solidaridad que los internautas han demostrado los unos hacia los otros”, declaró Jean-François Julliard, Secretario General de Reporteros sin Fronteras. Los enemigos de Internet Reporteros sin Fronteras publica un informe de 70 páginas en el que se hace un balance de la situación de la libertad de expresión en línea en los diez países considerados enemigos de Internet y los 16 países ubicados bajo vigilancia. Los regímenes represivos realizan múltiples esfuerzos para controlar los contenidos, que van de la censura a la represión física de los actores de la Web, pasando por la difusión masiva de propaganda. “Túnez y Egipto fueron retirados de la lista de enemigos de Internet tras la caída de los gobiernos establecidos. Estos países permanecen no obstante bajo vigilancia, al igual que Libia. Las experiencias de la revolución deben consolidarse y las nuevas libertades, ser garantizadas. También ubicamos bajo vigilancia a tres democracias –Australia, Corea del Sur y Francia–, debido a diferentes medidas que podrían tener consecuencias negativas en la libertad de expresión en línea y de acceso a la Web”, agregó el Secretario General de la organización. Movilización en un sitio destinado a ello Con motivo de esta jornada, Reporteros sin Fronteras concibió un sitio web específico (12mars.rsf.org) en el que los internautas pueden descargar el pictograma que representa la defensa de la libertad de expresión en línea. En él, también es posible ver un video elaborado para la ocasión por el ilustrador francés Joel Guenoun, así como consultar un mapa de los hoyos negros de la Web. Se invita a los internautas a difundir la información de nuestro sitio en las redes sociales, los blogs y los sitios que apoyan a los netciudadanos encarcelados. Pueden utilizar el pictograma, disponible en una veintena de lenguas (chino, árabe, birmano, turkmeno, persa, ruso), como imagen de su perfil en Facebook, Twitter y otras redes sociales. 2010, ¿año de la Web? El año 2010 vio la consagración de las redes sociales y de la Web como instrumentos de movilización y de difusión de información. También estuvo marcado por una creciente complementariedad de los medios de comunicación tradicionales y los nuevos medios, ilustrada con la Primavera Árabe, pero también con la publicación de cables diplomáticos estadounidenses por WikiLeaks, en colaboración con varios medios de comunicación internacionales. Internet es ante todo un instrumento, empleado para lo mejor y para lo peor. En los países más divididos crea un espacio de libertad. Su potencial de difusión de información irrita a los dictadores y vuelve ineficaces los métodos tradicionales de censura. Le Web es utilizada por los disidentes, pero también por las autoridades para difundir la propaganda oficial y reforzar la vigilancia y el control de la población. La nueva estrategia de los regímenes autoritarios tiene que ver más con la manipulación y la propaganda en línea que con el bloqueo puro y duro. Cierto, países como China, Arabia Saudita o Irán todavía efectúan un filtraje severo, que incluso tiende a acentuarse en periodos de tensión, pero sus internautas continúan aprendiendo a evadir la censura. ----- Dia Mundial contra a Cibercensura: Repórteres sem Fronteiras divulga sua nova lista de países inimigos da Internet A organização cria um site específico para a data: 12mars.rsf.org Por ocasião do Dia Mundial contra a Cibercensura, a 12 de março de 2011, Repórteres sem Fronteiras elaborou um ponto da situação da liberdade de informação online. “Um em cada três internautas no mundo não tem acesso a uma Internet livre. Cerca de sessenta países, em maior ou menor grau, censuram a rede e perseguem os net-cidadãos. Pelo menos 119 pessoas se encontram presas pelo simples fato de terem utilizado a Internet para se expressar livremente. Estes números são por si só assustadores. Apesar da rede ter desempenhado um papel crucial nas recentes revoluções tunisiana e egípcia, são cada vez mais os governos que tentam manipular a informação que circula pela Internet e suprimir os conteúdos críticos. Mais do que nunca, é necessário defender a liberdade de expressão online e proteger os ciberdissidentes. Esse Dia Mundial também deve servir para homenagear a solidariedade mútua entre os internautas”, declarou Jean-François Julliard, secretário-geral de Repórteres sem Fronteiras. Os inimigos da Internet Repórteres sem Fronteiras divulga um relatório de 70 páginas que faz um balanço da situação da liberdade de expressão online nos 10 países considerados como inimigos da Internet e nos 16 países colocados sob vigilância. Os regimes repressivos desenvolvem intensos esforços para controlar os conteúdos digitais, desde censura até repressão física dos utilizadores da rede, passando pela difusão massiva de propaganda. “A Tunísia e o Egito abandonaram a lista dos inimigos da Internet após a queda dos respetivos regimes. Contudo, esses países continuam sob vigilância, tal como a Líbia. As conquistas da revolução têm que ser consolidadas e as novas liberdades devem ser garantidas. Três democracias – a Austrália, a Coreia do Sul e a França – também foram colocadas sob vigilância, devido a diferentes medidas que podem acarretar consequências negativas sobre a liberdade de expressão online e o acesso à Internet”, acrescentou o secretário-geral da organização. Mobilização num site específico Por ocasião desse Dia Mundial, Repórteres sem Fronteiras concebeu uma página específica (12mars.rsf.org) na qual os internautas podem baixar o pictograma que representa a defesa da liberdade de expressão online. É igualmente possível ver um filme realizado para a ocasião pelo ilustrador francês Joel Guenoun e consultar o mapa dos “buracos negros” da rede global. Pede-se aos cibernautas que divulguem essas informações nas redes sociais, blogues e nos sites de apoio aos net-cidadãos presos. Podem utilizar o pictograma disponível em vinte línguas diferentes (entre as quais o chinês, árabe, birmanês, turcomano, persa ou russo) como imagem de seu perfil Facebook, Twitter ou em outras redes sociais. 2010, ano da Internet? O ano de 2010 assistiu à consagração das redes sociais e da Internet como instrumentos de mobilização e de transmissão de informações. Por outro lado, ficou igualmente marcado pela crescente complementaridade entre a mídia tradicional e a nova mídia, exemplificada pela primavera árabe, mas também pela publicação dos telegramas diplomáticos americanos por WikiLeaks, em parceria com vários meios de comunicação internacionais. A Internet continua sendo uma ferramenta, utilizada tanto para o melhor como para o pior. Nos países mais fechados ao exterior, cria um espaço de liberdade. Seu potencial de difusão de informações exaspera os ditadores e torna ineficazes os métodos tradicionais de censura. Se a Internet é utilizada pelos dissidentes, também o é pelas autoridades, a fim de difundir a propaganda oficial e reforçar a vigilância e o controle das populações. A nova estratégia dos regimes autoritários já não passa tanto por um bloqueio puro e duro, mas sim pela manipulação e propaganda online. Se é certo que alguns países, como a China, a Arábia Saudita e o Irã, continuam aplicando um filtro rigoroso, e inclusive intensificando-o em períodos de crise, os internautas vão aprendendo cada vez melhor a contornar a censura.

March 11, 2011

LAPSI conference and award: Last 9 days for submitting a paper or an application

by Cristiana Sappa

Dear All, This quick message is to remind you that: 1) you still have some days to submit a paper for the LAPSI public conference of May 5th and 6th. All the relevant information on the call for paper is here: http://www.lapsi-project.eu/call/form The Review Committee selecting the papers according to the call for papers criteria is composed of: Roger Longhorn, Rolf Nordqvist, Herbert Burkert, Paul Uhlir, Ton Zijlstra 2) you have the same amount of days to submit an application for the LAPSI award of May 6th. You find the relevant information in the call for applications here: http://www.lapsi-project.eu/award/form The Review Committee selecting the applications according to the call for applications criteria is composed of: Rufus Pollock, Marco Ricolfi, Paul Uhlir, Julian Valero. Feel free to distribute this information to whoever may be concerned. I hope to see you in Milan. Kind Regards, Cristiana Sappa Project Manager, LAPSI, www.lapsi-project.eu, and EVPSI, www.evpsi.org Postdoctoral Researcher, Torino Law School Research Fellow, Nexa Center for Internet and Society, http://nexa.polito.it

March 11, 2011

Neelie Kroes: we must move away from the current playing field for specialists in copyright law.

by Paolo Brini

Neelie Kroes Vice-President of the European Commission responsible for the Digital Agenda Addressing the orphan works challenge IFRRO (The International Federation of Reproduction Rights Organisations) launch of ARROW+ (Accessible Registries of Rights Information and Orphan Works towards Europeana) Brussels, 10 March 2011 <http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=SPEECH/11/163&forma…> Ciao, Paolo

March 10, 2011

New CopySouth papers released

by Francesco Sellari

New CopySouth papers released http://copysouth.org/portal/theriopapers 8 March 2011. A new set of papers that critically analyse the failings and contradictions of the international copyright system are being released today by the CopySouth Research Group. The papers were presented at the third international conference of CopySouth held in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil at the end of June 2010. Previous CopySouth events were held in the UK (2005) and in India (2008). Among the themes and topics examined in the ten papers that are now available: North-to-South cultural flows, cultural diversity, copyright and music (written by two musicians), the Google book settlement, file sharing, as well as various aspects of the economics of the international copyright system and who benefits from its current operation. The authors of this freely-downloadable collection are based in Brazil, Bolivia, Cuba, the United States, South Africa, the Philippines, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom. The papers are currently available in the language in which they were presented at the Rio workshop: Portuguese, Spanish and English. All of the papers examine various ways in which the copyright system impacts on the lives of people who live in the global South where more than 75 % of the worlds population lives. http://copysouth.org/portal/theriopapers The CopySouth Research Group contact(a)copysouth.org

March 10, 2011

Re: [nexa] Esautorare ICANN?

by Andrea Glorioso

Sull'argomento suggerisco anche la lettura di questo blog post di Milton Mueller - non perche` sia la verita` rivelata, ma perche` Milton e` uno dei massimi esperti mondiali di ICANN/Internet Governance e, come sa chi ha avuto il piacere di conoscerlo, non ha peli sulla lingua. :) http://blog.internetgovernance.org/blog/_archives/2011/3/7/4765678.html Commerce Department: “Foreign devils made us do it” by Milton Mueller on Mon 07 Mar 2011 11:12 AM EST | Permanent Link | ShareThis The slowly dawning knowledge that the US Commerce Department's NTIA has been pushing to give national governments more power over ICANN has generated cognitive dissonance in this country. Isn't this supposed to be the land of Internet freedom, not the land of intergovernmental control? Wasn’t it the Commerce Department who created a private sector governance agency in the first place? The NTIA is now compounding the confusion by claiming that its newly aggressive stance toward ICANN is an attempt to stave off a takeover by the UN or some other intergovernmental conspiracy. We are told that there are “increasing pressures on ICANN” from foreign powers, and that a strengthened GAC is the only way to appease them. This meme was planted in the mind of a Washington Post reporter, new to the ICANN beat, and has spread from there to a columnist for Time Magazine. But the NTIA's argument is completely bogus. There are no “increasing pressures” on ICANN from other countries. The pressures have, in fact, dramatically subsided in the past five years. The pressure is made in the USA. Let's examine first the so-called "threat" of foreign takeover. Depending on how one counts, there have been three or four attempts by external entities to pre-empt or “take over” the functions now performed by ICANN, dating back to 1995. Each one has failed and in each case they failed because the U.S. didn’t want them to succeed. Since 2005, each threat has become progressively weaker, even as ICANN’s size, budget and staff have grown and its presence has become more entrenched. Back in 1996, the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), an intergovernmental organization based in Geneva, had the support of the Internet Society and Internet pioneer Jon Postel when it first made an attempt to grab what are now ICANN’s responsibilities. That effort, known as IAHC, failed because the U.S. said no. The newly formed ICANN was indeed very weak and shaky from 2000-2002, but that was because it has no money and could not get the cooperation and support of VeriSign, the dominant company in domain name registrations. ICANN overcame that threat by recognizing VeriSign’s property right over .com and allowing it to raise rates, creating a powerful symbiosis. The World Summit on the Information Society, which occurred from 2002 – 2005, mounted the biggest and most coordinated international challenge to ICANN so far. But even that failed to put a dent in ICANN’s private sector nature, both because there was no clearly superior alternative and because the US didn’t let it. Last year the ITU, at its quadrennial Plenipotentiary conference, made a last-ditch attempt to raise the issue of intergovernmental control of critical Internet resources. That effort led to nothing but an ITU pledge to work with ICANN and the first written recognition of ICANN’s existence in the ITU’s official documents. Moving beyond smallish matters of Internet governance, where on earth did anyone get the idea that the US is helpless unless desperate measures are taken to appease foreigners? The US has no trouble resisting UN takeovers of anything it doesn’t want taken over. It provides a goodly portion of the UN budget, and when agencies such as UNESCO are perceived to threaten US interests that money goes away, fast. The US has no trouble vetoing UN votes even when they involve resolutions with the support of virtually every other government in the world. The US entered the war in Iraq against the strenuous opposition of most of the world’s states, including longtime allies such as Germany and France. The idea that an institutional creature strongly supported by the US will somehow be yanked involuntarily into the UN's orbit is just ridiculous. Even if you think the world’s governments are itching to take over ICANN, there is no plausible mechanism for them to do it, unless the U.S. government and the big players in the Internet industry want them to. I challenge anyone with substantive knowledge of international law and institutions to set out a plausible scenario by which ICANN and the IANA contract could be forced into the UN or some other intergovernmental arrangement without the consent and support of the U.S. The Commerce Department ploy persists nevertheless. It is a classic gambit: governments build support for their actions by playing up the fear of an external enemy. It plays on mental models that are deeply ingrained in most Americans. The USA is assumed to be the beacon of freedom. The rest of the world can be divided into either distasteful authoritarian states or mushy socialist democracies, and either of them (in this mindset) would regulate the Internet to death if given the chance. So if there’s any threat to Internet freedom lurking in the world, it must come from someone else, not us. To business people especially, it is literally inconceivable that the most powerful threats to the Internet’s freedom might come from their own government. Unfortunately, it does. While the US does have some of the world’s most liberal institutions, it also has the largest and most powerful government and military-industrial complex in the world. The only government that has ever threatened to blow up ICANN because of a controversial top level domain is – you guessed it – the US government (.xxx). The US and China are the only governments in the world I know of to declare that cyberspace is a “national asset.” But when China says that, they mean a bordered, territorial Chinese Internet; when the savants in Congress and Washington think tanks say that, they mean the whole bloody thing. We have the greatest capacity for online surveillance and cyberwar of any nation on earth. We have unmatched levels of control over and visibility into international financial flows that can be leveraged to control lots of things outside our borders, including the Internet. Just ask Wikileaks. As the host to the world’s most powerful multinational copyright and trademark holders, we are the most susceptible to regulating the entire internet – not just our part of it – on behalf of intellectual property rights protection. It is the US and the US alone that has the capability of exerting more control globally than any of its rivals, given current conditions. You don’t need to believe the US is evil to appreciate this point; just think of what happens when an elephant dances among chickens; no matter how nice its intentions are, any misstep it makes can have fatal consequences. The point I am making is that the Commerce Department spinmeisters are not telling the truth when they claim that their strenuous attempts to subordinate ICANN’s nongovernmental policy making processes are justified by some desperate attempt to stave off foreign barbarians. NTIA is doing what it is doing because there are strong economic and political forces right here in this country who want it to yank the tether. Journalists, advocacy groups, and citizens should not be fooled by claims of foreign pressures. When discussing U.S. policy with U.S. policy makers we need to ask tough, pointed questions about who in this country gains from the policies being sought by the Commerce Department. Ask them which constituencies in this country (including government agencies such as DoD and NSA as well as businesses) asked for which policies and why they think bringing ICANN under the control of a governmental committee led by the US Commerce Department would benefit them. Ask them about the interagency meetings and task forces that vet their policy choices, who is represented on them and what they discuss. And don't buy it when the deflect responsibility to unnamed foreign entities. 2011/3/9 Andrea Glorioso <andrea(a)digitalpolicy.it>: > Caro Paolo, cari tutti, > > dato che la Commissione Europea partecipa (da tempo) alle discussioni > relative ad ICANN e alla governance di Internet, sono ahimé costretto a > tediarvi ancora con il solito disclaimer - quello che dico non > rappresenta necessariamente una posizione ufficiale della Commissione. > > On 3/8/2011 6:30 PM, Paolo Brini wrote: >> Il 08/03/2011 15:48, Andrea Glorioso ha scritto: >>> >>> Perche` dici che il piano e` tornato d'attualita`? >> >> Ciao Andrea, >> >> sia perché ora è di nuovo promosso simultaneamente da diversi governi, >> vedi per esempio >> <http://news.cnet.com/8301-31921_3-20040431-281.html> (dalle >> affermazioni di Del Bianco e meeting di Brussels della scorsa settimana >> in poi). > > Prima di tutto, gli articoli di Declan McCullagh vanno presi con una > certa cautela. McCullagh - che per altro leggo sempre con piacere - ben > rappresenta una certa ideologia, molto diffusa negli Stati Uniti (e non > solo), che vede le Nazioni Unite come il fumo negli occhi. Si può poi > discutere dei meriti e dei demeriti delle diverse posizioni in merito, > ma è importante tenere questo punto in mente. > > Infatti, che io sappia, durante il meeting di Bruxelles (un incontro tra > il Board di ICANN e il Governmental Advisory Committee, per discutere i > punti di disaccordo relativi all'introduzione dei nuovi "generic Top > Level Domains") un singolo paese - Kenya - ha semplicemente osservato > una banalità, ovvero che è difficile per i rappresentanti dei paesi in > via di sviluppo giustificare le spese per partecipare agli incontri di > ICANN. Tutto ciò nell'ambito di un punto molto specifico, ovvero la > richiesta del GAC che gli Stati siano esenti dal pagamento delle > "objection fees" all'introduzione di nuovi gTLDs (il problema non è > essere braccini, ma introdurre delle linee di budget formali per far > fronte a queste possibili "fees", che come sanno tutti coloro che > lavorano nelle pubbliche amministrazioni è sempre un bagno di sangue). > > Inoltre, Kenya - e leggo le trascrizioni - ha detto "[developing > countries] will just go to the ITU *for the information*". McCullagh si > è convenientemente scordato quel "for the information". > > Del Bianco non rappresenta uno Stato. Le sue opinioni sono interessanti, > ma sono le opinioni di un'organizzazione che rappresenta un certo numero > di aziende, guarda un po', statunitensi. Almeno una di queste aziende > trae una parte sostanziale dei propri introiti dal sistema ICANN così com'è. > > Per altro, che piaccia o meno a McCullagh, Del Bianco e altri, le > Nazioni Unite e le relative agenzie hanno una chiara responsabilità in > vari aspetti della governance di Internet. Ciò non significa che le > Nazioni Unite debbano o possano o vogliano "governare Internet", ma non > si può nemmeno far finta che un'organizzazione privata con sede in > California e con un chiaro contratto di dipendenza dagli Stati Uniti > possa completamente rimpiazzare delle sedi istituzionali e multilaterali. > >> sia perché (limitatamente alla parte di esautorarlo della sua autorità, >> non di trasferire i suoi poteri alle Nazioni Uniti) le pressioni >> dell'amministrazione Obama sembrerebbero volere arrogarsi un controllo >> totale sui nomi di dominio e sui TLD, sia per la posizione del GAC. > > La proposta degli Stati Uniti di imporre un "veto" all'introduzione di > nuovi gTLD, come avrai visto, non ha trovato consenso all'interno del > GAC stesso. Ma in ogni caso, dire che gli Stati Uniti vogliano > "esautorare" ICANN significa dimenticarsi che ICANN opera sulla base di > un contratto con il Governo degli Stati Uniti; all'interno del > territorio degli Stati Uniti; sottoposto alla giurisdizione degli Stati > Uniti. > > Quindi gli Stati Uniti, dal mio punto di vista, non stanno "esautorando" > granché. Stanno semplicemente ricordando - in maniera a mio parere > alquanto goffa - che ICANN non è mai stata e non è indipendente da loro. > > Che poi la soluzione a questo problema oggettivo debba o possa essere un > trasferimento di alcune o di tutte le funzioni di ICANN alle Nazioni > Unite o ad una delle sue agenzie, è una discussione molto interessante, > ma che secondo me, in questo particolare momento, è poco più di un "red > herring". > > Ciao, > > Andrea > >

March 10, 2011

Accessible Registries of Rights Information and Orphan Works towards Europeana

by Paolo Brini

March 10, 2011