September 2011 - nexa - server-nexa.polito.it

Raccomandazioni del CoE relative a Internet
by J.C. DE MARTIN Sept. 24, 2011

Sept. 24, 2011

Recommendation CM/Rec(2011)8 *of the Committee of Ministers to member states on the protection and promotion of the universality, integrity and openness of the Internet* /(Adopted by the Committee of Ministers on 21 September 2011 at the 1121st meeting of the Ministers' Deputies) / /https://wcd.coe.int/wcd/ViewDoc.jsp?Ref=CM/Rec%282011%298&Language=lanEnglish&Ver=original&BackColorInternet=C3C3C3&BackColorIntranet=EDB021&BackColorLogged=F5D383 / 1. The member states of the Council of Europe, States Parties to the Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (ETS No. 5, hereinafter "the Convention") have undertaken in Article 1 to secure to everyone within their jurisdiction the rights and freedoms defined in this Convention. They have particular roles and responsibilities in securing the protection and promotion of these rights and freedoms and can be held to account for violations of these rights and freedoms before the European Court of Human Rights. 2. The right to freedom of expression, which includes the freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference, is essential for citizens' participation in democratic processes. This right to freedom of expression applies to both online and offline activities, regardless of frontiers. In a Council of Europe context, its protection should be ensured in accordance with Article 10 of the Convention and the relevant case law of the European Court of Human Rights. 3. The Internet enables people to have access to information and services, to connect and to communicate, as well as to share ideas and knowledge globally. It provides essential tools for participation and deliberation in political and other activities of public interest. 4. The individual's freedom to have access to information and to form and express opinions, and the ability of groups to communicate and share views on the Internet depend on actions related to the Internet's infrastructure and critical resources, and on decisions on information technology design and deployment. Governmental action may also have a bearing on the exercise of these freedoms. 5. In particular, access to and use of the Internet is exposed to risks of disruption of the stable and ongoing functioning of the network due to technical failures and is vulnerable to other acts of interference with its infrastructure. The question of the stability and resilience of the Internet is intrinsically related to the cross-border interconnectedness and interdependence of its infrastructure, as well as its decentralised and distributed nature. Actions that take place in one jurisdiction may affect the ability of users to have access to information on the Internet in another. 6. Moreover, decisions taken in the context of the technical co-ordination and management of resources that are critical for the functioning of the Internet, notably domain names and Internet protocol addresses, may have a direct bearing on users' access to information and on protection of personal data. These resources are distributed in different jurisdictions and are managed by various non-governmental entities with a regional or global remit. 7. Against this background, the protection of freedom of expression and access to information on the Internet and the promotion of the public service value of the Internet are part of a larger set of concerns about how to ensure the universality, integrity and openness of the Internet. 8. People increasingly rely on the Internet for their everyday activities and to ensure their rights as citizens. They have a reasonable expectation that Internet services will be accessible and affordable, secure, reliable and ongoing. The Internet is, similarly, a critical resource for numerous sectors of the economy and public administration. 9. These expectations give rise to state responsibility to preserve carefully the general public interest in Internet-related policy making. Indeed, many countries have recognised the public service value of the Internet, whether in their national policies or legislation or in the form of political declarations, including in international fora. 10. States have a duty to ensure the protection of fundamental rights and freedoms of their citizens and they are called upon to respond to their legitimate expectations regarding the critical role of the Internet. As a result, it is the role of states to ensure the protection of the public interest in international Internet-related public policy. 11. In addition, states have mutual expectations that best efforts will be made to preserve and promote the public service value of the Internet. In this context, it is necessary to acknowledge their shared and mutual responsibilities to take reasonable measures to protect and promote the universality, integrity and openness of the Internet as a means of safeguarding freedom of expression and access to information regardless of frontiers. 12. Therefore, the Committee of Ministers, under the terms of Article 15./b/ of the Statute of the Council of Europe, recommends member states to: -- be guided by the principles contained in the Committee of Ministers' Declaration on Internet governance principles, both in the context of developing national Internet-related policies and when participating in such endeavours within the international community; -- protect and promote the universality, integrity and openness of the Internet having regard to the principles and in accordance with the commitment set out in this recommendation, and ensure that they are reflected in practice and law; -- ensure the broad dissemination of this commitment to all public authorities and private entities, in particular those dealing with the management of resources that are critical for the functioning of the Internet, and to civil society organisations; -- encourage these actors to support and promote the implementation of the principles included in the present recommendation. *Commitment to protect and promote the universality, integrity and openness of the Internet* *1. General principles* _1.1. No harm _ 1.1.1. States have the responsibility to ensure, in compliance with the standards recognised in international human rights law and with the principles of international law, that their actions do not have an adverse transboundary impact on access to and use of the Internet. 1.1.2. This should include, in particular, the responsibility to ensure that their actions within their jurisdictions do not illegitimately interfere with access to content outside their territorial boundaries or negatively impact the transboundary flow of Internet traffic. _1.2. Co-operation _ States should co-operate in good faith with each other and with relevant stakeholders at all stages of development and implementation of Internet-related public policies to avoid any adverse transboundary impact on access to and use of the Internet. _1.3. Due diligence_ Within the limits of non-involvement in day-to-day technical and operational matters, states should, in co-operation with each other and with all relevant stakeholders, take all necessary measures to prevent, manage and respond to significant transboundary disruptions to, and interferences with, the infrastructure of the Internet, or, in any event, to minimise the risk and consequences arising from such events. *2. Integrity of the Internet * _2.1. Preparedness _ 2.1.1. States should, jointly, and in consultation with relevant stakeholders, develop and implement emergency plans for managing and responding to disruptions to, and interferences with, the infrastructure of the Internet. 2.1.2. In particular, states should co-operate with a view to supporting the development and implementation of common standards, rules and practices aimed at preserving and strengthening the stability, robustness and resilience of the Internet. 2.1.3. States should create an environment that facilitates information sharing and response co-ordination among stakeholders, notably through the creation of public-private partnerships, in respect of activities involving a risk of causing significant transboundary disruptions to, and interferences with, the infrastructure of the Internet. _2.2. Response_ _2.2.1. Notification _ States should, without delay, provide notification of any risk of significant transboundary disruptions to, and interferences with, the infrastructure of the Internet to potentially affected states. _2.2.2. Information sharing_ States should, in a timely manner, provide potentially affected states with all available information relevant to responding to transboundary disruptions to, and interferences with, the infrastructure of the Internet. _2.2.3. Consultation_ States should enter into consultation with each other without delay with a view to achieving mutually acceptable solutions regarding measures to be adopted to respond to significant transboundary disruptions to, and interferences with, the infrastructure of the Internet. _2.2.4. Mutual assistance_ As appropriate, and with due regard to their capabilities, states should, in good faith, offer their assistance to other affected states with a view to mitigating the adverse effects of transboundary disruptions to, and interferences with, the infrastructure of the Internet. _2.3. Implementation_ States should, in consultation with relevant stakeholders, within the limits of non-involvement in day-to-day technical and operational matters, develop reasonable legislative, administrative or other measures as appropriate to implement their due diligence commitments regarding the integrity of the Internet. _2.4. Responsibility_ States should engage in dialogue and co-operation for the further development of international standards relating to responsibility and liability and to the settlement of related disputes. *3. Resources that are critical for the functioning of the Internet* States should take all reasonable measures to ensure that the development and application of standards, policies, procedures or practices in connection with the management of resources that are critical for the functioning of the Internet incorporate protection for human rights and fundamental freedoms of Internet users in compliance with the standards recognised in international human rights law.

1 0

Council of Europe calls for state cooperation to respond to disruptions to the Internet
by J.C. DE MARTIN Sept. 24, 2011

Sept. 24, 2011

Council of Europe calls for state cooperation to respond to disruptions to the Internet The Committee of Ministers has adopted on 23 September two recommendations and two declarations that call on states to uphold free speech online, including when it is threatened by disruptions or interferences to the Internet. In a _Recommendation on the protection and promotion of the universality, integrity and openness of the Internet _ <https://wcd.coe.int/wcd/ViewDoc.jsp?Ref=CM/Rec%282011%298&Language=lanEngli…>the Committee laid out a framework of co-operation for member states with a view to preserve a global, stable and open Internet as a means of safeguarding freedom of expression and access to information. The Council of Europe will present these documents for discussion with other Internet stakeholders at the upcoming Internet Governance Forum (Nairobi, 27-30 September). URL Press Release: https://wcd.coe.int/wcd/ViewDoc.jsp?Ref=DC-PR079%282011%29&Language=lanEngl… Press release - DC079(2011) *Council of Europe calls for state preparedness and cooperation to respond to disruptions to the Internet* Strasbourg, 23.09.2011 -- The Committee of Ministers of the Council of Europe has adopted two recommendations and two declarations that call on states to uphold free speech online, including when it is threatened by disruptions or interferences to the Internet. In a _Recommendation on the protection and promotion of the universality, integrity and openness of the Internet <https://wcd.coe.int/wcd/ViewDoc.jsp?Ref=CM/Rec%282011%298&Language=lanEngli…>_ the Committee laid out a framework of co-operation for member states with a view to preserve a global, stable and open Internet as a means of safeguarding freedom of expression and access to information. The Committee of Ministers urged states to develop policies, in conjunction with other stakeholders, to prevent and respond to harm to the Internet. While not getting involved in day-to-day operational issues, states should develop emergency plans, share information and assist each other in preventing and managing major cross border incidents affecting the Internet. They should also strive to ensure that critical Internet resources are managed with respect for international human rights law. In a Declaration, the Committee of Ministers adopted _10 Internet governance principles <https://wcd.coe.int/wcd/ViewDoc.jsp?Ref=CM/Del/Dec%282011%291121/5.1&Langua…>_ that should be upheld by Council of Europe member states when developing national and international policies related to the Internet: protection of human rights, democracy and the rule of law; multistakeholder governance; responsibility of states; empowerment of Internet users; universality; integrity; decentralised management; open standards, interoperability and end-to-end nature; open network; and cultural and linguistic diversity. The Committee of Ministers also _recommended <https://wcd.coe.int/wcd/ViewDoc.jsp?Ref=CM/Rec%282011%297&Language=lanEngli…>_ that states adopt a new broad notion of media and acknowledge that social networks, online games or online whistleblower sites are entitled to media freedom rights and responsibilities established under article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The Recommendation offers a set of criteria to be used when providing a graduated and differentiated policy response to different actors according to their role in the production and dissemination of information or content and in the operation of applications designed to facilitate mass communication, including platforms or applications for content-based interactive experiences. As a form of interference, regulation should be a measure of last resort; preference should be given to self-regulation and to new media embracing voluntarily journalistic standards. Attention has to be paid to situations of strong media concentration with a view to guaranteeing a satisfactory level of pluralism, diversity of content and consumer choice. In a _Declaration on freedom of expression and freedom of assembly and association with regard to domain names and name strings <https://wcd.coe.int/wcd/ViewDoc.jsp?Ref=CM/Del/Dec%282011%291121/5.1&Langua…>_,the Committee of Ministers expressed its concern about measures proposed in some states to prohibit the use of certain words in domain names and name strings. The Committee stated that the right to freedom of expression is fully applicable to domain names and strings. This is particularly important in view of the extension of the domain name space to include generic names in 2012. The Council of Europe will present these documents for discussion with other Internet stakeholders at the upcoming Internet Governance Forum (Nairobi, 27-30 September). For further information: _www.coe.int/media <http://www.coe.int/media>_ *Contact:* _Jaime.Rodriguez(a)coe.int <mailto:Jaime.Rodriguez@coe.int>_; mob. +33 (0) 6 89 99 50 42 *Council of Europe Directorate of Communication *Tel: +33 (0)3 88 41 25 60 Fax:+33 (0)3 88 41 39 11 pressunit(a)coe.int <mailto:pressunit@coe.int> www.coe.int <http://www.coe.int/>

1 0

IGF 2011
by luca belli Sept. 23, 2011

Sept. 23, 2011

Cari Tutti, La settimana prossima avrà luogo l'Internet Governance Forum 2011, organizzato sotto l'egida delle Nazioni Unite. Chi volesse partecipare a distanza potrà trovare tutte le indicazioni relative alla remote participation su http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/remote-participation-2011 I links al fine di partecipare ai singoli workshops saranno disponibili dalla prossima settimana mentre la lista dei workshops é disponibile su http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/w2011/list-of-workshops-2011 Buon proseguimento Luca Belli Doctorant en Droit Public, CERSA Université Panthéon-Assas, Paris 2PRES Sorbonne Universités

2 1

sorveglianza su locali marocchini da parte di NYPD
by J.C. DE MARTIN Sept. 22, 2011

Sept. 22, 2011

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=explorer&chrome=true&srcid=0B9pqQ9F7… Interessante squarcio su cosa significa fare sorveglianza nel 2011. juan carlos

1 0

Convegno PIC-AIS Comunicazione e civic engagement. Istituzioni,cittadini e spazi pubblici nella postmodernità - 22 e 23 settembre
by Daria Santucci Sept. 22, 2011

Sept. 22, 2011

Buongiorno a tutti, vi segnalo il Convegno organizzato dall’Associazione Italiana di Sociologia - Sezione Processi e Istituzioni Culturali, dal titolo "Comunicazione e civic engagement. Istituzioni,cittadini e spazi pubblici nella postmodernità", che si svolgerà giovedì 22 e venerdì 23 Settembre 2011 a Roma, presso il Dipartimento di Comunicazione e Ricerca Sociale, Sapienza Università di Roma, Centro Congressi. Programma in allegato. Saluti, Daria Santucci -- Daria Santucci, Ph.D. Professor of Web Communication Semiotics Communications Professional Journalist +39 347 2512926 www.vitaminapubblica.org www.progetto-rena.it/author/daria_santucci <http://www.vitaminapubblica.org/>

1 0

Fwd: [A2k] EU signs MoU on Key Principles on the Digitisation and Making Available of Out-of-Commerce Works
by J.C. DE MARTIN Sept. 22, 2011

Sept. 22, 2011

Penso che questa notizia interessi molti in lista. juan carlos -------- Original Message -------- Subject: [A2k] EU signs MoU on Key Principles on the Digitisation and Making Available of Out-of-Commerce Works Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2011 09:53:45 +0530 From: Pranesh Prakash <pranesh(a)cis-india.org> Organization: Centre for Internet and Society To: Commons Law <commons-law(a)sarai.net>, A2K List <a2k(a)lists.keionline.org> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Dear all, I believe this is a very interesting and important development in the EU. They've taken a non-legislative approach to something even broader than the orphan-works problem: the out-of-commerce book digitisation problem. The FAQ on this: http://goo.gl/L30Ew - From the FAQ: ## 4. What are the main elements of the MoU? It is sector specific, providing solutions for books and learned journals. It is based on voluntary licensing agreements to be negotiated in the country of first publication of the works. The determination of the out-of-commerce status will be decided in the country of first publication according to criteria defined by the parties. The types of use of the works will be agreed by the parties in each licensing agreement. It foresees the need for solutions to situations of collective management when not all right holders are represented by a collecting society. ## 5. Why a MoU? Why is the Commission not proposing a legislative initiative? Copyright holders, whether authors or publishers, are the ones who can decide whether or not to permit libraries or other cultural institutions to digitise out-of-commerce works contained in their collections and put them online as part of a digital library project. Through voluntary agreements interested parties can negotiate mutually acceptable terms and conditions for the online exploitation of out-of-commerce works. This is preferable to legislation that could be too prescriptive and lack the flexibility to provide solutions adapted to the needs of particular users and the specificities of particular sectors while fully respecting copyright. The Key Principles contained in the MoU signed today contain the necessary elements to ensure sufficient flexibility enabling authors and publishers to mandate collective management organisations to grant national and multi-territorial licences to those libraries and other publicly accessible cultural institutions wanting to digitise and make available out-of-commerce books and learned journals in their collections. In turn, the MoU recognises that legislative backing for these licensing solutions voluntarily developed by stakeholders may be needed in some Member States in order to cover situations where licences include right holders that are not members of a collective management organization. ## 6. How do out-of-commerce works differ from orphan works? There is one fundamental difference between them: orphan works are works where the copyright owners are not known or cannot be found so it is not possible to get the necessary authorisations to use their works. By contrast, the right holders of out-of-commerce works are generally known so a user such as a library will know whom to contact to get the necessary permissions to use the works. Whereas for the use of orphan works, the key element is the determination of the "orphan works" status, for the use of "out-of-commerce" works, the key element is how to facilitate their licensing (without having to determine whether within a collection of out-of-commerce works there are some that may, or may not, be orphans). ## 9. Who are the signatories to the MoU? The MoU was signed by the European Writers? Council (EWC), the Federation of European Publishers (FEP), the European Publishers' Council (EPC), the International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medical Publishers (STM), the European Bureau of Library, Information and Documentation Associations (EBLIDA), the Conference of European National Librarians (CENL), the Association of European Research Libraries (LIBER), European Visual Artists (EVA), the European Federation of Journalists (EFJ) and the International Federation of Reprographic Rights Organisations (IFRRO). - -- Pranesh Prakash Programme Manager Centre for Internet and Society W: http://cis-india.org | T: +91 80 40926283 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAk56uFAACgkQ7JoSBR1cXwe7LACfaftdu8n1YqQt2pcirH5qWLUs pvEAn1Xdj7d3MTvsTR98BaGIIibPHo6i =tRc5 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ A2k mailing list A2k(a)lists.keionline.org http://lists.keionline.org/mailman/listinfo/a2k_lists.keionline.org

1 0

Documentario "NMY" in Creative Commons e "Notte dei Ricercatori"
by alessandro cozzutto Sept. 22, 2011

Sept. 22, 2011

Buongiorno a tutti, Venerdì 23 Settembre alle ore 11, presso il Dipartimento di Studi Politici dell'università di Torino, via Giolitti 33, primo piano, avrà luogo la proiezione del documentario "Nice Meeting You", prodotto da Dot 2.0, Dipartimento Virtuale di Studi Politici e Sociali<http://www.dotduepuntozero.org>, e rilasciato in Creative Commons. Alla proiezione del documentario<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CRJv942hOeA&feature=player_embedded>, che racconta l'esperienza di dieci volontari italiani presso il campo profughi palestinese di Bourj El Barajneh, Beirut (Libano), seguirà una conferenza tenuta da ricercatori esperti in relazioni internazionali. L'iniziativa è volta a promuovere la pubblicazione di un DVD multimediale, i cui contenuti (video-foto-testi) saranno rilasciati sempre in CC. I ricavi della vendita del DVD saranno devoluti ai bambini del campo profughi. Il documentario e l'iniziativa Dot 2.0 verrano inoltre presentati il giorno stesso in Piazza Castello, dalle ore 17 alle 24, nell'ambito dell'iniziativa internazionale "Notte dei ricercatori". Ecco ilo link alla locandina dell'iniziativa<http://www.dotduepuntozero.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id…> , per informazioni info(a)dotduepuntozero.org cordiali saluti, -- Alessandro Cozzutto ale.cozzutto(a)gmail.com http://www.dotduepuntozero.org

1 0

Chi siamo – Reset Radio
by vale.it.newsletters＠gmail.com Sept. 21, 2011

Sept. 21, 2011

http://www.resetradio.net/chi-siamo/ Radio che trasmette musica e materiali in (cc). V

1 0

Preparare una lista per le prossime elezioni?
by Luigi Di Liberto Sept. 21, 2011

Sept. 21, 2011

Buon giorno a tutti, so che è una cosa piuttosto difficile per via del gran numero di firme a sostegno necessarie ma se ci prepariamo per tempo è una impresa anche possibile, mi pare che ci siano 6 mesi di tempo per raccoglierle ed in caso di elezioni anticipate in cui i 6 mesi non ci sono potrebbe essere possibile fare dei ricorsi alla Corte di Giustizia Europea per lesione dei diritti fondamentali ed indurre in questo modo il parlamento italiano a modificare all'ultimo momento questo assurdo meccanismo sul quale si basa la presentazione delle liste che nei fatti impedisce a nuove formazioni politiche di riuscire a presentare liste elettorali. Mi pare che a fronte del clamoroso fallimento dell'intergruppo 2.0 sia indispensabile ormai la presenza nel parlamento italiano di una formazione politica che faccia della difesa dei diritti telematici la bandiera e frontiera contro strabordante invadenza del copyright. Insomma un soggetto politico italiano che faccia propria con grande forza e determinazione la piattaforma internazionale del Partito Pirata. Non è che mi appassioni molto la definizione di Pirata ma è ormai un "marchio di fabbrica" che potrebbe garantire una visibilità superiore a qualsiasi altra denominazione (sempre che l'associazione italiana Partito-Pirata non abbia in preventivo una propria discesa in campo autonoma, spero che non voglia ripetere l'errore di avere qualche candidato "annegato" nel senso di neppure capolista, nelle liste di SEL), ma eventualmente si potrebbe anche usare altro nuovo marchio. Mi sembra assurdo che persone come Cortiana non abbiano ad essere rappresentanti in parlamento del Movimento della Rete, anzi auspico vivamente che voglia essere il Leader di questa formazione, ma sarebbe molto bello riuscire a portare in parlamento un gruppo di persone che si sono in questi anni attivati sui temi che in questa lista si discute. Credo che al programma classico del Partito Pirata si potrebbe aggiungere l'impegno per una riforma costituzionale della democrazia diretta a cominciare dall'abolizione del quorum sui referendum e l'inserimento dei referendum consultivi o in alternativa proposte di legge di iniziativa popolare con lo stesso numero di firme per i referendum (che potrebbero anche essere aumentate se viene abolito l'obbligo della autenticazione, che comunque andrebbe lo stesso abolito sul criterio che tre cittadini siano equiparati al Pubblico Ufficiale) ma che entro sei mesi debbano essere discusse e votate (senza passare dalle commissioni) dalle camere congiunte in seduta unificata e con votazione palese di cui debbano essere resi pubblici i voti dei parlamentari, come succede al parlamento europeo. Potremmo anche aggiungere l'abolizione del finanziamento pubblico ai partiti, anche se ora ha altro nome, e quello agli organi di informazione dei partiti stessi, alcune cose che tagliano i privilegi della casta politica come i vitalizi in modo retroattivo e l'abolizione delle provincie comprese le prefetture sempre se su questi punti si trova una convergenza unitaria. ed aggiungerne qualche altro che non abbia tendenze di politiche sinistrose o destroidi. Per tutto quello che non parte del programma ogni eventuale eletto ha totale libertà nella presa di posizioni e di voto. Bon, io l'ho buttata li, come dice spesso una persona che stimo, "prova a lanciare un oggetto in acqua, se galleggia e qualcuno ci sale disposto a remare nel tempo può diventare un veliero". Da parte mia sono disposto a remare ma non sono disponibile a candidature elettorali. LDL

2 1

Libro: "Digital AlterNatives"
by J.C. DE MARTIN Sept. 21, 2011

Sept. 21, 2011

Digital AlterNatives with a Cause? Hivos (The Hague) and The Centre for Internet and Society (Bangalore) consolidate their 3 year knowledge inquiry into the field of youth, technology and change in the 4 book collective "Digital AlterNatives with a cause?". This collaboratively produced collective, edited by Nishant Shah and Fieke Jansen,asks critical and pertinent questions about theory and practice around 'digital revolutions' in a post MENA (Middle East - North Africa) world. It works with multiple vocabularies and frameworks and produces dialogues and conversations between digital natives, academic and research scholars, practitioners, development agencies and corporate structures to examine the nature and practice of digital natives in emerging contexts from the Global South. The books are available for a free download in a .pdf format. [...] Continua qui: http://cis-india.org/digital-natives/blog/dnbook

1 0