|
PRIVACY Forum Archive Document
|
PRIVACY Forum Digest Wednesday, 6 December 2000 Volume 09 : Issue 25
(http://www.vortex.com/privacy/priv.09.25)
Moderated by Lauren Weinstein (lauren@vortex.com)
Vortex Technology, Woodland Hills, CA, U.S.A.
http://www.vortex.com
===== PRIVACY FORUM =====
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The PRIVACY Forum is supported in part by
the ACM (Association for Computing Machinery)
Committee on Computers and Public Policy,
Cable & Wireless USA, Cisco Systems, Inc.,
and Telos Systems.
- - -
These organizations do not operate or control the
PRIVACY Forum in any manner, and their support does not
imply agreement on their part with nor responsibility
for any materials posted on or related to the PRIVACY Forum.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
CONTENTS
Proposal for a Representative Global Internet Policy Organization
(Lauren Weinstein and Peter G. Neumann)
*** Please include a RELEVANT "Subject:" line on all submissions! ***
*** Submissions without them may be ignored! ***
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Internet PRIVACY Forum is a moderated digest for the discussion and
analysis of issues relating to the general topic of privacy (both personal
and collective) in the "information age" of the 1990's and beyond. The
moderator will choose submissions for inclusion based on their relevance and
content. Submissions will not be routinely acknowledged.
All submissions should be addressed to "privacy@vortex.com" and must have
RELEVANT "Subject:" lines; submissions without appropriate and relevant
"Subject:" lines may be ignored. Excessive "signatures" on submissions are
subject to editing. Subscriptions are via an automatic list server system;
for subscription information, please send a message consisting of the word
"help" (quotes not included) in the BODY of a message to:
"privacy-request@vortex.com". Mailing list problems should be reported to
"list-maint@vortex.com".
All messages included in this digest represent the views of their
individual authors and all messages submitted must be appropriate to be
distributable without limitations.
The PRIVACY Forum archive, including all issues of the digest and all
related materials, is available via anonymous FTP from site "ftp ftp.vortex.com",
in the "/privacy" directory. Use the FTP login "ftp" or "anonymous", and
enter your e-mail address as the password. The typical "README" and "INDEX"
files are available to guide you through the files available for FTP
access. PRIVACY Forum materials may also be obtained automatically via
e-mail through the list server system. Please follow the instructions above
for getting the list server "help" information, which includes details
regarding the "index" and "get" list server commands, which are used to access
the PRIVACY Forum archive.
All PRIVACY Forum materials are available through the Internet Gopher system
via a gopher server on site "gopher.vortex.com/". Access to PRIVACY Forum
materials is also available through the Internet World Wide Web (WWW) via
the Vortex Technology WWW server at the URL: "http://www.vortex.com";
full keyword searching of all PRIVACY Forum files is available via
WWW access.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
VOLUME 09, ISSUE 25
Quote for the day:
"You can break a man's skull.
You can arrest him.
You can throw him into a dungeon.
But how do you fight an idea?"
-- Sextus (Andre Morell)
"Ben-Hur" (MGM; 1959)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 06 Dec 2000 20:37:42 PST
From: lauren@vortex.com (Lauren Weinstein; PRIVACY Forum Moderator)
Subject: Proposal for a Representative Global Internet Policy Organization
Greetings. I believe that this may be of interest to many PRIVACY Forum
readers, since the issues involved potentially have broad implications that
relate to privacy and many affiliated topics. My apologies in advance to
anyone who receives duplicates of this text via other venues.
--Lauren--
------------------------
PFIR Proposal for a Representative Global Internet Policy Organization
December 6, 2000
http://www.pfir.org/statements/proposal
PFIR - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
[ To subscribe or unsubscribe to/from this list, please send the
command "subscribe" or "unsubscribe" respectively (without the
quotes) in the body of an e-mail to "pfir-request@pfir.org". ]
In the "PFIR Statement on Internet Policies, Regulations, and Control"
(http://www.pfir.org/statements/policies, July 2000), we proposed the
creation of a new international organization to coordinate and help establish
recommended policies and standards for the Internet. The goal of such an
organization would be the furthering of fair and balanced availability,
growth, and usefulness of the Internet on a global basis to benefit the
entire world's population, not just particular regions or interest groups.
It has become increasingly obvious that some entities currently involved in
Internet policy making, including ICANN (Internet Corporation for Assigned
Names and Numbers) and the U.S. Dept. of Commerce, are incapable of
adequately addressing the broad international aspects and issues relating to
the Internet. This is true even to the limited extent (if any) that they
might consider such non-parochial concerns to be within their mandated
purview. The above referenced PFIR document discusses why we feel that a
new international organization would be beneficial in addressing many of
these matters in a useful and proactive manner.
We now propose a possible framework for the organization that we previously
postulated. We wish to emphasize that this is merely a basic concept put
forth as a starting point for thought and discussion, not as a fully-formed
proposal. There are myriad details and problems (some of a fundamental
nature) that would need to be enumerated, understood, and/or solved before
any such organization such as we envisage could become a reality.
The perceived lack of fair and balanced representation in the creation and
promulgation of Internet policy is a critical shortcoming with the existing
entities engaged in this area. We therefore suggest that for the proposed
new organization, a structure similar in some respects to (but differing in
many important aspects from) that of the United Nations might be a useful
starting point.
We visualize an international organization (presumably a non-profit
corporation) to which a large number of global representatives will input
ideas and votes regarding a wide range of Internet-related issues. This
organization, as mentioned above, would serve to help formulate recommended
policies and standards regarding the Internet, but significantly, it would
not encompass any enforcement powers.
Nationalities provide a natural unit on which to base representations in a
global organization, but do not in and of themselves represent the varied
interests of Internet users. We therefore suggest a number of delegates
from each country (and other agreed-upon political units) who would be the
basis of such a representative body. Henceforth in this discussion we will
use the term "country" when referring either to nations or to other political
units being included within the organization.
One possible organizational structure would include five delegates from each
country, apportioned as one delegate from each of the following five
categories:
- Business
- Government
- Education
- Public policy, public interest, and non-profit organizations
- Citizens and residents
There are of course other reasonable ways to organize these or additional
categories. Each individual delegate would have a single vote, both when
voting on issues relating directly to their particular category and when
voting on issues brought before the main body of the organization. The
manner in which these delegates would be chosen could and presumably would
vary between countries, and would be a matter for internal discussion and
decision within each such country, though suggestions and guidance in this
regard might well be available from the larger organization itself (but
would not be binding).
We view the complex issues of the Internet as being best handled through
this form of representative framework. We do not envision global "Internet
user" votes on policy matters, since such votes appear completely
unworkable, easily manipulated, and impossible to validate.
There are many potential issues and problems to be resolved in considering
the creation of such an organization. One obvious matter is establishing
the list of entities who would be empowered to participate in the
representative forum, as relates to countries that are subject to trade,
communication, or other embargoes set in place by other nations. Similarly,
groups of individuals claiming national status who might not be generally
recognized globally as such is as another difficult topic. For now, we
leave these issues, and various other important matters such as overall
funding considerations, for upcoming analysis and discussion.
It is anticipated that this new organization would encompass both a general
assembly including the full range of countries as described above, and a
"guiding" assembly consisting of representatives of the countries with the
largest current Internet populations (to be defined via an agreed-upon
algorithm). The primary role of this guiding assembly would be to help
direct high-level policy directions for the organization as a whole. No
guiding or main assembly countries or delegates would possess any veto over
the organization's decisions or recommendations. We expect that this
proposed lack of veto powers may be a cause of possible consternation among
some business and government interests, who may feel themselves to already
be vested with the exclusive rights to determine the Internet's future. We
believe that public discourse regarding this issue may be particularly
interesting and illuminating.
We wish to reiterate that the scope of this organization would be directed
towards the creation of recommended policies and standards concerning a
broad range of global Internet issues, not the enforcement of such policies
or standards. That having been said, it is hoped that the existence of a
policy body with a truly representative and global nature would help to
avoid many rapidly increasing problems currently affecting Internet issues
and by extension many other facets of our societies. This new international
organization could also help to minimize disillusionment and threats of
major, long-term network fragmentations that have been arising within the
current Internet regime.
There are no significant technical reasons why such new policies could not
hold voluntary sway. Administrators and users of the Internet DNS (Domain
Name System), for example, could at any time choose to turn away from the
current root servers and direct their systems toward new domain naming
environments. This same principle could hold true through a broad range of
Internet-related issues.
There could be some risk of short-term confusion relating to the significant
change in course that the creation of this new organization would entail.
However, we believe that rational international policies will be sufficiently
convincing to bring the various players together in a framework with much
more long-term stability and fairness than the current ad hoc system.
The scope of this project is large, but we feel that it is completely
possible and practical. By making use of Internet and other technologies,
various potentially expensive aspects of such a global organization can be
minimized. Physical meetings of the entire body of delegates might well be
unnecessary, or at least be relatively rare. E-mail, telephone
communications, video-conferencing, and other readily available technologies
could serve for the bulk of ongoing communications.
Also, it would be unnecessary for this new organization to independently
recreate technical expertise that already exists elsewhere. For example,
technical subcommittees of the organization might involve entities such as
ICANN or the IETF (Internet Engineering Task Force), etc. to help implement
the recommended technical policies of the organization. This would free
these ostensibly technically-oriented groups from even the perception of
being involved in policy creation and its related controversies.
When viewed in the context of the Internet's immense scope and growing
importance, soon to underly so many aspects of our lives, the direction that
we propose is by no means radical or extraordinary. In fact, it would be
extraordinarily unwise and unforgivable to continue along the current
course, with the fate of the global Internet effectively in the hands mainly
of narrow interest groups and U.S. government agencies, whose power as
relates to the Internet derive mainly from historical accident, not
purposeful, balanced, or representative planning.
Again, there are many details that would need to be worked out in the course
of creating the organization that we've outlined. But the moment to start
down this difficult but necessary road is now. Too much time and energy have
already been wasted amidst selfish bickering and polarization that threaten
to reduce the shining promise of the Internet to the same sordid levels that
we've come to expect in the modern political arenas. Surely we can do
better than that.
We welcome your comments, suggestions, and viewpoints regarding this
proposal. Thank you.
Lauren Weinstein
lauren@pfir.org
(818) 225-2800
Co-Founder, PFIR - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
Moderator, PRIVACY Forum - http://www.vortex.com
Member, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
Peter G. Neumann
neumann@pfir.org
(650) 859-2375
Co-Founder, PFIR - People For Internet Responsibility - http://www.pfir.org
Moderator, RISKS Forum - http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/Risks
Chairman, ACM Committee on Computers and Public Policy
http://www.csl.sri.com/neumann
------------------------------
End of PRIVACY Forum Digest 09.25
************************
Copyright © 2005 Vortex Technology. All Rights Reserved.