[Media Caucus] Internet Governance

[Ronald Koven]

RE: Internet Governance

WPFC Position Paper

INTERNET GOVERNANCE: DEFEND FREE FLOW OF INFORMATION

It is becoming increasingly clear that so-called  governance,  management
and administration of the Internet will be the central issue in
preparations
for the second World Summit on the Information Society. UN Secretary
General
Kofi Annan was mandated to direct a study incorporating the views of
diverse
interests to be produced in time for WSIS II, scheduled for Tunis, Tunisia,
in November 2005.

Civil society caucuses are already exchanging message traffic on how to
determine their positions. Many of those groups have histories of favoring
content controls.  Any proposals that threaten press freedom on the
Internet, whatever the source, should be rejected.

It was clear at WSIS I that there was a general feeling among
member-states,
including US allies in the European Union, that  Internet governance 
should
not be the exclusive preserve of ICANN, the Internet Corporation for
Assigned Names and Numbers, a California-based company under contract to
the
US Commerce Dept.

ICANN has allocated Internet domain names on a neutral, technical basis. It
has included industry, NGOs and international representation in its
governing board and committees.

Governments which want to turn responsibility over to an international
body,
presumably in the UN system, want to go beyond technical matters to deal
with content questions, like pornography, pedophilia, fraud, hate speech,
etc., in a way that ICANN has refrained from doing. The Council of Europe s
Cybercrime Convention points the way governments seem to be headed. The
United States signed that Convention, but it has a separate protocol on
hate
speech that was designed to give the United States the option not to sign
onto an element that would clearly violate the US Constitution s First
Amendment.

Under the US-accepted compromise of a two-year UN study to submit
recommendations to WSIS II, a process has begun that will probably produce
a
UN proposal for modifications of the Internet governance system.

A role for ICANN should be preserved as part of any new system that may
emerge under UN auspices. Supporters of a free and open Internet should be
able, with the backing of allies like the UN Department of Information and
Communications and the UNESCO Secretariat, to resist any changes that
threaten the free flow of information and ideas on the Internet.

 Governance  must not be allowed to become a code word for government
regulation of Internet content. The intergovernmental debates over two
years

of preparations for WSIS I amply demonstrated that authoritarian
governments, which already censor their own Internet traffic,

seek content controls internationally and/or legitimization of such
controls
nationally. The system must not be reorganized to permit this on an
international level or encourage it at the national level.

In fact, the Internet s growth, popularity and integrity are based on its
content not being regulated by governments or international organizations.

Bearing in mind that the Declaration adopted December 12, 2003, at the
World
Summit in Geneva provided that  freedom of the press and freedom of
information are essential to the Information Society,  the following
principles should guide any changes in the Internet governance system:

1. There should be no controls over content, nor modifications of the
Internet s technical  architecture  that facilitate or permit censorship of
news or editorial opinion. Nor should  self-regulation  be allowed to
become
a surrogate for governmental regulation of content on the Internet.

2. The system should explicitly commit itself to respect and to implement
Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and to the
fundamental principle of press freedom. National or international security
concerns must not be allowed to limit freedom of expression, including news
and editorial comment, in cyberspace.

3. Considerations of  ethics  should not be allowed to become a veiled
approach to introducing or allowing censorship.

4. There are many forms of communication over the Internet, and it is
important not to confuse them. News, for example, is different from such
things as pornography, pedophilia, fraud, conspiracy for terrorism,
incitement to violence, hate speech, etc., although there may be news
stories about such problems. Such matters are normally covered in existing
national general legislation and should, if appropriate and necessary, be
prosecuted on the national level in the country of origin.

5. Any legal actions that may arise should be adjudicated in the
jurisdiction where a disputed message first originated, or in a single
jurisdiction agreed upon by the parties to any given dispute.

The Internet is a major opportunity to improve exchanges of information and
ideas throughout the world. Nothing should be allowed to restrict this
powerful new medium for better communications among people. #



-------------------- End Forwarded Message --------------------