Slashdot Mirror
Civil Society Statement To the E-G8 and G8
jrepin writes "The signatories of this statement are representatives of civil society from around the world working towards the promotion of Internet freedom, digital rights, and open communication. The French Presidency of the G8 is holding a G8 internet meeting -- the eG8 Forum -- immediately before the G8 Summit in Deauville, with a view to shaping the agenda of the G8 Summit regarding key global internet policy. This meeting is significant because this is the first year that the internet's role in society and the economy is explicitly on the G8 agenda. We believe that G8 Member States should use the e-G8 meeting as an opportunity to publicly commit to expanding internet access for all, combating digital censorship and surveillance, limiting online intermediary liability, and upholding principles of net neutrality."
>>>"combating digital censorship and surveillance"
It was the French president who was the leading proponent for censorship/surveillance of citizens (second only to Australian Minister Conroy). How ironic that he would step forward with this proposal. Must be doublespeak.
Information wants to be expensive AND wants to be free. So you have Value vs. Cheap distribution fighting each other.
Call me a cynic but I'm sure they'll come out with a statement something along the lines of internet freedom, digital rights, and open communication is a great idea so long as it is our sort of internet freedom, digital rights, and open communication and those of our sponsors.
Cory Doctorow at BoingBoing thinks this conference is an attempt to push Sarkozy's agenda to control the Internet.
And here I was all excited that some CivE professional society was going to point out the dramatic need for first world economies to maintain their physical infrastructure.
What does the first sentence have to do with the story about eG8? Is there a direct cause/effect, is the G8 recognizing it in some sort of way, or is this story exploiting the eG8 story for self-promotion?
The eG8 story is significant, but let's not all sing Kumbaya just yet. The context is "freedom", but the content is money. The Internet is the new economic revolution. While the context of the industrial revolution may have been unions and labor law, the content for them would be how to cash in.
What is even more significant is the idea of moving the entire G8 to an Internet meeting through an undisclosed service. And before you cheer that Anonymous would take the place of the physical protesters, it would more than likely be hosted through a private VPN service to locations around the world.
What I would like to see, though, is a good portion of the meeting transmitted online. If they truly believe in access and against censorship, then they can at least post portions online and allow for responses.
I8-D
What will come out of this is simple.
There will be an international organization created specifically for regulating and policing the internet comprised of leadership from other countries. They will dictate Intellectual Property rules, bandwidth rules, free speech rules, criminal penalties for disruptions and attacks, as well as lead to "sanctions" of countries unwilling or unable to abide by the new international organization's rules.
It will be completely worthless.
>>>Contrary to current best practices in policymaking, the invite list has been limited primarily to representatives of government and corporate leaders, who already enjoy disproportionately large influence over Internet regulation.
The signatories of this statement represent most of the groups that wade waist-deep into politics to promote the free and open web. They keep banging on the door, but they don't get a seat at the table. Many of these are the same groups that tried to change the ACTA treaty. As civil society members, they will always be pushing for greater transparency, better access, a more ethical approach. That's their role.
They're right of course that if business leaders (Around 1,500 guests in all says the Guardian article) get access, the third leg of society, civic leaders, should also have a place. However, no one will just open the door and let them in. They need clout to earn a seat, and they're having trouble building it up. They need charismatic leaders, or need to be able to influence blocks of voters. Right now, they have no standing on any political stage, let alone in a summit meeting like this.
Better define exactly what they mean by "net neutrality".
And as long as criminals and cyber-warfare are around, some degree of surveillance will be needed. Safeguards and limitations need to be discussed, but a no-surveillance position will never make it, and you'll be dismissed as non-serious idiots.
Here, let me translate:
"The signatories of this statement are representatives of civil society from around the world working towards the promotion of Internet freedom, digital rights, and open communication. The French Presidency of the Gate is holding a Gate [Internet] meeting -- the e-Gate Forum -- immediately before the Gate Summit in Deauville, with a view to shaping the agenda of the Gate Summit regarding key global [Internet] policy. This meeting is significant because this is the first year that the [Internet's] role in society and the economy is explicitly on the Gate agenda. We believe that Gate Member States should use the e-Gate meeting as an opportunity to publicly commit to expanding [Internet] access for all, combating digital censorship and surveillance, limiting online intermediary liability, and upholding principles of net neutrality."
Yeah -- clever. Combating censorship and surveillance (from governments, not for people) limiting online intermediary liability (for businesses, not people), and upholding principles of net neutrality (which we can say, because that feel-good term is not concretely defined as anything at all).
In short, show your proof of netizenship papers at the Gate, select few shall decide construction details of the e-Gate.
TL;DR: $TFS =~ s/G8/Gate/gi;
P.S. The Internet -- Capitalized because it's Serious Business.
As long as we (the general public I mean) act in way contrary to those goals, they will never come to pass.
People still support DRM and OS-lockdown technologies that are the very same ones that can be used for control and censorship. People need to start valuing ethical considerations when purchasing, especially with mobile tech. It's too late to ever completely lock down general PCs, but with mobile becoming an ever bigger fraction of computing, we are teetering on the brink of the public losing control of its own computing devices. Locked bootloaders, removal of software and products (e.g 1984) from our devices... if we stop buying that shit, it'll be only a matter of months before things become more open again. I'm amazed at how many people did buy their own golden cages.
Technologies like PGP have been around for 20 years, and are built into almost every mail client, yet people still send clear text emails. People need to start using the available and widely deployed technology to limit the ability to snoop and inspect.
Insert five hundred more examples here.
Sadly, you can't force people to care about their own freedom, and if they don't, a small number of people making noise doesn't accomplish much. People have to start caring. If they don't, then governmental and corporate control will ONLY increase from here on out.
He's constantly poking his nose into different things which are none of his business. With abysmal results as well.
Just couple months ago he dragged us into this Libya thing. Before that was global banking regs (did not go well either.) Even before that he "negotiated" with Russia during Georgian war - and Putin basically had him to fuck off.
Could French finally have this clown stop?
The bankers have all been rounded up and put in jail? The 2.5 wars are over? The Japanese nuclear genie is back in the bottle? Bankruptcy has been averted in the EU? The Global Elite have stopped raping women?
No. But my ability to point this out is going to be taken away.
The man doublethinks, and is thus sincere each time he speaks in favor of the opposing positions of the same issue.
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
We believe that G8 Member States should use the e-G8 meeting as an opportunity to publicly commit to expanding internet access for all, combating digital censorship and surveillance, limiting online intermediary liability, and upholding principles of net neutrality.
That there is a whole lot of Kool Aid.
From the article:
In this way we can know what you are doing and you can know what we think," Sarkozy told the eG8 forum.
"We need to talk to you. We need to understand your expertise, your hopes and you have to know our limits and our red lines."
Sarkozy can only think about talking to the industry, not listening to it. Sarkozy can only think about expressing limits and red lines and to use the industry expertise to enhance the surveillance of the population instead of developing the markets. Obviously the common market does not weight much in the mind and heart of Sarkozy like the Americans like to say, but then again, for G8 that consideration is irrelevant, right?
Nothing good will come out of this. G8 meetings aren't about consumer rights. Or if they are ... enjoy them while you still have them.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Shouldn't they have called it the iG8? Or did they opt for e-G8 because are they afraid of Apple's IP lawyers?
"Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
--- Jerry Garcia
We are particularly concerned about the increasing trend of nations cutting off citizens’ access to the Internet and mobile networks in times of crisis, as Egypt, Libya, Iran, China, Nepal, and Burma have all done.
You have a "CRISIS". You think the White House would be interested in facilitating your access to gay porn when there is a "crisis" on its hands?
You don't get it.
The G8 are not there to accept your discussion about internet freedom, they are there specifically to destroy it.
They are extremely freaked out about what happened when a single man lit himself on fire and the social networks ended up focusing an entire regional uprising, that continues till this day in Libya, Egypt..etc.
They want the internet stopped, they want it destroyed, they want it controlled.
If your document has any suggestions on how to do this, they will listen.
If not, you are a terrorist.
-Hack
Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
And I'm afraid pregex syntax has changed (willen haven-on changed? Damn these present-tense-hypothetical-future tenses!)
$TFS ~~ s:g:i/G8/Gate/;