Slashdot Mirror
UN Declares Internet Freedom a Basic Right
The United Nations Human Rights Council has passed a landmark resolution (PDF) declaring that internet freedom is a basic human right. They wrote: "...the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online, in particular freedom of expression, which is applicable regardless of frontiers and through any media of one’s choice, in accordance with articles 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights." The council also called upon all countries to 'promote and facilitate access to the Internet.' The article points out that this comes alongside a report from the Pew Internet Center, which asked a group of internet stakeholders how they think firms in the private sector will handle the ethical issues that arise with countries wanting to censor or restrict internet access. The responses were varied, but skepticism was a recurring theme: 'Corporations will work around regional differences by spinning off subsidiaries, doing what's needed to optimize on future profits.'"
Well, that oughta do it. Thanks guys. Considering they can't find a way to stop Assad from using tanks on his own people, I wouldn't hold my breath that the UN is going to come to your aid when Comcast decides to throttle your netflix stream...
So we can start by restoring everything taken off the Internet by DMCA takedown notices, right? Since that's the leading cause of Internet censorship.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
My crazy neighbor Jimmy just declared he is High Gnome King of the 3rd Parallel Crux of the 14th Arm of the Correlian Empire.
I'm sure people will get right on that, too.
Anyone else find it interesting that Russia, China, and Iran - the three named in http://yro.slashdot.org/story/12/06/18/1429257/the-uns-push-for-power-over-the-internet are all missing from the list of countries at the top of the resolution.
spy and control their citizens (and if possible, of other countries too) is an government basic right, or at least, the ones that matters more think so.
in particular freedom of expression
"...Now give us control of the root DNS servers so we can take down anyone daring to express unpopular ideas about WWII, religion, socialism, or the latest pseudo-royal who can afford a super-injunction to hide the bink he boinked."
Does that mean that UN itself is going to stop turning around, and trying to take it over every other week. And go hand in hand with the dictatorships of the world to throw the shackles on the rest of the world in order to protect their "sensitives" from the rest of us?
Om, nomnomnom...
Freedom of Speach must be protected at all cost. Its under attack all over the world
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2012/06/14/alexander-aan-atheist-who-blasphemed-on-facebook-sentenced-to-two-years-in-prison/
http://www.google.com/webhp?rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS433US433&sourceid=chrome-instant&ie=UTF-8#hl=en&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS433US433&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=blasphamy%20laws&oq=&gs_l=&pbx=1&fp=e757a35b73c411c2&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.,cf.osb&biw=984&bih=720
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Evelyn_Beatrice_Hall
Part of what the resolution says is that the Human Rights Council "...[a]ffirms that the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online..." (emphasis added)
This is pretty much opposite the legal situation in the U.S. at least, where the government can demand access to your ISP's logs and the courts pretty much go along with it, but they still need a warrant to put you under physical surveillance.
I would tag this "sudden outbreak of common sense" except that I expect this resolution will have even less impact than the typical U.N. resolution.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
Well, that oughta do it. Thanks guys. Considering they can't find a way to stop Assad from using tanks on his own people, I wouldn't hold my breath that the UN is going to come to your aid when Comcast decides to throttle your netflix stream...
I would go to the UN, complain and then the UN may send a strongly worded letter to Comcast!
Comcast would rue the day they crossed the UN!
Yet another horrible headline. The resolution doesn't declare the Internet a basic right, it declares that the Internet isn't exempt from the protection of basic rights. Not even close to the same thing, though it doesn't surprise me that Soulskill apparently couldn't tell the difference.
match up with Ron Paul's notion of Internet Freedom (probably not well at all!) or Richard Stallman's definition of free software (probably talking about something completely different)?
This is the same group that tried to get the ACTA treaty passed everywhere and NOW they say Internet access is a basic human right?
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
So, since there are dictators who attack their own citizens with military weapons, we can just ignore free speech rights? Internet freedom is a subset of freedom of speech.
Palm trees and 8
haha ***CENSORED*** the ***CENSORED*** really is ***CENSORED***
***CENSORED***,
John
That governments will show the same care for freedom of the Internet that they show for freedom of speech, right?
I think it only follows that some access to the Internet, and some freedom on the Internet, will need to be recognized as a basic right. It may sound silly, but think of it this way: If "freedom of speech" is a basic and inalienable human right, how divorced can that "free speech" be from communications infrastructure?
The internet is the way that people are communicating and organizing. It's where we share thoughts and ideas and artistic expression. Denying access to the Internet today would be roughly equivalent to denying colonial Americans access to roads and meeting places. You can't say that free speech is a basic human right, and yet still find it reasonable to deny people the means to communicate with each other.
The UN is a joke. The US will never ratify this and implement this in our laws. It only applies to those "other" UN members. Take the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child treaty which was implemented 17 years ago, but we have YET to ratify it because the conservatives have a huge problem with children having rights or their own views and feelings being taken into account on things like education, parental placement, etc. as well as being prohibited from the death penalty if you are under 18 years old, etc. Good luck with that. Who is going to stop us? The UN?
Ron Paul is championing internet freedom as a key tenant of individual liberty in the 21st century. The UN is declaring internet freedom a basic right.
Large portions of the population of the United States do not trust the government. The "two party system" is broken.
Solution? Give more power to a one world government. Trust the UN to do what the corrupt US government, beholden to their corporate masters cannot/will not do.
Something stinks here. Control over the internet is one of the only levers of power that America has left. With the dollar on the way out, governance over the internet is the last thing (besides an insanely huge military) that gives the United States any control over the rest of the world.
As scary as having the US control the internet might be, the idea of UN doing it is even worse. This is the same body that cannot speak with a unified voice on Syria. That is a serious issue where people are dying in large numbers. How well are they really going to handle issues like censorship and intellectual property?
There's something that doesn't happen every day, much less only 16 /. posts apart.
I find this statement, considering that it came from the UN, to be somewhat suspicious. Do they really want to protect all freedom of expression? Would the UN continue to champion my freedom of speech if I blasphemed the false prophet muhammad? Or is this just one more case of the UN trying to make an Internet power grab without thinking things through?
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
The private sector is not the problem. Getting deep packet app providers to abide by UN rules will not stop China and Russia from developing inhouse censorship solutions.
but is this really that important when people are dying because of their lack of other basic human rights?
I don't know about everybody else, but I think food, water, shelter, and personal safety are a damn sight more important than Internet access.
The only effective means towards internet freedom is for the internet to be an anarchy. No one must control any significant fraction of it.
Any time you have one party with a large degree of control, whether that is the US government, China, or Facebook, you're going to have a less free internet. The problem seems to be that most people WANT a less free internet, so they act to give these entities more and more control all the time. The end result is that the same power that can "protect us from evil things online" is the same power that will also stifle freedom of political speech, freedom from having our every move tracked, and more.
The impetus for internet freedom must come from the people, and the people don't appear to give a shit. I don't know how to solve that.
Even China, which filters online content through a firewall, backed the resolution. It affirmed that “the same rights that people have offline must also be protected online, in particular freedom of expression, which is applicable regardless of frontiers and through any media of one’s choice.”
The Chinese delegation was probably laughing when they voted. Sure, same rights, no problem.
so access to internet is a human right but not access to drinkable water?
Is this the same UN that wants to take over the Internet to keep 'Muricans from saying all kinds of offensive things about furrin religiosities?
I tend to think the most liberal set of rights should set the standard for Internet rights, rather than the most conservative. But I'm a liberal, so take that for what it's worth.
"My God...it's full of trolls!"
UN Decleares the internet a basic human right.
I would be careful though, because the UN's idea of freedom isn't meant for _you_ it is meant for _them_.
As in, _they_ want to track, control and insure everyone is connected so that _they_ can have access to track, control and insure....insure nothing changes, and only those approved changes happen to further their control and tracking efforts of every single man, women, child, cat, dog on the planet.
That way they continue to live in luxery while you are put in your place.
That is what they are talking about when they discuss internet freedom.
Remember, you are dealing with the same criminals that have been trying to create wars of conquest throughtout the world anywhere there is a private central bank that doesn't accept Federal Reserve notes, and any population just happens to be sitting on large resource reserves.
-Hack
Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
As long, of course, as one doesn't use those rights contrary to the purposes of the UN.
This from the same Human Rights Council that is currently considering Syria being a member of the human rights council (http://www.timesofisrael.com/assad-vies-for-seat-on-un-human-rights-council-report-says/). If you want to know what kind of nonesense goes on in the Human Rights Council, check this out: you will be appalled. http://blog.unwatch.org/
IMHO, the UN Human Rights Council is filled with clueless bozos.
Now unblock Pirate Bay :)
At the timing of news stories, to see the conspiracies in action behind the scenes
http://tech.slashdot.org/story/12/07/06/0021254/ron-pauls-new-primary-goal-is-internet-freedom
It is clear Ron Paul is an agent of the fascist UN. We have been fooled!
(this post is sarcasm, not actual paranoid schizophrenia)
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Which has about as much meaning as if my local Girl Scouts got together and passed a resolution declaring that internet freedom is a basic human right.
I wonder how this is going to jive with the US and UK plans to deprive the filthy terrorist antisocial homicidal wife beating child molesting file-sharers of internet access?
Basic human rights is what we need to survive: food, water and shelter. WE DO NOT NEED THE INTERNET TO SURVIVE.
The UN is a running joke.
Operation Guillotine is in effect.
Either +1 funny, or +1 insightful (depending how you feel about double-barreled anti-right-wing parody).
Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities. - Voltaire
The has recognized this right, oh, since forever. Except in America, we understand that government's non-involvement is the action (or inaction) that protects our freedom. Instead, the U.N. resolution has already kicked off a series of ill-conceived misunderstandings that private firms, corporations, groups, etc. are under the obligation to respect the basic internet freedoms - where really the State is the one that can legitimately infringe on my rights, now they want to say so can my neighbor? But how does the authorities mandate regulation and direct action from private organizations in order to protect individual freedoms? Are all governments now under the obligation to punish all hackers who interfere with the freedom of expression by, say, DDoS, straight hacking, etc. etc.
And if offline rights are to be respected, let's consider property rights. It's illegal to break into my home, remove my documents or copy them and distribute them. It's illegal to take my things, and give transfer them to other persons without my permission. It's called "theft" to knowingly possess an object which you know not to belong to you. So wikileaks and megaupload, they are violating basic freedoms and more importantly warrant direct police action by the State.
You "information is free" morons haven't thought any of this through, have you? A better resolution would be "do as thou wilt shall be the whole of internet freedom".
Mod parent up. One must think sideways.
"We receive as friendly that which agrees with, we resist with dislike that which opposes us" - Faraday
Let's declare everything that is good and desirable a "right", let's make those "rights" universal across the world while we're at it. Nevermind that such "rights" are incompatible with more fundamental rights of individual freedom and responsibility.
A civil society is based on respect for individuals. Letting them use their body, mind and property in peaceful ways. You can do anything you want within this basic ethic of "negative" rights (what you are not allowed to do: murder, rape, enslave, steal, defraud).
By declaring "positive rights" we ignore the question of who is it we are forcing to provide those services. We make a short-sighted calculus of forcing a few innocent people (service providers) for a well-intentioned goal (charity and solidarity). But goals don't justify means and what we are really doing is eroding the fabric of civil society by fostering disrespect for individuals.
The best thing we can do for the internet is keep it out of the hands of politicians and central planning. Instead we should leave individual freedom, property and competitive forces to drive improvements, as has been the case with internet until the recent political rush to intervene (privacy, net neutrality, intellectual "property", cybersecurity, etc.).
These comments are mine; I do not speak for my employer.
Hope UN declares file sharing a basic right
Casteism
Cell phones
Internet Access
Computers
iPads
Coach Bags
Pocket Dogs
Luxury Cars
And all the other horse shit people feel they are entitled to by the virtue of their existence.
"UN Declares Internet Freedom a Basic Right" - how US gov can accept it ? UN is not US. Freedom is US is limited due to fight with imagination "terrorists".
Recipes for USA bankrupt - http://tinypaste.com/0d66f dd = dollar deluge (printed in the infinity)