As if SOPA, ACTA Bill C-30 were not enough, there is a new threat to the information superhighway – from the United Nations, none the less. From The Wall Street Journal:
On Feb. 27, a diplomatic process will begin in Geneva that could result in a new treaty giving the United Nations unprecedented powers over the Internet. Dozens of countries, including Russia and China, are pushing hard to reach this goal by year’s end. As Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin said last June, his goal and that of his allies is to establish “international control over the Internet” through the International Telecommunication Union (ITU), a treaty-based organization under U.N. auspices.
If successful, these new regulatory proposals would upend the Internet’s flourishing regime, which has been in place since 1988. That year, delegates from 114 countries gathered in Australia to agree to a treaty that set the stage for dramatic liberalization of international telecommunications. This insulated the Internet from economic and technical regulation and quickly became the greatest deregulatory success story of all time.
Really?
Does this not illustrate that it is:
time to leave the UN – iff we cannot de-legitimize and dismantle the organization as a whole
time to really push to establish an internet substitute which is diffused, so that there are no pipelines which could be controlled by any regulatory body (the current technology that could be used for this is still under development – and much too slow)
Yeah, I have called for both these things in the past, but perhaps the time is running out faster than we expected…
Over the weekend, this video, purported to be from ‘Anonymous’, was released. It demands that the Canadian Minister, Vic Toews, remove bill C-30 (which would permit civil servants unlimited snooping powers on the citizens via the internet without judicial oversight) and that he step down immediately.
The following video also purports to be from ‘Anonymous’. As I have no connection to that group, I have no idea if it is authentic. However, I do think it is worth posting because it raises several issues worth further discussion:
This video raises the connection between the desire by various governments to regulate arms and to regulate the internet.
This is a deeper connection that one may think, at first glance. But, deep down, both are attempts to take away the citizen’s ability to protect themselves – including, if necessary, to resist their government. Both are ways in which governments make their citizens less secure, more isolated, and more afraid of their government.
Even if you are not as libertarian in your views as I am (I think that monopoly control over infrastructure – even, or perhaps especially, information infrastructure – is perilous to civil liberties), it is easy to see how governments are threatened by citizenry that is difficult to control and willing and able to oppose them.
Firearms are a means of physical self-defense and an equalizer between the strong and the weak. Even a small woman can protect herself from a rapist with the use of a gun: her physical safety is no longer dependant solely on the timely response of the state to come to her aid. This threatens the government monopoly on the enforcement of laws: as every monopoly’s natural reaction would be, the government’s reaction is to restrict this competition.
Let’s be clear about this: government ‘regulation’ of firearms is not about increasing public safety by having many well trained, well armed citizens available in public spaces who would be able to stop law-breakers and thus increase public safety. To the contrary: it is always specifically designed to restrict gun ownership, use, and the very presence of privately owned guns in public spaces. This intolerance on the part of government of guns in private hands – even though this increases public safety – is indicative of the government’s disrespect for its citizenry, with the goal to increase government coercive powers at the root of all ‘arms regulations’.
Information is a weapon and a powerful one.
So is anonymous speech.
The internet enables both.
As a matter of principle, anonymous speech is necessary for the preservation of the very freedom of speech. For example, The Federalist Papers could never have been published had their authors not had absolute anonymity at the time of publication! The bigger the government is, the more dangerous it is to speak up against it openly. Without anonymous speech, governments do indeed become more totalitarian and more tyrannical in nature: this cycle has been repeated so often, it is blatant.
Yet, the ever-growing governments in the formerly-free world now wish to have complete and unfettered access to the information which would identify each and every internet user: to be able to attach a name to every sentence uttered on the internet, from seeking sensitive advice at an online support group to dissenting political speech!
Of course, the governments are also increasing citizen surveillance on so many fronts… There will soon be no arena where we do have ‘presumption to privacy’, not even in our homes and certainly not anywhere else. So, the whole ‘getting a warrant’ might be a mute issue…
Technology is beautiful – but it is a tool, to be used for good or evil. It is necessary that we understand these tools because our society will need to evolve along with them. What am I talking about?
As new technologies arise, we will need to develop laws to govern their use. However, these laws (all laws, really) ought to be focused on protecting the civil libeties of individual citizens – not legitimizing the ways that governments and big business can circumvent them!
This is big. Powerful lobbyists, working with their allies in government, have put forward what amounts to an unavoidable choke point for your Internet use: two bills aimed at Internet users, and a government decision about the future of Internet access.
If we don’t stop this set-up, you’ll have to deal with bigger bills, widespread warrantless surveillance, and restricted choice.
By signing an OpenMedia.ca petition, you helped push back against new Internet restrictions and Big Telecom price-gouging. But these new challenges require more resources than ever to fight. Will you donate today so we can defend your rights? Your donation will empower the fight for an open and affordable Internet.
These three imminent threats will create an Internet choke point for Canadians, and they’re unfolding right now:
Online Spying: The government has tabled their invasive spying plan (Bill C-30) to mandate that every Internet provider must hand “authorities” access to the private information of any Canadian, at any time, without a warrant1. Despite appearances the contrary, they are still pushing this through parliament.
The Internet Lockdown: Through Bill C-11, Big Media lobbyists are seeking the power2 to compel telecom providers (who will now have surveillance capabilities) to cut Internet access for no good reason, remove or hide vast swaths of the Internet, and lock users out of their own services.
The Cell Phone Squeeze: Big Telecom giants are lobbying the government to turn over control of mobile communications—which experts say are the future of Internet access—to just three giant companies3. This will lead to rising prices, even worse customer service, and more easily controlled surveillance.
Steve and Lindsey, on behalf of your OpenMedia.ca Team
P.S. We created a media sensation this week and your petition signature helped start it all! Your team here at OpenMedia.ca has been run off our feet with media requests! Please chip in so we can keep up the pressure. We’ll report back on our progress to everyone that contributes.
Footnotes
[1] The Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario has written that the online spying bills could “undercut the future of freedom, innovation and privacy”
[2] Big Media is pushing for C-11 to include the power for courts to issue injunctions ordering ISPs to block access to websites. Many proposed amendments also include rules that mean accused (i.e. not necessarily convicted) “repeat infringers” could have their Internet connections terminated. The “enabler provision” may also be expanded in such a way that could be used to target legitimate websites that host user generated content. Those websites—including YouTube—could be penalized for hosting content that Big Media controls.
[3] Montreal Gazette: Spectrum auction called a threat to new entrants
[4] Conservative supporters, including some conservative MPs, have denounced the online spying bills.
Support OpenMedia.ca
OpenMedia.ca is a non-profit organization that relies on donations from people like you to operate. Our small but dedicated team ensures even the smallest contributions go a long way to make your voice heard. Please donate today.
The Big Three are ripping us off and using the money to manipulate Canadians and the government.
As we’ve been saying, the Big Three cell phone companies have a plan to price-gouge Canadians by shutting out small competitors1. Now they’re unleashing a misinformation campaign to muzzle your voice.
For example,
Rogers recently bought and paid for a trumped-up study2 that wrongly implies Canadians (you) can afford to pay more for telecom services.
Rogers just took to the courts to argue that Canada’s false advertising rules violate the telecom giant’s freedom of expression! This after being caught red-handed and fined $10,000,000 dollars for misleading cell phone advertising.3
With these two acts of extreme arrogance, Rogers has demonstrated that they will go to ridiculous lengths to tighten their stranglehold on communications and raise prices.
Some say mobile is the future of the Internet and communications. We have to stop the Big Three from creating a command and control communications market with tight contracts, content controls, price-gouging overage fees, and disrespectful customer service.
P.S. Unlike Big Telecom, we listen to Canadians. Some of you have expressed that we should provide more details in our messages. We heard you—here’s some more detailed background information:
Cell phone companies require low-frequency wireless spectrum to deliver the latest mobile devices to customers. There is a new block of 700 MHZ spectrum that will be available for use through an auction later this year and the government is about to decide who will have access to the spectrum.The Big Three providers are sitting on more than enough spectrum to do deliver their services to Canadians (including those in rural areas). They want the government to take a do nothing approach and allow the Big hree to control essential spectrum and shut out independent competitors. You can also check out CTV News coverage of this issue here.
Lemay Yates recently released a report, bought and paid for by Rogers, that suggests Canadians have better Internet speed, availability and pricing than our global counterparts. But this research directly contradicts many other independent reports (from the OECD, Harvard, the New America Foundation, Akamai, and more) that show Canada falling woefully behind on key metrics like price and speed.
According to the Vancouver Sun: “Rogers Communications Inc. is asking an Ontario court to strike down part of a federal law requiring a company to have ‘adequate and proper’ tests of a product’s performance before advertising claims about the product — on the grounds that it violates its freedom of expression.”
OpenMedia.ca is a non-profit organization that relies on donations from people like you to operate. Our small but dedicated team ensures even the smallest contributions go a long way to make your voice heard. Please donate today.
This creates precisely the type of environment where hacker-vigilaties will be not just tolerated, but positively embraced by a population that feels increasingly under attack by the very institutions created to ensure their individual rights.
Let’s not make any mistakes about it: it is not Twitter and Google who are increasingly censoring us, the members of online communities. Even though they facilitate access to the virtual world of the web, they are themselves physical corporations which exist in the real world, very much subject to the whims of real-world governments.
As such, they are subject to the arbitrary rules which various governments impose on corporations operating within their physical boundaries.
It is unreasonable for us to expect that these corporations will put the freedom on the internet above their ability to physically survive…
So, you may blame them for buckling – but don’t blame them for imposing the censorship itself: the blame lies directly with our governments, our regulating bodies, and us, the citizens, who permit this encroachment!
The solution?
We must all fight to prevent all governments from usurping jurisdiction over the internet, the way they have been doing!
How?
I don’t know. Yes, I have been thinking about this for a long time, but there simply is no clear answer.
The easiest solution I suspect would be to continue the efforts to create alternatives to the ‘pipelines’ that ISPs use to deliver internet connections, but the more people try to solve this, the more actual attempts there are to make the web truly uncontrollable and impossible to be regulated by anyone or anything anywhere, the better chance there is of success.
So – keep your elective representatives responsible – and keep hacking!
Two related stories from TorrentFreak update us on what has been happening in Sweden in the Pirate Bay saga.
First, the founders have not been permitted to appeal their case, so their conviction stands. (This should put fear into all of us, because what they were doing was legal under Swedish law – they were only charged and prosecuted because of pressure from the US movie industry.)
SOPA may appear to be officially dead, but that does not mean that the lobbyists will not try to convince legislators to sneak SOPA-style provisions into other legislation: whether as bits attached to other bills in the US, or trying to incorporate aspects of it into laws of other countries. We must remail vigilant!
‘While SOPA may be dead (for now) in the U.S., lobby groups are likely to intensify their efforts to export SOPA-like rules to other countries. With Bill C-11 back on the legislative agenda at the end of the month, Canada will be a prime target for SOPA style rules. In fact, a close review of the unpublished submissions to the Bill C-32 legislative committee reveals that several groups have laid the groundwork to add SOPA-like rules into Bill C-11, including blocking websites and expanding the “enabler provision”to target a wider range of websites. ‘
…
‘The music industry is unsurprisingly leading the way, demanding a series of changes that would make Bill C-11 look much more like SOPA. ‘
…
‘Several lobby groups also want language similar to that found in the infamous Section 103 of SOPA. That provision, which spoke of sites “primarily designed or operated for the purpose of…offering goods or services in a manner that engages in, enables, or facilitates” infringement, raised fears that it could be used to shut down mainstream sites such as YouTube.’
‘Just as they’ve been warning for a few weeks now, a variety of websites, some small and others large in scope and influence, have shut down their virtual doors today in response to the possible passage of the Stop Online Piracy Act, otherwise known as SOPA.
The controversial legislation, before the House of Representatives, has caused nothing less than outrage from Internet service providers and their customers. The legislation, meant to stop companies from copying, or “pirating” content or software from others and reselling it, has been seen by many as over-reaching, a “sprawling new regime” of laws which will “stifle investment” and further “chill free speech” across the Globe.’
