[At-Large] input to WSIS+20 comments sought

[christian de larrinaga]

The problem is deeper than that. The implication of what OSB is pushing is that nobody has
a right to security online. This is done in the name of "Safety".


C

parminder via At-Large <at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org> writes:

> The state is formed by the (no doubt fictional but meaningful) social
> contract whereby individuals agree to give up some of their liberties
> for the sake of collective social living. The collective decisions
> needed for such living are enforced by the state which has a monopoly
> over use of legitimate coercive force in this regard. Constitutions
> based on fundamental rights are supposed to ensure that any such
> curtailing of liberties for collective sake is justified by cannons of
> legitimacy, necessity, proportionality,  and minimalism (tested on the
> ground that no other less intrusive mean was available towards the
> same end) .
>
> Karl is stating more or less the same in terms of the internet and law....
>
> Which is a great starting principle, and already presupposed in
> constitutional democracies, but the real problems all lie downstream
> in interpretations and implementation, by law makers, courts,
> executive, and so on ..
>
> parminder
>
> On 10/03/23 15:36, christian de larrinaga via At-Large wrote:
>> Sympathetic to this Karl. But ...
>>
>> Check the UK's Online Safety Bill. For "public detriment" we should now read
>> the use of the terms "harms" and "safety". Both are subjectively assessed and at high risk of
>> politicisation. They are also being bandied about to be used for
>> prevention of harms. This is at the root of argument to make use of
>> encryption too risky on communications providers bottom lines.
>>
>> C
>>
>>
>>
>> Karl Auerbach via At-Large <at-large at atlarge-lists.icann.org> writes:
>>
>>> With regard to principles, I like to start with a foundation, vague
>>> and ambiguous as it may be, to set a general direction.
>>>
>>> Below is what I have been proposing for a long time...
>>>
>>> (By-the-way, this formulation finds its distant ancestor in the US
>>> "Hush-a-Phone" case, a rather significant, and somewhat amusing, case
>>> that was the start of a sequence that led to the opening of telco
>>> circuits to other sues, such as the ARPAnet and Internet.)
>>>
>>> First Law of the Internet
>>>
>>> + Every person shall be free to use the Internet in any way
>>>    that is privately beneficial without being publicly
>>>    detrimental.
>>>
>>>     - The burden of demonstrating public detriment shall
>>>       be on those who wish to prevent the private use.
>>>
>>>         - Such a demonstration shall require clear and
>>>           convincing evidence of public detriment.
>>>
>>>     - The public detriment must be of such degree and extent
>>>       as to justify the suppression of the private activity.
>>>
>>> https://www.cavebear.com/old_cbblog/000059.html
>>>
>>> The general shape of this principle is that one has a freedom to use
>>> the net as they please.  But that pleasure is subject to the rather
>>> cloudy boundary of "public detriment".  However, the principle places
>>> the burden of proving that "public detriment" on those who complain.
>>> And the level and evidence of that proof has to be high, not merely a
>>> bald assertion.
>>>
>>>          --karl--
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> At-Large mailing list
>>> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
>>> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>>>
>>> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of
>>> your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list
>>> accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy
>>> (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of
>>> Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman
>>> link above to change your membership status or configuration,
>>> including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling
>>> delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> At-Large mailing list
> At-Large at atlarge-lists.icann.org
> https://atlarge-lists.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/at-large
>
> At-Large Official Site: http://atlarge.icann.org
> _______________________________________________
> By submitting your personal data, you consent to the processing of
> your personal data for purposes of subscribing to this mailing list
> accordance with the ICANN Privacy Policy
> (https://www.icann.org/privacy/policy) and the website Terms of
> Service (https://www.icann.org/privacy/tos). You can visit the Mailman
> link above to change your membership status or configuration,
> including unsubscribing, setting digest-style delivery or disabling
> delivery altogether (e.g., for a vacation), and so on.


-- 
christian de larrinaga 
https://firsthand.net