[EURO-Discuss] Sale of PIR vs. Contract for the Web: a time for choice.

[Jean-Jacques Subrenat]

Dear Colleague,

the sale of PIR by ISOC to a private investment firm deserves the attention of all entities and individuals active in Internet matters.

The transformation of .org and PIR would require some thorough investigative journalism. Indeed, global Internet users are entitled to know the names and specific interests involved in the decisions which led to what seems to be a textbook case of the public interest being overruled by specific interests. 

In the opposite direction, the ‘’Contract for the web’’ initiative by Tim Berners-Lee and others, calls for a robust defense of fundamental principles to preserve the Internet and its users, https://contractfortheweb.org/ . One can subscribe
- as an individual, https://contractfortheweb.org/endorse-the-contract/endorse-as-an-individual/ 
- or on behalf of an organisation, https://contractfortheweb.org/endorse-the-contract/endorse-on-behalf-of-an-organisation/ 

In February 2018, in an article I wrote for WikiTribune, I advocated exactly this kind of compact between Internet industries, public authorities and global users. These were my concluding lines:

''There is a need for global standards among today’s actors, not only in business and trade terms, but for the wider public interest. Sovereign states should exercise their authority to better regulate, investigate and correct. Governments often consult the private sector, but mainly on business aspects. A few months after his election, President Trump set up an advisory council of top US business leaders, which was disbanded less than a year later: its purpose was limited to making the US economy more competitive, and had no broader remit.

The World Economic Forum (WEF) brings together in Davos leaders from finance, industry, government, civil society and the media, providing a platform on a wide range of subjects, but as a forum it is not prescriptive, nor is it accountable. Now is an appropriate time for global corporations like Google and Tencent, Facebook and Alibaba, to set up a comprehensive list of best practices for the new era. Some sort of structured, transparent, accountable and global Advisory council, with an opting-in mechanism for corporations, governments and civil society entities, could provide useful advice in setting up global ethical standards across its membership. Social media have come under closer scrutiny because of the way their networks may be used by terrorist organisations, or by foreign powers to influence local politics as in the 2016 U.S. presidential election or in the U.K. referendum on Brexit. 

A first task for such a council would be to identify areas where there are widespread problems and malpractices (e.g. on privacy, on data protection), and to promote best practices, whatever their origin. In the 21st century, the strategies of state and non-state actors alike need to take into account, more than ever, the global public interest.’’

The full article, ‘’Global non-state global actors'' can be read here, https://www.wikitribune.com/wt/news/article/48999/ .

Best regards,
Jean-Jacques Subrenat.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://atlarge-lists.icann.org/pipermail/euro-discuss/attachments/20191125/c47643eb/attachment.html>