[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Fwd: Civil liberties groups ask W3C to reject PICS
- To: "debate@fitug.de" <debate@fitug.de>
- Subject: Fwd: Civil liberties groups ask W3C to reject PICS
- From: "Gunnar Anzinger" <a@gksoft.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Dec 97 17:21:13 +0100
- Comment: This message comes from the debate mailing list.
- Priority: Normal
- Reply-To: "Gunnar Anzinger" <a@gksoft.com>
- Sender: owner-debate@fitug.de
==================BEGIN FORWARDED MESSAGE==================
>From: Declan McCullagh <declan@well.com>
>To: fight-censorship@vorlon.mit.edu
>Subject: Civil liberties groups ask W3C to reject PICS
>Message-Id: <v0300780eb0bb6da0b47f@[168.161.105.216]>
>Date: Mon, 15 Dec 1997 18:29:46 -0500
*********
http://www.gilc.org/speech/ratings/gilc-pics-submission.html
GILC Submission on PICS
December 1997
We, the undersigned members of the Global Internet
Liberty Campaign (GILC), make the following
submission in relation to the W3C Proposed
Recommendation "PICSRules 1.1" dated 4 November
1997 (http://www.w3.org/TR/PR-PICSRules.htm).
GILC members are concerned with matters of human
rights, civil liberty, and personal freedom.
Noting that:
Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights explicitly protects freedom of
expression for all and specifically the "freedom
to hold opinions without interference and to
seek, receive and impart information and ideas
through any media".
This principle has been reaffirmed in multiple
international agreements, including the
International Covenant on Civil and Political
Rights.
W3C's mission is "to realize the full potential of
the Web: as an elegant machine-to-machine
system, as a compelling human-to-computer
interface, and as an efficient human-human
communications medium".
PICSRules 1.1 have been developed for, or can
be used for, the purposes of:
preventing individuals from using the
Internet to exchange information on
topics that may be controversial or
unpopular,
enabling the development of country
profiles to facilitate a global/universal
rating system desired by governments,
blocking access to content on entire
domains, via the specification of full or
partial domain names and/or IP
addresses, regardless of the username,
port number, or particular file path that
is specified in the URL,
blocking access to Internet content
available at any domain or page which
contains a specific key-word or
character string in the URL,
over-riding self-rating labels provided
by content creators and providers.
PICSRules 1.1 go far beyond the original
objective of PICS to empower Internet users to
control what they and those under their care
access. They further facilitate the
implementation of server/ proxy-based filtering
thus providing a more simplified means of
enabling upstream censorship, beyond the
control of the end user.
We draw to W3C's attention that:
similar techniques that block Internet sites have
prevented access to innocuous speech, either by
deliberate intent, through oversight, or as a
result of ignorance of the infrastructure of the
Web,
repressive governments are desirous of a more
easily implementable, technological, means of
restricting information their citizens are able to
access and inhibiting their communications with
others,
methods to restrict the ability of citizens to gain
access to information and to communicate with
others are contrary to principles of free
expression and democratic society,
PICSRules 1.1, in enabling the use of
wildcards in IP addresses, etc, facilitate
blocking of not only entire domains, but of the
majority of content originating from specified
countries,
the rapidly increasing number of people
accessing the Web discredits the perception, of
various government and industry
representatives, that limitations on content
accessibility are essential to provide a climate of
confidence for the furtherance of electronic
commerce. In fact, filtering and rating systems
intended for the protection of minors have
proven inefficient and counter-productive,
the ability of community organisations to
develop a ratings system applicable to their
values, a stated original intent of PICS, is not
enhanced by the complex, albeit sophisticated,
language of PICSRules 1.1.
Whilst the W3C media release of 25 November 1997
states that:
"PICSRules is a mechanism for
exchanging user settings, resulting in
an easy one-click configuration...With
PICSRules parents can go to a PTA
site and download initial settings which
are recommended for primary school
children..."
even a cursory analysis of PICSRules 1.1 indicates that
the likelihood of community organisations developing
complex profiles is slim. The necessary expertise is
more likely to be acquired by governments seeking to
restrict access to content and inhibit freedom of
expression.
PICSRules 1.1 are clearly intended to serve the purpose
of enabling the empowered to restrict the ability of the
unempowered to communicate.
It seems apparent that PICSRules have been developed
in response to calls from governments who seek a more
efficient and effective technological means of restricting
human-to-human communications. European and
Australian governments, at the least, are involved in the
development of a global rating system which will be
enabled by PICSRules 1.1. Mandatory labelling of
content has already been proposed in the UK, Australia,
USA. The ability of governments to restrict access and
freedom of expression through the use of firewalls
/proxies will be enhanced by the adoption of PICSRules
1.1.
In view of the above, we oppose the proposed adoption
of PICSRules 1.1 on the grounds that they will provide
a tool for widespread global censorship, which will
conflict with W3C's mission to "realize the full potential
of the Web...as an efficient human-human
communications medium".
We call on W3C to reject the proposals of the
PICSRules Working Group and direct resources
towards working on genuine metadata systems which
will facilitate easier and faster access to desired classes
of information by all Internet users, rather than solely
supporting denial of access.
Background:
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) (USA):
"Fahrenheit 451.2: Is Cyberspace Burning? -- How
Rating and Blocking Proposals May Torch Free Speech
on the Internet"
(http://www.aclu.org/issues/cyber/burning.html)
Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility
(CPSR) (USA):
"Filtering FAQ"
(http://quark.cpsr.org/~harryh/faq.html)
Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK):
"Who watches the Watchmen: Internet Content Rating
Systems, and Privatised Censorship"
(http://www.leeds.ac.uk/law/pgs/yaman/watchmen.htm)
Electronic Privacy Information Center (USA):
"Faulty Filters: How Content Filters Block Access to
Kid-Friendly Information on the Internet"
(http://www2.epic.org/reports/filter-report.html)
Imaginons un Reseau Internet Solidaire (IRIS) (F):
"Labeling and Filtering: Possibilities, Dangers, and
Perspectives"
(http://girafe.ensba.fr/iris/rapport-ce/annexe6.html)
This submission is made by the following organisations:
Associazione per la Libertà nella
Comunicazione Elettronica Interattiva
(ALCEI)
http://www.nexus.it/alcei.html
American Civil Liberties Union
http://www.aclu.org/
Bulgarian Institute for Legal
Development
http://www.bild.acad.bg/
CommUnity - The Computer
Communicators Association
http://www.community.org.uk/
Computer Professionals for Social
Responsibility
http://www.cpsr.org/home.html
Cyber-Rights & Cyber-Liberties (UK)
http://www.leeds.ac.uk/law/pgs/yaman/yaman.htm
Derechos Human Rights
http://www.derechos.org/
Electronic Frontiers Australia
http://www.efa.org.au/
Electronic Privacy Information Center
http://www.epic.org/
Fronteras Electrónicas España (FrEE)
http://www.arnal.es/free
Human Rights Watch
http://www.hrw.org/
Imaginons un Reseau Internet Solidaire
http://girafe.ensba.fr/iris/
NetAction
http://www.netaction.org/
Peacefire
http://www.peacefire.org/
Privacy International
http://www.privacy.org/pi/
quintessenz
http://www.quintessenz.at/entrance/index.html
===================END FORWARDED MESSAGE===================