Re: [icann-candidates] Re: [ICANN-EU] Article 31

["Andrew Bloch" <abloch@alum.mit.edu>]

On Tuesday, August 29, 2000 4:56 PM, Wolfgang Kleinwächter
(wolfgang.medienstadt@okay.net) wrote:
> It is good to see how history is circling. In 1968 Jean dÀrcy, the late
> director of the Institute for International Communication (IIC) in London
> "invented" in the debate around satellite broadcasting and its regulation
> in the 1960s (the first communication satellite Telstar was launched in
1964
> the UN had established an Outer Space Committee in 1965) the "right to
> communicate" (RTC). RTC was seen as a further development of Article 19,
> enshrined in the UN Human Rights Declaration and the UN Covenant on
> Political and Civil Rights (!966). The two elements which went beyond
> Article 19 in the RTC concept has been "access" and "participation". While
> article 19 secured the "right to information". which was seen as a
> one-way-process, leading to "imbalances" inthe flow of information, RTC
> was a label for "communication", a two-way-process, more in favour of
> "balance".

[First, note that the original message from Wolfgang never made it to the
icann-candidates list because I had originally set it so only members of the
list could post.  I just changed the setting so posters don't have to be
members of both groups.]

Wolfgang, thank you very much for posting this message.  Thinking about it
has helped me clear up some of my thoughts on ICANN, domain names, and the
Internet in general.

Because Article 19 covers a bi-directional right to receive and impart
information, the terms "one-way-process" and "two-way-process" can be
misleading.  After reading a few articles on the web, I think better terms
would be "single-ended/double-ended process", or
"single-participant/multi-participant process."  True communications
requires two parties.

Article 19 declares a right to "impart information, but having the right to
impart information means little if you have no good way of finding or
attracting your desired audience.  That's why a right to communicate,
including a right to a reasonable means for finding your audience, is so
important.  How can we apply this concept of a right to communicate to the
Internet in general, and to ICANN in particular?  Let's consider some
examples:

A timely example is the current ICANN at-large election process.  We can run
for the nomination, we can write statements, we can create campaign
websites.  But ICANN will not release the membership list so we cannot
communicate directly with the majority of the members.  We have the right of
freedom of expression, but not the right to communicate.

Domain names are another example.  Suppose I've decided to create an
anti-gambling website and I want to be able to reach potential visitors to a
casino called "VeryBad Casino".  Why is it that "VeryBad Casino" can have a
monopoly on "verybadcasino", so that any user that types "verybadcasino"
into the browser will be directed exclusively to VeryBad's website and never
mine?  Because I am not able to own the domain name "verybadcasino", or
something similar, I have a sharply limited right to communicate.

But, if the user instead typed "verybad casino" into a search engine, my
anti-casino site would have a chance.  The domain name problem occurs
because browsers are designed to use DNS as the primary "search" tool when
the user enters a single word or a domain name.  Will an expansion in the
gTLD improve the right to communicate?  Maybe a little, but not much,
especially not if .com is still the default TLD.

Perhaps, if we are seriously concerned with freedom of communication, we are
barking up the wrong tree by pushing for more gTLDs.  Increasing the number
of gTLDs could gain us a little more freedom, but perhaps more freedom could
be gained by getting Microsoft and Mozilla to make minor changes to how
their browsers operates.

These are just two examples.

> I encourage you to think ahead along the lines of the right to communicate
> and its key issues which go beyound Article 19 (or Article 10 in the
> European Human Rights Convention or the relevant articles in the national
> constitutions, like Article 5 in the German basic Law): access,
> participation, two-way communication. You can add easily today also
> openess and transparency.

Wolfgang, I completely agree.

Thank you,

Andy Bloch

P.S.: For reference, I've collected links and the text of some of the
relevant Articles, etc., below:

http://www.lib.byu.edu/~rdh/eurodocs/germ/ggeng.html
German Grundgesetz (Constitution)(English translation)
Article 5 (Freedom of expression)     (1) Everyone has the right freely to
express and to disseminate his opinion by speech, writing and pictures and
freely to inform himself from generally accessible sources. Freedom of the
press and freedom of reporting by radio and motion pictures are guaranteed.
There shall be no censorship.
    (2) These rights are limited by the provisions of the general laws, the
provisions of law for the protection of youth and by the right to
inviolability of personal honor.
    (3) Art and science, research and teaching are free. Freedom of teaching
does not absolve from loyalty to the constitution.
Article 73 (Exclusive legislative power, catalogue; amended 24 June 1968.
    The Federation has the exclusive power to legislate on:
    9. industrial property rights, copyrights and publication rights;

http://www.hri.org/docs/ECHR50.html#C.Art10
The European Convention on Human Rights
ARTICLE 10
    1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. this right shall
include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information an
ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.
This article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of
broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
    2. The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and
responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions,
restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a
democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial
integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the
protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or the
rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in
confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the
judiciary.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights
http://www.unhchr.ch/udhr/lang/eng.htm
Article 17
    1. Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in
association with others.
    2. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
Article 19
    Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right
includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive
and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of
frontiers.
Article 27
    1. Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of
the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and
its benefits.
    2. Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material
interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of
which he is the author.

U.S. Constitution, Amendment I: http://lcweb2.loc.gov/const/bor.html
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,
or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to
petition the government for a redress of grievances.