In this month’s VoM, we highlight Dave Clark’s recent presentation, concerning the role of the IETF in Internet protocols and human rights, made to the plenary at IETF 98 in Chicago. Clark reflects on the recent efforts proposing guidelines for human rights considerations in IETF standards work. He recalls earlier efforts (RAVEN) to prevent legal intercept requirements from being standardized by the IETF, and compares that to other SDOs like 3GPPP which took a more active role to facilitate demands of LEAs. He concludes with strong support for the use of human rights as a foundational value in considering technological design considerations, but asks do we design for a preferred outcome and let the “tussle” happen in a way which we have little control, or do we design for a range of outcomes some which we (individually or collectively) may not prefer?
Nowadays the Internet community has a laundry list of things to be frightened about. In the Internet Governance Project’s new paper, we try to reduce that list by one. With the governments’ attempts to localize data, increase surveillance and curb freedom of expression, civil society especially is concerned with how the governance of IoT will play out. Since the ITU-T SG 20 meeting on IoT is forthcoming, we are receiving calls for civil society to fight against the adoption of the Digital Object Architecture as the IoT standard at ITU. But is this really an issue we should be worried about? Karim Farhat’s paper “Digital Object Architecture and the Internet of Things: Getting a ‘handle’ on techno-political competition”, provides a more realistic look at ITU standard setting for IoT devices. Continue reading
The turmoil in Brazil’s politics has now touched on the Internet governance situation. For many years, Brazil’s Comitê Gestor da Internet no Brasil (CGI.BR), known in English as the Brazilian Internet Steering Committee, has been touted globally as the model of enlightened multi-stakeholder governance at the national level. Members of CGI.BR have been prominent and valued contributors in the global Internet governance environment, playing critical roles in ICANN, management of the .BR top level domain, the IANA transition, the NetMundial meeting, and the Internet address registry for Brazil. While Brazil’s government has often taken a multilateralist, government-centric approach to Internet, the CGI.BR has always been more aligned with the transnational Internet technical community and civil society in its approach. Domestically, the CGI aided the passage of the famous Marco Civil law by developing and promoting some enlightened “Principles for the Governance and Use of the Internet.”
But there were always flaws in the design of CGI. Those latent flaws are now coming back to haunt it. Continue reading
The United States Trade Representative recently issued a document describing its NAFTA negotiations priorities. On 28 July 2017, The R Street Institute arranged a panel on NAFTA and Digital Trade. IGP’s Farzaneh Badiei was invited to take part in the panel. The panel discussed the policy and political issues surrounding the priorities on digital trade and NAFTA. This blog post will briefly discuss the points some panelists made: