[Advisors] Safeguarding a free Internet - The Globe and Mail

Thu, 6 Dec 2012 07:46:46 -0600

--Apple-Mail-57D1E73E-9B0B-41F6-A66D-35B92E20ACC6
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/safeguarding-a-free-internet/article=
5978383/?service=3Dmobile

Safeguarding a free Internet

Safeguarding a free Internet (Thinkstock)
On Dec. 3, a major treaty negotiation began in Dubai: The World Conference o=
n International Telecommunications aims to update the International Telecomm=
unication Regulations that were last revised in 1988, before the emergence o=
f the Internet as a part of everyday life. In the interim, an array of Inter=
net-specific governance arrangements has evolved. While these mechanisms lea=
ve room for incremental improvement, they have enabled technological, social=
 and economic changes comparable to the Industrial Revolution.

Fundamentally altering the rules of the game midway through such a complex p=
rocess as the adoption of Internet technologies entails massive risks. Cauti=
on is even more strongly indicated if the proposed rules amount to repudiati=
on of the basic values embedded in the Internet that have contributed to its=
 successes. And yet a variety of WCIT proposals seek to erect new Internet g=
overnance arrangements that raise red flags.

One set of proposals would substantially change the economic model of the In=
ternet =E2=80=93 allowing states, for example, to collect fees for the trans=
it of Internet traffic through their territory or requiring companies using h=
igh amounts of bandwidth to pay network operators for the traffic generated b=
y their businesses. The net effect of these kinds of measures would be to re=
distribute wealth from the industrial world toward companies and individuals=
 in a small number of states, including Russia and China.

Charging for Internet traffic requires knowing where data packets originate.=
 Thus, efforts to employ international regulations to extract resources fit n=
aturally with other WCIT proposals to enable increased state surveillance an=
d blocking of Internet traffic. Such efforts are not new and don=E2=80=99t r=
equire international rules (as the recent Internet shutdown in Syria demonst=
rates), but such rules can make monitoring and blocking more effective and a=
lso potentially more legitimate.

These proposals are being advanced by a group of states led by Russia and Ch=
ina and with significant representation from the Arab world. While the stric=
t decision rules for multilateral treaty negotiations will likely prevent th=
em from prevailing at the WCIT, they will have ample opportunity to further t=
heir agenda in other venues. The next such major opportunity is the World Te=
chnology Policy Forum in Geneva next May.

In contrast, the group of countries broadly committed to the current multi-s=
takeholder model of Internet governance remains fragmented. This group lacks=
 an overall strategic vision of what they want the Internet to look like.

Such a lack of vision is a fundamental disadvantage in negotiation. Absent c=
lear values and preferences, it=E2=80=99s impossible to pursue a positive ag=
enda, limiting negotiators to a defensive, rearguard action. Further, it ham=
pers efforts to manage tradeoffs between distinct values such as civil liber=
ties and security.

The result could be a gradual move in the direction of more state control. T=
he perception that Internet governance outcomes are leading to a more state-=
controlled Internet, whether by design or by accident, risks creating a back=
lash.

While large-scale disruption of the Internet must be avoided due to its inte=
gration with financial markets and critical infrastructure, dissent and oppo=
sition online should not be seen as intrinsically threatening or illegitimat=
e. In particular, such political speech must be carefully distinguished from=
 cybercrime and cyberterrorism. The appropriate conceptual frame is civil di=
sobedience.

Maintaining this distinction will take leadership and training on the part o=
f law enforcement and security organizations, just as it will require restra=
int and moderation on the part of Internet activists such as hacker collecti=
ve Anonymous. Most of all, it will take sustained dialogue.

This kind of genuine engagement is important not only to minimize the immens=
e potential damage from major Internet disruptions, but also to communicate t=
hat, at least in this case, major industrial democracies and loose-knit hack=
er groups have substantially overlapping interests in preventing a heavily s=
tate-dominated Internet along the lines of the one desired by Russia, China a=
nd other authoritarian states.

Ensuring real opportunities for people who feel passionately about online fr=
eedoms to play a constructive role in the future of the Internet can help en=
sure vital civil liberties =E2=80=93 freedoms crucial to the Internet=E2=80=99=
s creative potential =E2=80=93 are not lost in the process of achieving othe=
r Internet governance goals, such as security. That is, it can help states c=
ommitted to a multi-stakeholder regime for Internet governance maintain thei=
r focus on a strategic vision for the Internet as they play a long game agai=
nst determined adversaries.

Gordon Smith is a distinguished fellow and Mark Raymond a research fellow at=
 the Waterloo-based Centre for International Governance Innovation.

Autocorrect errors courtesy of my iPhone 4S on the retarded Telus network

--Apple-Mail-57D1E73E-9B0B-41F6-A66D-35B92E20ACC6
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html><head><meta http-equiv=3D"content-type" content=3D"text/html; charset=3D=
utf-8"></head><body dir=3D"auto"><div><div class=3D"original-url"><a href=3D=
"http://m.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/safeguarding-a-free-internet/articl=
e5978383/?service=3Dmobile">http://m.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/safeguar=
ding-a-free-internet/article5978383/?service=3Dmobile</a><br><br></div><div i=
d=3D"article">
                <!-- This node will contain a number of 'page' class divs. -=
->
            <div class=3D"page" style=3D"font-family: Palatino, Georgia, Tim=
es, 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: 24px; line-height: 1.4; "><h1 class=
=3D"title">Safeguarding a free Internet</h1><div class=3D"leading-image"><im=
g src=3D"http://beta.images.theglobeandmail.com/73b/commentary/article597838=
2.ece/ALTERNATES/w620/web-smith-internet.JPG" class=3D"full-width"><div clas=
s=3D"caption">Safeguarding a free Internet (Thinkstock)</div></div>

On Dec. 3, a major treaty negotiation began in Dubai: The World Conferenc=
e on International Telecommunications aims to update the International Telec=
ommunication Regulations that were last revised in 1988, before the emergenc=
e of the Internet as a part of everyday life. In the interim, an array of In=
ternet-specific governance arrangements has evolved. While these mechanisms l=
eave room for incremental improvement, they have enabled technological, soci=
al and economic changes comparable to the Industrial Revolution.

Fundamentally altering the rules of the game midway through such a comple=
x process as the adoption of Internet technologies entails massive risks. Ca=
ution is even more strongly indicated if the proposed rules amount to repudi=
ation of the basic values embedded in the Internet that have contributed to i=
ts successes. And yet a variety of WCIT proposals seek to erect new Internet=
 governance arrangements that raise red flags.One set of proposals wo=
uld substantially change the economic model of the Internet =E2=80=93 allowi=
ng states, for example, to collect fees for the transit of Internet traffic t=
hrough their territory or requiring companies using high amounts of bandwidt=
h to pay network operators for the traffic generated by their businesses. Th=
e net effect of these kinds of measures would be to redistribute wealth from=
 the industrial world toward companies and individuals in a small number of s=
tates, including Russia and China.Charging for Internet traffic requi=
res knowing where data packets originate. Thus, efforts to employ internatio=
nal regulations to extract resources fit naturally with other WCIT proposals=
 to enable increased state surveillance and blocking of Internet traffic. Su=
ch efforts are not new and don=E2=80=99t require international rules (as the=
 recent Internet shutdown in Syria demonstrates), but such rules can make mo=
nitoring and blocking more effective and also potentially more legitimate.</=
p>These proposals are being advanced by a group of states led by Russia a=
nd China and with significant representation from the Arab world. While the s=
trict decision rules for multilateral treaty negotiations will likely preven=
t them from prevailing at the WCIT, they will have ample opportunity to furt=
her their agenda in other venues. The next such major opportunity is the Wor=
ld Technology Policy Forum in Geneva next May.In contrast, the group o=
f countries broadly committed to the current multi-stakeholder model of Inte=
rnet governance remains fragmented. This group lacks an overall strategic vi=
sion of what they want the Internet to look like.Such a lack of visio=
n is a fundamental disadvantage in negotiation. Absent clear values and pref=
erences, it=E2=80=99s impossible to pursue a positive agenda, limiting negot=
iators to a defensive, rearguard action. Further, it hampers efforts to mana=
ge tradeoffs between distinct values such as civil liberties and security.</=
p>The result could be a gradual move in the direction of more state contr=
ol. The perception that Internet governance outcomes are leading to a more s=
tate-controlled Internet, whether by design or by accident, risks creating a=
 backlash.While large-scale disruption of the Internet must be avoide=
d due to its integration with financial markets and critical infrastructure,=
 dissent and opposition online should not be seen as intrinsically threateni=
ng or illegitimate. In particular, such political speech must be carefully d=
istinguished from cybercrime and cyberterrorism. The appropriate conceptual f=
rame is civil disobedience.Maintaining this distinction will take lea=
dership and training on the part of law enforcement and security organizatio=
ns, just as it will require restraint and moderation on the part of Internet=
 activists such as hacker collective Anonymous. Most of all, it will take su=
stained dialogue.This kind of genuine engagement is important not onl=
y to minimize the immense potential damage from major Internet disruptions, b=
ut also to communicate that, at least in this case, major industrial democra=
cies and loose-knit hacker groups have substantially overlapping interests i=
n preventing a heavily state-dominated Internet along the lines of the one d=
esired by Russia, China and other authoritarian states.Ensuring real o=
pportunities for people who feel passionately about online freedoms to play a=
 constructive role in the future of the Internet can help ensure vital civil=
 liberties =E2=80=93 freedoms crucial to the Internet=E2=80=99s creative pot=
ential =E2=80=93 are not lost in the process of achieving other Internet gov=
ernance goals, such as security. That is, it can help states committed to a m=
ulti-stakeholder regime for Internet governance maintain their focus on a st=
rategic vision for the Internet as they play a long game against determined a=
dversaries.Gordon Smith is a distinguished fellow and Mark Raymon=
d a research fellow at the Waterloo-based Centre for International Governanc=
e Innovation.

</div></div></div><div><br><br><span style=3D"-webkit-tap-highlight-color: r=
gba(26, 26, 26, 0.296875); -webkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 22=
7, 0.230469); -webkit-composition-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469);=
 background-color: rgba(255, 255, 255, 0); ">Autocorrect errors courtesy of <=
/span>my iPhone 4S on the retarded Telus network<div><br></div><div><br><div=
><span style=3D"font-family: 'Lucida Sans Unicode', 'Lucida Grande', Arial; f=
ont-size: 22px; -webkit-tap-highlight-color: rgba(26, 26, 26, 0.296875); -we=
bkit-composition-fill-color: rgba(175, 192, 227, 0.230469); -webkit-composit=
ion-frame-color: rgba(77, 128, 180, 0.230469); -webkit-text-size-adjust: aut=
o; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); "><br></span></div></div></div></bo=
dy></html>=

--Apple-Mail-57D1E73E-9B0B-41F6-A66D-35B92E20ACC6--