[Advisors] Manila Principles for Intermediary Liability

[Garth Graham]

The overlap is at the level  of first principles. As Mozilla notes, "The Bill further empowers CSIS to take unspecified and open-ended “measures,” which may include the overt takedown of websites, attacks on Internet infrastructure, introduction of malware, and more all without any judicial oversight. " The intent of C51 has nothing to do with a free and open Internet. It's that openness that is the enemy of security. 

GG

> On Mar 27, 2015, at 11:46 AM, Michael Gurstein <gurstein at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Good point Garth and see also Mozilla's comment on Bill C: 51
> 
> https://blog.mozilla.org/netpolicy/2015/03/25/information-sharing-debates-continuing-in-problematic-directions/
> 
> I can see the general connection but any specific pointers re: the relationship between Bill C: 51 and Intermediary Liability?
> 
> M
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: advisors-bounces at tc.ca [mailto:advisors-bounces at tc.ca] On Behalf Of Garth Graham
> Sent: March 27, 2015 11:14 AM
> To: advisors
> Subject: [Advisors] Manila Principles for Intermediary Liability
> 
> Manila Principles for Intermediary Liability: a framework of safeguards and best practices for responding to requests for content removal; https://www.manilaprinciples.org
> 
> "Concerned solely with the laws, policies, norms, and practices that relate to how intermediaries handle third-party Internet content that could raise criminal or civil liability issues for them or for their users. Specifically, the principles are meant to be directed at laws, policies, norms, practices, and private terms of service that relate to content removal or filtering as well as platform blocking by an intermediary.”
> 
> A lot of thought has gone into the preparation of these principles, from the perspective of "policies that can foster and protect a free and open Internet.”  I think it might be appropriate for TC to endorse them, especially since Bill C51 is clearly modifying the context for defending a free and open Internet in Canada in a very negative way.   There is a “jurisdictional analysis” chart of compliance that includes Canada.  It indicates we’ve work to do:
> https://www.manilaprinciples.org/sites/default/files/jurisdictional-analysis.pdf
> 
> GG
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Advisors mailing list
> Advisors at tc.ca
> http://victoria.tc.ca/mailman/listinfo/advisors
>