 | |
| |
TechnologyDaily Mobile
Experts Discuss Internet Freedom
by Winter Casey
The Internet remains freer than traditional media in many countries but government interference is growing, an expert said Tuesday during a State Department conference on global Internet freedom.
Leading industry and human rights representatives gathered at the State Department to discuss issues related to Internet censorship and the obligations of U.S. companies when operating abroad. The issue garnered significant attention in 2006, including from lawmakers.
Robert Faris, research director at Harvard University's Berkman Center for Internet and Society, discussed the difference between government approaches to the Internet and other types of media. He noted that even though censoring the Internet can be expensive and difficult, more than 25 countries currently filter the Internet.
In addition to countries blocking Web sites for national security reasons or to prevent access to vices such as illegal drugs, Faris said, "we are beginning to see some commercial censoring" of the Internet for competition purposes. Nations are employing many different strategies to suppress content online, he said.
Other experts discussed how Internet freedom has become a human rights issue.
T. Kumar, Amnesty International's advocacy director for Asia and the Pacific, said that people were angry when they learned that U.S. companies were complying with content-restrictive laws in other countries such as China. He noted reports that Google, Microsoft and Yahoo all contributed to censorship in China.
Kumar said it was hypocritical of Yahoo, which cited privacy concerns, not to give the family of a U.S. Marine killed in Iraq access to his e-mail while at the same time handing over information requested by the Chinese government. The company eventually relented in the Marine's case after his family went to court.
Companies may be taking note of the potential repercussions caused by such actions.
The Guardian reported Saturday that Google founder Sergey Brin has said the decision to censor on a business level was a "net negative" and damaged the company's reputation.
Also this month a diverse group of stakeholders, including academics, businesses and advocacy groups, plan to focus on ways to support freedom of expression and privacy when companies operate abroad.
The group said it hopes to produce a set of principles that companies can use as a guide when they are faced with laws, regulations and policies that interfere with human rights' progress. Members of the group include Google, the Center for Democracy and Technology, Microsoft, Vodafone and Yahoo.
Blogger Rebecca MacKinnon said she believes the companies should be "commended for taking all the criticism directed at them seriously enough" to work with critics to help draw "red lines that their global operations would not be permitted to cross."
Companies also might be leery of more attention from Capitol Hill. A staffer for House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Tom Lantos, D-Calif, has said the issue of U.S. companies complying with censorship regimes and providing governments with the means to track down dissenters is a big concern for the lawmaker.
Kumar urged the Bush administration to be very clear to foreign governments and U.S. corporations on Internet censorship. If U.S. companies get censorship requests from China, they should have to go through the U.S. government first, Kumar said.
Dunstan Hope from Business for Social Responsibility called the problem extremely "complex." Among the factors contributing to the complexity include different cultural and government attitudes toward what constitutes freedom of expression, and rapidly changing and sophisticated technology.
Hope said some countries have good laws but lack enforcement. Another issue is that many involved don't agree on the best way to foster more international freedom of expression.
Alexis Krajeski from F&C Asset Management, a global asset manager, said Internet access and censorship is a big issue for shareholders given that people's ability to access and use the Internet affects the market, consumer's behavior online, individual stocks and the next generation of tech companies.
Krajeski said many foreign laws governing access to the Internet are unclear or contradictory in how they define appropriate speech, online behavior or privacy rights.
Leaders Meet To Discuss Global Issues
The rapid growth of user-generated content on the Internet will not put an end to traditional media business models, company leaders said at the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos, Switzerland, which ended Sunday.
Ogilvy & Mather Chairman Shelly Lazarus said Internet advertising enables companies to make some of the money they lose by providing free content. Meanwhile, Steve Chen, co-founder of YouTube, noted that "if you charge people for viewing content, they will now simply switch to the next provider."
During this year's conference, company leaders addressed social networking, the move toward 3D functionality and different ways to measure online business success. Another session at the meeting focused on the role of innovation and market approaches in the world.
The conference also examined how to protect privacy while trying to address security and how companies can comply with the laws of multiple countries that may contradict each other.
John Battelle, chairman and publisher of Federated Media, noted that the U.S. Justice Department has subpoenaed 35 companies demanding information on all the Internet addresses visited and on Web searches. "You leave footprints with every search you make," he noted, which is helping to create fear.
U.S., Philippines Agree To Protect IP
The United States and the Philippines have agreed on a memorandum of understanding to work together to support the protection of intellectual property rights, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office said Monday.
As part of the accord, the PTO will provide assistance on the development of patent and trademark examination manuals, automated patent and trademark examination tools, and on modernization projects. Patent offices from each country also plan to regularly exchange information on their examination practices and each country's IP laws.
NEW FEATURE
-Advertisement-
-Advertisement-
-Advertisement-
