CyberSafety Charter
To whom it may concern: I oppose the formation of the CyberSafety Constituency within the ICANN because it extends beyond the remit of ICANN, would be making public policy without the involvement of the public, and because it would be a forum for attacks on fundamental human rights. ICANN is primarily a technical body with partial responsibility for Internet governance. However, the RFC Editor has already addressed the issue of illegal activity in RFC 3514. While RFC 3514 is not yet implemented its existence demonstrates that the particular task at hand is being addressed outside of ICANN. To avoid reduplication of effort the CSC should not be formed within ICANN. Secondly the question of how to deal with undesirable data is a public policy question, which should be addressed in the forums set up for that purpose, namely governments. Any solution will have real impacts on the usefulness of the Internet for the general public. Given the recent statements by R. Bellovin and Avenue Q that the "internet is for porn" I conclude that consensus on the direction the CSC should take is very far from existing. Unless we have consensus on what the problem is we will not have consensus on its solution. Finally, all joking aside, censorship is a serious problem for millions of people around the world. The right to free speech is enshrined in the Universal Deceleration of Human Rights. I cannot say that the formation of a body to regulate speech on the internet would be anything short of a disaster for free speech. Furthermore to say that Leda and the Swan or The Garden of Earthly Delights (very explicit paintings) should be blocked is nothing short of a crime against art. Currently we should ask how we can evade filters on the internet, not create new ones. Sincerely, Watson Ladd Attachment:
signature.asc |