Talk:Surveillance, laws and governments vs. Internet rights – WS 07 2018: Difference between revisions
AlexanderI (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
AlexanderI (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
== Issue proposers == | |||
{| | {| | ||
|- | |- | ||
| Line 36: | Line 37: | ||
| "We need to put it under control": How both Europe and oppressive states claim the same rights on regulate Internet content | | "We need to put it under control": How both Europe and oppressive states claim the same rights on regulate Internet content | ||
|} | |} | ||
== Format == | |||
1-2 short reviews in the beginnig of | |||
session (7-10 minutes each) (pro- and contra- government regulation), | |||
than discussion by panesists (issue proposers?) and audience. | |||
If we could identify session participants with important opinions - we | |||
can call them to speak from the seat. | |||
== Description == | |||
=== Proposed by SME === | |||
The session can be a debate format: Among the Internet community, some are of the opinion that government actions and regulation usually hamper our internet rights and the fundamental principles of the Internet such as interoperability and openness. Some others believe that efforts such as data localization, legitimation of third-party platform content regulation and even surveillance and protectionism serve our rights and are here to protect us. And there are those who believe that there can be a genuine balance: good regulations that can enhance our Internet rights while respecting the Internet longstanding principles. We will be debating these issues during this session to provide a landscape of opinions about how government regulations positively or negatively affect our rights. | The session can be a debate format: Among the Internet community, some are of the opinion that government actions and regulation usually hamper our internet rights and the fundamental principles of the Internet such as interoperability and openness. Some others believe that efforts such as data localization, legitimation of third-party platform content regulation and even surveillance and protectionism serve our rights and are here to protect us. And there are those who believe that there can be a genuine balance: good regulations that can enhance our Internet rights while respecting the Internet longstanding principles. We will be debating these issues during this session to provide a landscape of opinions about how government regulations positively or negatively affect our rights. | ||
=== Proposed by FP === | |||
Internet developed without states interference. It’s grows and | |||
success was achieved because of lack of government involvements. Any | |||
states and inter-governmental organizations failed to create any | |||
comparable network. | |||
Now Internet became significant part of our life. Some countries | |||
recognize Internet as the fundamental right. Some other countries and | |||
regimes recognize Internet as the major threat. | |||
In this session we will start from history of government involvements | |||
to the Internet, discuss current laws and state activities. Then we | |||
proceed to discussion about impacts of current and proposed | |||
regulations. Should governments be allowed to regulate internet, or | |||
should we apply current governance of the Internet to our governments. | |||
Is any dialog possible with governments? | |||
Revision as of 20:44, 8 May 2018
Issue proposers
| 8 | Olga Kyryliuk | NGO “Digital Defenders Partners” | Internet freedom: at the edge of liberty and security |
| 137 | Nata Goderdzishvili | Data Exchange Agency | Building sustainable balance of individual privacy and state security considering GDPR and NIS regulations |
| 156 | Alexander Isavnin | RosKomSvoboda | Development of IG ecosystem Government interverence to technical infrustructure of Internet, affecting not just network performance, but also human rights. |
| 162 | Olga Kyryliuk | NGO “Digital Defenders Partners” | State surveillance online |
| 190 | Laurin Weissinger | University of Oxford Academia | How can the fight against abuse (e.g. crime) be balanced with citizens' rights and expectations of privacy online? |
| 214 | Giorgi Kldiashvili | Institute for Development of Freedom of Information (IDFI) | Surveillance in the Digital Age and the Importance of Transparency and Public Trust |
| 223 | Eduardo Santos | D3 ‐ Defesa dos Direitos Digitais | "We need to put it under control": How both Europe and oppressive states claim the same rights on regulate Internet content |
Format
1-2 short reviews in the beginnig of session (7-10 minutes each) (pro- and contra- government regulation), than discussion by panesists (issue proposers?) and audience. If we could identify session participants with important opinions - we can call them to speak from the seat.
Description
Proposed by SME
The session can be a debate format: Among the Internet community, some are of the opinion that government actions and regulation usually hamper our internet rights and the fundamental principles of the Internet such as interoperability and openness. Some others believe that efforts such as data localization, legitimation of third-party platform content regulation and even surveillance and protectionism serve our rights and are here to protect us. And there are those who believe that there can be a genuine balance: good regulations that can enhance our Internet rights while respecting the Internet longstanding principles. We will be debating these issues during this session to provide a landscape of opinions about how government regulations positively or negatively affect our rights.
Proposed by FP
Internet developed without states interference. It’s grows and success was achieved because of lack of government involvements. Any states and inter-governmental organizations failed to create any comparable network. Now Internet became significant part of our life. Some countries recognize Internet as the fundamental right. Some other countries and regimes recognize Internet as the major threat. In this session we will start from history of government involvements to the Internet, discuss current laws and state activities. Then we proceed to discussion about impacts of current and proposed regulations. Should governments be allowed to regulate internet, or should we apply current governance of the Internet to our governments. Is any dialog possible with governments?