Talk:Surveillance, laws and governments vs. Internet rights – WS 07 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:
- Introduction by moderator
- Two statements to spark the debate - one in favour, one against regulation (we don't have to deal in absolutes. Rather narratives of what works well and what or where it doesn't.)
- Q&A with key participants based on an set of questions we can define beforehand
- Open the discussion to the room
- Wrap-up
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?
Combined version
Do government action and regulations harm our digital rights or do they protect them? Some advocate that, in tradition of the early Internet, regulators only bring harm to innovation and free exercise of digital rights and hamper key principles of the Internet. Others call for more regulation in order to fight crime and abuse in digital spaces and keep the Internet safe for its users. Some political systems approach the Internet more radically than others. If the truth is in a balance, the question remains, how to strike this happy medium. Is a productive dialogue between stakeholders realistic when it comes to laws? In this workshop we will debate opposing takes on the matter to provide a landscape of opinions about how government regulations positively or negatively, directly and indirectly affect our rights online