This past Thursday, the U.N. Human
Rights Council passed a resolution stating that controlling or
infringing upon people's internet usage is a violation of human
rights. While not universally agreed upon, even China backed the
resolution, stating that people should have the same rights online as
they do offline. Now it is up to internet providers and technology
companies to decide whether or not to comply with this resolution or
not. Since the resolution is not technically a law, there is no legal
binding that these companies must work within. American
law-enforcement agencies often request information about internet
users from providers and companies, Thailand limits what kinds of
things may be said about the royal family, Turkey does not allow
discussion of atheism, and the tech company Cisco provides China with
a firewall to filter what shows up on the internet. These provide
internet and technology companies with a strong motivator towards
continuing to infringe upon internet rights, as it gives a high
profit margin. Some scholars believe that this will mean continuing
limits on internet use rights, while others are more hopeful about
companies complying with the resolution. Opinions expressed in the
Pew report were almost perfectly split between the two sides.
Only time will tell whether internet
companies will continue to work with oppressive and authoritarian
regimes to violate internet rights in for monetary reasons or if they
will protect these rights, like how the website Twitter already does.
Since the resolution is not binding, there is not much that can be
done to enforce these rights – we must have faith that these
companies will do the right thing. Sociology professor Simon
Gottschalk does not have high hopes for this, stating that “Firms
might decide to implement steps that protect dissidents only if it is
cost-effective for them to do so.” This resolution mostly works to
shame governments that engage in internet repression, and so its
effectiveness is limited to the sympathy of the ruling parties of a
given country. As a result, this may not have effects in many
countries, depending on both the ruling regime and the willingness of
tech and internet companies to play along. While freedom of
expression should be an inviolable human right, it may not be so for
a long while.
No comments:
Post a Comment