Interesting, Catherine. I appreciate your perspective. In your opinion, what's the solution to this problem?
Thanks, Yosem On Thu, Nov 28, 2019 at 11:47 AM Catherine Fitzpatrick <[email protected]> wrote: > This "contract" was likely drafted by the NGO Access Now, which has worked > on this for years and is associated with this effort. Access now is led by > Andrew McLaughlin, formerly of Google, and Berkman and the Obama > Administration and many other things, and Brett Solomon, the other > Australian, who has been promoting these fuzzy but extremist views for > years with little criticism. > > It is not a democratic exercise by any stretch of the imagination as NGOs, > however much they are needed in society, are advocacy organizations, not > democratic organizations, and this is not a legislative exercise by a > democratically-elected Congress in a liberal democracy under the rule of > law. I would prefer Congress as a drafting body than a group of hackers who > support Snowden. > > In that sense, it's very good it is not binding because it comes out of > the Benevolent Dictatorship hacker culture and warmed-over Google > opportunism. > > There is nothing about protecting private property and copyright which are > actually what made the Internet viable, such as it is. > > Any effort involving "an Internet Bill of Rights" or "Guiding Principles" > that sound like the UN should not succeed because it is not democratic or > legitimate. > > Tim Berners-Lee engineered into the Internet its very flaws bothering > people so much today: collectivism, lack of private property and copyright > protection, "sharing of knowledge" uber alles, and > lack of privacy. > > Catherine Fitzpatrick > > On Thursday, November 28, 2019, 12:19:55 PM EST, Thomas Delrue < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > On 11/24/19 10:31 PM, Yosem Companys wrote: > > The contract is non-binding, however. And funders and partners in the > > endeavor include Google and Facebook, whose data-collecting business > > models and sensation-rewarding algorithms have been blamed for > > exacerbating online toxicity. > > I'm a little confused by the choice of words in the term "contract for > the web"... Can someone explain to me what exactly a non-binding > > contract is? > > The first 7 words of the Wikipedia entry for 'contract' are literally "A > contract is a legally binding agreement". How can a 'legally binding > agreement' be non-binding? > MW has as its first entry for 'contract' the following "a binding > agreement between two or more persons or parties especially : one > legally enforceable". > > Forgive my cynicism, but what exactly will this do or accomplish if it > isn't binding, except to make some folks feel warm and fuzzy for signing > something that will be forgotten in a heartbeat? > Surely, this is nothing more than a PR stunt? It's about as vacuous as > the statement "Don't be evil" (by google) or "We care about your > privacy" (by facebook), no? > > Don't get me wrong, I'm happy that TBL has started this conversation, as > it is one to be had. However, without the binding-ness, the good > intentions and desires, outlined in the 'contract', will go no-where. > Unfortunately, we don't need more conversation on this subject, we need > actual change, and that requires enforceability. > > If the purpose of making it non-enforceable was to make sure entities > like google or facebook signed as well, then I ask "why? Why do they > have to sign as well"? Especially if they are the highest probability > candidates to violate the intention of the document. Why would it have > been important for them to sign something that will make no difference? > Why not leave them excluded and let them be on display for the predatory > entities that they are? > > -- > Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable from any major > commercial search engine. Violations of list guidelines will get you > moderated: https://lists.ghserv.net/mailman/listinfo/lt. Unsubscribe, > change to digest mode, or change password by emailing > [email protected]. >
-- Liberationtech is public & archives are searchable from any major commercial search engine. Violations of list guidelines will get you moderated: https://lists.ghserv.net/mailman/listinfo/lt. Unsubscribe, change to digest mode, or change password by emailing [email protected].
