PDC: Digital liberties working group
 |
Draft Policy
This is a draft policy which may still be under development and is not approved or endorsed by the party.
Until such time as it is endorsed by the party, it does not represent the views or intentions of the party. |
This Working Group (WG) was established by the Policy Development Committee (PDC) on 20 February 2013.
Working group report
This working group was tasked with developing policy to develop policy on digital liberties. The working group was chaired by Ben McGinnes and will present the following policy text to the April 3 PDC meeting.
Recommendation
The Digital Liberties working group recommends the following policies be adopted as a means to implement the PPAU platform.
Platform amendment
The grass-roots nature of the Internet is causing considerable disruption to traditional power structures. Unsurprisingly, this is leading to push-back: corporate and government entities have been trying for years to increase control over the Internet through a range of measures including censorship, reduction of access, treaties to reduce the rights of Internet users, and ever-broader surveillance and monitoring powers.[1]
Attempts to control the Internet take different forms over time, but all are justified through references to crime and other undesirable activities. They also all share one critical flaw: they are easily evaded by those with technical knowledge. They ultimately reduce the freedoms of the public while doing nothing to curb criminal behaviour. The Pirate Party will always defend for the founding principles of the Internet, and resist any and all attempts to control it. A fast and free Internet, open to all, is a safeguard not just for our economy and culture, but for our basic rights.
Net Neutrality
Net Neutrality is a fundamental principle behind the development of the internet. It ensures that the internet is free and open to all by preventing gatekeepers from blocking, speeding up, or slowing down content based on the source, destination or owner. Net Neutrality guarantees that even the smallest entrepreneurs have the same access standards as established firms.[2] The absence of such a guarantee would represent a perpetual threat to generations of new entrants.
Content providers and ISPs have undermined Net Neutrality by seeking to differentiate among different forms of information and data flow, and impose priorities.[3] Abandoning Net Neutrality and subjecting internet traffic to a commercial veto will hurt competition and innovation, and allow service providers to preference or block protocols and force consumers to use less desirable options.
Free, open and non-discriminatory access to the Internet is essential for our democracy and for our economic well-being and the Pirate Party will seek the adoption of clear Net Neutrality principles to protect the internet from the introduction of any discriminatory practices.
Data retention
Surveillance of the public is expanding constantly, and has reached a point which threatens essential trust between the state and the citizen. Plans have been tabled to expand surveillance further though a law which would force ISPs to retain telephone and internet data for 2 years, and force people to reveal their passwords on demand.[4] This is a gross invasion of privacy and will create a vast database of material on the private communication and interactions of the internet using public. A perpetual risk will exist that the database could become accessible through many channels not mentioned in the legislation, including subpoenas. The database will also pose little threat to criminal activity, since many technical avenues currently exist through which data retention can be avoided.
Censorship
Internet censorship proposals create a permanent infrastructure for web blocking, and connect it to a permanently shifting category of banned content. The RC classification has been altered frequently by parliament and has become patchwork and inconsistent.[5] We believe that the government should look to adequately funding law enforcement, removing illegal content and prosecuting those responsible for the manufacture of the material, rather than funding a filter that slows connection speeds, is liable to wrongly block websites and is easily circumvented.
Households may choose censorship programs for their own use, but that is the prerogative of patents: they must be permitted to make decisions for their own families, and the government should trust them to do so responsibly.
Policy text
Provide universal access to a fast, neutral Internet.
- Institute a common carriage agreement and legal protection for Net Neutrality, and ban the practice of screening, or prioritizing traffic based on packet sources or destinations.
- Allow exceptions in the case of a court order.
- Allow generic prioritization of traffic based on protocol types defined by the IETF.
- Support the installation of fibre-to-the-home Internet connections wherever possible.
Prevent the institution of a state-mandated data retention regime.
- Oppose and repeal any legal mechanisms enacted to create records of Internet use among the general public.
- Securely delete any data collected though such a regime.
Prevent the institution of internet censorship.
- Oppose and repeal any compulsory censorship architecture.
- Remove the catch-all "Refused Classification" category from classification systems.
Citations
[1]Geist, Secret Treaty To Rucb Internet Freedom, http://www.globalresearch.ca/secret-treaty-to-curb-internet-freedom/18782 (Accessed 30 March 2013)
Agence France-Presse, U.S. diplomat warns of global effort to curb Internet freedom, http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/03/07/u-s-diplomat-warns-of-global-effort-to-curb-internet-freedom/ (Accessed 30 March 2013)
Brew, Telecommunications data retention—an overview, 24 October 2012, http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/2012-2013/DataRetention (Accessed 30 March 2013)
Reporters without Borders, Internet Enemies: Report 2012, March 2012, http://march12.rsf.org/i/Report_EnemiesoftheInternet_2012.pdf (Accessed 30 March 2013)
[2]Lessig and McChesney, No Tolls on The Internet, June 2006, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/07/AR2006060702108.html (Accessed 30 March 2013)
[3]ibid.
[4]McDonald, Web inventor says proposed data retention laws a "bad idea", January 2013, http://www.computerworld.com.au/article/452142/web_inventor_says_proposed_data_retention_laws_bad_idea_/ (Accessed 30 March 2013)
Brew, Telecommunications data retention—an overview, 24 October 2012, http://www.aph.gov.au/About_Parliament/Parliamentary_Departments/Parliamentary_Library/pubs/BN/2012-2013/DataRetention#_Toc338835114 (Accessed 30 March 2013)
[5] Collins, The truth about refused classification, October 2010, http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/40072.html (Accessed 30 March 2013)
Got feedback or suggestions? Send us an email at [email protected].