The Internet
flux and contenux
[EXPRESS] Herv Morin: Internet must be neutral and opened, safe and in case of
Herv Morin, president of the New Centre, and Defence Minister, updated her , who the first version had been introduced last June. v.2 distinctly improved underline Fabrice Epelbouin on the site Read Write Web. A general evaluation which they find it difficult to share in the reading of the new texts. Notably articles 1et 3, not much changed, while the most criticising.
In the 1st article, the first version Every person has the right to achieve and to use freely neutral, Internet network and opened was replaced by: Every person has the right to achieve and to use freely Internet, neutral and opened, respecting the rights of other people .. A modification of form with the merit to announce exceptions brought in the principles of opening and of neutrality developed then. The text indeed points out: The right to a free use of network opposes to any form of filtration by public, safe powers for motives of public order as, for example, struggle counters paedophilia. The use of network can also be supervised in case of infringement of personal rights of other people.
They note that the text describes at no instant what he hears by neutral and opened , and therefore rights and freedom which she brings to the citizens. He sets only out to define restrictions with it. So he validates the principle of blockage or of filtration of contents as planned by Loppsi. And it is no because an "example" specifies. Indeed, the use of the notion of attack in " public order " allows to rake over open sea in possible restrictions. A legal notion considered to be a very vague concept , difficult to define by the jurists. In administrative law, it is about a characterised state by good order, security, salubrity and public calmness .
All criminal offences come back into the field of public order , explains us a jurist. It can concern the p do-pornography as well (and not paedophilia in passage) as counterfeiting. It is finally a French application of what is substantially found in ACTA or in principles on the neutrality of FCC, the American authority of regulation of telecommunications. Let be the idea of an Internet neutral, free and opened but applying only to lawful contents. To add notion, also complex, of right of other people allows to a natural or artificial person to make order the judge the respect for its freedom.
As underlined it very just, last June,
Jean-Mark Manach: - " the problem of statements of human rights , or "basic rights", it is because they put forward the rights of people, citizens, those of "other people", and even less those of ' " public order . And fortunately. Also, he told he hoped: that Herv Morin, and those with whom he wrote this plan, will understand that it is not possible, straightaway, to define our rights and freedom by what cannot undermine public order and rights of other people .
The article 4 on human dignity is also vague and subject to many interpretations. He says: the dignity on Internet defines itself as the refusal, via the numerical world, to undermine human dignity. The protection of childhood, especially, justifies the respect for a particular alertness. The respect for human dignity in the numerical world also implicates the refusal of use of qualifiers opposite to public order and to public decency. Hanging of Saddam Hussein, intimacy stolen from Laura Manaudou: the absence of authority of regulation of available contents on numerical support unlike the broadcasting sector should not lead to allow on Internet what is forbidden elsewhere .
Except that terms " particular alertness " do not mean thing in itself big (or many things), it is good to remind that absence of an authority of regulation means under no circumstances lacuna in the law and zone of non-right. As often remind of it many jurists, it exists at the hour current of many laws which are applicable and applied to Internet, for example in case of defamation.
As for the first version, the internauts Statement.
By Astrid Girardeau
December 30th, 2009 in 17:14
In [EXPRESS]
Graffiti: blockage, Statement of the Numerical Basic rights, filtration, Herv Morin, Loppsi
6 Answers in '[EXPRESS] Herv Morin: Internet must be neutral and opened, safe and in case of '
Sign TrackBack in comments in RSS or for '[EXPRESS] Herv Morin: Internet must be neutral and opened, safe and in case of'.
-
In practice, our analyses are close, but I tinted mine of one good dose of optimism (where from my long introduction).
Obvious either, the reconnaitre is well needed, to break some sugar on the back of a minister have interview the day before one -
Regarding the notion of public order, it is a notion which is not so vague as this. It is notably used always in the case law of the European Court of human rights when this last interprets basic rights appearing in the European Convention of human rights.
I am not certainly jurist, but it happens that I have participated recently in the translation of an executive summary of a study accomplished by distinguished jurists on filtration of Internet and right, cf. . They find (there p. 20 and 21) following explanation:
Other dispositions proclaiming conditional rights, as articles 8 and 10 of CEDH in touch with the right to the respect for private life and to the freedom of expression, establish as general principle or as a general clause of public order that interferences must be envisaged by law , continue one or several legitimate purposes with regard to the article which declares conditional right and to be necessary in a democratic society to achieve or aforementioned purposes .
This clause of public order contains first of all 3 basic principles which are:
* the exclusive competence of law to limit freedom;
* the need to follow one of the legitimate purposes listed by Convention;
* the "necessity" of interference in a democratic country , which is interpreted by the European Court of human rights as implicating that the interference in a society which intends to remain democratic
** corresponds to a imperious social need ;
** is made proportional in followed legitimate purpose . -
And after one or two cyberattacks, the Internet under a plan " Vigipirate will be crossed and he will not remain any more big thing of the Internet neutral and opened. What will not change thing big in the Internet which takes shape currently and at very high speed. The neutrality of the net will be only for the big operators, actors of the net between them. Said in another way, this neutrality which is drawn in us will prevent an operator from favouring its VOD to that of another big actor. On the contrary, for five guys in their garage or for geek in the cave, you would not should count for it. There will be those who broadcast contents and who will agree not to filter mutually and those who consult these contents. These last will consult what the distributors would like to broadcast, and how they would like to make it (ACTA, etc). And it can understand each other. There is only to take as models of the spam and of the phishing to understand problems of such network. A neutral and opened network, it is well in the country of Bisounours, in the country of the Human beings unfortunately.
The economic model which puts on in place currently on the net is going to create a kind of purification of this one or only some actors will diffuse. It will then be simpler to control who makes what, and who has the right to make what. There is a running at present in sites, paid contents. As it will not be possible to pay everything and that they would like to amortise his investments, more time on the sites will be spent than they will pay us, to the detriment of others. Already that Facebook occupies rather well the time of available connection for some, if these same decide to pay for two or three sites, there will not remain any more a lot of hope for other sites of credit of traffic during daily two hours of connection in network. And when they see which are the contents which occupy the bandwidth most in the world, they see right away who is on the way to earning the web: firms. It is the big failure of the web, not to have succeeded in making understand that the interest of this network is not to be a shopping arcade with one cookie RFID who trace us.
So, even if he well is to work out a statement of the rights of the internauts, she risks being ineffectual in not enough utility which she can again have: what is called "private life" today and right to neglect . For the one as for others, these domains are currently and mainly managed (for the Westerners), by the United States (Google, Microsoft, Apple, Amazon, Wikipedia, Facebook, Twitter etc); country with its own vision on these domains. For a part of the population internaut, he is already too much late: it will be never possible to know if the data which they have on their servers will be abolished or only not introduced in the screen of the user when they would like to manage our "private life" and right to neglect . Epic fail!
It seems to me that failure and fall of Internet are well enough seen currently. He is being modelled by economy and by policies. And if it is not what constitutes failure, result is it outright fall. An Internet modelled by some interests economic normal, the contents of the "Majors" and others are the most asking and searched and supervised by policies normal, him do their job. I know the fantasy of some who think that the Internet would be "Intuable" and the best tool for the freedom of expression. Not only the Internet (became) technically rather easy to control, not only the freedom of expression does not exist if it is reduced to the single tool, but especially, and HADOPI reminds us of it, all this world is fond only of a thread.
-
@Gibus
However, according to many jurists, public order is in essence a vague concept. So the site Juritravail to say: There are not enough legal notions which are as difficult to define as that of public order .
-
[] article initially published on The Internets [...]
-
[] read the rest of the article [...]
Leave a comment
The Internet
- [3615]//small pause//
- [->] Gmail: Https speeded up by default
- [Etc.] First Person Tetris
- [EXPRESS] The American senator Mike Doyle: I will oppose to any try to cut the access to Internet
- [EXPRESS] stony Berecz (Indom): The dictatorship of Google becomes unbearable
- [EXPRESS] The opinion of the Authority of Competition on the unique price of the e-book
- [EXPRESS] Frederick Mitterrand: Gallica is called to become the equivalent of Google Books. The time of delay is finished.
Categories
- [3615] (3)
- [Actu] (20)]
- [Edito] (1)]
- [Etc.] (71)
- [EXPRESS (91)
- [Interview (1)
Key words
Archives
- January, 2010 (63)
- December, 2009 (221)
- November, 2009 (24)
