High Quality
Open the downloaded document, and select print from the file menu (PDF reader required).
Freedom Fighters:
The Role of Internet Corporations inPromoting Digital Freedoms
Abstract
Through its global nature, the Internet has challenged traditional concepts of nationalsovereignty and legitimacy. Multinational corporations operating in various legal jurisdictions face difficult questions of opposing laws and values. These firms state theirpreference for American-style protection of speech and privacy, but are bound by conflicting laws abroad. The most notable example is China where Google, Microsoftand Yahoo! operate in a jurisdiction which provides far less individual autonomy thanthe United States. This paper examines the mechanisms, both political andtechnological, through which these firms can further the values of free expression andprivacy and contends that much more could be done to further individual rights. Itdetermines that current corporate policies, including the recently announced GlobalNetwork Initiative, are laudable efforts, but ultimately fall short. In order to more fully promote digital freedoms, American Internet companies should actively support privacy enhancing tools and construct policies as narrowly as legally allowable to thwartautocratic pressure.
Table of ContentsI.
Introduction....................................2
II.
A Libertarian Network?..................3
III.
A Network of Control......................6
IV.
Corporations on the Zoned Net......8
V.
Towards a More Perfect Union.......12
Kevin Donovan
STIA-305 Term Paper1
In April 2007, Chinese journalist Shi Tao was sentenced to ten years in prison for“leaking state secrets.” His trial, in its entirety only two hours long, hinged uponinformation obtained by Chinese government prosecutors from the local subsidiary of Silicon Valley giant Yahoo!. The multinational Internet company had provided to theChinese officials personally identifiable information about Shi Tao, who used the Yahoo!email service to distribute a summary of a meeting in which journalists were instructed by government censors to downplay the anniversary of the June 4th, 1989 politicalcrackdown.
1
In what would become a widely condemned action, Yahoo! had directly contributed to a severe punishment of a political dissident.To many, the saga of Shi Tao was a shock. The Internet was supposed to liberate. A global, interactive, open medium for communication was believed to advance freedomof expression and provide checks upon government abuse of power. Many early observers of the Internet saw cyberspace as beyond the control of government; its rulesand norms would develop independently of traditional institutions. The fundamentalarchitecture of the Internet allegedly supported the libertarian ethic, which pervadedInternet governance discussions throughout the 1990s.The underlying reality of the Internet, however, is vastly different. Through various means, both technical and political, governments can and do exert increasingcontrol over citizen behavior online. The same network that was supposed to herald anew era of free expression has become a carefully manicured arena of regulated
Kevin Donovan
STIA-305 Term Paper2
1
MacKinnon, Rebecca. "Shi Tao, Yahoo!, and the lessons for corporate social repsonsibility."RConversations. Dec. 2007. University of Hong Kong. 4 Dec. 2008 <http://rconversation.blogs.com/ yahooshitaolessons.pdf>. 3.
discourse. Throughout the world, in countries both authoritarian and democratic, a wide range of content is blocked. In this restrictive endeavor, governments have come torely on the cooperation of private entities. The practice and policy of Internet filteringand surveillance requires the involvement of prominent technology firms, includingGoogle, Microsoft and Yahoo!.These companies, of course, are required to obey local regulations, but as the backlash following the case of Shi Tao makes clear, in a global network, values andnorms can differ widely. American Internet companies have both a philosophical andfinancial preference for freedom of expression and individual user privacy, but, giventheir subservience to Chinese law, their ability to promote these is limited. Recentefforts, such as the Global Network Initiative, “a collaborative approach to protect andadvance freedom of expression and privacy in the ICT sector,” are feasible options, but a variety of other choices exist.
2
This paper seeks to explain the technical and legal basis for the conflict of valuesand to critically assess the Global Network Initiative and other options to protect theuniversal human rights of freedom of expression and privacy as they relate to theexpansion and use of the Internet.
II. A Libertarian Network?
Today, the Internet is so pervasive in the developed world that its origins are of little concern to many; however, it is the birth of the Internet and its subsequentformation that laid the foundation for many of today’s disputes concerning freedom of
Kevin Donovan
STIA-305 Term Paper3
2
"Global Network Initiative." Global Network Initiative. 4 Dec. 2008 <http:// www.globalnetworkinitiative.org>.
Add a Comment