NationStates Jolt Archive

This draft proposal may span several UN-categories.

Objective: To regulate the Internet to conform to an international standard applied to content and legal responsibility.

The Internet as it appears today is in a state of anachy. It is full of annoying and offensive content and mechanics. There is all manner of pornography, it is used by terrorists, it is fraught with fraudulent advertising, SPAM, the list is too long to be compiled here. It is only too obvious that this international medium needs to adhere to some international standards to prevent it's degrading influence.

In the beginning, the visions for the Information Superhighway were quite different from the results we live with today. It was supposed to further the cause of information, not to further the cause of porn-mongers! Even if there exists national legislations on this subject, the nature of the internet is such that these laws are near impossible to enforce.

Thus I propose that we try to work out some basic rules to govern this medium and enforce them with international law. I ask that delegates submit their proposals to be incorporated in this draft.

At this time I have the following suggestions:

1. The use of technical means to impose advertising, privacy invation and tracking is banned.

2. Legal responsibility for information posted on the Internet must be assured by barring anonymity for the person\persons submitting information.

3. The viewing of public content submitted on the internet may not be punished in any way.

4. The viewing of private content on the Internet (such as e-mail, private chats or user-restricted areas) is punishable to the same extent as other privacy violations.

This draft proposal may span several UN-categories.


I am not sure you can do that.


Objective: To regulate the Internet to conform to an international standard applied to content and legal responsibility.


I am not sure you can do that either :}


The Internet as it appears today is in a state of anachy. It is full of annoying and offensive content and mechanics. There is all manner of pornography, it is used by terrorists, it is fraught with fraudulent advertising, SPAM, the list is too long to be compiled here. It is only too obvious that this international medium needs to adhere to some international standards to prevent it's degrading influence.


And? I have laws in my nation that apply to my people. That's all I need.


In the beginning, the visions for the Information Superhighway were quite different from the results we live with today. It was supposed to further the cause of information, not to further the cause of porn-mongers! Even if there exists national legislations on this subject, the nature of the internet is such that these laws are near impossible to enforce.


Porn is a by-product of freedom of speach. You can not have one without the other.


1. The use of technical means to impose advertising, privacy invation and tracking is banned.


No. If someone is using my site for free, I want the right to advertise to them. Otherwise I will have to charge them for the site, or run it at a loss. And sometimes tracking people is a way of making sure that no one is breaking the law with impunity.


2. Legal responsibility for information posted on the Internet must be assured by barring anonymity for the person\persons submitting information.


It depends on what you want to ban. People post anonymous replies, so that the general public can't see them. And sometimes people write erotic stories that they do not want their actual names attached to because of their reputation. I am not willing to stop them having this right.
However I will accept that the owner of the site should keep a record of the person, so that legal things can be dealt with.


3. The viewing of public content submitted on the internet may not be punished in any way.


No!!! If someone is publishing child porn, and Mr Smith downloads it he should be punished for viewing it. We will go after the people who put it up there, and the people who made it, but the people who download it and potentially distrubute it are equally guilty.


4. The viewing of private content on the Internet (such as e-mail, private chats or user-restricted areas) is punishable to the same extent as other privacy violations.

Who is viewing it? The government sometimes require the right to view private content. And web-site hosters should have a right to monitor any chat going on on their site, even if it is private.

And what nation has jurisdiction over the violations? If I live in TilEnca, but host a site in GeminiLand, which set of "privacy violations" cover the intrusion? We might have no privacy laws in TilEnca, so I can do pretty much what I want, but they might have severe laws in GeminiLand that I would be in violation of. But since I am in my own nation then why should I be subject to the laws of another nation?


I am a huge advocate of no international regulation for the internet. There are far too many problems and legal minefields and variances in national laws. Since the internet has no borders, but countries do, it should be left up to the countries to decide what is legal in their nation, and what isn't.

Tilenca, you will have ample opportunity to discuss the pro's and con's until blue in the face if you wish, but:

"Thus I propose that we try to work out some basic rules to govern this medium and enforce them with international law. I ask that delegates submit their proposals to be incorporated in this draft."

So if you do not wish to aid me in setting up a proposal, then post your objections elsewhere and refrain from cluttering up this thread. I will take your advice on creating a proposal though, but I must ask you to submit those to me by telegram.

This draft proposal may span several UN-categories.

Objective: To regulate the Internet to conform to an international standard applied to content and legal responsibility.

Here we go....


The Internet as it appears today is in a state of anachy. It is full of annoying and offensive content and mechanics. There is all manner of pornography, it is used by terrorists, it is fraught with fraudulent advertising, SPAM, the list is too long to be compiled here. It is only too obvious that this international medium needs to adhere to some international standards to prevent it's degrading influence.

Given that its nature is decentralized, and non-contained... How is any single body, or even a conglomerate body to do this?


In the beginning, the visions for the Information Superhighway were quite different from the results we live with today. It was supposed to further the cause of information, not to further the cause of porn-mongers! Even if there exists national legislations on this subject, the nature of the internet is such that these laws are near impossible to enforce.

Wouldn't "Porn" be classified as information? And given that "Porn" is in itself not illegal... Why is it an issue?

Further, given that the internet even exists beyond the UN's realm of jurisdiction; how would even UN legislation apply?


Thus I propose that we try to work out some basic rules to govern this medium and enforce them with international law. I ask that delegates submit their proposals to be incorporated in this draft.

My Proposal is to remove this draft...


At this time I have the following suggestions:

1. The use of technical means to impose advertising, privacy invation and tracking is banned.

Imposed advertising is a form of commerce for free website services.

What is meant by "privacy invation" ?

Tracking is used extensively for web-security and within online shoping carts..


2. Legal responsibility for information posted on the Internet must be assured by barring anonymity for the person\persons submitting information.

Barring anonymity?


3. The viewing of public content submitted on the internet may not be punished in any way.

And here you were complaining about Porn in your heading....


4. The viewing of private content on the Internet (such as e-mail, private chats or user-restricted areas) is punishable to the same extent as other privacy violations.

What if the private information is your own?

...


It's Tekania II! Same great flavor! Half the carbs!

Yeah, er, just kidding ;)

I'm in agreement that this would be a hard proposal to work out. I'm not sure the internet has large enough unified bodies to make anything short of a novel-worth in regulatory law useful. Unless this proposal were to change its scope to something a little more specific needing to be stopped or promoted on the internet, I'm not sure it'll work out.

Tilenca, you will have ample opportunity to discuss the pro's and con's until blue in the face if you wish, but:

"Thus I propose that we try to work out some basic rules to govern this medium and enforce them with international law. I ask that delegates submit their proposals to be incorporated in this draft."

So if you do not wish to aid me in setting up a proposal, then post your objections elsewhere and refrain from cluttering up this thread. I will take your advice on creating a proposal though, but I must ask you to submit those to me by telegram.

Then my suggestion to make the proposal better is to shelve it and find something else to make law about.

How can we delegates amend our suggestions for a proposal when we disagree with its core function? It's very unstatesmanlike to exclude such delegates from the discussion and foolhardy to ignore their good comments.

But c'mon now, we know the support here is acted out through tough love. I understand this forum to be a place where us UN members can "preview" what our fellow nation states are cooking up and respond with appropriate criticism, either as addition OR subtraction. Never was I under the impression that you could request only select members to lick your boots at the drop of a parchment. :rolleyes:

Anyway, as for the proposal itself, I have two issues:

WHO/WHAT will regulate it? And HOW?

By who, I do not want the vague "us" as in the U.N. as a whole. Let's get more specific. Who is "us"? People the U.N. can confirm that will filter and censor what we decide is "inappropriate" to mold the Internet into less of an "anarchy"? But what if I think pornography is appropriate for people over a certain age to view? What if I disagree that the Internet is not just an information tool, but also a form of entertainment? Because it is the latter, and if pornography is included, then alright by me. Just keep it safe and decent (as decided in my nation).

As for the how, you said yourself that "the nature of the internet is such that these laws are near impossible to enforce." "These" being national laws. Now, if national laws are ineffective, tell me, how will international law be any different in regulating such a phenomenon? I also would like an explanation as to how the technical means of regulation would appear without severely hindering one's ability to access the information or entertainment they want.

I went to a high school where they enacted a security firewall that would detect forbidden words on webpages, and if a certain quota of inappropriate words (words as deemed by the administrators) was reached, then the firewall would block the page and warn the user. If the user made multiple violations, their usage of the internet was suspended until an administrator fixed it.

I found this to be the most FRUSTRATING piece of technology ever invented, not because I surfed questionable sites, but because the system could not distinguish between online games (which were prohibited) and video games or any other type of game. You see, I'm a video gamer and I like to research the products hitting the shelves. But this is only one example among many flaws with the security in place, making the internet less enjoyable than I was used to.

So I have issues with the meat of this proposal as well, so I would suggest leaving it up to the nation's themselves about whom they want to prosecute when it comes to rights and privacy violations on the Internet.

I think it would be a worthy undertaking to set global standards for the net.

Here's my proposal on how to do it.

First of all we're talking about setting standards not making anything illegal or enforcing anything.

Instead what could be done is have a UN committe browse websites, sample the content, and decide if it meets whatever rating requirements and give it a UN rating.

This way each nation or even each individual has some way of knowing what kind of material is on the site. Call it a parental guidance kind of thing.

Products that block UN ratings of a certain level could be created....by nations not by the UN.

I believe it's best to keep things simple and still leave as much power as possible in the hands of each nation.

I realize it would take quite a bit of time to rate all websites and it may never be completed. Rating some of them is better than none of them. Perhaps a system where website creators can apply for a UN rating could also be devised.

I think it would be a worthy undertaking to set global standards for the net.

Here's my proposal on how to do it.

First of all we're talking about setting standards not making anything illegal or enforcing anything.

Instead what could be done is have a UN committe browse websites, sample the content, and decide if it meets whatever rating requirements and give it a UN rating.

This way each nation or even each individual has some way of knowing what kind of material is on the site. Call it a parental guidance kind of thing.

Products that block UN ratings of a certain level could be created....by nations not by the UN.

I believe it's best to keep things simple and still leave as much power as possible in the hands of each nation.

I realize it would take quite a bit of time to rate all websites and it may never be completed. Rating some of them is better than none of them. Perhaps a system where website creators can apply for a UN rating could also be devised.

I think there would still be issues with this. Because what classifies as "adult orientated" in my nation might not be in another. And given that you become an adult at 14 in my nation (with all the rights and so forth associated with that) we probably have a few websites that a lot of UN members would find unacceptable due to their concern about ages. So would all my sites be listed as illegal because of the prudish attitudes of some UN members? Or would they still be legal in my nation but illegal in GeminiLand where you do not become an adult until you are 92?

I like this idea more than an international body creating actual laws to restrict the internet, but I think it still has issues :}

I think there would still be issues with this. Because what classifies as "adult orientated" in my nation might not be in another. And given that you become an adult at 14 in my nation (with all the rights and so forth associated with that) we probably have a few websites that a lot of UN members would find unacceptable due to their concern about ages. So would all my sites be listed as illegal because of the prudish attitudes of some UN members? Or would they still be legal in my nation but illegal in GeminiLand where you do not become an adult until you are 92?

I like this idea more than an international body creating actual laws to restrict the internet, but I think it still has issues :}


This is fun :)

Ok that's where the power to interpret the UN ratings and apply the censorship based on the nations own software is important.

As long as the UN rating is clear about the contents then each nation
can develop their own system to determine what is appropriate for
who. (or is that whom lol)

For instance a nation may decide the UN committe is a bunch of tightwad old geezers and not censor anything. This way the individual citizen still has the ability to check the site's UN rating and has a better idea of what it contains.

Also the individual citizen probably also has access to other nations software if they want to limit the content based on the UN ratings or any other nation's ratings.

This is fun :)


Isn't it just :}


Ok that's where the power to interpret the UN ratings and apply the censorship based on the nations own software is important.


Which I have no problem with.


As long as the UN rating is clear about the contents then each nation
can develop their own system to determine what is appropriate for
who. (or is that whom lol)


It is whom (as in "it is suitable for him or her").


For instance a nation may decide the UN committe is a bunch of tightwad old geezers and not censor anything. This way the individual citizen still has the ability to check the site's UN rating and has a better idea of what it contains.


Hold on. Now we are getting in to nations censoring things, and not the people. So the nation could decide political speach is not appropriate for it's people, and censor that? Not good :}

(I was linking this to the idea of film certificates - that a site could be listed by the government as u, pg, 12, 15 or 18 or 18A (hardcore stuff - not the usual brand of adult film!)) And it would have to be a body in the nation that was not in the pay or influence of the government, because it should not be the government who decides what we see and hear - back to the political censorship again.


Also the individual citizen probably also has access to other nations software if they want to limit the content based on the UN ratings or any other nation's ratings.

Cool.

See - this is an idea I can (sort of support) - it is not attempting to regulate the net via law, but by guidance and suggestion, leaving the power in the hands of the users (which is where it should be)

*makes annoying buzzer noise* sorry, this proposal stinks and we cannot endorse it. It violates our domestic laws of privacy and personal rights that are entrenched in our constitution. By voting on this, we are breaking our own laws.

This is ridiculous, and Radlettt will do everything to reject it fully.

1) Porn is freedom of speech, as are terrorist and racist sites.
2) Annoying? Define that.
3) Regulate the internet? Hah. If you every manage to do it, then in 5 minute some computer geek will find some way around the law.

This a total waste of time. If the internet were to be regulated, then it would be an individual country's descision to filter their own domains (i.e: .rd for Radlett)

This draft proposal may span several UN-categories.

You have to choose one.

Objective: To regulate the Internet to conform to an international standard applied to content and legal responsibility.

Um, try "Hell no." No matter the legal system you use, you're stepping on someone's toes and allowing people to violate their laws in some fashion. Normally I'm not opposed to that, but this case is different. We're talking about something established internationally and which changes from country to country as their laws, or lack of, mold it to them. Trying to unify that is like trying to unify humanity.

The Internet as it appears today is in a state of anachy. It is full of annoying and offensive content and mechanics. There is all manner of pornography, it is used by terrorists, it is fraught with fraudulent advertising, SPAM, the list is too long to be compiled here. It is only too obvious that this international medium needs to adhere to some international standards to prevent it's degrading influence.

Okay, I'm trying to hold back the scorn I feel for this passage.

1) No, it's not. Each government has their own laws about what they allow on it. Why do you think the porn sites have those age disclaimers?

2) Personally, I find little of it offensive, and the annoyance is usually people, not the net itself.

3) What's wrong with pornography? And give me a real reason, not one relying on religion, the fear of little kids stumbling on it (a phenomena which was created by the early efforts to stop it, ironically), or some BS about it degrading people.

4) Phones, the mail, and hundreds of other items are used by terrorists. Should we ban cars just because they're used by terrorists? How about electricity? Or reading? Better yet, let's just ban life altogether and destroy everything! Seriously, don't try the heartstrings. It annoys people.

5) Real life is fraught with fraudulant advertising on every medium. It's existed for thousands of years. The internet is just another medium. Skepticism is a good thing everywhere.

6) Spam is nothing new. Another one of those that's been around. It's just that on the internet it got a special name.

It is not obvious that it needs to adhere to any medium beyond those already controlling it.

In the beginning, the visions for the Information Superhighway were quite different from the results we live with today. It was supposed to further the cause of information, not to further the cause of porn-mongers! Even if there exists national legislations on this subject, the nature of the internet is such that these laws are near impossible to enforce.

The "It's icky!" arguement about porn applied to the internet. Emotional arguement, denied due to lack of evidence.

Also, if it's so hard to enforce, then why are child molestors being arrested for having child porn they got from the internet? It's not that difficult if you actually fund your police.

Thus I propose that we try to work out some basic rules to govern this medium and enforce them with international law. I ask that delegates submit their proposals to be incorporated in this draft.

My proposal is you take the draft, print it out, send it through a shredder, and then run a magnet over any computer part that may contain a memory of it.

At this time I have the following suggestions:

1. The use of technical means to impose advertising, privacy invation and tracking is banned.

Which covers TV, radio, billboards, anything governments try to track their citizens, etc.

2. Legal responsibility for information posted on the Internet must be assured by barring anonymity for the person\persons submitting information.

Ever hear of IP addresses? You're not anonymous when you post online. If I had the right setup, I could not only tell you where you lived, I could tell you which room you were in when you posted that and use the information i gained to tell you your exact bank balance, the birth and death dates of your family going back six generations, your medical records, etc. All under four hours with six phone calls and a fun use of the printer.

3. The viewing of public content submitted on the internet may not be punished in any way.

Which includes child porn. And a few other unsanitary items.

4. The viewing of private content on the Internet (such as e-mail, private chats or user-restricted areas) is punishable to the same extent as other privacy violations.

So now we're punishing people for checking their email?

The internet has proved to be far more than it's designers intended it to. I think the initial design brief was to find a way to link missile launch computers together so if one went of they all went off (a la Dr Strangelove), although I may be hopelessley wrong ;)

It has, in my opinion, proved to be a great equaliser among individuals. It is a place where the views of the stupid and credulous bear as much weight as those of the intelligent and well read (and vice versa).

As such, I am against most forms of regulation on this topic. However I would not have a problem with some sort of UN body rating sites by Adult/Young Adult/Etc. This would remove the problem of establising uniform ages for Adulthood etc.

As such, I am against most forms of regulation on this topic. However I would not have a problem with some sort of UN body rating sites by Adult/Young Adult/Etc. This would remove the problem of establising uniform ages for Adulthood etc.

How? The UN includes a wide range of species, resulting in a wide range of maturity rates. Sarkarasetans reach maturity at 16, humans achieve it at 18, elves can range anywhere from 16 to over 100, and then there are races such as velociraptors and others. Try to create a uniform age is nearly impossible.

How? The UN includes a wide range of species, resulting in a wide range of maturity rates. Sarkarasetans reach maturity at 16, humans achieve it at 18, elves can range anywhere from 16 to over 100, and then there are races such as velociraptors and others. Try to create a uniform age is nearly impossible.
Yeah, I know. Tetonians are considered legal adults at 16, and Tilenicans at 14, which is why I was suggesting an 'Adult or not' definition. This would leave it up to various nations to use this in a manner relevant to their laws and customs. I didn't mean that the rating things would be binding, either. Merely that they'd be there, for parents say, to use as a guideline. Also as a marker for nanny software.

Sorry, The UN dosn't have the power to do this. The UN only has power over nationts belonging to the UN. The internet includes all nations. Even if you did pass the resolution, we couldn't enforce it on non UN countries and the whole resolution would then be pointless.

For the rating system there's nothing to enforce.

Your supplying a service.

If the rules say only those belonging to the UN can apply
to have websites originating from their nations rated
then so be it.

Something is better than nothing.