Re: [Pearg] Research Group Last Call for "A Survey of Worldwide Censorship Techniques"

[Eliot Lear <[e-mail]>]

Hi Mallory

> On 26 May 2020, at 19:04, Mallory Knodel <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Hi Eliot,
> 
> On 5/26/20 6:02 AM, Eliot Lear wrote:
>> I have a concern about the use of the term “censorship”.  Is removal of fraudulent material censorship?  How about taking down a system that part of a DOS attack?  Is taking down a system that is attacking critical infrastructure censorship?  Is botnet disruption censorship?  Are FCC frequency rules against harmful interference censorship?  By the sweeping definition given, they are.  This  immediately diminishes the credibility of the work because it flies in the face of what normal people think censorship is.
> 
> It's important to remember two things: Not all governments and decision makers operate in good faith, or with the same legal and moral frameworks, so the legality of censorship can't be relied upon to define what is censorship.

I agree.

> Second it is strategic to define censorship as any restriction on content so as to raise the cost. Because while there are indeed recognized legal, legitimate and proportional reasons why the rights to free expression and to access information should be violated, censorship measures should not be taken without careful consideration as it is a human rights matter.


But the definition in the doc is so broad as to vary substantially from its commonly understood pejorative meaning without any foundation or qualification.  That gives governments license to say, “It’s okay to censor sometimes: it’s necessary for our national defense!”  That is where the definition leads when it includes BOTNET/DOS mitigation.

Eliot