Re: [Pearg] descriptive censorship work: draft-hall-censorship-tech

Joseph Lorenzo Hall <joe@cdt.org> Mon, 20 May 2019 10:08 UTC

Return-Path: <jhall@cdt.org>
X-Original-To: pearg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: pearg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2ED28120041 for <pearg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 May 2019 03:08:22 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.999
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cdt.org
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ksr51CiMPo75 for <pearg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 May 2019 03:08:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-it1-x136.google.com (mail-it1-x136.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::136]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9B689120086 for <pearg@irtf.org>; Mon, 20 May 2019 03:08:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-it1-x136.google.com with SMTP id i63so22169727ita.3 for <pearg@irtf.org>; Mon, 20 May 2019 03:08:19 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cdt.org; s=google; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ZnERrL/DeO7Ect5qvGZgE8bijohHyYRvs2+u6UqOgNM=; b=FAra9WpBV/Eiaiq9IHfoEbBiiGyRteb731SN0Tlt56bB4HLrsMjpMHMAfi6qKzuVwF ucO4lNSl8QxZR7gR3w71ISqibXbuE9+MJPQqb9Ehofvktc+flVSvBrOlODCUHzFF7z+6 D7UJ8/4wX99gcQJ7AWox+PrZ9cUxOfzwgdazY=
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ZnERrL/DeO7Ect5qvGZgE8bijohHyYRvs2+u6UqOgNM=; b=FMR658hYeiCmQDnYav6Ze+hVdzRr9kLApwEG7F8bSmscjvb1dU0XKfcvZAnkW+xEj4 alSdC8LbSEoUCUDSsmfNSXXvPE1Sfz793qUC5Fxo5ixAFKEwjxjHIVyuoVFacZWYhopB eD3XOgGPOtUiNx+Od2MvWhdsQR88862M4MyAZoaAn1++L6KkhciyeZB7alW034ac1B15 UxnLqSEl2OEGX768RNewLwl9sw8aMh12hB0KERlUl0YyNPHfTxu1ZQ1jQHGt9DmQtqnj hdkpsfHSuTs0Xr9N1PtjQ6hOVyMcdqzQrgzpUCUTlE0uJEvaxIrj4ZDVc6Dyf2RcqEZk 7C8Q==
X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXCv5In1XIvdx7KytF/b4b8SJHXJiT3nyK9EqzA7+fdGTNH2t63 gZ1jaMHzCzaYFZS1kHjJn13Bw/Dhj5bgIP81/kdccQ==
X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqzJECDJvVQtanoxiHHoFd+Uwxbr2UOOziNSgmaRQDrelDEvbIv/rOKUCdwloNe9i27z8QdBmzz+FjHLD97dYrw=
X-Received: by 2002:a24:d945:: with SMTP id p66mr2954258itg.38.1558346898274; Mon, 20 May 2019 03:08:18 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <CABtrr-Ubq5z_Nx4-VA7gLgGMaxOBvfpSpXKJfeO9Q9C9eCA8Fg@mail.gmail.com> <CAJm22JazQHLN=zZ_RpAwYX5AcUuws6nan-4jShzLwSbz2ysHsQ@mail.gmail.com> <e88b630d-b979-185b-e744-977ab080baad@cs.tcd.ie> <1397790134.3745.1558087203082@appsuite-dev-gw2.open-xchange.com> <d1dd5c3a-ba10-406e-d7d7-fc8c07d7ea10@article19.org> <542887485.4822.1558343428572@appsuite-dev-gw2.open-xchange.com>
In-Reply-To: <542887485.4822.1558343428572@appsuite-dev-gw2.open-xchange.com>
From: Joseph Lorenzo Hall <joe@cdt.org>
Date: Mon, 20 May 2019 06:08:06 -0400
Message-ID: <CABtrr-VV1-vR_hJSsv6crKCbJeRA1AQ099S37NHhG78PfTrgJA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Vittorio Bertola <vittorio.bertola@open-xchange.com>
Cc: Amelia Andersdotter <amelia@article19.org>, pearg@irtf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="0000000000004f10ba05894ee9e8"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/pearg/Z88LCrcjypwVDdDnT9-Q7Rykpcg>
Subject: Re: [Pearg] descriptive censorship work: draft-hall-censorship-tech
X-BeenThere: pearg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Privacy Enhancements and Assessment Proposed RG <pearg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/pearg>, <mailto:pearg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/pearg/>
List-Post: <mailto:pearg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:pearg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/pearg>, <mailto:pearg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 May 2019 10:08:22 -0000

(A quick note that I haven't been able to keep up with this conversation as
I've been preparing to testify in the USA today on another part of my work
unrelated to this (election security). I'll be able to jump back into the
conversation tomorrow; thank you all for your patience!)

On Mon, May 20, 2019 at 05:10 Vittorio Bertola <vittorio.bertola=
40open-xchange.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote:

>
>
> > Il 19 maggio 2019 03:37 Amelia Andersdotter <amelia@article19.org> ha
> scritto:
> >
> > To be fair, Facebook faces fines in the order of tens of millions of
> > euros if they fail to block something they should have blocked.
> > Over-blocking has indeed been a persistent concern among those groups
> > who have argued that blocking is not a good solution to any particular
> > content moderation problem.
>
> It's true that, in the end, most independent blocking decisions by private
> companies derive from the fear of legal trouble, which by definition
> derives from a law and thus from a political/governmental decision. So I
> see why you could argue that most private censorship still indirectly
> derives from governmental pressure (the other big case I see is that of
> pro-intellectual-property upload filters, which until a couple of months
> ago were not legally mandated, but were privately adopted to avoid
> potential litigation with copyright owners; but one could say that this was
> still a consequence of a legal framework biased in favour of protecting
> commercial IP rights).
>
> There are however a few cases in which it's quite hard to establish this
> connection; think for example of the Google Shopping case[1], which IMHO is
> indeed a form of private censorship. This does not derive from indirect
> legal pressure - on the contrary, it was ruled as illegal - but only comes
> as a consequence of private business interests.
>
> In the end, I am really afraid of a future in which more and more
> censoring power is in the hands of private companies, so I would like the
> draft to cover that as well.
>
> Ciao,
>
>
> [1]
> https://www.beuc.eu/blog/how-google-is-eroding-consumers-freedom-to-choose/
> --
>
> Vittorio Bertola | Head of Policy & Innovation, Open-Xchange
> vittorio.bertola@open-xchange.com
> Office @ Via Treviso 12, 10144 Torino, Italy
>
> --
> Pearg mailing list
> Pearg@irtf.org
> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/pearg
>
-- 
Joseph Lorenzo Hall
Chief Technologist, Center for Democracy & Technology [https://www.cdt.org]
1401 K ST NW STE 200, Washington DC 20005-3497
e: joe@cdt.org, p: 202.407.8825, pgp: https://josephhall.org/gpg-key
Fingerprint: 3CA2 8D7B 9F6D DBD3 4B10  1607 5F86 6987 40A9 A871