Tag: Internet Governance

Today, Turkish President Abdullah Gül signed a law increasing the government’s already tight grip on the internet. Even before Gül put pen to paper, Turkey was home to one of the world’s most restrictive internet censorship regimes — and this new legislation will only further undermine Turkish internet users’ fundamental rights.

Nearly a month after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit) struck down the U.S. Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) authority to enforce existing network neutrality rules, the FCC announced its response. In a statement today, FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler engaged in impressive verbal acrobatics to avoid the simple truth: In order to protect the open and innovative internet the FCC must correct its earlier mistakes and expand the agency’s regulatory authority over internet service providers (ISP) under Title II of the 1996 Communications Act.

In September 2013, the European Commission presented its proposed regulation for a single market for electronic communications (see Access’s analysis here). The Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) Committee is the lead committee for this proposal and will provide its final report on February 24, before the legislative proposal is voted on by the full European Parliament in early April 2014.

Access welcomes yesterday’s vote in the LIBE Committee, which addressed several of the problematic provisions and proved its commitment to protecting the internet as a platform for free expression and innovation.

2014 was already set to be a critical year for internet governance, with some key meetings planned having the potential to push the needle on much needed reform. But in the aftermath of Snowden’s revelations, it looks like 2014 could be the year for change. With rising political pressure, heightened public awareness and activism, and a new global meeting on the future of internet governance, 2014 could provide the opportunity to advance a positive reform agenda that: preserves the interoperable/global nature of the internet; is secure and facilitates the exercise of human rights, for all users without discrimination or regard for where they happen to connect; is inclusive in decision-making so that policies reflect the public interest. This is the first in a series of blog posts in which we will break down the major international internet governance moments on our radar for 2014.

Today, February 11th, internet users around the world are standing together. Today, individuals, civil society organizations, and thousands of websites will let the world’s governments know that we reject global mass surveillance at home and overseas. Today, we fight back.

In 2013, the world learned that the NSA’s reach into our privacy extends further and deeper than we ever could have imagined.

When it comes to US surveillance reform, structural changes don’t grab as many headlines as, say, ending bulk collection programs. Yet, ultimately, reforming the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) system, including its Court of Review (FISCR), would be one of the most feasible and effective solutions to protecting the rights of users everywhere against the abuses of intrusive surveillance.

The Culture and Education (CULT) and Legal Affairs (JURI) Committees of the European Parliament voted today on the European Telecom Single Market proposal, tabled in September 2013 by the Digital Agenda Commissioner Neelie Kroes. The proposed Regulation, which principally aims at completing a “European Single Market for electronic communications and achieving a Connected Continent” includes provisions putting network neutrality at stake.

Last Thursday, Europe’s top privacy watchdogs stepped down at the conclusion of their terms. This week, the European Commission has yet to name a successor for its most important privacy posts. At a time when the European Union is actively considering landmark privacy legislation and simultaneously responding to the Snowden mass surveillance revelations, this is at best a shocking oversight and at worst a deliberate attempt to undermine Europeans’ privacy rights.