Critiques of the human right to Internet access[ edit ] High-profile criticism of the notion that access to the Internet should be considered a human right comes from Vint Cerf who is often dubbed the "father of the Internet".
This sounds highly debatable, but perhaps that technical argument will be had on another day. Article 5A of the Constitution of Greece states that all persons has a right to participate in the Information Society and that the state has an obligation to facilitate the production, exchange, diffusion, and access to electronically transmitted information.
Other recommendations call on states to respect online anonymity, adopt privacy and data protection laws, and to decriminalize defamation. Whether the UN or Vint Cerf is right on a philosophical level as to whether internet access should be characterised as a human right, technology is changing rapidly and the courts will have to do their best to keep up.
Even signing an online petition has been known to cause arrests and the internet has become a useful tool in the organization of protest movements and demonstrations. La Rue thus emphasizes "Each state should thus develop a concrete and effective policy to make the Internet widely available, accessible, and affordable to all segments of population.
Universal service and National broadband Is the internet a human right from around the world The type and breadth of access which is ensured by an enshrined right can also widely vary, with governments which have pursued an enshrinement of a right to broadband often setting seemingly-adequate minimum targets of speed, number of home connections, type of provision, etc.
Matthew Ingram on Gigaom also makes the practical point that not defining internet access as a human or civil right "makes it easier for governments to place restrictions on access or even shut it down entirely".
Interestingly, the UK Court of Appeal has agreed with the sentiment of the UN report, although without expressing its conclusion in terms of human rights. Indeed, even the United Nations report, which was widely hailed as declaring internet access a human right, acknowledged that the internet was valuable as a means to an end, not as an end in itself.
By vastly expanding the capacity of individuals to enjoy their right to freedom of opinion and expression, which is an "enabler" of other human rights, the Internet boosts economic, social and political development, and contributes to the progress of humankind as a whole.
This has threatened governing regimes and lead to many censoring or cutting Internet service in times of crisis. They argue that "The potpourri of protocols, wires, and bits that make the Internet are no more special than the hammer and nails used to build a home, and to classify either as a human right would be a sincere mistake.
The best way to characterise human rights is to identify the outcomes that we are trying to ensure. From the technological standpoint, JD Rucker on the Techi Blog argues that outcomes are key, and elevating the internet to the status of an inalienable right will result in "increased opportunity, improved education, and the end of hostilities based upon ignorance".
Inthe parliament launched a massive program to expand access to the countryside. However, full internet bans have occasionally been permitted by the courts. Cerf does concede that internet access may be a civil right, defined as a right which is "conferred upon us by law" arguably a definition which does not apply to the UK where the European Convention on Human Rights has been incorporated into our law.
The court ruled that the internet was an "essential part of everyday living" and therefore, a complete ban on use in this case would be disproportionate. Internet access was also pivotal in the Occupy movement. The report made 88 recommendations on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of expression online, including several to secure access to the Internet for all.
Breadth of ensured provision[ edit ] See also: Closer to home, there are already a number of laws which allow state authorities to restrict internet access, most notably rules relating to sex offenders and terrorist suspects.
Human rights activists are lobbying for any regulation on the Internet to be in the form of protections of rights rather than in limiting access to the Internet.A recent United Nations Human Rights Council report examined the important question of whether internet access is a human right.
While the Special Rapporteur's conclusions are nuanced in respect. People may joke that others spend too much time on the internet, but this intricate series of tubes has become an important part of everyday life—so much so that it’s become a.
Jan 05, · The same reasoning above can be applied here — Internet access is always just a tool for obtaining something else more important — though the argument that it is a civil right is, I concede, a.
In formal terms, the Internet is a global system of interconnected computer networks that use the Internet protocol suite (TCP/IP.) This enables billions of.
The right to Internet access, also known as the right to broadband or freedom to connect, is the view that all people must be able to access the Internet in order to exercise and enjoy their rights to freedom of expression and opinion and other fundamental human rights, that states have a responsibility to ensure that Internet access is broadly.
This summer, the UN declared that it considers the internet to be a human right. Specifically, an addition was made to Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), which states.Download