[IRP] On "right to access the Internet" versus "right tothe internet"

[Michael Gurstein]

Hi Lisa,

I'm not sure of your reasons for the below...

It should be noted that a number of countries have now in one form or
another begun to acknowledge access to the Internet as a "right" (Costa Rica
(constitution), Finland (constitution), Sweden (ministerial statement),
probably others and so on... Support through the Charter would be
"progressive" certainly in some contexts but most definitely not an outlier.

Mike

-----Original Message-----
From: irp-bounces at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
[mailto:irp-bounces at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org] On Behalf Of Lisa
Horner
Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2010 10:45 AM
To: 'Slim Amamou'; irp at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
Subject: Re: [IRP] On "right to access the Internet" versus "right tothe
internet"


Hi Slim

....

A separate point to contribute to the discussion.... My personal opinion on
whether we should frame access as a right or not is that we shouldn't at
this stage.  I think it should be a separate article at the beginning of the
Charter called "access", but the wording shouldn't refer to it as a right.
Rather something like "all people should have access to the Internet as it
is necessary to realize a number of human rights".  That's mainly because
our goals are to apply existing standards to the Internet.  However, we've
also said that we'll be progressive and forward looking in our
interpretations, and I've been swayed by a lot of the arguments arguing for
rights language recently.  It'd be good to hear as many people's thoughts on
this as possible!

Again - welcome to the list Slim...I hope you'll continue to discuss.

All the best,
Lisa


________________________ _______________________________________________
IRP mailing list
IRP at lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org
http://lists.internetrightsandprinciples.org/listinfo.cgi/irp-internetrights
andprinciples.org