SUBSCRIBE TODAY!
Subscribing entitles a reader to complete stories on all topics released as they happen, special features, confidential documents and access to the complete, searchable story archive online back to 2004.
IP-Watch Briefs

Advertisement


Inside Views

Contribute your views! Submit an Inside Views idea to info [at] ip-watch [dot] ch.

We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.

Occupy IP: New Economy Businesses Clash With Old

It may be too much, too late for content providers finally trying to tame the internet, and a fresh approach is needed, writes Bruce Berman.




Special Reports

Non-Communicable Diseases Issue Energises Public Health Policymakers Read More >


Latest Comments
  • I deeply apprecite the initiative to combat agains... »
  • 1. Cuál es el problema principal que se plantea en... »

  • For IPW Subscribers
    A guide to Geneva-based public health and intellectual property organisations. Read More >

    Monthly Reporter

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter, published from 2004 to January 2011, is a 16-page monthly selection of the most important, updated stories and features, plus the People and News Briefs columns.

    The Intellectual Property Watch Monthly Reporter is available in an online archive on the IP-Watch website, available for IP-Watch Subscribers.

    Access the Monthly Reporter Archive >


    United States Moves To Promote Internet Freedom, ‘Knowledge Commons’

    Published on 20 January 2010 @ 10:46 pm

    By for Intellectual Property Watch

    The United States is working to become a master at empowering its residents and others through networked technology while it navigates the murky areas of international policy and law.

    Alec Ross, senior advisor for the Innovation Office of US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, said 2009 was a very good year for Clinton “in terms of how she systematically integrated technology into America’s diplomatic agenda” while recognising opportunities to update the nation’s policy framework.

    [Update: Clinton's remarks from 21 January are available here.]

    Panellist Ross, who spoke at an event hosted by the New America Foundation and Slate, said Clinton has “monitored and immersed herself in the issue of Internet freedom” and noted that she was expected to give an important speech on Thursday morning addressing the State Department’s position on the future of the internet. Internet freedom has “just very recently become a sexy A1 above-the-fold topic, but it has been a long term focus for us,” he said.

    Ross is helping prepare Clinton’s speech, and in his remarks that likely will frame Clinton’s upcoming speech, he said the State Department will be offensively making positive use of tools for economic empowerment.

    “We don’t just view the issue of internet freedom,” he said. “It goes to the issue of what kind of world we want.”

    For example, is there one internet and one “knowledge commons” from which we can all draw, or do we want to live in a world where the knowledge you have access to is limited by country, he asked the packed room in Washington, DC.

    He pointed out that when he joined the State Department last year, there were 4.1 billion mobile handsets on the planet and nine months later that figure grew by 500 million to reach 4.6 billion today.

    “That’s a 10 percent increase in nine months,” he said. “We’re at the tipping point of global connectedness.”

    Ross reiterated that tomorrow’s speech is not only about China, although China has recently been a prime topic of discussion in the United States and on Wednesday’s panel because of Google’s recent announcement that it might discontinue censoring material on its Chinese website, www.google.cn, which operates inside of China. Google has asserted that it was hit with a cyber attack originating from China that was aimed at gaining access to the Gmail accounts of Chinese human rights activists.

    “The State Department is not the foreign policy arm of Google,” said Ross, “but we’re looking into the issue.”

    He added that: “tomorrow’s speech is not a speech about China. There are ‘honour killings’ – and I use the term in quotes – of women in the Middle East when they use social media…. There are manipulations of content and censorship in places like Tunisia. Even though China is grabbing headlines, we need to recognise the global perspective of this.”

    Panellist Rebecca MacKinnon, a fellow with the Open Society Institute and co-founder of Global Voices Online, said it’s important that Westerners are aware that when it comes to China, people can circumvent the government’s internet firewall through devices such as proxy servers. However, she added, that only solves the problem of helping people access content outside of China.

    “It doesn’t help with the internet that’s being built by Chinese people” inside of China, she said.

    “Chinese firms are under tremendous pressure to be nannies for Chinese public,” she said, referring to the possibility that a Chinese internet service provider could lose its business licence if it does not actively monitor and take down what the Chinese government could consider inappropriate content. Chinese firms in China are held liable for what users do on carriers and platforms, she explained.

    Panellist Tim Wu, a Schwartz Fellow at the New America Foundation, a professor at Columbia Law School and a contributing writer with Slate, raised the issue of internet neutrality, a hot debate in the United States as the nation’s Federal Communications Commission puts together a national broadband plan at the behest of Congress.

    “The FCC moving forward on net neutrality [an open, unfettered internet] is an effort by Google” and others to “have a free and open internet within the United States,” he said.

    Wu added that in China the media is a regulated industry and internet firms – especially US-based internet firms – often are not self-aware that they are media companies too.

    “They can get used to censorship [in a place like China] and then they lose their will inside the United States,” he told panellists and moderator James Fallows, a New America Foundation board member and correspondent with The Atlantic Monthly magazine.

    Evgeny Morozov, contributing editor to Foreign Policy magazine and a Yahoo! fellow at the Institute for the Study of Diplomacy at Georgetown University, said Google should have “known who they are dealing with,” referring to the Chinese government. “Google needs to be cognizant of the political costs and the social role” that setting up its services in China would stir.

    MacKinnon said that in the long term she agrees “with the many millions of people in China who feel that their ability to innovate, learn and prosper and do the business that they want to do is suffering because of censorship and information control. Whether that is compatible with the Chinese Communist Party’s survival is another question.”

    Sharon McLoone may be reached at info@ip-watch.ch.

     

    Comments

    1. Juanita Deharo says:

      I hope the Australian Government takes note of the US position. It is moving to introduce a similar filtering impost on ISP’s in Australia. The list of sites to be filtered will be secret. Is Australia the next China?


    Leave a Reply

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website. By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    We welcome your participation in article and blog comment threads, and other discussion forums, where we encourage you to analyse and react to the content available on the Intellectual Property Watch website.

    By participating in discussions or reader forums, or by submitting opinion pieces or comments to articles, blogs, reviews or multimedia features, you are consenting to these rules.

    1. You agree that you are fully responsible for the content that you post. You will not knowingly post content that violates the copyright, trademark, patent or other intellectual property right of any third party or which you know is under a confidentiality obligation preventing its publication and that you will request removal of the same should you discover that you have violated this provision. Likewise, you may not post content that is libelous, defamatory, obscene, abusive, that violates a third party's right to privacy, that otherwise violates any applicable local, state, national or international law, that amounts to spamming or that is otherwise inappropriate. You may not post content that degrades others on the basis of gender, race, class, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sexual preference, disability or other classification. Epithets and other language intended to intimidate or to incite violence are also prohibited. Furthermore, you may not impersonate others.

    2. You understand and agree that Intellectual Property Watch is not responsible for any content posted by you or third parties. You further understand that IP Watch does not monitor the content posted. Nevertheless, IP Watch may monitor the any user-generated content as it chooses and reserves the right to remove, edit or otherwise alter content that it deems inappropriate for any reason whatever without consent nor notice. We further reserve the right, in our sole discretion, to remove a user's privilege to post content on our site. IP Watch is not in any manner endorsing the content of the discussion forums and cannot and will not vouch for its reliability or otherwise accept liability for it.

    3. By submitting any contribution to IP Watch, you warrant that your contribution is your own original work and that you have the right to make it available to IP Watch for all purposes and you agree to indemnify IP Watch, its directors, employees and agents against all damages, legal fees and others expenses that may be incurred by IP Watch as a result of your breach of warranty or of these terms.

    4. You further agree not to publish any personal information about yourself or anyone else (for example telephone number or home address). If you add a comment to a blog, be aware that your email address will be apparent.

    5. IP Watch will not be liable for any loss including but not limited to the following (whether such losses are foreseen, known or otherwise): loss of data, loss of revenue or anticipated profit, loss of business, loss of opportunity, loss of goodwill or injury to reputation, losses suffered by third parties, any indirect, consequential or exemplary damages.

    6. You understand and agree that the discussion forums are to be used only for non-commercial purposes. You may not solicit funds, promote commercial entities or otherwise engage in commercial activity in our discussion forums.

    7. You acknowledge and agree that you use and/or rely on any information obtained through the discussion forums at your own risk.

    8. For any content that you post, you hereby grant to IP Watch the royalty-free, irrevocable, perpetual, exclusive and fully sub-licensable license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such content in whole or in part, world-wide and to incorporate it in other works, in any form, media or technology now known or later developed.

    9. These terms and your posts and contributions shall be governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of Switzerland (without giving effect to conflict of laws principles thereof) and any dispute exclusively settled by the Courts of the Canton of Geneva.