Re: Invalid acceptance of DRM requirement (was Re: walling of the web)

Mark Watson <watsonm@netflix.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 2:34 AM, Norbert Bollow <nb@bollow.ch> wrote:
> > Therefore, in shaping and building the open web of the future, I
> > would suggest that the relevant legal arguments are not so much
> > about what is currently legal or illegal, but about what on the
> > basis of first principles, in particular human rights, should be
> > legal or illegal.
> >
> 
> Thanks for clarifying. It certainly helps to know more explicitly
> that the basis of your position is fundamentally a political one.
> 
> The above is a really a question for the W3C Director and Team.
> Myself, I think it's a little much to expect an unelected technical
> standardization body to operate on the basis of a particular
> political position. You're free to ask that we adopt such a position,
> but I think it's unlikely to happen.

Actually I'm not asking that W3C should adopt a particular political
position.

I thought that I had made that clear before, for example in my posting
of Tue, 25 Jun 2013 08:39:15 +0200, in which after summarizing two
major streams of political viewpoints, I wrote: “What I would suggest
is that if W3C effectively picks a side, W3C should choose the side
that corresponds to the ‘open web’ values.” I have never demanded that
W3C must pick a side.

What I'm asking for in the posting to which you are responding is that
in all decisions that significantly contribute to shaping the future of
human societies (including but not limited to decisions made at W3C)
the internationally accepted human rights should be considered, and
given a higher weight than all other rules of national or international
law.

This demand to give due weight to human rights is IMO very fundamental
and should not really be controversial. Giving consideration to human
rights concerns may lead to a decision to avoid supporting either of
two conflicting viewpoints. It may lead to a decision to support one or
other side in the debate. It may lead to lack of consensus on how
exactly the principles which have been internationally accepted as
human rights should be interpreted, or on what are the appropriate
conclusions on how technology should be shaped to support them. Even in
that case, it would at least lead to documented disagreements.  

Greetings,
Norbert
FreedomHTML.org

Received on Wednesday, 10 July 2013 16:17:39 UTC