The NetBillOfRights is a list of user rights that should be held true in order to prevent abuses. This grew out of NetDemocraticRepresentation as related to InternetGovernance and is mainly concerned at setting directions for controlling bodies and dispute resolution protocols such that:
- ICANN to conform with Californian laws not to raise unnecessary suspicions, organizing elections among its members in a way accepted by international usages, accepting member's control, separating Staff and contractors from the Board, informing everyone of the financial risks they accept in participating to their BoD, respecting its ByLaws?, accepting the major UN languages, paying the expenses incurred by its Members due to their participation to its administration, bear in mind that AtLarge members are not true ICANN members
- ICANN limits its role to its charter which is:
- a serious and planned management of the IP addressing plan in the best interest of the world, of the future and of the privacy protection is privacy really an issue for ICANN?
- an honest management of the public TLD set as defined by Jon Postel. [link please(or quote)]
- everyone be explained that the uniqueness of the root system may be achieved at several places including the user's system as well as the ICANN systems and that it allows an unlimited number of free TLDs and of alternative versions of the same TLDs (value added clones) the serious netter knows this but hopes that the equivalent of CodeFork can be reduced
- no derogation to law is accepted, in particular it should be understood that everyone is free to call someone else the way he wants, through the words, means of access, paid rates, procedures, delays, etc., he wants and that only the publication of an access method may be subject to limitations resulting from due industrial property and trade marks (in the electronic services class) rights. Sorry, I don't follow this - could you give an example?
- no generic accepted method may be subject to limitation due to intellectual protection excepts patents. As such TLDs, search engines, menus and other generic methods of access based upon the search and the hidden usage of an IP address are not subject to limitations due to the usage of trade marks by the caller or due to the content of the used tables which are the sole intellectual property of the method operator (would we object if the query "car ford" on Yahoo permits me to access too the Renault web site?) One man's generic is another's business method.
- no one can be imposed in a way or another what he will publish or read on the network: this means [some things should not be published and isn't a DenialOfService attack really just reading?]
- no one is obliged to install a site because he got an access method, [Please clarify]
- no one is obliged to receive undesirable e-mail, That's best dealt with from the sender's end, i.e. spam, harassment etc.
- no one is obliged to receive banner, commercials, etc..., Circumvention of a TechnicalProtectionMeasure? or RightsManagementInformation?
- no one may be imposed a language he does not understand making him waste time and attention, sounds petty, can this be clarified
- no one may be imposed ideas, images, concepts he does not want,
- no one may be restricted in his freedom of speech, Isn't there a contradiction between this one and the above?
- no one may be imposed an access technique he has has not, etc., [huh?]
- no one may be imposed to make available on his site a response to an access technique, a language, ideas and concepts he does not support. What like having webmaster@host if you provide a website?
- no one can be granted a more favorable access through the network other than based upon his fair endeavor, work, investments, industrial property, innovation, loyal alliances can you give at least one reason not to allow more favourable access?]
- no one will be excluded from any public structure, group or list The trolls will love that one
- everyone will be permitted in a true and equal fair way to expose and defend his new concepts, his propositions and suggestions in the best of his interests. His moral intellectual property on them will be acknowledged and defended by others so his interests are not wasted because he disclosed his innovation proposition to the best of the user community. This is just what the DMCA was for; the most noble efforts can be twisted.
- no one will be denied the protection of the most favorable national law to his interests he is entitled to be claim protection due to the location of his web site or the incorporation of his operating body (notion of 'Internet asylum'). That will make KiddiePorn? and drug users and terrorists and.... happy.
ElectronicFrontiersAustralia attempted a NetBillOfRights a few years ago. The plan was to balance the rights with acknowledgement of ethics, the rights to be preferably couched in policy and law, the ethics to be enforced only by common etiquette and regard. The EFA list was acknowledged, linked and blessed by CPSR and EFF too. While untouched for quite some time it remains credible, and can be found online at http://home.san.rr.com/merel/ere.html.
See also: SpamDefenseRoadmap and the US BillOfRights
Net Bill Of Rights