In March the Russian authorities turned their attentions to online social networks — and the Kremlin proved adept at getting major international companies to comply with its directives: on 15 March Twitter blocked an account that promoted drugs and on 29 March Facebook took down a page called “Suicide School” rather than see its entire network blacklisted.

On 25 March, reports surfaced that the ministry of Communications and Mass Media planned to transfer maintenance of the Registry of Banned Sites from communications regulator Roskomnadzor to a third party selected by Roskomnadzor. The ministry proposed changes to the registry; to maintain website owners’ information on the register but deny sites owners — as well as hosting and Internet providers — access to the entire registry. Internet service providers will also be obliged to restore access to sites that have been removed from the register within 24 hours.

Education and schools

ISPs win small victory on child protection

Reports from 1 March stated that Vladimir Putin agreed a change to the Russian administrative code exempting internet service providers from responsibility for preventing availability to children of harmful materials from publicly accessible internet services. Responsibility now rests with all “persons who provide access to information distributed via telecommunication networks in places accessible to children” rather than ISPs.

Saratov demands better filtering

On 13 March the Saratov regional prosecutor reported that the Bazarno-Karabulaksky district prosecutor had discovered that pornographic websites were accessible from computers in the village school of Alekseevka. Similar violations were discovered in schools of Maksimovka, Vyazovka and Sukhoi Karabulak. The schools were told to upgrade their content filtering.

Tyva schools ordered to improve content filtering

On 27 March it was reported that the Tandinsky district court in the Tyva Republic had accepted a district prosecutor’s demand that Kochetovo village school enhance its content filtering. An inspection had found that students could access websites providing instructions on manufacturing smoking blends and explosives, as well as publications included on the Federal List of Extremist Materials.

Neryungri prosecutor demands filtering

It was reported on 27 March that the Neryungri prosecutor had discovered that computers in several schools and a college allowed access to undesirable websites. Educational managers were fined for their negligence and content filters are currently being installed.

Pskov clamps down on porn

On 29 March it was reported that the Dnovsky district prosecutor in Pskov had discovered that students in a secondary school in the town of Dno were able to freely access pornographic websites and sites promoting the use of illegal drugs. The school was told to stop allowing such access.

Bashkortostan targets cannabis site

The Meleuzovsky prosecutor in Bashkortostan discovered that banned websites were accessible in several Meleuz educational institutions. Students in one school could access a website containing information on manufacturing hashish. The prosecutor demanded that the schools restrict access.

Extremism

Extremism “discovered in burger bar”

On 28 February an inspection by the counter-propaganda department of the Karachay-Cherkess Republic ministry of the interior’s anti-extremism unit found an extremist website on the Federal List of Extremist Materials, made publicly accessible from a computer in the Momento Burger internet cafe in Cherkessk. The case is now being considered by the local prosecutor.

Syktyvkar assault on ‘extremist materials’

It was reported on 15 March that the Syktyvkar city court had accepted its prosecutor’s writ demanding that access to 20 sites be restricted by the ISP ParmaTel for featuring extremist materials.

Vologda blocks Islamist website

On 18 March it was reported that the Sokolsky prosecutor had issued a request to an ISP to block access to radical Islamist websites including an article included on the Federal List of Extremist Materials.

Samara clamps down

On 19 March the Kirovsky district court of Samara granted the prosecutor’s office claim against an Internet provider for providing access to a website that contained the book The Gardens of the Righteous by Imam Abu Zakaria Mohiuddin Yahya. The book is included on the Federal List of Extremist Materials.

Moscow prosecutor restricts access

On 19 March it was reported that Gagarinsky prosecutor in in Moscow had filed a writ with Gagarinsky district court against the ISP Niko-2001, demanding restrictions on access to five websites containing publications on the Federal List of Extremist Materials. The ISP complied and the case was dropped.

Nazis suppressed in Lipetsk

Reports from 19 March stated that the Sovetsky district prosecutor in Lipetsk had successfully demanded that the White Resistance (Beloie Soprotivleniie) website be recognised as extremist because it contained Aryan supremacy propaganda, including Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf.

Ulyanovsk goes for Islamists

On 21 March the Ulyanovsk regional prosecutor stated that the Inzensky district prosecutor had found a number of publicly accessible websites containing extremist materials, including the Letter of the Autonomous Mujahideen Group of Vilayata KBK IK, which is on the Federal List of Extremist Materials. The district prosecutor has served a writ against the local branch of the ISP Rostelekom demanding that access be blocked.

Saratov upholds ban

On 22 March it was reported that the civil law panel of the Saratov regionial court had upheld a lower court’s decision to order the ISPs COMSTAR-Regions and Altura to restrict access to websites containing extremist materials.

Saratov prosecutor sues against hatred

On 27 March the Saratov regional prosecutor was reported to have filed eight writs against the ISP COMSTAR-Regiony and the regional branch of the ISP Rostelekom, demanding restrictions on access to websites containing references to extremist activity and materials aimed at inciting hatred or enmity.

Poem targeted in Tambov

On 27 March it was reported that the Michurinsk city prosecutor in Tambov had demanded that the ISP Telesputnik restrict access to a web page containing a poem included on the Federal List of Extremist Materials. The poem was declared extremist by a city court in Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk in 2007.

Chelyabinsk restricts nationalist site

On 28 March the Chelyabinsk regional prosecutor announced that the Leninsky district prosecutor in Magnitogorsk had filed seven writs demanding that ISPs restrict access to a right-wing website publishing extremist materials — among them the the article Open Questions of Russian Nationalism.

Sverdlovsk targets Islamists

On 28 March the Sverdlovsk regional prosecutor announced that the Kamensk-Uralsky prosecutor had filed several writs against the ISPs Kamensk-Telekom and Konveks-Kamensk and the regional branch of Rostelekom demanding restrictions on access to websites containing materials on the Federal List of Extremist Materials including the tract Adhering to the Sunnah of the Prophet (Peace and Blessings of Allah be Upon Him).

Bryansk ISP gets court order

On 28 March it was announced that the Bryansk regional court had granted the request of the Volodarsky district prosecutor to restrict access to websites containing extremist materials. The Sovetsky district court last year rejected the request but was overturned on appeal.

Ivanovo prosecutor wants explosives ban

On 28 March the Ivanovo regional prosecutor reported that the Teikovsky prosecutor had identified publicly accessible websites that contain information about manufacturing explosives. Writs demanding restriction of access to the websites were subsequently issued.

Kirov kills fascist website

On 28 March the Kirov regional prosecutor reported that a publicly accessible website offering items with fascist symbols for sale was identified during an audit. The Kirov city prosecutor demanded that the ISP MTC block access and the court complied.

Gambling and online casinos

‘No more gambling’ in Chapayevsk

On 6 March the Samara regional prosecutor declared that the Lenin district court of Samara had accepted 19 complaints by the Chapayevsk town prosecutor about inadequate restrictions on access to gambling websites.

Ulyanovsk restricts pyramid schemes

On 14 March it was reported that the Novomalyklinsky district prosecutor’s office of the Ulyanovsk region had issued writs against the local branch of the ISP Rostelekom demanding restrictions on access to websites run by the pyramid-scheme impresario Sergey Mavrodi.

Kurgan stops the betting

On 15 March it was reported that the Dalmatovsky district prosecutor had identified 25 gambling websites. The prosecutor demanded that the ISP Rus block the sites, and it agreed.

Online gambling halted in Penza

On 15 March the Penza regional prosecutor reported that the Lenin district prosecutor had identified 13 online casino websites. The prosecutor filed a writ against the ISP Rostelekom demanding that access be restricted, which was granted.

Orenburg rules out casinos

On 15 March it was reported that the Novotroitsk town court in the Orenburg region had agreed to a  prosecutor’s demands for restrictions on access to online casino sites. The ISP Ass-Com blocked more than 20 websites voluntarily.

Omsk bars access to gambling

On 20 March the Leninsky district prosecutor’s office in Omsk sued the ISP Sakhalin in the Leninsky district court, demanding restrictions on access to pyramid-scheme websites.

Pskov stops the gamblers

On 21 March it was reported that the Pskov regional prosecutor had found 85 websites with gambling-related information and demanded access restrictions for the sites. After a long legal wrangle, the local branch of the ISP Rostelecom was ordered to restrict access.

Khanty-Mansiysk closes online bookies

On 22 March the Khanty-Mansiysk Autonomous district prosecutor’s office reported that the Nyagan Town prosecutor had identified several gambling websites. Based on the results of the inspection, the prosecutor filed a lawsuit against the local Rostelekom branch demanding that access to the websites be restricted. The Khanty-Mansiysk district court has granted the petition in full.

Perm blocks gambling access

On 26 March the Perm regional prosecutor reported that pyramid-scheme websites had been found in the public domain in Chernushinsky district. The district prosecutor issued a writ demanding that the local ISP restrict access to these sites, which was accepted by the district court.

Khanty-Mansiysk clamps down

On 26 March it was reported that the appeal court in the Khanty-Mansiysk autonomous district had accepted demands from local prosecutors that pyramid-scheme websites be blocked.

Social networks

Twitter closes account and deleted Tweets

On 15 March it became known that in the two preceding weeks Twitter had blocked access to five tweets and closed one user account upon request from Roskomnadzor because its owner advertised the sales of illegal drugs. Three Tweets were blocked for promoting suicide and two more for assisting in drug distribution. The deleted user’s account had advertised a drug distribution network, and was reported to Roskomnadzor by Twitter after its removal.

ISP blocks social networks in Ryazan and Orel

On 28 March it was reported that the ISP Rostelekom had blocked the Odnoklassniki and VKontakte social networks in the Ryazan and Orel regions and had blocked access to YouTube in Orel and Livejournal in Ryazan. The websites were included on the Registry of Banned Sites, but the block was later lifted.

Roskomnadzor warns Facebook

On 28 March it was reported that the federal communications agency Roskomnadzor notified Facebook that it would be blocked unless it removed a page called “Suicide school”, containing (mostly humurous) information about suicide. The page was added to Russia’s internet blacklist and was taken down by the social networking site.

Drugs and pornography

Samara blocks drug-dealing sites

On 12 March it was reported that the Novokuibyshevsk city court in Samara region had demanded that local ISPs MIRS, Next Tell-Samara, Progress IT and TesComVolga restrict access to 25 websites that offered narcotics and psychedelic substances for sale. The websites were identified during an audit conducted by the FSB Department of Samara Region.

Sverdlovsk prosecutor demands drugs action

Reports from 12 March stated that the Sverdlovsk regional prosecutor had filed eight writs against the local branch of the ISP Rostelekom,  demanding restrictions on access to the websites containing material encouraging the use of illegal drugs.

Vladimir restricts access to porn and drugs

On 18 March the Vladimir regional prosecutor declared that the Kolchuginsky interdistrict prosecutor had  found websites containing pornographic materials, information about drug manufacturing and articles about suicide methods, made publicly accessible from a computer installed in the Kolchugino town post office. The prosecutor issued a writ against against a local branch of the ISP Rostelekom demanding that access be restricted, to which the ISP agreed.

Samara prosecutor demands porn block

On 19 March it was reported that the Novokuibyshevsk city prosecutor had filed six writs to block websites featuring child pornography. The lawsuits are pending.

Khabarovsk court upholds ISP porn decision

On 21 March it was reported that the Khabarovsk regional court had upheld the decision of the Centralny district court in October 2012 against the local branch of the ISP Rostelekom, restricting access to two websites with pornographic content.

And the rest…

Website blocked for suicide book

On 27 March it was reported that a book by Perm psychotherapist Yuri Vagin, Aesthetics of Suicide (Estetika samoubiystva) had been categorised as extremist. The federal communications agency Roskomnadzor included the website of the Perm psychoanalytic society, which published the book, on the Registry of Banned Sites.

Orthodox parish registered as dangerous

On 27 March it was reported that Roskomnadzor had included the website of Svyato-Vvedensky parish of Rostov on the Register of Banned Sites. As of 30 March, a message “The requested page could not be found” could be seen when attempting to access the site.

Websites warned over Pussy Riot

On 5 March Roskomnadzor reported that it had issued warnings in late February 2013 to the editorial boards of Argumenty i Fakty newspaper and the Polit.ru online news service for republishing a video clip by the Pussy Riot punk collective. The video had been previously been defined by a court as extremist.

Popular writers blog added to banned list

On 19 March Roskomnadzor added to the Register of Banned Sites a page from the online blog of popular writer Leonid Kaganov that featured the lyrics to a satirical song from a 1990s TV show — supposedly for encouraging suicide. A blog post in which Kaganov commented on this ban was then added to the register — and then so was his entire blog, even though, on the request of Roskomnadzor, Kaganov removed the contentious lyrics from his blog.

Sakhalin ISP told to stop giving bribery tips

On 26 March the Sakhalin regional court reversed a previous Yuzhno-Sakhalinsk city court decision not to ban the ISP Rostelekom from allowing access to a website containing information about giving bribes. The ISP must now restrict access to the site.

Andrei Soldatov is a Russian journalist, and together with Irina Borogan, co-founder of the Agentura.Ru website. Last year, Soldatov and Borogan co-authored The New Nobility: The Restoration of Russia’s Security State and the Enduring Legacy of the KGB (PublicAffairs)

The post What Russia censored in March appeared first on Index on Censorship.

On Friday, Google hosted its first Big Tent event in DC with co-sponsor Bloomberg to discuss the future of free speech in the digital age.

Each panel was guided by hypothetical scenarios that mirrored real current events and raised interesting free speech questions around offence, takedown requests, self-censorship, government leaks, national security and surveillance. The audience anonymously voted on the decision they would have made in each case, but as Bill Keller, former executive editor at the New York Times, acknowledged, “real life is not a multiple choice question”. Complex decisions are seldom made with a single course of action when national security, privacy and freedom of expression are all at stake.

The first panel explored how and when news organisations and web companies decide to limit free speech online. Google’s chief legal officer David Drummond said that governments “go for choke points on the internet” when looking to restrict access to particular content, meaning major search engines and social media sites are often their first targets regardless of where the offending content is hosted online. Drummond said that Google is partially blocked in 30 of the 150 countries in which it operates and cited an OpenNet Initiative statistic that at least 42 countries currently filter online content. Much of this panel focused on last year’s Innocence of Muslims video, which 20 countries approached Google to review or remove. Drummond questioned whether democracies like the US, which asked Google to review the video, are doing enough to support free expression abroad.

Mark Whitaker, a former journalist and executive at CNN and NBC, said staff safety in hostile environments is more important in deciding whether to kill a story than “abstract issues” like free speech. Security considerations are important, but characterising freedom of expression as “abstract” and endorsing self-censorship in its place can set a worrying precedent. Bill Keller argued that publishing controversial stories in difficult circumstances can bring more credibility to a newsroom, but can also lead to its exile. Both the New York Times and Bloomberg were banned in China last summer for publishing stories about the financial assets of the country’s premier. This reality means that news organisation and web companies often weigh public interest and basic freedom of expression against market concerns. Whitaker acknowledged that the increased consolidation of media ownership in many countries means financial considerations are being given even greater weight.

The second panel debated free speech and security, with Susan Benesch of the Dangerous Speech Project standing up for free speech, former US Attorney General Alberto Gonzales coming down hard on the side of security, and current Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security Jane Holl Lute backing up Gonzales while recognising the vital role free speech plays in a functioning society.

In the first scenario posed to this panel, audience members were split on whether mobile networks should be shut down when a clear and imminent threat, such as the remote detonation of a bomb, arises. Lute said, “the first instinct should not be to shut down everything, that’s part of how we’ll find out what’s going on,” whereas Benesch focused on the civil liberties rather than surveillance implications of crippling communications networks.

In cases of extremism, which the panel agreed is often more easily and quickly spread via digital communications, Benesch endorsed counter speech above speech restrictions as the best way to defend against hate and violence. 94 percent of the audience agreed that social media should not be restricted in a scenario about how authorities should react when groups use social media to organise protests that might turn violent.

Google’s executive chairman Eric Schmidt closed the event by highlighting what he considers to be key threats and opportunities for digital expression. Schmidt believes that the world’s five billion feature phones will soon be replaced with smartphones, opening new spaces for dissent and allowing us “to hear the voices of citizens like never before”. Whether he thinks this dissent will outweigh the government repression that’s likely to follow is unclear.

Big Tent will make its way back to London next month where Google hosted the first event of its  kind two years ago. The theme will focus on “innovation in the next ten years” with Ed Milliband, Eric Schmidt and journalist Heather Brooke as featured speakers.

Google is an Index on Censorship funder.

The post Google asks DC to explore free speech in digital age appeared first on Index on Censorship.

CISPA would allow tech companies and governments to exchange information related to possible cyber attacks — without legal hurdles. The bill’s sponsor, Michigan Republican Mike Rogers, dismissed the bill’s critics as “14-year-olds in their basements”, but there are some very valid concerns over CISPA’s potential to threaten digital freedom.

Electronic Frontier Foundation’s (EFF) Rainey Reitman criticised the  ”dangerously vague” bill, which she says allows companies to “spy on the electronic communications of millions of Internet users and pass sensitive information to the government with no form of judicial oversight.”

The bill was passed by a two-thirds majority. An amendment preventing employers from acquiring the passwords to social media accounts of employees was blocked by the House. The US Senate stopped the bill from passing last year, but the House has reintroduced it this year. The White House has also previously threatened to veto the bill.

Despite its failure last year, the bill’s discussion this time around did not focus on the privacy issues pointed out by groups like EFF or the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Instead, supporters of CISPA used last week’s Boston marathon bombings to illustrate its necessity. Texas Republican Mike McCaul said that the United States needs to arm itself against “digital bombs.”

So who will benefit from CISPA’s passing? According to TechDirt, the bill will benefit big defence contractors — including Rogers’ wife, defence expert Kristi Rogers, who has been publicly writing about and supporting her husband’s efforts to strengthen cybersecurity. She currently works for lobbying group Manatt, working on “executive-level problem solving in the defence and homeland security sectors”, and previously lead Aegis LLC: a security company that has a $10 billion contract with the US State Department.

CISPA’s opponents have also been drowned by its supporters’ aggressive lobbying. Transparency watchdog Sunlight Foundation has reported that the pro-CISPA lobby has spent a whopping $605 million since 2011 to pass the bill.  In fact, companies like AT&T and Verizon have already spent millions on ensuring CISPA’s passing (interestingly, neither of these companies are participating in the Global Network Initiative’s efforts to help telecommunications companies protect freedom of expression and privacy rights).

Even though the bill has now been passed by the House, it has yet to be considered by the Senate. The White House has also warned that the bill would be vetoed as it is, citing concerns over accountability for companies that fail “to safeguard personal information adequately.”

To find out more about the concerns around CISPA, and to voice your concerns, visit the campaign’s site.

The post CISPA: Who benefits from ‘dangerously vague’ bill? appeared first on Index on Censorship.

The subject has been intermittently making headlines in India, with a number of politically motivated arrests made under the Information Technology Act’s controversial Section 66a. Causing more confusion, in 2011, the Minister for Communications & Information Technology, Kapil Sibal, made headlines by asking social media intermediaries to take down “objectionable” content.

At the time, the content in question seemed to be mainly objectionable to to the government itself. The content in question seemed to be mainly objectionable to the government alone.

This caused a huge public uproar, and since then Sibal has exercised more caution, though still maintaining that “the country must have an enabling framework — rules and regulations must not come in the way of the growth of the net.”

As well as Index on Censorship, the roundtable in Bangalore brought together a number of actors, including analysts from social media giants Facebook and Google, as well as Change.org, Wikimedia India Foundation, Medianama, Digital Empowerment Foundation, Open Governance India, Knowledge Commons, Alternative Law Forum, Center for Internet and Society, Tactical Tech, researchers from IIM Bangalore and Aziz Premji University. Journalists from The Hindu, Hindustan Times, DNA and smaller media organisations like Oorvani Media, Mahiti and The Alternative also took part in the debate.

The overall discussion centered around a few key issues, the first being whether the law “protects” free speech as it stands today. Many of those present felt that while Section 66a of The Information Technology Act 2000, which protects against “annoyance, inconvenience, danger, obstruction, insult, injury, criminal intimidation, enmity, hatred, or ill will…” has been misused in the past, it needs to be examined from different angles, such as protecting women from online abuse.

While some writers have outright rejected this argument, the Internet Democracy Project released a draft paper on the subject. In it, they revealed that women think of the internet — social media — as “the street” where they can be taunted and abused in a similar manner to real life. In fact, drawing on the experiences of writer Meena Kandasamy and singer Chinmayi Sripada, who have faced violent abuse on social networks, the panel discussed ways to fend off misogyny that did not involve the law. These included using humour, blocking people, ignoring the comments, and even asking or waiting for others to come to your defence.

Interestingly, many women who were questioned for the study revealed that they prefer not to go to their families to report the abuse, for fear that they would be told to stop spending so much time online. The women and their families also said they had little confidence in going to the police with the same complaints.

This led the panel to discuss beyond the validity of the law — and question the role and capacity of the police in enforcing controversial measures like Section 66a. Some felt that 95 per cent of police on the front lines were not even aware of free speech issues, or the law in question, while others believed that police reforms are the way forward.

Some were unsure if they wanted the police to be tech savvy in the future, suggesting that it could lead to more arrests than there are today. It was agreed that there needs to be more research on the law as it functions today, to understand the crucial role the police will play in upholding it, particularly regarding the role the judiciary currently plays.

The question of defamation was also raised, with some panelists believing that there needs to be a distinction between those who have a small number of followers versus those who have a large following. Can the punishment be the same, if the effect of their status update or tweet is not?

Other discussions assessed challenges to freedom of speech at state level rather than national level and whether or not the mainstream media is forcefully supportive of free speech on the internet. The panelists debated the issue of anonyminity, and whether it is the cause or the solution to some of the free speech issues we see today.

An issue was raised surrounding how internet users are not a core constituency for the government right now; a fact reflected in the budget of the Ministry of Information and Technology, which chooses to focus areas such as computer hardware.

Another question circulating the room was whether strict laws such as Section 66a were designed with the intention to shape the internet a certain way, so that future users simply fall into line. The government’s perspective on the internet’s purposes was also explored, examining whether the National Broadband Network, currently being laid out to connect rural India, was viewed simply as a delivery service platform or for two-way communication.

Two questions that prompted considerable debate were “what is the role — actual or desired — of non legal actors such as intermediaries, pressure groups; the public at large” and “what non-legal strategies can we develop to protect free speech and who should implement such strategies?”

Some suggestions were to try out a “naming and shaming” site or Tumblr account for hate speech, although there were doubts as to how effective it would be. Other panelists advised that intermediaries could reveal more data that could save the government from taking drastic measures — for example, if a certain video was not being heavily viewed from within India, then the government would not feel the need to censor/block a website as it does now.

It was clear that civil society members and even the intermediaries are grappling with the same questions as the government. While a section of Indian society is firmly opposed to laws like Section 66a, there are discussion platforms to help understand how to operate within the constraints of the law.

The post The big issues for Indian web users appeared first on Index on Censorship.

Many commentators believe that by then the bill will include amendments extending the list of conditions for blocking websites to include those containing information about homosexuality, which could be blocked without a court order. Current laws on protection of children could be similarly amended.

Duma deputy Elena Mizulina stated: “No adult has the right to impose their sexual preferences on a person under 18 years of age. Propaganda for homosexuality should be considered information inappropriate for children.” The League for Internet Safety, which is backed by the Kremlin and was behind the introduction of the register of banned websites in Russia, supports the initiative.

Schools, students, libraries and a post office

Tuva prosecutor demands school filters
On 22 February it was reported by the Ulug-Khem district prosecutor’s office of the Tuva republic that computers in a school that had been discovered in an inspection last October to allow unfettered access to extremist websites were still lacking filtering software. The computers, in a school in the town of Shagonar, allowed access to Islamist, anti-Semitic and fascist videos and books. The prosecutor demanded that the republic’s minister of education penalise the school’s principal and ensure that the school end the violations.

Stavropol attack on “harmful” advertising
On 26 February it was reported that a prosecutor’s audit of the Stavropol region in January had found that internet service providers were placing ads for pornographic materials and films featuring scenes of cruelty on school websites hosted on portals narod.ru and ukoz.ru. On 9 January, the prosecutor’s office told the head of the Stavropol city education office to cease violating legislation on the rights of minors. Ten school principals now face disciplinary action.

Restrictions on student access in Vologda
On 28 February it was reported that the Vologda city prosecutor had found websites containing extremist and pornographic materials and alcohol advertising to be accessible from computers in five schools. The prosecutor told the schools to block students’ access.

Rural school told: block “damaging” information
On 18 February it was reported that the Kalininskii district prosecutor in the Saratov region had found that computers in the Simonovka village secondary school provided access to websites “that could damage the health and moral and spiritual development of children”. The prosecutor told the school administration to cease the violations.

Library must restrict access to explosives sites
On 18 February it was reported that the Khanty-Mansiysk autonomous district prosecutor had found that Beloyarsk library computers provided access to websites with information on manufacturing explosives. The library was told to cease the violations and to bring charges against those responsible.

Surgut prosecutor hits at school porn
On 22 February it was reported that the Surgut district prosecutor had found that computers in the Lyaminsk high school allowed access to pornographic material. The prosecutor demanded that the school install content-filtering software to restrict students’ access to harmful websites.

Amur school instructed to block violence
On 11 February it was reported that the Bureya district prosecutor of the Amur region had found that computers in Rodionovo secondary school allowed access to sites promoting violence and brutality, drugs, pornography and anti-social behaviour. The school principal was ordered to cease the violations and bring disciplinary action against those responsible.

Kostroma post office fined
On 13 February the Kostroma region prosecutor reported that an inspection by the Mezhevsky district prosecutor had revealed that a computer in the Georgievskoe village post office allowed access to extremist materials and information on the manufacturing and use of tobacco and illegal drugs. After a court case, the post office was fined 20,000 rubles (£425).

Bashkortostan court orders school filters
On 13 February it was announced that Dyurtyuli interdistrict prosecutor in Bashkortostan had found that computers in schools provided access to websites with information on narcotics. The prosecutor demanded that the schools install filtering software and limit access to these sites, demands that were backed by a court.

School head sued on access to extremism
On 6 February it was reported that the Umetskii district prosecutor in the Tambov region had found a computer in a local high school that allowed access to extremist materials. The principal of the school was ordered to cease allowing access, and the prosecutor recommended disciplinary charges against the responsible parties.

“Students need protection” in Kineshima
On 6 February the Ivanovo regional prosecutor reported that the Kineshma prosecutor had found that computers in the city’s schools provided access to extremist materials. The schools were ordered to cease violations of anti-extremism legislation.

Salekhard school must install internet filters
On 6 February it was reported that the Salekhard city prosecutor had found that students of a secondary school were inadequately protected from harmful information: computers at the school could be used to access pornographic material, information about manufacturing explosives, and texts with foul language. The principal was ordered to install working internet filters.

Prosecutor demands protection from poetry
On 8 February it was reported that Omsukchan district prosecutor in Magadan had established that filtering software in the Omsukchan village high school was failing to prevent access to extremist materials, including Vladimir Shcherbina’s poem “Progonite zhida” (Chase Away the Jew). The school was ordered to restrict access to the extremist websites.

Extremism

Altai court orders block on 29 websites
On 25 February the Gorno-Altaisk city court upheld the demand of the Altai Republic prosecutor that the regional branch of the ISP Mobil’nye TeleSystemy limit access to 29 websites. The materials include songs on the Federal List of Extremist Materials published on 12 websites, and a book also on the list published on 17 sites. The court ordered the ISP to limit access to these materials. The decision has not yet entered into force.

Saratov prosecutor demands restrictions
On 26 February it was reported that the Leninskii district prosecutor in Saratov had identified several sites “containing public calls for extremist activities, terrorism, incitement of hatred or enmity, as well as humiliation of human dignity”. The prosecutor has ordered the regional branch of the ISP MTS to restrict access to these sites by installing IP-address filtering on its routers.

Extremist sites blocked in Smolensk
On 27 February it was reported that two websites containing extremist material had been blocked in response to a demand from the Roslavl prosecutor in the Smolensk region.

Yekaterinburg authorities block sites
On 27 February the Sverdlovsk regional appeal court considered the regional prosecutor’s appeal against the decision of the Upper Iset Yekaterinburg district court to dismiss the request of Zheleznodorozhnyi district prosecutor in Ekaterinburg to block access to four extremist websites. The appeal court overturned the original decision and ordered the ISP Telnet Service to restrict access to websites on the Federal List of Extremist Materials.

Omsk oppositionist added to register
On 27 February it was reported the administration of LiveJournal.com had blocked the account of Mikhail Yakovlev, the Omsk opposition leader. The author was notified that his page had been added to the Register of Banned Sites. According to Yakovlev, the ban could be related either to his criticism of the Sverdlovsk governor Yevgeniy Kuyvashev or to his liberal position on soft drugs.

Altai demands restrictions
On 18 February the Altai regional prosecutor announced that the Zarinsk prosecutor had identified several websites containing extremist materials and demanded that two ISPs use IP-address filtering to block them.

Kirov action against ISPs
On 18 February the Kirov district prosecutor in Samara filed 10 legal suits against ISPs demanding blocks on websites that contain extremist materials. The suits are currently being considered.

Extremist website accessed from college
On 20 February it was reported that the counterpropaganda officers of the Centre for Extremism Prevention of the Karachay-Cherkessia’s Ministry of Internal Affairs had discovered that computers at the Karachay-Cherkessia College of International Tourism and Hospitality Management in the village of Uchkeken, provided unfettered access to a website included on the Federal List of Extremist Materials. The audit results have been forwarded to the prosecutor’s office.

ISP blocks sites in Smolensk
On 11 February it was reported that in the city of Gagarin in the Smolensk region the ISP Orbit Plus partially blocked access to several sites that published Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf and other pro-Nazi texts. Last November the regional prosecutor demanded that the ISP cease violating the Law on Combating Extremist Activity.

Videos barred in Altai
On 13 February the Gorno-Altaisk city court considered a suit filed in January by the Altai republic’s prosecutor against the ISP Rostelecom demanding restrictions on access to extremist videos published via the online social network VKontakte. In the course of the trial it was established that access to the videos had been restricted prior to the start of the trial. The case was subsequently dismissed.

Islamist videos banned in Kursk
On 13 February it was reported that the Zheleznodorozhnyi district prosecutor in Kursk had found extremist materials accessible online including anti-Russian Islamist video clips and other materials aimed at undermining the constitution and justifying murders of law enforcement officers. The ISPs Aksinet and Comstar-Regiony were told to restrict access to the relevant sites and complied with the demand.

Audit of websites in Karachay-Cherkessia
On 5 February the Centre for Extremism Prevention and the FSB of the Karachay-Cherkessia republic identified a publicly accessible website containing extremist material. The audit results have been forwarded to the republic’s prosecutor.

ISP warned in Krasnodar
On 7 February the Krasnodar regional prosecutor reported that the Temryukskii district prosecutor had identified a publicly accessible website, Vilayat Dagestan – maintained by Imarat Kavkaz (“Caucasus Emirate”) organisation – publishing extremist materials. The director of the regional branch of the ISP MTS was warned about about the impermissibility of extremist activity.

Gambling and online casinos

Khanty-Mansiysk court blocks gambling
On 25 February it was reported that the Urai prosecutor in Khanty-Mansiysk autonomous district had been granted court backing to ensure that the ISP Rostelecom block access to gambling websites.

Tula prosecutor goes for pyramid scheme

On 26 February the Sovetskii district prosecutor in Tula sued the ISPs Altair Tula, MTS, RadioPeydzh-T, Tulskii Gosudarstvennyi Universitet and ER-Telecom Holding, demanding that they restrict access to sites of the MMM pyramid scheme.

Ufa prosecutor demands restrictions
On 25 February it was announced that the Sovetskii district prosecutor in Ufa had sued the ISP Ufanet demanding that it block access to 26 gambling websites.

Gambling targeted in Surgut
On 27 February the Khanty-Mansiysk autonomous district prosecutor reported that the Surgut city prosecutor had identified several illegal gambling websites. The prosecutor demanded that six ISPs restrict access.

Tula casino access barred
On 27 February it was reported that the Tsentralnyi district prosecutor in Tula had filed 33 writs against ISPs demanding restrictions on access to online casinos. The Tsentralnyi district court ordered the ISPs to comply.

Pyramid-scheme sites banned in Yamal-Nenets
On 1 March the Yamal-Nenets autonomous district prosecutor reported that the Gubkinskiy city prosecutor had identified pyramid-scheme advertising on 18 websites and that Gubkinskiy city court had accepted the prosecutor’s demand that the ISP Pursatkom restrict access to the sites.

Chita court order ISP to block pyramid schemes
On 19 February it was reported that the central district court of Chita had granted a prosecutor’s request to order the local branch of the ISP Rostelecom to restrict access to the sites of Sergei Mavrodi, the creator of pyramid schemes. The decision has not yet entered into force.

Samara bars gambling ads
On 19 February it was reported that the Neftegorsk interdistrict prosecutor in the Samara region had identified 10 sites that provided information about a pyramid scheme. The Leninskii district court of Samara accepted the prosecutor’s demand that the ISP Rostelecom limit access to these sites. The court’s decisions have not yet entered into force.

Casino sites blocked in Kaliningrad
On 20 February it was announced that the Moscovskii district prosecutor in Kaliningrad had identified two gambling websites. The ISP TIS-Dialogue agreed voluntarily to its demand that it limit access to these sites.

Computer club told to clamp down
On 21 February it was reported that Kurganinskii district prosecutor in Krasnodar had found a pyramid-scheme website to be accessible via a computer club. The prosecutor’s demands that the owner of the club restrict access were accepted by the district court.

Surgut blocks pyramid sites
On 12 February it was reported that the Surgut city prosecutor had successfully moved to restrict access to pyramid-scheme websites.

Online casinos blocked in Samara
On 13 February the Leninskii district court in Samara accepted nine demands from the Chapaevsk prosecutor for restrictions on access to online casinos. The decisions of the court have not yet entered into force.

Tula orders online casino ban
On 15 February it was reported that the Sovetskii district court of Tula had accepted prosecutors’ demands that ISPs Altair Tula, MTS, and ER-Telecom Holding block access to gambling websites.

Casinos blocked in Komi Republic
On 14 February it was reported that the Ukhta city prosecutor had been given court approval for its demand that the ISP GSP restrict access to nine gambling websites.

Drugs

Samara court blocks drug promotion
On 20 February it was announced that the Oktiabrskii district prosecutor in Samara had filed 70 writs demanding restrictions on access to websites promoting illegal drugs. Of these, 43 have been accepted by the local court and the rest are pending. Previously, on 5 February, the Kirov district prosecutor on Samara had successfully demanded restrictions on access to seven sites promoting drugs.

Cannabis sites blocked in Voronezh

On 13 February the Voronezh ISP Votek Mobile was ordered by a district court to limit access to the online cannabis seed distributor Semyanych, kacheli.my1.ru and ganzhaman.tut.by. Votek Mobile closed access to these sites.

And the rest

Move on fake diplomas site
On 8 February the Zhigulevsk city court in Samara backed the city prosecutor’s demand for restrictions on access to a website offering fake diplomas from various educational institutions. The court’s decision has not yet come into force.

Chechnya ban on Islamist TV channel
On 12 February the Leninskii district court of Grozny declared the internet TV channel Imam TV extremist. The site carries Musa Yandyrhanov’s video Napominaniie (Reminder) and talks by other members of illegal armed groups. The court said these materials promoted terrorism, contained incitement to violence against government representatives and incited hatred on religious grounds.

Block on sites giving bribery tips
On 12 February the Bashkortostan republic prosecutor announced that Sharanskii district prosecutor had identified several websites containing tips on giving bribes. The ISP Bashinformsvyaz was made to restrict access to these sites.

User group banned in St Petersburg
On 15 February it was reported that the Centralnyi district prosecutor in St Petersburg had ordered the social network VKontakte to block the user group Childfree. The prosecutor found that the group’s posts contained material violating the rights of minors. The VKontakte administration blocked the user group and deleted all its posts and blocked one user’s account.

ISP sued for posting bribery tips
On 4 February the Nefteyugansk interdistrict prosecutor identified sites containing bribery tips and filed a writ against the ISP Elektrosviazi demanding that it restrict access to these sites.

Orel blocks bribery sites
On 7 February it was reported that the Orel city prosecutor had identified several websites with tips on bribery and had been granted its demand for restrictions on access to the sites.

Post by designer added to banned list
On 5 February the popular designer Artemy Lebedev reported that the ISP Roskomnadzor had added his blog post containing an animated movie, Dumb Ways to Die, to the Register of Banned Sites. Roskomnadzor interpreted the video — a public service announcement by Metro Trains Melbourne in Australia — as promoting suicide.

Andrei Soldatov is a Russian journalist, and together with Irina Borogan, co-founder of the Agentura.Ru website. Last year, Soldatov and Borogan co-authored The New Nobility: The Restoration of Russia’s Security State and the Enduring Legacy of the KGB (PublicAffairs)

The post What Russia censored in February appeared first on Index on Censorship.

In our increasingly digital times, freedom of expression may look like one of the positive beneficiaries of our ever more interconnected world. Countries like China or Iran build firewalls and employ small armies of censors and snoopers in determined attempts to keep their bit of the internet controlled and uncritical of their ruling elites. But with social media, blogs, citizen journalism, and ever greater amounts of news on a diverse and expanding range of sites, information is shared across borders and goes around censors with greater ease than ever before.

Yet online and off, free speech still needs defending from those in power who would like to control information, limit criticism or snoop widely across people and populations. And it would be a mistake to think the free speech attackers are only the obvious bad guys like China, Iran or North Korea.

While Putin’s Russia jails members of Pussy Riot, passes new laws to block websites and journalists continue to face risks of violent attack, it is Turkey, in 2013, that has more journalists in jail than even Iran or China. In 2004, the European Union assessed Turkey as democratic enough to be a candidate for EU membership. Today, Turkey’s government puts pressure on media companies and editors to rein in critical journalists and self-censorship is rife.

Meanwhile, in the UK, a fully paid-up member of the democracy club, the government and opposition argue over whether Parliament should regulate the print media (“statutory underpinning”, to use the jargon introduced by the Leveson Report into the phone-hacking scandal). On 18 March, the UK’s three main political parties agreed on a new press regulation system whereby an independent regulator would be set up by royal charter. And in this debate over media standards and regulation, the most basic principle, that politicians should not in any way control the press (given their interests in positive, uncritical press coverage), has been too easily abandoned by many. Yet the press faces big questions: what has happened to its standards, how can individuals fairly complain? Similar debates are under way in India, with corruption and the phenomenon of ‘“paid news” among concerns there. Falling standards provide easy targets for those who would control press freedom for other reasons.

Plenty of governments of all shades are showing themselves only too ready to compromise on civil liberties in the face of the large amounts of easily accessible data our digital world produces. Shining a light on requests for information — as Google and Twitter do in their respective transparency reports —  is one vital part of the campaigns and democraticdebate needed if the internet is not to become a partially censored, and highly monitored, world.

Google’s recent update of its figures for requests for user data by law enforcement agencies shows the US way ahead of other countries — accounting for over a third of requests with 8,438 demands, with India coming in at 2,431 and the UK, Germany and France not so far behind India.

Both India and the UK have also used too widely drawn laws that criminalise “grossly offensive” comments, leading to the arrest and prosecution of individuals for innocuous social media comments. Public outcry and ensuing debate in both countries is one sign that people will stand up for free speech. But such laws must change.

A new digital revolution is coming, as millions more people move online via their mobiles. As smart phone prices fall, and take-up expands, the opportunities for free expression and accessto information across borders are set to grow. But unless we are all vigilant, whether we face democratic or authoritarian regimes, in demanding our right to that free expression, our digital world risks being a partially censored, monitored and fragmented one. This is the global free speech challenge of our times.

This article appears in Fallout: free speech and the economic crisis. Click here for subscription options and more.

The post Global view appeared first on Index on Censorship.

Brazil’s indigenous population have gone online to campaign against social injustice in their community – Alberto Cesar Araujo/Demotix

Despite their poor economic and living conditions, Brazil’s indigenous peoples are increasingly using the internet to make their struggle for rights known to the world.

Historically, native Brazilians have been deprived of proper citizenship, first by slavery and the loss of their homeland in the 16^th century and, after that, by prejudice, impoverishment, the loss of cultural traces and the disappearance of entire populations. But, the emergence of the internet has allowed Brazilian Indians access to a new era of free speech and civil activity.

One example of their fight to be heard is the campaign against the Draft Constitutional Amendment #215, currently being debated in the Chamber of Deputies. If the amendment passes, it would remove the Federal Government’s power to delimit indigenous lands and pass it to Congress.

Indigenous leaders fear this would strengthen landowners’ powers, who already have a strong lobbying position in Congress and would likely do their best to inhibit the creation of new reservations.

An online petition against the amendment has gathered more than 27,000 signatures.

Their cause also attracted huge support through social media late last year. Facebook users showed support to the Guarani and Kaiowá peoples by adding “Guarani-Kaiowá” to their profile name. The 45,000-strong group perpetually struggle to protect their ancestral province from land-grabbing farmers in the state of Mato Grosso do Sul.

In January 2013, however, Facebook ordered the additional names be removed, reminding users that they were forbidden from adopting fake names on their accounts.

Access to justice

Considered to be one of the main platforms for indigenous discussion, the Índios Online website is maintained by indian peoples from the states of Alagoas, Bahia, Roraima and Pernambuco.

Supported by the Ministry of Culture and Thydewá, an organisation protecting the rights of indigenous peoples, Índios Online allows “offline” Native Brazilians from all over the country to voice their needs and interact with other users.

According to the president of Thydewá, Sebastián Gerlic, those who feel their interests have been threatened by the website often approach the Justice system to censor its content — particularly regarding videos produced and uploaded by the indians.

Ingigenous Brazilian Potyra Tê Tupinambá ended up in court for her film documenting land reposession in an indigenous reservation in the northeastern state of Bahia. The ongoing lawsuit was taken out by a land owner interviewed on camera. It was a testimony, according to Gerlic, given spontaneously and with no animosity.

“The farmer accused Potyra of transmitting his image on the internet without his permission, and now he looks for reparation,” says the president of Thydewá, who took reponsibility for the director’s legal defence.

The internet was also a strong ally in the indigenous peoples’ struggle against the looting of the natural resources on their reservations. In mid-2011, the Ashaninka people used a solar-powered computer to denounce the invasion of their land by Peruvian woodcutters. This information was passed to authorities in federal capital Brasília, who sent a task force formed by the Federal Police and the Brazilian Army to arrest the invaders.

The Ashaninkas also addressed chief justice of the Supreme Court Joaquim Barbosa in an online petition, urging the Supreme Court to address the problem of tree cutting in their native territory. They demanded financial reparation for the lumbering activities that could reach 15,000,000 BRL (around 30,000,000 USD). 

Limited access

Indians usually access the internet through centres maintained by Funai, Brazil’s National Indian Foundation or in LAN (local area network) houses, schools or in private homes. Funai does not have any digital inclusion programme specifically for the indigenous peoples – this responsibility goes to the Ministry of Culture. Through its programme called “Points of Culture”, the Ministry invested more than 1,300,000 BRL (about £447,000) on installing internet connections inside the Indian communities.

Despite public investments, online access has grown far less in indigenous communities than in poorer urban areas. According to a survey led by Rio de Janeiro State’s Secretary of Culture, in partnership with NGO Observatório das Favelas (“Slum Observatory”), 9 out of 10 people living in low-income areas in Rio have internet access.

Brazil has a population of 896,917 indigenous people divided in 230 different ethnic groups, according to the last Brazilian Census from 2010. This represents around 0.47 per cent of the country’s population.

Amongst this populus, access to employment is a problem. According to the last Census, 83 per cent of adult Brazilian indians earn no more than minimum wage (678 BRL a month, about £233) and 52.9 per cent of them don’t have any income at all.

According to the Indigenous Missionary Counsel, an organisation aiding native Brazilian peoples, at least 200 indians have been killed in Brazil in the last decade, mainly because of land disputes.

The post Brazilian indians go online to demand their rights are protected appeared first on Index on Censorship.

This article was originally published on Open Democracy, as a part of a week-long series on the future digital freedom guest-edited by Index

The digital age has inevitably shaken the concept of copyright to its core. When you have “digital” content, you always have the “human readable” format and you also have the digital expression of the copyrighted material translated by computers into bits — the ones and zeroes. As a result there is a degree of inevitable copying of the work in question. “Digital” means copying, in other words.

Similarly, networks must make temporary copies to function. So, “network” means copying.

Computers make copies in order to process and display information. Therefore “computer” also means copying. As a result, the growth of computers accessing content over digital networks means either reinventing information and communications technologies or re-inventing copyright to some extent.

Unfortunately, it has taken a painfully long time for this fairly simple realisation to dawn on many of the analogue industries that had grown too comfortable to grab the opportunities that the digital revolution offers. One of the best examples of this dogged refusal to accept the most basic concepts of digital technologies was the debate surrounding the copyright status of temporary technical copies created by computer networks.

In 1999/2000, publishers and the music industry ran an energetic lobbying campaign against a copyright exception for incidental network copies that, “do not interfere with the normal exploitation of the work” by the copyright owner.

The European Publishers’ Council (EPC) warned in 2001 that “unless we have Parliament’s amendments [to prohibit unauthorised temporary copying] or something similar in effect, we do not have the ability to authorise any kind of copy, regardless of its economic significance, and thereby lose our control over illegal, piratical distribution of our works.”

The logic of the publishers was somewhat more subtle and more dangerous than it sounds. If every copy in an internet provider’s network would be a copyright infringement, the provider could not function without prior authorisation. Providers would be liable for copies made in the transmission of legal/authorised content and doubly liable (for the copy and the facilitation of the infringement) for illegal/unauthorised content.

If the amendments in question had been adopted, European Internet companies would have had no option other than to monitor, delete, censor and restrict their customers in every way that the publishers considered appropriate for fighting against copyright infringement — as well as increasing prices by demanding royalties for legitimate content. Of course, 1999/2000 was a lifetime ago in internet years and things have moved on in the meantime.

Or have they? In 2012, the Austrian High Court has referred the “kino.to” case to the European Court of Justice. One of the questions asked in that case is: “are reproduction [sic] for private use and transient and incident reproduction permissible only if the original reproduction was lawfully reproduced, distributed or made available to the public?”

The referral attempts to re-open the question of making internet companies independently liable for copyright infringement in relation to every unauthorised file that passes over its network. So, we are back in 2000, with a threat that internet companies could be forced into a “gatekeeper” role as a privatised police force.

An unwise ruling from the European Court of Justice would speed up an already problematic trend that is fuelled by efforts to use internet companies as private enforcement “tools” in order to protect copyright in the online environment. Even though both ACTA and SOPA failed, their proposals on the enforcement of copyright through “voluntary”arrangements with any or all internet intermediaries live on. The US-led OECD “Communiqué on Principles for Internet Policy-Making”[pdf] adopted in June 2011 talks obscurely of norms of responsibility that enable private sector voluntary co-operation for the protection of intellectual property.

It somewhat less obscurely reflects an active choice to avoid references to the right to a fair trial and due process of law, choosing instead to refer to “fair process” — which sounds like both, but means neither. This practical implementation of such a policy can be seen in efforts of the United States “IP Enforcement Coordinator”, to exploit the global reach of US companies to take “voluntary” punitive actions against foreign online services considered to be breaching US copyright rules. The “voluntary” measures taken against Wikileaks also give a taster of where this policy is heading. Payment service providers blocked payments to Wikileaks while Amazon withdrew hosting services.

Amazon pulled hosting services from Wikileaks in 2010 after pressure from the US government

This increasing pressure on intermediaries to meddle with content is happening at a particularly inauspicious time. Internet access providers are increasingly demanding the right to interfere with the functioning of the open internet (i.e. undermining the concept of network neutrality). The core value of the internet for free speech is the “any-to-any” concept whereby any part of the network can (broadly speaking) communicate unrestricted with any other part of the network.

This is now under threat from the privatised enforcement measures demanded by some policy-makers from internet intermediaries that are increasingly finding commercial advantages in making such interventions.

Suddenly, we end up confronted simultaneously with all the worst aspects of policy-development over the past fifteen years. We have courts questioning the most fundamental elements of the networked environment — the “right” of network providers to make the transient copies that are essential to the functioning of the Internet — the argument that we already had thirteen years ago.

Layered on top of these existential questions, we have policy-makers tinkering with the most fundamental legal principles of a society that is based on the rule of law, seeking to replace the regulation of free speech and communication by laws and courts with terms of service and the whims of internet access providers, hosting providers, domain name registrars, domain name registries, search engines, payment providers and advertising networks.

And layered on top of this, we have internet access providers raising their own existential questions about the viability (from their perspective) of the core concept of the internet – the  ”any-to-any” principle.

Joe McNamee is EU advocacy co-ordinator at European Digital Rights

The post Getting copyright right appeared first on Index on Censorship.

This article was originally published on Open Democracy, as a part of a week-long series on the future digital freedom guest-edited by Index

Threats to digital freedom are growing just as the number of people accessing the internet is taking off, with millions more likely to join the digital world through mobiles and smartphones in the coming years.

The range of challenges is wide: from state censorship, including firewalls and the imposition of network or country-wide filters, to increasing numbers of takedown requests from governments, companies and individuals, corporate hoovering up of private data, growing surveillance of electronic communications, and criminalisation of speech on social media.

The rapid growth of threats to our digital freedom, in democracies as well as authoritarian regimes, means that the next few years could prove to be a watershed period determining whether the net remains a free space or not. Defending our freedom online means taking action now — beginning with understanding the nature of the threats and who lies behind them.

Governments send mixed messages
In democracies such as the US, UK, Sweden, India or Brazil, governments and politicians will often make stirring calls to defend digital freedom, emphasising that fundamental rights to freedom of expression and privacy apply online as much as off. But faced with temptations, such as the growing technological ease of mass population surveillance — from mobile phones to internet usage, web searches and social media chat — too many governments in democracies are starting to look at the sort of mass gathering of communications data that previously only authoritarian regimes would consider.

This leads to strange contradictions in government policy stances. In the UK, the government has temporarily withdrawn its proposed “snoopers’ charter” (the Communications Data Bill) in the face of swingeing criticism from an MPs’ scrutiny committee and from wider civil society. The Bill in its proposed form would have represented the most extensive mass surveillance of a population’s activities in the digital world of any democracy.

Yet at the same time, the UK along with the US, Germany and many other European countries has stood firm against attempts by China and the Russia, with some support from an array of other countries, to introduce top-down global control of the internet. Instead the UK government, along with many other (though not all) democracies, has argued for the current more “multistakeholder” model where no one body, country or group controls the net. The Indian government wobbled to a disturbing extent on this before refusing to go along with China and Russia at the major international telecoms summit in Dubai last December, in their push for this top down control.

Countries such as China and Iran have, unsurprisingly, been in the vanguard of those trying to build firewalls, block websites, and in myriad ways limit, control and monitor their population’s use of, and access to, the web. Yet the number of countries limiting the internet in some way has grown sharply in the last few years. Some of the limits introduced may seem unimportant, such as the Danish government having a country-wide internet block on their population accessing gaming sites in other countries (not for censorship reasons but to preserve the Danish monopoly on this profitable business). But the more the internet is filtered at network or country level, the less free it becomes.

There will always be arguments why a particular filter is necessary — to tackle child porn, to protect children and young adults from legal adult porn, to tackle crime and terrorism, to stop offence. Filtering and blocking sites always run the risk of over-blocking, of hiding not stopping a problem, and of being used for reasons beyond those stated.

Unless governments stand up for free speech, there can be segments of the public who demand limits on speech that undermine free expression as a fundamental right. One key example of this is the growing sensitivity of many people to offence. Yet there is no right not to be offended, and one person’s offence is another’s honest argument or piece of creative art. In the UK and India, we have recently seen arrests and prosecutions for supposedly offensive comments or photos and other postings on social media (in the case of these two countries relating to the common root of a 1930s English law that criminalised ‘grossly offensive’ phone, and then electronic, communications). There is now growing concern and debate about this criminalisation of mostly harmless social media comment. In the UK the director of public prosecutions Keir Starmer has issued interim guidelines in an attempt to rein in the growing number of such prosecutions.

Corporations as censors
Another disturbing part of this growing set of threats to our web freedom is the role played by corporations. Many web hosting companies and internet service providers state their support for fundamental rights, including free expression, while insisting that they also have to obey the laws of countries they are in. Google and Twitter have led the way in publishing transparency reports showing the number of takedown requests and user data information requests they have received from different governments.

But companies can become complicit in censorship if they take content down too readily in the face of public or government complaints — avoiding the risk of court cases or libel suits, playing safe. Companies such as Facebook or Twitter also set their own terms of service which define what is and is not acceptable usage and behaviour on their platforms. Perfectly normal perhaps — just like a club sets the rules of behaviour of its members.

But when the club, in the case of Facebook, is a billion strong, and its terms of service dictate what types of images and language are and are not acceptable, moreover dictating that anonymity is not allowed, then these are the sorts of constraints on free expression that are usually the preserve of governments to decide — governments that can be held accountable by their citizens (in democracies) and challenged by civil society, in the courts and through the ballot box.

The retention and commercial use of increasingly large amounts of individuals’ data from their internet activities has also sparked an extensive and vital debate about privacy. Privacy online is very often closely intertwined with free expression online: if someone is monitoring what you do or say or gathering it up and exploiting it commercially, that can be a major chill on free speech.

Whether and to what extent there should be a “right to be forgotten” is one part of this debate. Given the pervasive nature of the web, actually deleting individual data is becoming increasingly difficult. At the same time requests to delete individual data from news reports, for instance, is a sort of censorship of the historical record which would be highly undesirable.

Digital freedoms closing down

There are a wide and growing set of threats to our digital freedoms. But there are positive trends too. The rapid, intense and so far successful fight back against various forms of extensive imposition of copyright controls (ACTA, PIPA, SOPA and others) shows this is not a one-way street.

Even in regimes like Iran and China, many ordinary citizens have found ways to evade the censor, to widen their ability to communicate and access information. Governments can be challenged — at least in democracies — if they go down the route of mass surveillance or criminalisation of social media comment. Defending our digital freedom means becoming active, engaging with the arguments, making the case: bad decisions and laws can be stopped, limited or reversed. It is a national and an international debate — and the debate is now on.

The post Gathering clouds over digital freedom? appeared first on Index on Censorship.

As individuals in cities stock up on phones, laptops and tablets, accessing free wifi at more and more public places, the question of digital access in rural India still remains. Over the last decade, The National e-Governance Plan sought to bridge this gap by establishing a Common Service Center in each village. A CSC, as it is known, is a public-private partnership and operates as a one-stop hub for online government services (e-delivery) such as payment of certain utility bills, birth and death certificates, university exam results and such.

However, the overall experiment has revealed that the CSCs do not function equally. People do not need to use these government facilities more than once a month (if that), so unless the private entrepreneur is savvy enough to generate other income from the hub, it is not profitable to run. As well as this, irregular electricity supplies often restrict the timings of the CSC. And finally, while a public office with computers serves some purpose, it cannot substitute having personal connections in people’s homes.

This is why the government of India proposed a National Broadband Network, which will essentially lay out a fibre-optic cable across the country to achieve last mile connectivity. The idea behind this is simply that the network, like roads, will be provided by the government to then encourage private operations to start services those previously untouched areas. The government has committed about $4 billion to build the network that is projected to connect 250,000 village headquarters. One can only hope that it does not become mired in allegations of corruption, like so many other government projects in India.

— Of the 937.70 million telecom subscribers in India, 63.5 per cent are from urban areas

To understand India, you first need to look at some numbers. As of September 2012, the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India revealed that in a country of 1.24 billion people, there are a total of 937.70 million telecom subscribers, including both wireless and wireline. Of these, 595.69 million or 63.5 per cent are from urban areas, while the rest, 342.01 million or 36.47 per cent are from the rural areas. The overall teledensity of the country is 77.04 per cent, with urban pockets at a whopping 161.13 per cent compared to 40.36 per cent in rural areas. Finally, the total number of internet subscribers in India (excluding those who use it on their mobile phones) is 24.01 million, a 5.97 per cent jump from the previous quarter. Some studies put mobile 3G subscriptions at 30 million, as of late 2011.

The figures reveal two important details. The first is that while there are many subscribers for telecom, that does not translate to each citizen owning a phone. In fact, the discrepancy between urban and rural teledensity, compounded by the very low broadband penetration in the country all point to the woefully inadequate job by both government and markets to connect much of rural India.

The solution to digital constraints in rural India has been one of hits and misses in the recent past. In terms of policy, India’s objectives have remained to some degree, quite ambitious. The 2012 Telecom Policy aims to take rural teledensity to 60 per cent by 2017 and one hundred per cent by 2020. The methods, however, are being changed as we speak.

In 2002, the government had constituted a Universal Service Obligation Fund, with the overall intention of encouraging private telecom operators to service remote and less lucrative markets. It did not work, as many service operations opted to pay a penalty instead of rolling out service in commercially unviable regions. For example, villages in India can often have only 500 residents, or be so poor that companies cannot even be guaranteed a minimum number of subscribers to justify their spending on infrastructure. At the same time, the high volume of mobile phones and internet subscriptions in the urban areas suggest that the market has successfully serviced cities, but is not incentivised enough to reach the deepest pockets of India.

While the government will be watched closely to see if it can deliver the network infrastructure it has promised to rural India on time, another facet of an inclusive digital development needs to be kept in mind. Right now, the internet in India serves populations who can read and write in some of the dominant languages including English, Hindi and some prominent state languages. However, as homes in smaller corners of the country get connected, everything from keyboards to content will have to cater to local dialects.

At the same time, outside of big e-commerce portals, projects that serve the smallest customer will be the only way the internet becomes relevant and constructive to rural India. Else, it will solely become a vehicle to youtube videos, Bollywood and cricket updates and let’s face it, porn.

When the final tabulation is done, it seems the government of India has understood all too well that leaving last mile of internet connectivity to commercial companies is not a viable strategy. Another reason they are taking up the challenge with a degree of renewed vigor is that they have pinned high hopes on their ability to deliver government services and crucial information in a more efficient manner through the net. To that end, the information highway needs to be established, so that the distance between the digital haves and digital have-nots does not increase any further.

The recent $1 million TED prize-winning education researcher Dr Sugata Mitra’s ground-breaking project, Hole in the Wall, demonstrates that all that is really needed to spur learning is access to information. In this case, Dr Mitra left an internet connected PC in a hole in a wall, and left to their own devices, slum children quickly learned how to use the computer and go online. Imagine the possibilities if they can grow up as digital natives.

The post Will new plans for a digital rural India hit or miss? appeared first on Index on Censorship.