Princípios para a Governança e Uso da Internet

the Internet should be governed based on democratic principles, in democratic societies. I don´t know if I, in 2009, would have been smart enough to write such principles It’s not just sufficient to have a list of principles written down, but it´s important that a large number of people understand and agree with and subscribe to these principles. Not everyone may immediately agree with all of the principles, but there can be a discussion around each of them I would very much like to see initiatives like this be replicated in other countries of the region.

CGI. br - Internet Steering Committee in Brazil Multistakeholderism Principles for the Governance and Use of the Internet Liberty, Privacy and Human Rights The use of the Internet shall be guided by the principles of freedom of expression, the privacy of the individual, and respect for human rights, recognizing that they are essential pillars for the preservation of a fair and democratic society. I think the primary principle, that is widely adopted, is that all the rights and freedoms and responsibilities that are enjoyed by citizens offline should be enjoyed by citizens online, is an absolute correct principle and assuming you have a human rights framework offline and that´s being ensured online; which again is an assumption that is not correct in many jurisdictions.

and the most common regulation in the world is human rights, and the way of making sure that everyone can use the Internet on equal terms is that of having a focus on human rights and freedom of expression, when handling the Internet. as they facilitate other rights. In this case, freedom of expression makes scientific investigation easier, facilitates education, press and citizenship information, decision-making, Nowadays, the Internet is the most important tool for freedom of expression and for access to information.

So, it has a completely distinct role. If we leave this in the hands of Government, there shall be greater control over citizenship, There is also a contradiction, that we have not been able to agree with the security issue. The same public opinion feels that there is willingness to forsake privacy in the interest of greater security.

there are organizations such as in the US - the NSA - which is trying to do the most they can to find ways to tap into that or to use cyber warfare, and things like that. On the one hands it offers enormous amounts of freedom; on the other hand it´s another opportunity for governments to try to make their own use of it for their own purposes. Democratic and Collaborative Governance Internet Governance shall be exercised in a transparent, multilateral and democratic way, with the participation of different sectors of society, thereby preserving and encouraging its character of collective creation.

but it´s an amazing idea to bring the government, to bring private industry, to bring academics and civil society all together to the same table - and, it´s really how dialog has to happen. So, there are few things that are actually as important as multistakeholder engagement and the reason for this is that CSIRT operate in a very, very technical area. And we have a great community with a lot of technical experts that really understand what they are doing there.

But the reality is that the Internet today is being used by so many different types of people, with so many different types of technical background, that they don´t necessarily understand all of the activities of a CSIRT. "everyone has got skin in the game". If it doesn´t work everybody who is each of these categories of groups is hurt.

So the first answer is from my point of view as soon as you put things together where you´ve got all the materially concerned parties represented and nobody represented who has not a materially concerned party then you´ve got it right. always – and I also feel that this is one of the most positive characteristics of Internet governance. It is that we are never quite happy with the model we have and, therefore, we continue to investigate to see where the defects are, in order to put them right.

And in many cases there will be technical solutions that are far easier and far more efficient and far more effective than coming at it from a law enforcement point of view. So it’s important to bring together - just exactly along the lines that you’re talking about - people from different backgrounds, even to work on the same problem Universality Access to the Internet must be universal so that it may be a means to achieve human and social development, thereby contributing towards the construction of an inclusive society, without any discrimination, for the benefit of all. and therefore it’s important that we have, not only compliance with content accessibility guidelines for Web content, but many other parts of the Internet, including the devices used by the end users need to be accessible.

However, there are still major challenges regarding access, especially in the more backward parts of the world. Digital exclusion does not happen only between developed countries and emerging countries; it is also present between countries of our own region, internally. There are even gaps within the countries themselves.

– rural locations, of complex geography – the conditions are completely different. Let’s look at what has improved: we have many more people communicating, who are interested in accessibility and who are communicating Now, equipped with all this, it is as if we had the tools, but these tools are not in fact being used. These tools are not proving to be efficient, because we still cannot access information in many sites, and I would even say that in the majority of sites we have some kind of barriers to accessibility As I see it, it is universality that is still lacking in order to achieve accessibility.

So, it is very important for us to fix accessibility, not only for the disabled and the aged persons in our population Diversity Cultural diversity must always be respected and preserved, and the expression of diversity must be preserved, without enforcement of any creeds, mores or values. Look, I consider that we always regard diversity as something positive, and I do indeed feel that we shall take this as the main aspect. However, the truth is that diversity implies conflict I think that the Internet It helped us to perhaps understand the extent of the lack of diversity, as it was not the Internet that created racism, for example.

Racism has always been present in a society. What effectively happens is that the Internet has made this dimension of society – like Brazilian society, for example – more visible. We need to start to admit that Brazilian society is one that is constructed both in harmony and in conflict.

For example, the base we now have is that of a society where male chauvinism is still very much present, racism is still present as this network area is an area involving problem-solving, and we must not show any fear of crawling under a rack to look for the disconnected wire; This is not an area in which women normally get involved, and for these things we need to change This means that diversity today, within this discussion, in the Internet Forum in Brazil, is extremely important so that we can understand that we, in a traditional community, also have access and are able to carry out work with urban civil society, with regard to communications and technology. Innovation Internet Governance shall promote constant development and disclosure of new technologies and and models, for usage and access. Innovations cause risks - what are you going to do about those risks?

Well, if you over control it you don´t get innovation and if you under control it you get a lot of bad guys figuring out how to take advantage of the new attack opportunities. Brazil hopes very much to be the hub of invention in the Americas and around the world and I think it´s important to make sure that Brazil is supporting its innovators. So, I think the legal environment is crucial for investment decision.

You aren´t as a venture capitalist going to put millions of dollars into a company that could be declared illegal the next day; that investment would suddenly - that 50 million dollar investment maybe be worth zero dollar with one quick ruling. The reality isn’t historically lots of people have not been in favor of innovation, they get scared When a US Congressman asks me if we have more open communication and more people are able to use this to communicate with each other - will that cause a law-enforcement problem? Probably.

and so, we need to allow the architecture of the Internet to evolve, while at the same time, maintaining the features that made it such a great platform for innovation and economic growth. Net Neutrality Filtering or traffic privileges shall be based exclusively on technical and ethical criteria. Use of political, commercial, religious or cultural grounds, or any other type of discrimination or favouritism, shall not be acceptable.

However, the crux of the matter is that, thus, we separate and regulate what the Internet is; we regulate the companies that provide Internet access, but we do not regulate the content of the Internet. In other words, the ‘over the top’ applications are not regulated; However, the principle of neutrality is established in the year 2010, setting out That the companies may not establish any kinds of restrictions, or establish limits or blocks; therefore, in Chile, it is guaranteed that any person may openly develop applications for the Internet, without any problems. So, for example, if there is an institution that wants to have an online radio station, there is no need to ask anyone, and they just broadcast through the Internet.

And, finally, you need to make sure that you don’t create an environment that gives certain players an advantage in the regulatory process over others. The Internet needs to be application agnostic: That means it cannot discriminate among applications or classes of applications. That’s very important, because it prevents Internet service providers from distorting competition, or increasing costs through access fees.

So, again, if you look at case-by-case proceedings, you know, if you are a start-up, and you have 0 or 1 lawyers on staff, you are not capable of running multi-year proceedings in front of the regulatory agency. By contrast, if you’re a large company, you have lots of lawyers, you have lots of money, you can afford to play games at the agency, so we need to think about that, as well. So the exceptions I’ve talk about Zero Rating, and I’ve said that, in my view, Zero Rating, if it’s short-term, and non-exclusive, would be an exception that would be acceptable in particular countries, in particular circumstances.

And this is the interesting use of language. If we call them “exceptions”, maybe we can live with them. If we call them violations, because the Net neutrality principle must never be infringed, then we just cannot have a conversation that everyone can agree on.

Net Inimputability The fight against illicit practices on the network shall affect those ultimately responsible and not the means of access or transport, always preserving the core principles of defense of freedom, privacy, and respect for human rights. we should govern the uses or the misuses of the Internet, not the Internet itself. So, of course that particular principle in the Decalogue resonates very strongly with me.

The Manila Principles document contains two kinds of directives: One aimed at governments and states, when they are formulating their laws and regulations around the issue of intermediary liability, but they also look at corporations and their policies and practices for content removal. we should look to the offline world for analogies for determining whether or not we need something new in the online world. And I think that holds here as well.

And it tries to evolve a set of principles that can be used by both states and by corporations when they want to ensure that a proper balance exists between freedom of speech concerns and between the need to be able to react to valid requests for removal of content So, I think the fact that we look at those people there are responsible for the content and attempt to hold them responsible for their actions as opposed to the Internet itself or the intermediaries, in this case, is entirely appropriate. So I think we need to be careful about trying to make those intermediaries "the judge", if you will, because I think that that will move us very very quickly to, basically, a censorship by proxy position. Funcionalidade, Segurança e Estabilidade A estabilidade, a segurança e a funcionalidade globais da rede devem ser preservadas de forma ativa através de medidas técnicas compatíveis com os padrões internacionais e estímulo ao uso das boas práticas.

This is a system that has to be looked at at as a large scale social science activity, not just as a purely technical activity. Even the behavior, here´s a good example: how do you build a system that is going to be resilient and then you get forces like a DDoS attack - distributed denial of service attack - in which tons of traffic, lots, lots of traffic, is focused on one site, and it causes a jam and then that site goes down. Now that may be because somebody is deliberately trying to do it or it could be for unintended reasons.

Victoria´s Secret unveiled its new line of lingerie over the network and they got more traffic than they could handle and all of a sudden they brought their portion of the network down. So you have to look at these things from a different perspective. I think we - all the cyber security players, stakeholders - we all have a huge responsibility to avoid the Internet and the cyber space to become a battlefield.

Internet is not developed to be a battlefield. It is developed to make the world a better place for everyone. For economic growth and social prosperity; and every stakeholder has a responsibility to keep the Internet that way and to do that we must care and pay more attention to the cyber ecosystem health – I mean improving the health - and we must keep working together for that.

the Board sat together and we thought through the problem of making sure that the CERT community could work together well. And we kind of thought of collaboration as something that is really rooted in three different principles: First of all, we need to be able to build a community where the teams can communicate and work together. Second, the teams need to be able to rely on each other, so they need to be able to know what the capability of other team is.

For instance, when one team reaches out to another and they have a security incident that´s ongoing, they need to know exactly what they can expect from that other team, as in what it´s going to be a positive collaboration around this incident. And finally, they need to have the tools and techniques - or standards, if you wish - to be able to exchange information rapidly, so that they can actually have their people focus on doing the difficult work, the work that really requires people to think through problems, whereas they can use those tools, techniques and standards to exchange data very, very, very quickly on the machine to machine level. Standardization and Interoperability The Internet shall be based on open standards that enable interoperability and everyone´s participation in its development.

There have actually been quite a few changes in the basic protocols overtime. Yes. They have been incremental and they have been compatible.

Yes. So you have TCP fast start, you have content delivery networks that are cashing things - you have any number of very sophisticated changes that have taken place. But they have not positioned themselves as: this is an incompatible, new, distinct network that you have to throw the whole thing out.

But nonetheless the changes are big; they are not just small, little, tiny changes. They´ve made substantial difference in the operation of the network. With the protocols we were running thirty year ago, if we limited ourselves to those protocols today the network would not be working very well.

We have a situation where the main players that interfere with a process of standardization are companies that are directly interested, as they shall be selling products in that area, and service providers – the Government actually has a role that is somewhat less prominent. In addition, these people are defending corporate interests. Standards are essential for interoperability.

Why is this? It is interoperability that shall back the user – at the end and also during the process - so that the user does not become a captive, a victim, of the aims of a large corporation which, out of the blue, in order to boost its profits, says: OK, this version of the system is henceforth withdrawn, meaning that you shall need to purchase this other. Our typical user is unprepared for these strategies.

This means that someone must think of these users who make up most of the Brazilian population and yet are enthusiastic users. Even though, a great thing about the network is that the amount of stuff that is forced on you is very, very, little. You can send an individual package that does not have an IP, it has to be an IP packet, it doesn´t have to be a TCP packet, it could be a UDP packet or it could be something else - it´s only a question of whether or not the other guy understands it.

But the genius of the IP design is that it is intended to have almost nothing in it; it is intended to be as little as possible rather than as much as possible. Legal and Regulatory Environment The legal and regulatory environment shall preserve the dynamics of the Internet as a collaborative space. I think governments cannot on the one hand want to enable the use of ICTs for economic growth and development and seek to encourage innovation and then on the other hand put a brake on these activities.

I think one either has to say: we are moving into an information economy and into a knowledge economy; we are going to support initiatives; except that this is a global economy that we´re in - the Internet economy is a global economy. We need to look at how we can enable local innovation, encourage local startups, apps, whatever, in order to compete in the global environment, but except that it is a global environment. So like a lot of protectionism, I think it´s problematic if somebody is - through innovate and disruptive introduction of technology - having an impact on their local service provider or that is actually, probably high-priced or overpriced, that´s why people aren´t using the service; or providing a real alternative for people at a lower cost.

I think local responses have to be more innovative and more competitive and say: "If actually that´s what´s going to happen we are also going to introduce technology”. Because it´s very basic technology that is going to be able to compete with this and so we´ll have our own local version of Uber – or something, whether it´s Airbnb or whatever it is. These are very innovative, effective ways of sharing resources, especially in our case - in stressed economies - that also generate revenues and things.

So, there are the issues around: how do you tax these services? They are very legitimate concerns that we have to work through and consider, but I think a ban on them is really retrogressive. And I think it´s very contradictory for countries that have put Internet economy - or digital economy - as one of their main pillars in their economy.

I get the chills every time we talk about Internet governance because the Internet needs administration; it probably does not need governance other than ways of figuring out who´s accountable for what misdeeds and what to do about is an ordinary societal problem. Thieves on the streets are a problem; bad people on the Internet are a problem. We don´t view that as something to build governance structures around we view it as something that governance structures ought to figure out a way to deal with.

And certainly by ending up with a global network we´ve ended up with global problems and global issues which can´t be solved in a single country. And there are people debating the governance and making the decisions who do not understand the Internet, do not understand the administrative side, do not understand the separation, do not understand the protocols. When we started with the drafting of the Italian Declaration we had a seminar in the Chamber of Deputies, where the author of the "Marco Civil" was there, giving to people the information about the importance of the "Marco Civil".

The "Marco Civil" has been everywhere in Europe, taken into account, seriously taken into account. There are many ways for us to seek solutions to the problems, and regulation is one of them. Public debate is another way we can find solutions.

I believe that we must not renounce the possibility of regulating activities; however, regulation also brings restrictions And, therefore, we shall resort to regulations only when this is the right path to take. The average weekly usage by Brazilians is one of the highest rates in the world. The Steering Committee must fight for solutions that make sure the people make adequate use of the Internet So, I think having the principles actually makes a lot of sense because it engenders the discussion.

and you can get to a certain agreement where you actually know where people stand with respect to the principles. and it´s important to articulate, explain and educate people about these principles. there are things, initiatives such as the Marco Civil Law in Brazil; I feel that these initiatives are very important and help a lot.

They provide us with a mark, a framework for work. This does not mean to say that we have a guarantee, but at least we have a more general approximation about the consensus we have reached, at the level of society. In other words, these initiatives present a general description of what we want the Internet to be like.

You guys have done an amazing job and really built a solid framework for Brazil - it´s a leading example anywhere in the world. Principles for governance and use of the Internet Interviews recorded during the cycle of conferences in commemoration of the 20th anniversary of the Internet Steering Committee in Brazil - CGI. br between June and December 2015 Interviewees Interviewers Executive and Editorial Department Advisory Board for CGI.

br Activities Director Technical Assistance Communications Advisory Service of NIC. br Production and Filming General Management Executive Production Production Cameraman Filming Assistant Electrician Electrics Assistant Editing and Computer Graphics Released by Internet Steering Committee in Brazil - CGI. br Brazilian Network Information Center - NIC.