Internet intermediary

Last updated

Internet intermediary refers to a company that facilitates the use of the Internet. Such companies include internet service providers (ISPs), search engines and social media platforms. [1]

Contents

Definition

According to OECD, and cited by UNESCO, Internet intermediaries can be defined as organizations (primarily, for-profit companies) that "bring together or facilitate transactions between third parties on the Internet. They give access to, host, transmit and index content, products and services originated by third parties on the Internet or provide Internet-based services to third parties" and lists the following organizations as fitting this definition: [2] [3]

  1. Internet access and service providers (ISPs);
  2. Data processing and web hosting providers, including domain name registrars;
  3. Internet search engines and portals;
  4. E-commerce intermediaries, where these platforms do not take title to the goods being sold;
  5. Internet payment systems; and
  6. Participative networking platforms, which include Internet publishing and broadcasting platforms that do not themselves create or own the content being published or broadcast.

UNESCO study of 2014

In 2014 UNESCO released a report on the Internet intermediaries relation to digital rights worldwide. It found that Operations of internet intermediaries are heavily influenced by the legal and policy environments of states. [4]

According to the UNESCO study, levels of transparency of Internet service providers on matters related to privacy and surveillance are very low. Data protection practices varied widely in tandem with whether or not countries had data protection laws. Few companies make an effort to be transparent about how they respond to government requests, or speak up for their users, even in relatively open political and media environments. Some companies do not have publicly available privacy policies for their core services. [4]

Search engines’ policies and practices related to content restriction and manipulation are shaped by their home jurisdictions and to varying degrees by other jurisdictions in which they operate. The stricter the intermediary liability regime in a given jurisdiction, the more likely content is to be removed either proactively by the company or upon request by authorities without challenge. Without government transparency, company transparency reports are the only way for users to ascertain the extent and nature of requests being made. While such transparency reports are presented by American Google search engine, they are not released by Russian Yandex and Chinese Baidu companies. [4]

For the two platforms with international user bases (Facebook and Twitter), UNESCO researchers identified tensions between the companies’ own policies and practices and governments’ laws and regulations. The policies and practices of the more domestically focused platforms more closely mirror home governments’ expectations and requirements. Companies are much more transparent about how they respond to government requests than they are about the nature and volume of content restricted for violation of their own private rules. There is significant concern amongst some human rights advocates, including for example those working to stop gender-based violence and online hate speech, about companies’ lack of communication with users about how terms of service are developed, interpreted and enforced. [4]

UNESCO recommended that

1) laws and regulations governing intermediaries should be consistent with international human rights norms, including the right to freedom of expression;

2) laws, regulations and governmental policies, as well as corporate policies and rules, should be developed in consultation with all affected stakeholders;
3) transparency reporting and other actions to communicate with the public about company policy and practice should be comprehensive and sufficiently standardized so that it is possible to compare and analyze datasets across multiple companies;
4) data protection regimes at the national level are vital, as are legal frameworks and other mechanisms to ensure that government access to user data and company practices in handling government requests are based on strict principles of necessity, proportionality, and accountability in terms of remedial mechanisms;
5) Intermediaries’ private rules and accompanying enforcement processes, as well as government-supported efforts by companies to collectively self-regulate, should be compatible with human rights norms, including the right to freedom of expression. They should adhere to core principles of accountability, transparency and due process;
6) It should be possible for people to report grievances and obtain redress from private intermediaries as well as from state authorities, including from national-level human rights institutions;
7) In order for freedom of expression to be protected and respected online, governments and companies have a responsibility to consult with stakeholders on their laws and rules and explain them clearly. They also have an obligation to educate users about their rights so that people can understand and effectively exercise them; recognize when their rights have been restricted, violated, or otherwise interfered with; and know where and how to report grievances and seek redress; and

8) Stakeholders concerned with protecting online freedom of expression should consider how to support and broaden global mechanisms that strengthen the incentives and capacity for intermediaries to respect internet users’ rights, particularly in the area of self-regulation. [4]

Related Research Articles

Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT) is a Washington, D.C.-based 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization whose mission is to strengthen individual rights and freedoms by defining, promoting, and influencing technology policy and the architecture of the Internet.

China Digital Times is a California-based bilingual news website covering China. It aggregates news and analysis from around the Web, while also providing its own original analysis, commentary, translations and multimedia content. According to Alexa.com, visitors to the site come from more than one hundred countries.

Internet Governance Forum

The Internet Governance Forum (IGF) is a multistakeholder governance group for policy dialogue on issues of Internet governance. It brings together all stakeholders in the Internet governance debate, whether they represent governments, the private sector or civil society, including the technical and academic community, on an equal basis and through an open and inclusive process. The establishment of the IGF was formally announced by the United Nations Secretary-General in July 2006. It was first convened in October–November 2006 and has held an annual meeting since then.

Internet censorship in India Overview about the Internet censorship in India

Internet censorship in India is done by both central and state governments. DNS filtering and educating service users in suggested usages is an active strategy and government policy to regulate and block access to Internet content on a large scale. Also measures for removing content at the request of content creators through court orders have become more common in recent years. Initiating a mass surveillance government project like Golden Shield Project is also an alternative discussed over the years by government bodies.

Source protection, sometimes also referred to as source confidentiality or in the U.S. as the reporter's privilege, is a right accorded to journalists under the laws of many countries, as well as under international law. It prohibits authorities, including the courts, from compelling a journalist to reveal the identity of an anonymous source for a story. The right is based on a recognition that without a strong guarantee of anonymity, many would be deterred from coming forward and sharing information of public interests with journalists.

Internet censorship

Internet censorship is the control or suppression of what can be accessed, published, or viewed on the Internet enacted by regulators, or on their own initiative. Individuals and organizations may engage in self-censorship for moral, religious, or business reasons, to conform to societal norms, due to intimidation, or out of fear of legal or other consequences.

Media is the communication outlets or tools used to store and deliver information or data. The term refers to components of the mass media communications industry, such as print media, publishing, the news media, photography, cinema, broadcasting, and advertising.

Electronic Commerce Directive 2000 Directive of the European Parliament

The e-Commerce Directive, adopted in 2000, sets up an Internal Market framework for online services. Its aim is to remove obstacles to cross-border online services in the EU internal market and provide legal certainty for businesses and consumers. It establishes harmonized rules on issues such as the transparency and information requirements for online service providers; commercial communications; and electronic contracts and limitations of liability of intermediary service providers. Finally, the Directive encourages the drawing up of voluntary codes of conduct and includes articles to enhance cooperation between Member States. Twenty years after its passage, there is wide-ranging discussion, especially in the European Parliament, about how to revise this directive in anticipation of the Digital Services Act.

Copyright infringement Intellectual property violation

Copyright infringement is the use of works protected by copyright law without permission for a usage where such permission is required, thereby infringing certain exclusive rights granted to the copyright holder, such as the right to reproduce, distribute, display or perform the protected work, or to make derivative works. The copyright holder is typically the work's creator, or a publisher or other business to whom copyright has been assigned. Copyright holders routinely invoke legal and technological measures to prevent and penalize copyright infringement.

Global Network Initiative

The Global Network Initiative (GNI) is a non-governmental organization with the dual goals of preventing Internet censorship by authoritarian governments and protecting the Internet privacy rights of individuals. It is sponsored by a coalition of multinational corporations, non-profit organizations, and universities.

Section 230 is a piece of Internet legislation in the United States, passed into law as part of the Communications Decency Act (CDA) of 1996, formally codified as Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 at 47 U.S.C. § 230. Section 230 generally provides immunity for website publishers from third-party content.

Notice and take down is a process operated by online hosts in response to court orders or allegations that content is illegal. Content is removed by the host following notice. Notice and take down is widely operated in relation to copyright infringement, as well as for libel and other illegal content. In United States and European Union law, notice and takedown is mandated as part of limited liability, or safe harbour, provisions for online hosts. As a condition for limited liability online hosts must expeditiously remove or disable access to content they host when they are notified of the alleged illegality.

Access to information is the ability for an individual to seek, receive and impart information effectively. This sometimes includes "scientific, indigenous, and traditional knowledge; freedom of information, building of open knowledge resources, including open Internet and open standards, and open access and availability of data; preservation of digital heritage; respect for cultural and linguistic diversity, such as fostering access to local content in accessible languages; quality education for all, including lifelong and e-learning; diffusion of new media and information literacy and skills, and social inclusion online, including addressing inequalities based on skills, education, gender, age, race, ethnicity, and accessibility by those with disabilities; and the development of connectivity and affordable ICTs, including mobile, the Internet, and broadband infrastructures".

World Intermediary Liability Map

The World Intermediary Liability Map (WILMap) is an online repository of information on international intermediary liability regimes hosted at Stanford CIS. The WILMap has been designed, developed and launched in July 2014 by Giancarlo Frosio.

Human rights and encryption

Human rights applied to encryption is an important concept for freedom of expression as encryption is a technical resource of implementation of basic human rights.

Internet universality is a concept and framework adopted by UNESCO in 2015 to summarize their positions on the Internet. The concept recognizes that "the Internet is much more than infrastructure and applications, it is a network of economic and social interactions and relationships, which has the potential to enable human rights, empower individuals and communities, and facilitate sustainable development. The concept is based on four principles stressing the Internet should be Human rights-based, Open, Accessible, and based on Multistakeholder participation. These have been abbreviated as the R-O-A-M principles. Understanding the Internet in this way helps to draw together different facets of Internet development, concerned with technology and public policy, rights and development."

Multistakeholder participation is a specific governance approach whereby relevant stakeholders participate in the collective shaping of evolutions and uses of the Internet.

Online hate speech is a type of speech that takes place online with the purpose of attacking a person or a group based on their race, religion, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability, or gender.

Media independence absence of external control on a media institution

Media independence is the absence of external control and influence on an institution or individual working in the media. It is a measure of one's capacity to "make decisions and act according to its own logic," and distinguishes independent media from state media.

The draft Information Technology [Intermediary Guidelines (Amendment) Rules] 2018 seeks to amend India's Intermediary Guidelines Rules 2011 by making intermediaries legally required to provide time-bound assistance to any government agency, provide traceability requirements, as well as deploy "technology-based automated tools to identify and remove public access to unlawful information". Intermediaries with more than 5,000,000 users must set up a company in India. The changes also include prohibited hosting of another category of content, i.e. ‘public health or safety’. The draft Rules have been framed under Section 79 of the Information Technology Act, 2000 which covers intermediary liability.

References

CC-BY-SA-icon-80x15.png  This article incorporates text by Rebecca MacKinnon, Elonnai Hickok, Allon Bar, Hae-in Lim, UNESCO available under the CC BY-SA 3.0 license.

  1. ↑ "Internet intermediaries: Dilemma of liability · Article 19". www.article19.org. Retrieved 13 May 2015.
  2. ↑ The Economic and Social Role of Internet Intermediaries, OECD, 2010, p.9
  3. ↑ Rebecca MacKinnon, Elonnai Hickok, Allon Bar, Hae-in Lim, UNESCO. Fostering Freedom Online: the Role of Internet Intermediaries. UNESCO. 2014, p.19-23
  4. 1 2 3 4 5 Rebecca MacKinnon, Elonnai Hickok, Allon Bar, Hae-in Lim, UNESCO. Fostering Freedom Online: the Role of Internet Intermediaries. UNESCO. 2015, p.10-13

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.