Retourner vers la vidéo

[EN] La société civile s'en va t'en guerre à l' e-G8

  • 0:09 - 0:12
    Thank you, everyone to be here,
  • 0:12 - 0:16
    sorry for the improvising and
  • 0:16 - 0:18
    the impromptu condition
  • 0:18 - 0:20
    of this press conference,
  • 0:20 - 0:22
    as you also know,
  • 0:22 - 0:26
    there is very very little, if any,
  • 0:26 - 0:29
    representation of civil society in this eG8
  • 0:29 - 0:33
    In last minute on Thursday,
  • 0:33 - 0:38
    they threw in some foldable chairs for us,
  • 0:38 - 0:40
    they improvised some freedom of expression panel
  • 0:40 - 0:43
    just to say that our issues
  • 0:43 - 0:45
    were represented after all.
  • 0:45 - 0:48
    But what we saw yesterday
  • 0:48 - 0:50
    was Nicolas Sarkozy addressing
  • 0:50 - 0:53
    only CEOs and business actors,
  • 0:53 - 0:55
    telling them You are the Internet,
  • 0:55 - 0:57
    You are the revolution and
  • 0:57 - 0:58
    You are doing everything.
  • 0:58 - 1:00
    And you now have the responsibility
  • 1:00 - 1:02
    to fight the pedonazis,
  • 1:02 - 1:05
    the terrorists, and the copyright wars
  • 1:05 - 1:08
    so this is something that disturbs us,
  • 1:08 - 1:11
    I think, all of us, here.
  • 1:11 - 1:14
    Maybe each of us will make
  • 1:14 - 1:18
    a quick statement of 4 to 5 minutes
  • 1:18 - 1:21
    let's say 4 minutes if we can do it
  • 1:21 - 1:25
    We have fantastic people around here
  • 1:25 - 1:29
    from Yochai Benkler of the Berkman Center
  • 1:29 - 1:31
    to Jean-François Julliard of Reporters Sans Frontières
  • 1:31 - 1:34
    to Susan, how would you define yourself?
  • 1:34 - 1:37
    Susan Crawford, former ICANN board member.
  • 1:38 - 1:42
    Professor Lawrence Lessig who doesn't need any
  • 1:42 - 1:45
    introduction at all, and Jeff Jarvis.
  • 1:46 - 1:49
    Maybe Susan, you can begin.
  • 1:49 - 1:52
    The communique's already been drafted
  • 1:52 - 1:54
    for this g8 summit,
  • 1:54 - 1:56
    errr meeting, this e-g8 meeting.
  • 1:56 - 1:58
    It's been leaked to the NYtimes
  • 1:58 - 2:00
    which published this story this morning,
  • 2:00 - 2:04
    explaining exactly what the communique would say
  • 2:04 - 2:08
    The reason this press conference has been called is
  • 2:08 - 2:10
    that civil society groups have joined together
  • 2:10 - 2:12
    from around the world,
  • 2:12 - 2:15
    to issue a very short and simple statement
  • 2:15 - 2:18
    calling on the eG8 and in turn the G8
  • 2:18 - 2:22
    to protect the open Internet
  • 2:22 - 2:25
    to maintain the neutrality of the Internet,
  • 2:25 - 2:29
    to establish the principles that encourage
  • 2:29 - 2:31
    the free flow of the information
  • 2:31 - 2:34
    All of us sitting up here today
  • 2:34 - 2:36
    understand as do you out there
  • 2:36 - 2:40
    that an open Internet is actually the basis
  • 2:40 - 2:44
    for a democratic flourishing around the world
  • 2:44 - 2:47
    that all government policies
  • 2:47 - 2:49
    that hoped to encourage citizens
  • 2:49 - 2:53
    to flourish including education,
  • 2:53 - 2:56
    health, energy policy...
  • 2:56 - 2:58
    every variety of policy
  • 2:58 - 3:00
    that operates in the world today
  • 3:00 - 3:04
    are all encouraged by the existence of an open Internet
  • 3:04 - 3:06
    and that access to the Internet
  • 3:06 - 3:09
    is fundamental to human beings around the world
  • 3:09 - 3:12
    These are the most important policies
  • 3:12 - 3:13
    that governments should be embracing :
  • 3:13 - 3:18
    an open, fast and fair, and free Internet
  • 3:18 - 3:21
    so it's a very simple reason for this conference.
  • 3:21 - 3:22
    We wanna make sure that
  • 3:22 - 3:24
    these other voices are heard
  • 3:24 - 3:26
    even though the communique itself
  • 3:26 - 3:29
    may already have been drafted.
  • 3:29 - 3:32
    I call on my colleagues here,
  • 3:32 - 3:34
    Mr Jarvis, Mr Lessig, Mr Benkler and
  • 3:34 - 3:36
    Reporters Without Borders
  • 3:36 - 3:38
    to amplify on these remarks.
  • 3:38 - 3:39
    But it's really very simple :
  • 3:39 - 3:40
    we feel these voices aren't being heard
  • 3:40 - 3:44
    We really want to ensure that the voiceless,
  • 3:44 - 3:46
    the future that hasn't been invited to this conference,
  • 3:46 - 3:50
    is allowed to have its say as well.
  • 3:51 - 3:53
    Thank you Suzan
  • 3:53 - 3:55
    We have a few copies here
  • 3:55 - 3:58
    of the civil society statement to the eG8 and G8.
  • 3:58 - 4:02
    The signature list is not the latest one
  • 4:02 - 4:05
    You can see groups such as Access Now
  • 4:05 - 4:07
    who couldn't get a badge to enter here
  • 4:07 - 4:09
    the Association for Progressive Communications
  • 4:09 - 4:12
    I won’t name them all, but
  • 4:12 - 4:14
    there is german Digitale Gesellschaft,
  • 4:14 - 4:16
    the Electronic Frontier Foundation,
  • 4:16 - 4:20
    the European EDRI and so on and so on…
  • 4:20 - 4:22
    There is also this petition,
  • 4:22 - 4:25
    that was organized by Access Now,
  • 4:25 - 4:28
    that has been signed now by people
  • 4:28 - 4:30
    from more than nineteen countries
  • 4:30 - 4:34
    to reclaim exactly what was mentioned before
  • 4:34 - 4:39
    which is all that is not at the eG8
  • 4:39 - 4:42
    So, maybe we will hear now Jean-François,
  • 4:42 - 4:47
    because he will be leaving for a workshop later on
  • 4:47 - 4:51
    and yep : Reporters Without Borders.
  • 4:51 - 4:53
    Yeah, thank you, I’m going to speak in French,
  • 4:53 - 4:56
    I’m sorry for those who don’t understand French,
  • 4:56 - 4:57
    but I will say the same during
  • 4:57 - 4:59
    the next panel in a couple of minutes,
  • 4:59 - 5:01
    but I would like to say a few words
  • 5:01 - 5:03
    in French because there are many French reporters here.
  • 5:04 - 5:08
    I am extremely disappointed by what is said here,
  • 5:08 - 5:10
    in this meeting from the start
  • 5:10 - 5:14
    because we gathered the top people concerned with
  • 5:14 - 5:16
    the internet throughout the world
  • 5:16 - 5:18
    the CEOs of the biggest companies
  • 5:18 - 5:22
    those that made Internet’s
  • 5:22 - 5:23
    extraordinary growth possible
  • 5:23 - 5:24
    whereas there hasn’t been a single word
  • 5:24 - 5:26
    concerning those who are suffering
  • 5:26 - 5:27
    because of the Internet
  • 5:27 - 5:30
    I think of the 126 people who are now in jail,
  • 5:30 - 5:34
    126 bloggers NetCitizens, Internet users
  • 5:34 - 5:38
    who are jailed in Iran, in China, in Libya, in Vietnam
  • 5:38 - 5:40
    and in a whole lot of other countries,
  • 5:40 - 5:43
    who are jailed only because they have used Internet
  • 5:43 - 5:44
    I find this outrageous
  • 5:44 - 5:46
    that no one had a thought for them yet,
  • 5:46 - 5:50
    none of the leaders in the Internet sector
  • 5:50 - 5:52
    who talked since the beginning of the meeting
  • 5:52 - 5:54
    have had a thought for them
  • 5:54 - 5:56
    It is good to want to promote Internet,
  • 5:56 - 6:00
    but we should start with having a thought for those
  • 6:00 - 6:03
    who are suffering from this.
  • 6:03 - 6:06
    And I can also tell that if we need
  • 6:06 - 6:08
    to make only one recommendation to the G8
  • 6:08 - 6:10
    and the governments that compose the G8,
  • 6:10 - 6:11
    it would be to put the defence
  • 6:11 - 6:13
    of a Free internet before anything else.
  • 6:13 - 6:16
    There is today one person in three in the world,
  • 6:16 - 6:17
    one internet user in three,
  • 6:17 - 6:19
    who doesn’t have access to a free internet.
  • 6:19 - 6:22
    So before thinking of regulation,
  • 6:22 - 6:26
    before thinking of even defending intellectual property,
  • 6:26 - 6:28
    before thinking to promote
  • 6:28 - 6:29
    economic transactions on the Internet,
  • 6:29 - 6:32
    we need to focus on keeping Internet free
  • 6:32 - 6:34
    Focus on allowing the Internet users,
  • 6:34 - 6:34
    all around the world,
  • 6:34 - 6:36
    wherever they might be,
  • 6:36 - 6:37
    to keep accessing a free Internet,
  • 6:37 - 6:39
    and to keep accessing the same Internet.
  • 6:39 - 6:41
    So if we have to make only one recommendation,
  • 6:41 - 6:42
    it’s this one,
  • 6:42 - 6:44
    disregarding any other recommendation,
  • 6:44 - 6:47
    the G8 governments need to make the defence
  • 6:47 - 6:50
    of a Free internet their one absolute priority.
  • 6:51 - 6:52
    Thank you Jean-François.
  • 6:52 - 6:56
    It's very hard now to choose
  • 6:56 - 6:58
    who between those impressive analysts
  • 6:58 - 7:01
    will speak first
  • 7:01 - 7:03
    Shall we cast a vote ?
  • 7:04 - 7:05
    Professor Lessig, maybe ?
  • 7:05 - 7:08
    Yes, so, I just spoke and I'll be very brief.
  • 7:09 - 7:12
    It's surprising to come to France
  • 7:12 - 7:16
    and find something so deeply American going on
  • 7:17 - 7:20
    In the United States, for the last 30 years,
  • 7:20 - 7:23
    we've been trapped in an ideology
  • 7:23 - 7:26
    that says that we should regulate
  • 7:26 - 7:28
    by getting business together
  • 7:28 - 7:32
    and ask them what is good public policy.
  • 7:32 - 7:34
    We've done that in the United States
  • 7:34 - 7:36
    to our great detriment.
  • 7:36 - 7:40
    The financial crisis brought about by deregulation
  • 7:40 - 7:42
    pushed on the American government by
  • 7:42 - 7:44
    financial interests who benefited
  • 7:44 - 7:46
    and then brought the economy down
  • 7:46 - 7:49
    And in every other area of Internet policy
  • 7:49 - 7:50
    we see the same thing
  • 7:50 - 7:52
    we have no broadband
  • 7:52 - 7:54
    as Bankler's report for the Berkman Center demonstrates,
  • 7:54 - 7:56
    we have no penetration,
  • 7:56 - 7:58
    no effect of broadband in the United States
  • 7:58 - 8:01
    because of a strong policy of deregulation
  • 8:01 - 8:02
    that the American government bought,
  • 8:02 - 8:04
    and it bought because the only people
  • 8:04 - 8:07
    they cared to listen to were business
  • 8:07 - 8:09
    So to come to France,
  • 8:09 - 8:11
    and to see an event like this
  • 8:11 - 8:14
    where the presumption of the President is
  • 8:14 - 8:16
    « Get the biggest businesses together
  • 8:16 - 8:18
    and ask them what the future
  • 8:18 - 8:20
    of the internet should be » is astonishing
  • 8:20 - 8:22
    it’s just...
  • 8:22 - 8:24
    You know, I did a little bit of French philosophy,
  • 8:24 - 8:26
    but I don’t remember the French philosopher
  • 8:26 - 8:30
    who said : « Public policy is best devised
  • 8:30 - 8:32
    by asking the businesses
  • 8:32 - 8:34
    to draw up the public policy ».
  • 8:34 - 8:36
    That doesn’t sound very French to me.
  • 8:36 - 8:42
    So I’d love to come back to the Paris
  • 8:42 - 8:43
    that I loved before,
  • 8:43 - 8:45
    which is not the American version of Paris,
  • 8:45 - 8:47
    but the French version of Paris
  • 8:47 - 8:50
    by a reminder that they are more interests
  • 8:50 - 8:52
    than the interest of business.
  • 8:52 - 8:54
    Business is important,
  • 8:54 - 8:56
    and in business there is a division between
  • 8:56 - 8:58
    the incumbents and the innovators
  • 8:58 - 8:59
    and we have to keep that division alive.
  • 8:59 - 9:01
    But there is also the people
  • 9:01 - 9:02
    who built the internet.
  • 9:02 - 9:04
    They weren’t originally business,
  • 9:04 - 9:06
    it was civil society, it was ISOC,
  • 9:06 - 9:09
    it was ICANN... it was not ICANN, it was IETF
  • 9:10 - 9:13
    but it was a bunch of people who just aren’t here
  • 9:13 - 9:14
    so I agree with Susan,
  • 9:14 - 9:18
    we need to find a way to remind the people here,
  • 9:18 - 9:20
    that the people who are not here,
  • 9:20 - 9:23
    who are just as important to the story as them.
  • 9:30 - 9:32
    To avoid repeating
  • 9:34 - 9:38
    the critical change produced by
  • 9:38 - 9:40
    the digital network environment
  • 9:40 - 9:44
    is the radical decentralization
  • 9:44 - 9:48
    of the capacity to speak, to create,
  • 9:48 - 9:54
    to innovate, to see together, to socialize,
  • 9:54 - 9:58
    the radical distribution of the poor means
  • 9:58 - 10:00
    of production, computations, communications,
  • 10:00 - 10:05
    storage, sensing, capture, human sociality
  • 10:05 - 10:06
    that which gets us together
  • 10:06 - 10:08
    inside the experience,
  • 10:08 - 10:09
    being there on the ground.
  • 10:09 - 10:12
    That is true for the first time
  • 10:12 - 10:14
    since the industrial revolution,
  • 10:14 - 10:16
    that people can actually,
  • 10:16 - 10:18
    with the things they own,
  • 10:18 - 10:20
    capture the world and do something
  • 10:20 - 10:22
    that is at the very core
  • 10:22 - 10:24
    of the most advanced economies.
  • 10:24 - 10:26
    Preserving that framework,
  • 10:26 - 10:28
    preserving a framework that is open,
  • 10:28 - 10:33
    free-flowing, flexible, adaptive to change
  • 10:33 - 10:37
    and inviting so that one person's sacrifice
  • 10:37 - 10:42
    in Sidi Bouzid can then be translated
  • 10:42 - 10:44
    throughout the Arab world into
  • 10:44 - 10:48
    a moment of mobilization
  • 10:48 - 10:52
    That’s new, that’s what is critical.
  • 10:52 - 10:54
    For over fifteen years now,
  • 10:54 - 10:57
    we have seen two opposing camps
  • 10:57 - 11:00
    around the question of internet policy.
  • 11:00 - 11:03
    One camp is the camp of the 20th century incumbents,
  • 11:03 - 11:06
    who are afraid that something will change
  • 11:06 - 11:10
    who are afraid of the people rising to participate
  • 11:10 - 11:13
    afraid of the outsiders innovating,
  • 11:13 - 11:14
    and coming from the edges
  • 11:14 - 11:18
    who aren't authorized by the incumbents to innovate
  • 11:18 - 11:20
    who don’t have to come and say
  • 11:20 - 11:21
    « Will you please implement this
  • 11:21 - 11:24
    for me on your network? ».
  • 11:24 - 11:26
    These are all the companies
  • 11:26 - 11:28
    that we see now as great fifteen years ago
  • 11:28 - 11:30
    were from the outside
  • 11:30 - 11:32
    That’s where the source of innovation is
  • 11:32 - 11:35
    And the other model has been
  • 11:35 - 11:36
    « Let’s keep things open,
  • 11:36 - 11:39
    let’s keep things flexible, let’s keep things flow. »
  • 11:39 - 11:42
    And this opposition between those who say
  • 11:42 - 11:46
    « It’s going too fast, slow it down,
  • 11:46 - 11:49
    make it manageable, make it safe »
  • 11:49 - 11:52
    and those who say
  • 11:52 - 11:55
    « It’s extraordinary, it’s creative, let’s open this up,
  • 11:55 - 11:56
    because we’re in a process of
  • 11:56 - 11:58
    continuous experimentation,
  • 11:58 - 12:00
    and adaptation, and learning.»
  • 12:00 - 12:02
    This is an enormous learning moment.
  • 12:02 - 12:04
    That opposition has been there for fifteen years
  • 12:04 - 12:06
    and occasionally we’ve seen periods
  • 12:06 - 12:08
    such as in the United States twelve years ago
  • 12:08 - 12:11
    where the approach of shutting things down
  • 12:11 - 12:12
    making Internet Service Providers
  • 12:12 - 12:14
    have to look upon of what it is that the content
  • 12:14 - 12:19
    of their producers, regulating on software
  • 12:19 - 12:21
    regulating new services
  • 12:21 - 12:23
    to make sure that they don't make too much
  • 12:23 - 12:26
    of a threat to the incumbent industries win.
  • 12:26 - 12:28
    Then there was a long period of lolling
  • 12:28 - 12:30
    in between where we understood
  • 12:30 - 12:31
    the centrality of the commons
  • 12:31 - 12:34
    where we understood the centrality of what's open
  • 12:34 - 12:36
    and now what is baffling about this two days
  • 12:36 - 12:40
    is the seeming resurgence of what we saw
  • 12:40 - 12:43
    ten, twelve, fifteen years ago
  • 12:43 - 12:45
    as though we had learned nothing.
  • 12:45 - 12:48
    When people yesterday on the panel on IP
  • 12:48 - 12:50
    were talking about if we don't have
  • 12:50 - 12:51
    strong intellectual property
  • 12:51 - 12:52
    the Internet will be just
  • 12:52 - 12:54
    an empty set of tubes and boxes,
  • 12:54 - 12:58
    I heard that fifteen years ago, and maybe,
  • 12:58 - 13:00
    maybe then it was a plausible assumption.
  • 13:00 - 13:02
    Today, it is laughable,
  • 13:02 - 13:04
    except that it seems to have the ear of power.
  • 13:04 - 13:08
    So, I think that what's critical here,
  • 13:08 - 13:10
    is to understand is that there are pathways,
  • 13:10 - 13:12
    like the Hargreaves Report from last week
  • 13:12 - 13:13
    shows a pathway that says: No!
  • 13:13 - 13:16
    I don't have to lock things down,
  • 13:16 - 13:17
    I have to be very careful about
  • 13:17 - 13:19
    locking things down for IP
  • 13:19 - 13:22
    instead I need to explore ways
  • 13:22 - 13:24
    to open and allow flows.
  • 13:24 - 13:26
    That's the critical opposition.
  • 13:26 - 13:28
    Achieving socially desirable
  • 13:28 - 13:30
    and acceptable and legitimate goals
  • 13:30 - 13:34
    while retaining an open fluid free Internet.
  • 13:34 - 13:39
    Versus, being so scared of the new,
  • 13:39 - 13:41
    that you are willing to lock it down,
  • 13:41 - 13:44
    or to try to lock it down and to distort it.
  • 13:44 - 13:46
    That's the opposition on which we all have to be
  • 13:46 - 13:48
    -- whether it's about business, and innovation
  • 13:48 - 13:52
    about social equality and access,
  • 13:52 - 13:54
    or about democracy and participation
  • 13:54 - 13:58
    whether it's about liberty, equality or fraternity
  • 13:58 - 14:01
    -- we all have to be on the same side of the path
  • 14:01 - 14:02
    of retaining an open net
  • 14:04 - 14:06
    Thank you. Yes.
  • 14:07 - 14:10
    I find myself profoundly frightened
  • 14:10 - 14:11
    in these two days
  • 14:11 - 14:12
    I'm frightened of those who are so
  • 14:12 - 14:16
    frightened of change that they will try to stop it.
  • 14:16 - 14:18
    The Internet is not governments,
  • 14:18 - 14:20
    I said to President Sarkozy yesterday,
  • 14:20 - 14:22
    yet the government tries to act as if it is.
  • 14:22 - 14:25
    He said it was not clear,
  • 14:25 - 14:27
    he feels he has the authority to regulate it.
  • 14:27 - 14:29
    I tweeted this morning
  • 14:29 - 14:30
    that I felt rather like a native,
  • 14:30 - 14:32
    to be so presumptuous,
  • 14:32 - 14:35
    of the Americas or of Africa
  • 14:35 - 14:37
    when the colonist ships
  • 14:37 - 14:39
    would come in to civilize it
  • 14:39 - 14:41
    « We have nothing to fear »
  • 14:41 - 14:44
    As the CTO of the Verizon Administration
  • 14:44 - 14:45
    in America calls it,
  • 14:45 - 14:47
    the Internet is « The Eighth Continent ».
  • 14:47 - 14:48
    It is a new land;
  • 14:48 - 14:50
    it has not been colonized,
  • 14:50 - 14:52
    there is no flag from France
  • 14:52 - 14:54
    or the US or the UK or anyone on it.
  • 14:54 - 14:56
    It is ours.
  • 14:56 - 14:58
    So, to that extent
  • 14:58 - 15:00
    I don't blame President Sarkozy
  • 15:00 - 15:03
    and Publicis at all for convening this meeting
  • 15:03 - 15:05
    because they are filling a vacuum
  • 15:05 - 15:07
    that we the people have left.
  • 15:07 - 15:09
    Then I think it is incumbent upon us,
  • 15:09 - 15:11
    the citizens of this 8th continent,
  • 15:11 - 15:12
    of this new land,
  • 15:12 - 15:15
    to hold and convene our own meeting,
  • 15:15 - 15:16
    and our own discussion,
  • 15:16 - 15:18
    so we can invite,
  • 15:18 - 15:19
    we should invite, the governments,
  • 15:19 - 15:21
    we should invite the companies.
  • 15:21 - 15:22
    But I'd rather this discussion
  • 15:22 - 15:24
    was held at our table,
  • 15:24 - 15:26
    rather then at government's table,
  • 15:26 - 15:28
    which is what's happening here.
  • 15:28 - 15:30
    So what does that discussion need to entail?
  • 15:30 - 15:33
    I don't think that we need to have
  • 15:33 - 15:36
    Constitution or a set of laws on the Internet.
  • 15:36 - 15:40
    This... as my esteemed colleagues up here say,
  • 15:40 - 15:42
    it is the very architecture of the Internet,
  • 15:42 - 15:44
    that is its best protection
  • 15:44 - 15:46
    that is its very openness,
  • 15:46 - 15:47
    that is its best protection to stay open.
  • 15:47 - 15:49
    And the fact that it is distributed.
  • 15:49 - 15:51
    So I think that we need to have
  • 15:51 - 15:54
    a discussion of principles
  • 15:54 - 15:56
    as I say, or in... in...
  • 15:56 - 15:58
    it won't end in some sort of statute or constitution
  • 15:58 - 16:00
    because I don't think it should.
  • 16:00 - 16:01
    Yet I do think we need to have a discussion,
  • 16:01 - 16:02
    because we need principles we can point
  • 16:02 - 16:04
    to when we see them violated,
  • 16:04 - 16:06
    when we see Verizon, and Google,
  • 16:06 - 16:08
    right I am going to talk about Google,
  • 16:08 - 16:10
    I am a certified fanboy
  • 16:10 - 16:11
    but I am very disapointed in Google
  • 16:11 - 16:13
    for doing a devil's pact with Verizon
  • 16:13 - 16:14
    to cut up the Internet,
  • 16:14 - 16:16
    into the Internet and Schminternet
  • 16:16 - 16:18
    when you are on the wire it acts one way,
  • 16:18 - 16:20
    when you are out of the wire it acts another way
  • 16:20 - 16:22
    it's all in one Internet.
  • 16:22 - 16:24
    So, what are those principles?
  • 16:24 - 16:26
    On my blog I wrote a post
  • 16:26 - 16:27
    that led up to my question
  • 16:27 - 16:28
    to President Sarkozy yesterday
  • 16:28 - 16:30
    on my suggestion that he and others
  • 16:30 - 16:31
    take an Hippocratic Oath,
  • 16:31 - 16:32
    and I'm so honored to have been quoted by
  • 16:32 - 16:36
    Professor Lessig in a Lessig Powerpoint,
  • 16:36 - 16:37
    I'm sorry keynote,
  • 16:37 - 16:41
    I'm sorry we'll have an au revoir on this, but I...
  • 16:41 - 16:43
    There are many good efforts
  • 16:43 - 16:44
    to build Bills of Rights for the Internet,
  • 16:44 - 16:46
    and I have thrown out my humble suggestions,
  • 16:46 - 16:48
    and they weren't certainly wrong,
  • 16:48 - 16:49
    but I think among them
  • 16:49 - 16:50
    there is the right to connect,
  • 16:50 - 16:52
    and when someone cuts off that right
  • 16:52 - 16:54
    it's a violation of Human Rights.
  • 16:54 - 16:57
    So when Egypt cuts off the Internet connection,
  • 16:57 - 16:59
    the Human Rights have been violated.
  • 16:59 - 17:02
    That right to connect is a preamble
  • 17:02 - 17:04
    to the right of free speech.
  • 17:04 - 17:06
    And what follows the right of free speech
  • 17:06 - 17:08
    is the right to act and to assemble.
  • 17:08 - 17:09
    It was in the French constitution
  • 17:09 - 17:11
    that the notion of the right
  • 17:11 - 17:13
    to assemble was invented.
  • 17:13 - 17:16
    I think we need a notion that
  • 17:16 - 17:18
    our information of our institutions
  • 17:18 - 17:19
    and of our government
  • 17:19 - 17:20
    should be open by default,
  • 17:20 - 17:23
    and closed only by necessity.
  • 17:23 - 17:25
    We are the opposite today.
  • 17:25 - 17:26
    I think we have to have an understanding
  • 17:26 - 17:29
    of what it means to be private and to be public.
  • 17:29 - 17:30
    I wrote a whole book on that
  • 17:30 - 17:32
    - I won't bore you with that.
  • 17:32 - 17:33
    I think we have to respond
  • 17:33 - 17:35
    to the notion of net neutrality by saying that
  • 17:35 - 17:36
    all bits are created equal,
  • 17:36 - 17:38
    and that when anyone restricts a bit
  • 17:38 - 17:40
    for any reason, whether that it was a telco
  • 17:40 - 17:42
    to restrict how you watch a movie,
  • 17:42 - 17:44
    whether that it is China restricting you
  • 17:44 - 17:46
    to search for Falun Gong,
  • 17:46 - 17:48
    or is that Egypt cutting off the internet,
  • 17:48 - 17:50
    whatever the flow of the internet that is restricted,
  • 17:50 - 17:52
    the whole internet is restricted.
  • 17:52 - 17:53
    And so finally we have to hold up
  • 17:53 - 17:55
    to the structure of the internet
  • 17:55 - 17:56
    to be open and distributed
  • 17:56 - 17:58
    because that is its only defense.
  • 17:58 - 18:01
    But I would argue... I would say that...
  • 18:01 - 18:04
    they convened you've gone today.
  • 18:04 - 18:06
    It's very important and should continue
  • 18:06 - 18:08
    and we need to talk about these issues
  • 18:08 - 18:10
    at the table of the internet,
  • 18:10 - 18:12
    and not at this table here,
  • 18:12 - 18:15
    or not only at this table here.
  • 18:15 - 18:18
    Before we go to questions I have
  • 18:18 - 18:22
    comments myself on this whole « eG8 » thing.
  • 18:22 - 18:24
    Thank you for restating.
  • 18:24 - 18:26
    I think that beyond the right to connect,
  • 18:26 - 18:30
    it's existing fundamental rights
  • 18:30 - 18:32
    that are being used through the internet.
  • 18:32 - 18:34
    There is maybe no need to define
  • 18:34 - 18:36
    new freedoms because it's the existing
  • 18:36 - 18:37
    freedoms that are being attacked today.
  • 18:37 - 18:40
    So this eG8 forum,
  • 18:40 - 18:43
    beyond the local political whitewash
  • 18:43 - 18:47
    of Nicolas Sarkozy, after 4 years of pushing
  • 18:47 - 18:48
    for disconnecting French citizens
  • 18:48 - 18:50
    with the HADOPI law,
  • 18:50 - 18:52
    censorship of web content with the LOPPSI,
  • 18:52 - 18:54
    and pushing of his notion of a « civilized internet »,
  • 18:54 - 18:57
    he pushed up to the organization of this event.
  • 18:57 - 19:00
    Beyond that local political whitewash,
  • 19:00 - 19:04
    this eG8 forum is to me a smokescreen
  • 19:04 - 19:06
    to what the governments are really
  • 19:06 - 19:08
    doing towards the Internet.
  • 19:08 - 19:10
    In the last twelve months,
  • 19:10 - 19:14
    we witnessed an increase in the rate of
  • 19:14 - 19:17
    repressive measures attacking the Internet,
  • 19:17 - 19:20
    attacking our fundamental freedoms.
  • 19:20 - 19:22
    I'm thinking of the US government reaction
  • 19:22 - 19:24
    to Wikileaks, the US government seizure
  • 19:24 - 19:26
    of domain names,
  • 19:26 - 19:28
    the COICA PROTECT-IP act,
  • 19:28 - 19:31
    the conclusion of the ACTA
  • 19:31 - 19:32
    (Anti Counterfeiting Trade Agreement)
  • 19:32 - 19:35
    that will turn internet actors into
  • 19:35 - 19:36
    private copyright police
  • 19:36 - 19:38
    the blackout of Internet in Egypt of course,
  • 19:38 - 19:41
    the administrative censorship of websites
  • 19:41 - 19:44
    in France, and other countries of Europe.
  • 19:44 - 19:45
    Everywhere you look,
  • 19:45 - 19:47
    governments are trying
  • 19:47 - 19:48
    to gain control of the Internet.
  • 19:48 - 19:50
    And what we are being sold here
  • 19:50 - 19:54
    is the red carpet to those, Orange,
  • 19:54 - 19:57
    Vivendi, Alcatel-Lucent and so on.
  • 19:57 - 19:58
    But if you look a little bit closer,
  • 19:58 - 20:00
    those very companies
  • 20:00 - 20:04
    are more and more basing their business models
  • 20:04 - 20:06
    on the restriction of fundamental freedoms.
  • 20:06 - 20:08
    Orange by selling this non-neutral
  • 20:08 - 20:10
    so-called « mobile Internet access »,
  • 20:10 - 20:13
    Vivendi by pushing for the tougher
  • 20:13 - 20:16
    copyright vision, 19th century vision
  • 20:16 - 20:19
    where you try to forbid copies at all costs
  • 20:19 - 20:22
    even if it implies to ban freedom to read,
  • 20:22 - 20:24
    share and access culture;
  • 20:24 - 20:28
    Alcatel-Lucent and Huawei are manufacturing
  • 20:28 - 20:29
    the devices that are being used
  • 20:29 - 20:31
    in authoritarian regimes to censor the Internet,
  • 20:31 - 20:33
    and by telecoms operators
  • 20:33 - 20:34
    who harm our freedom of communication
  • 20:34 - 20:36
    by harming net neutrality
  • 20:36 - 20:38
    So we, the citizens,
  • 20:38 - 20:40
    would expect from the governments
  • 20:40 - 20:43
    that they protect us from those corporations,
  • 20:43 - 20:46
    that they regulate the behaviours,
  • 20:46 - 20:48
    whether they're anti-competitive
  • 20:48 - 20:49
    or against our fundamental freedoms
  • 20:49 - 20:52
    from the corporations, but instead of that,
  • 20:52 - 20:55
    what we see here is the glitter and a red carpet.
  • 20:57 - 20:59
    Now if you have questions,
  • 20:59 - 21:02
    I see Jean-François has to leave,
  • 21:02 - 21:02
    but maybe if you're late to
  • 21:02 - 21:04
    that thing it will be all right.
  • 21:04 - 21:06
    5 minutes or something?
  • 21:06 - 21:08
    I mean, they're French, they will be late already.
  • 21:08 - 21:10
    Yes, of course but it will be another audience,
  • 21:10 - 21:12
    to tell the same, so I want to use
  • 21:12 - 21:13
    this opportunity as well
  • 21:13 - 21:16
    to raise this issue in a more official format as well.
  • 21:16 - 21:18
    You have maybe three or four minutes,
  • 21:18 - 21:20
    if then one has questions directed to Jean-François,
  • 21:20 - 21:22
    maybe first the questions directed to Jean-François ?
  • 21:24 - 21:25
    Or general questions ?
  • 21:25 - 21:27
    Ok, no questions so I'm free. Merci.
  • 21:27 - 21:29
    General questions ?
  • 21:29 - 21:30
    One here, one here and one here.
  • 21:30 - 21:32
    Yes, please, maybe you'd like
  • 21:32 - 21:34
    to speak in a microphone ?
  • 21:34 - 21:37
    If you want to come here,
  • 21:37 - 21:39
    Yes, one quick question,
  • 21:39 - 21:41
    I'm Eric Scherer at France Télévisions.
  • 21:41 - 21:42
    How do you reconcile
  • 21:42 - 21:45
    what you are saying,
  • 21:45 - 21:48
    about open Internet and freedom of expression
  • 21:48 - 21:51
    and the need to educate governments,
  • 21:51 - 21:52
    members of Parliament
  • 21:52 - 21:56
    and the rest of the society
  • 21:56 - 21:58
    about what you are just saying?
  • 21:58 - 22:02
    There is a big need of Internet literacy
  • 22:02 - 22:04
    to the governments
  • 22:04 - 22:05
    and to the members of Parliament.
  • 22:05 - 22:08
    They are totally illiterate about that.
  • 22:08 - 22:09
    How do you reconcile that?
  • 22:09 - 22:10
    Shall I take this one?
  • 22:10 - 22:12
    Well, that's what we are trying to do
  • 22:12 - 22:14
    with « La Quadrature du Net »
  • 22:14 - 22:18
    for more than 3 years now. And we are building,
  • 22:18 - 22:19
    thanks to an open internet,
  • 22:19 - 22:22
    a toolbox for citizens first of all
  • 22:22 - 22:23
    to understand what's going on,
  • 22:23 - 22:26
    and then to participate in the public debate.
  • 22:26 - 22:27
    So, we, La Quadrature du Net,
  • 22:27 - 22:29
    are nothing but the sum
  • 22:29 - 22:32
    of all supporters caring about those issues
  • 22:32 - 22:34
    and pushing for those issues,
  • 22:34 - 22:36
    to the parliament, to the elected representatives
  • 22:36 - 22:38
    and to all layers of civil society.
  • 22:38 - 22:41
    I think we have all the tools,
  • 22:41 - 22:42
    here on the table to do it,
  • 22:42 - 22:46
    it's just a matter of working towards it.
  • 22:47 - 22:48
    Larry ?
  • 22:49 - 22:52
    Yes. I think that the net
  • 22:52 - 22:54
    has been pretty good at educating itself
  • 22:54 - 22:57
    about the values of this network.
  • 22:57 - 22:59
    I can't speak for France or for Europe,
  • 22:59 - 23:00
    but I think in the United States,
  • 23:00 - 23:04
    we see in civil society communities
  • 23:04 - 23:06
    that are engaged in trying to spread
  • 23:06 - 23:08
    and defend what Internet is about.
  • 23:08 - 23:11
    The problem that I see in the United States is,
  • 23:11 - 23:14
    and again, I speak only of the United States:
  • 23:14 - 23:16
    our government is so deeply corrupted
  • 23:16 - 23:18
    by the dynamic that I'm talking about,
  • 23:18 - 23:20
    that there is a wide gap between
  • 23:20 - 23:24
    what the educators, the parents, the students,
  • 23:24 - 23:26
    everybody understands
  • 23:26 - 23:28
    the future policy should be,
  • 23:28 - 23:30
    and what our government actually hears.
  • 23:30 - 23:33
    So, I have shifted a bunch of my work
  • 23:33 - 23:34
    towards addressing that issue of
  • 23:34 - 23:36
    that corruption in the United States,
  • 23:36 - 23:38
    because I don't think we get
  • 23:38 - 23:40
    anything until we solve that.
  • 23:40 - 23:42
    But I think that we have
  • 23:42 - 23:46
    actually seen massive progress on this issue
  • 23:46 - 23:48
    over the past decade, and I'm encouraged by that,
  • 23:48 - 23:50
    at least in the context of what people think.
  • 23:52 - 23:56
    There was one question somewhere... over here ?
  • 23:56 - 23:57
    Ok. Jean-Jacques ?
  • 23:57 - 24:00
    Do you want to come to the microphone or shout ?
  • 24:00 - 24:02
    I can shout, if you can hear me.
  • 24:02 - 24:05
    Jean-Jacques, I work for European Internet Company
  • 24:05 - 24:06
    and I'm also Council member
  • 24:06 - 24:08
    of the Internet Society, ISOC.
  • 24:08 - 24:10
    Rather than questions, just to make a point,
  • 24:10 - 24:12
    this is not actually just another
  • 24:12 - 24:15
    of these ideas which are shared by civil society,
  • 24:15 - 24:17
    a lot of these ideas are also shared by
  • 24:17 - 24:20
    companies and actually the vast majority
  • 24:20 - 24:21
    of Internet companies out there.
  • 24:21 - 24:24
    Just yesterday, ISOC issued
  • 24:24 - 24:25
    a press statement which also
  • 24:25 - 24:27
    called for all stakeholders to be involved
  • 24:27 - 24:29
    in this discussion around the internet
  • 24:29 - 24:30
    and internet policy making.
  • 24:30 - 24:32
    Without all stakeholders being involved
  • 24:32 - 24:34
    have no point of having a discussion;
  • 24:34 - 24:36
    and they also called for governments
  • 24:36 - 24:38
    to uphold and protect the open
  • 24:38 - 24:41
    and decentralised nature of the Internet.
  • 24:41 - 24:43
    This is fundamental for all of us
  • 24:43 - 24:45
    in this ecosystem. It needs to happen.
  • 24:45 - 24:48
    This is not just about civil society.
  • 24:48 - 24:50
    This is about users, civil society,
  • 24:50 - 24:52
    technical communities and companies
  • 24:52 - 24:54
    and governments sitting around the table
  • 24:54 - 24:56
    discussing the issues.
  • 24:56 - 24:58
    Thank you -- I actually want to take that up
  • 24:58 - 25:00
    and emphasize it.
  • 25:00 - 25:02
    We have a long tradition
  • 25:02 - 25:05
    of thinking there is an opposition
  • 25:05 - 25:08
    between efficiency or competition
  • 25:08 - 25:12
    or markets, and justice and society,
  • 25:12 - 25:14
    and that somehow we have to trade off
  • 25:14 - 25:16
    between two competing goals
  • 25:16 - 25:19
    that aid society: growth and welfare,
  • 25:19 - 25:22
    and justice and redistribution.
  • 25:22 - 25:25
    But in fact, what has happened with the Internet,
  • 25:25 - 25:30
    is that growth and innovation is exactly
  • 25:30 - 25:32
    what democracy and justice require.
  • 25:32 - 25:36
    Both of them need the means of production
  • 25:36 - 25:38
    distributed widely in the population,
  • 25:38 - 25:40
    so that anyone can speak, anyone can create,
  • 25:40 - 25:42
    anyone can create their own innovation,
  • 25:42 - 25:44
    anyone can create their own business.
  • 25:44 - 25:47
    This age old traditional divide is a divide
  • 25:47 - 25:49
    of the industrial economy.
  • 25:49 - 25:52
    We have been able to overcome that divide
  • 25:52 - 25:54
    and today it's between
  • 25:54 - 25:56
    20th century business models,
  • 25:56 - 25:58
    and both innovation and growth
  • 25:58 - 26:02
    and civil society, democracy and justice
  • 26:02 - 26:04
    on the other opposing side.
  • 26:04 - 26:08
    In that battle between on one hand innovation,
  • 26:08 - 26:10
    growth, democracy and justice
  • 26:10 - 26:13
    and preserving revenue streams
  • 26:13 - 26:14
    of incumbent industries,
  • 26:14 - 26:16
    it is not a closed choice.
  • 26:18 - 26:19
    There was a question here ?
  • 26:19 - 26:21
    Yes, I guess this question is really
  • 26:21 - 26:23
    for Professor Lessig.
  • 26:23 - 26:27
    Very basically, why is this so hard?
  • 26:27 - 26:29
    You know the car came along,
  • 26:29 - 26:30
    we have parking tickets,
  • 26:30 - 26:32
    you can lose your license,
  • 26:32 - 26:33
    there are charges for homicide.
  • 26:33 - 26:35
    There is a wide range of penalties
  • 26:35 - 26:37
    for all violation shit.
  • 26:37 - 26:39
    Copyright law, as you rightly pointed out
  • 26:39 - 26:40
    at the debate yesterday was
  • 26:40 - 26:44
    the exact same one as it was in 1999.
  • 26:44 - 26:46
    So the Internet is not new,
  • 26:46 - 26:48
    copyright is not new
  • 26:48 - 26:50
    and I know there are obviously different
  • 26:50 - 26:53
    regulatory legal things around this,
  • 26:53 - 26:56
    but why have we seemingly made
  • 26:56 - 26:58
    no progress on coming up with
  • 26:58 - 27:00
    a very basic framework that has penalties
  • 27:00 - 27:05
    that fit all the different shades of violation?
  • 27:06 - 27:08
    I think it's actually different depending on the country.
  • 27:08 - 27:11
    I am struck by the debate
  • 27:11 - 27:12
    in France around copyright.
  • 27:12 - 27:15
    I was at conference at Avignon two years ago
  • 27:15 - 27:18
    and I felt like it was 1995 all over again.
  • 27:18 - 27:21
    Because as if nothing had been
  • 27:21 - 27:23
    ever talked about this issues,
  • 27:23 - 27:25
    it was the exact same framework
  • 27:25 - 27:26
    that we were fighting back then.
  • 27:26 - 27:28
    But other countries in Europe are different.
  • 27:28 - 27:30
    I think Germany, for example,
  • 27:30 - 27:32
    the green party has been pushing
  • 27:32 - 27:34
    what they call a « cultural flat rate »
  • 27:34 - 27:36
    that would be an alternative way
  • 27:36 - 27:38
    to raise money for artists,
  • 27:38 - 27:40
    that would decriminalize much of the activity
  • 27:40 - 27:44
    which in France people would be kicked off the internet.
  • 27:44 - 27:46
    And this point was made.
  • 27:46 - 27:48
    I want to re-emphasize,
  • 27:48 - 27:50
    there is something really outrageous,
  • 27:50 - 27:52
    this point was made on my panel,
  • 27:52 - 27:56
    by the French entrepreneurs.
  • 27:56 - 27:58
    There is something really outrageous
  • 27:58 - 28:01
    about the idea that the penalty
  • 28:01 - 28:02
    that has been discussed in France
  • 28:02 - 28:04
    is the idea that you disconnect yourself
  • 28:04 - 28:06
    from the Internet.
  • 28:06 - 28:08
    Only somebody seventy years old would think
  • 28:08 - 28:10
    - people don’t touch the internet
  • 28:10 - 28:12
    at seventy years old -
  • 28:12 - 28:12
    would think that's proportionate.
  • 28:12 - 28:14
    The idea that you will disconnect yourself
  • 28:14 - 28:17
    from the most important infrastructure
  • 28:17 - 28:19
    for community, and commerce,
  • 28:19 - 28:23
    and political activity is outrageous
  • 28:23 - 28:25
    and yet that is discussed here.
  • 28:25 - 28:27
    And in other countries, the Nordic countries
  • 28:27 - 28:29
    and in Germany it is a much more open debate.
  • 28:29 - 28:31
    In United States again,
  • 28:31 - 28:32
    I think it is just hide out
  • 28:32 - 28:34
    by this political framework
  • 28:34 - 28:36
    where both Democrats and Republicans
  • 28:36 - 28:40
    are so deeply wedded to the content industry
  • 28:40 - 28:44
    that you can’t even have an open debate
  • 28:44 - 28:46
    about this issue among politicians.
  • 28:46 - 28:47
    This is just not a political issue.
  • 28:47 - 28:50
    And I think that we need to take advantage
  • 28:50 - 28:52
    of places where it is a political issue.
  • 28:52 - 28:54
    So Brazil has been extremely important
  • 28:54 - 28:56
    getting people to recognize why
  • 28:56 - 28:58
    there is an interesting
  • 28:58 - 29:00
    opportunity here for development.
  • 29:00 - 29:02
    And we need to push in those places
  • 29:02 - 29:04
    to move it along.
  • 29:04 - 29:06
    But finally, what has been amazing
  • 29:06 - 29:07
    to me has been WIPO.
  • 29:07 - 29:10
    I was at WIPO about six years ago,
  • 29:10 - 29:12
    when I walked in the bulding I was the devil
  • 29:12 - 29:15
    and the director general wouln't talk to me
  • 29:15 - 29:16
    and everybody said no word.
  • 29:16 - 29:18
    I was just there six months ago
  • 29:18 - 29:22
    and the Director General is extraordinarily
  • 29:22 - 29:24
    innovative in his ways of thinking about
  • 29:24 - 29:26
    the way copyright has got to evolve.
  • 29:26 - 29:28
    And he's thinking exactly about
  • 29:28 - 29:30
    the kind of framework
  • 29:30 - 29:30
    for thinking about what
  • 29:30 - 29:32
    a future regime should look like,
  • 29:32 - 29:34
    and I got to address the delegates,
  • 29:34 - 29:36
    the delegates were encouraging
  • 29:36 - 29:37
    and thinking about these issues.
  • 29:37 - 29:39
    It was a completely different place.
  • 29:39 - 29:41
    And I think we have to take an advantage of that
  • 29:41 - 29:43
    to some point show countries like
  • 29:43 - 29:46
    the United States and France that 1995
  • 29:46 - 29:48
    thinking is so twentieth century.
  • 29:49 - 29:52
    If I may add something on that, though?
  • 29:52 - 29:53
    It's very difficult to add something
  • 29:53 - 29:55
    on professor Lessig.
  • 29:55 - 29:58
    Those companies with business models
  • 29:58 - 29:59
    in the XXth century
  • 29:59 - 30:01
    were based on controlling the channels
  • 30:01 - 30:02
    of distribution of copies
  • 30:02 - 30:06
    still have hope in managing to attain
  • 30:06 - 30:09
    the same objective with the Internet.
  • 30:09 - 30:12
    There is still a chance with the ongoing mergers
  • 30:12 - 30:14
    between those medias group and telcos,
  • 30:14 - 30:17
    with the very strong influence
  • 30:17 - 30:18
    they have on policy makers.
  • 30:18 - 30:21
    They still have a chance to turn the Internet,
  • 30:21 - 30:24
    the universal Internet we love and share
  • 30:24 - 30:27
    into a globalized distribution channel
  • 30:27 - 30:30
    for Vivendi, Fox and those guys.
  • 30:30 - 30:33
    So we're really at a turning point here:
  • 30:33 - 30:36
    why they are continuing like it's 1999,
  • 30:36 - 30:39
    it's because they probably still have a chance,
  • 30:39 - 30:41
    and maybe they have a greater chance
  • 30:41 - 30:45
    than they had in 1999 to achieve this objective
  • 30:46 - 30:49
    I'm sure there are tons of other questions.
  • 30:51 - 30:54
    Andrew Rasiej, the Personal Democracy Forum
  • 30:54 - 30:56
    I just want to make a point,
  • 30:56 - 30:57
    and you're welcome to comment on it,
  • 30:57 - 30:59
    that the arguments will be made now
  • 30:59 - 31:00
    by the government officials and by
  • 31:00 - 31:02
    the incumbents that the digital divide
  • 31:02 - 31:04
    has been bridged because
  • 31:04 - 31:06
    broadband distribution is available
  • 31:06 - 31:08
    in many places where it wasn't before.
  • 31:08 - 31:10
    But they are not actually focussing
  • 31:10 - 31:11
    on the fact there is a new digital divide
  • 31:11 - 31:13
    that most working class people
  • 31:13 - 31:16
    can’t afford the broadband that is available,
  • 31:16 - 31:17
    and so we need a reframing
  • 31:17 - 31:20
    of the term « digital divide » specifically around
  • 31:20 - 31:22
    this subject which is that cost has reached
  • 31:22 - 31:25
    beyond the point of most people
  • 31:25 - 31:26
    to be able to participate
  • 31:26 - 31:28
    in the 21th century economy.
  • 31:28 - 31:30
    We have to be careful that they don’t argue
  • 31:30 - 31:32
    against these points that you are making
  • 31:32 - 31:36
    today to say that we bridge the digital divide
  • 31:36 - 31:38
    and therefore obscure what is really going on.
  • 31:38 - 31:40
    Yes, just to add onto that:
  • 31:40 - 31:42
    to make things very simple,
  • 31:42 - 31:44
    we are in a moment when government
  • 31:44 - 31:47
    can join hands with the content industry
  • 31:47 - 31:50
    and with the telcos to enforce scarcity,
  • 31:50 - 31:53
    content controls, and lots of their desired goals,
  • 31:53 - 31:56
    in a sense this is feeding a revenue model
  • 31:56 - 31:58
    of governments and Hollywood
  • 31:58 - 32:00
    to constrain Internet access,
  • 32:00 - 32:03
    to make it much more like a 20th century
  • 32:03 - 32:07
    broadcast medium and our older policy makers
  • 32:07 - 32:09
    see the Internet as nothing more
  • 32:09 - 32:10
    than a one-way screen.
  • 32:10 - 32:13
    The rest of the world understands
  • 32:13 - 32:16
    that the world has been turned upside down,
  • 32:16 - 32:18
    anybody can be a publisher,
  • 32:18 - 32:20
    anybody should get access to this platform
  • 32:20 - 32:22
    for democracy, for speech,
  • 32:22 - 32:24
    for content creation, for human flourishing.
  • 32:24 - 32:26
    What we are witnessing today
  • 32:26 - 32:29
    is the joining of hands of these giants incumbents
  • 32:29 - 32:31
    -- and government is one of the incumbents --
  • 32:31 - 32:34
    to try to keep things as they were.
  • 32:34 - 32:36
    And many voices are being left
  • 32:36 - 32:38
    out of that conversation
  • 32:38 - 32:40
    who could add significantly.
  • 32:40 - 32:43
    So a purpose of this meeting here today
  • 32:43 - 32:45
    with all of you is to make sure that no one
  • 32:45 - 32:48
    walks away thinking that there is consensus.
  • 32:48 - 32:52
    There is no consensus on enforcing scarcity,
  • 32:52 - 32:56
    higher prices and constrain access
  • 32:56 - 32:58
    for world citizens.
  • 32:58 - 33:00
    The next Google could come from France,
  • 33:00 - 33:02
    could come from France,
  • 33:02 - 33:04
    should come from France
  • 33:04 - 33:06
    but if Internet access is constrained
  • 33:06 - 33:08
    and controlled, it won't.
  • 33:09 - 33:12
    I think this also provides an opportunity
  • 33:12 - 33:14
    to talk about something that we
  • 33:14 - 33:17
    - who come here from the US -
  • 33:17 - 33:19
    can learn very well from France
  • 33:19 - 33:21
    and perhaps that France can learn
  • 33:21 - 33:23
    from itself and its own experience.
  • 33:23 - 33:26
    In a study I did for the FCC last year,
  • 33:26 - 33:28
    it became very clear
  • 33:28 - 33:32
    that US broadband penetration,
  • 33:32 - 33:36
    broadband prices, broadband speeds,
  • 33:36 - 33:39
    relative to its performance in 2000-2001
  • 33:39 - 33:44
    had declined from 2002 until 2009
  • 33:44 - 33:47
    by comparison to European countries.
  • 33:47 - 33:50
    In doing a very close case study
  • 33:50 - 33:52
    of half the OECD countries,
  • 33:52 - 33:54
    what became very clear
  • 33:54 - 33:56
    was that on all these questions
  • 33:56 - 34:00
    of penetration, speed and price,
  • 34:00 - 34:02
    the critical intervention
  • 34:02 - 34:05
    that European governments undertook,
  • 34:05 - 34:06
    and in particular in this case
  • 34:06 - 34:09
    very successfully the French government
  • 34:09 - 34:12
    that has in France some of the lowest prices
  • 34:12 - 34:15
    for the highest performance in the OECD
  • 34:15 - 34:20
    because of this, is to force monopolists
  • 34:20 - 34:22
    to introduce competition.
  • 34:22 - 34:26
    And what we have to learn
  • 34:26 - 34:28
    is that we take this simple principle,
  • 34:28 - 34:31
    I mean understand whatever it is,
  • 34:31 - 34:34
    that there is a core platform
  • 34:34 - 34:35
    that can't be worked around,
  • 34:35 - 34:37
    one of the things that government can do
  • 34:37 - 34:39
    is to make sure that there is competition
  • 34:39 - 34:42
    as a way of reaching this goal
  • 34:42 - 34:44
    of not having people priced out
  • 34:44 - 34:47
    even though in theory there is a connection.
  • 34:47 - 34:50
    It is absolutely critical that we commit
  • 34:50 - 34:52
    in the US to open access
  • 34:52 - 34:55
    in the broadband physical layer,
  • 34:55 - 34:58
    it is absolutely critical that we commit
  • 34:58 - 35:00
    to open access higher up when
  • 35:00 - 35:02
    we talk about mobile wireless,
  • 35:02 - 35:04
    and we need to go to each country
  • 35:04 - 35:05
    and learn what it has done well
  • 35:05 - 35:07
    in its processes that have worked
  • 35:07 - 35:10
    and translate that both to other countries
  • 35:10 - 35:12
    and to other regulatory problems.
  • 35:13 - 35:17
    If you are looking for some more digital divides,
  • 35:17 - 35:20
    I can think of one.
  • 35:20 - 35:23
    Wouldn't there be a digital divide
  • 35:23 - 35:28
    between people being connected to universal,
  • 35:28 - 35:30
    unrestricted Internet access
  • 35:30 - 35:33
    and the people connected
  • 35:33 - 35:36
    to some kind of restricted, blocked,
  • 35:36 - 35:38
    throttled, prioritised network
  • 35:38 - 35:40
    that isn't related to the Internet?
  • 35:40 - 35:42
    And if we look at this divide,
  • 35:42 - 35:44
    maybe there are already more people
  • 35:44 - 35:46
    if you take into account China
  • 35:46 - 35:48
    and mobile Internet users,
  • 35:48 - 35:50
    there may be more people
  • 35:50 - 35:52
    on the wrong side of that
  • 35:52 - 35:54
    digital divide as of today.
  • 35:55 - 35:58
    I'm sure there are plenty of other questions.
  • 36:00 - 36:02
    Alex Howard, O'Reilly Media.
  • 36:02 - 36:06
    To what extent can people make a difference?
  • 36:06 - 36:08
    We've heard this communique has been leaked.
  • 36:08 - 36:11
    What can and should civil society
  • 36:11 - 36:12
    and average citizens do
  • 36:12 - 36:15
    to actually make a difference
  • 36:15 - 36:16
    to governments who are coming
  • 36:16 - 36:18
    together tomorrow?
  • 36:19 - 36:22
    As for tomorrow, we put up
  • 36:22 - 36:27
    -- it's more of a joyful protest
  • 36:27 - 36:30
    than something that may have an effect --
  • 36:30 - 36:32
    we launched a website called
  • 36:32 - 36:36
    g8internet.com on which we put a manifesto
  • 36:36 - 36:40
    and called people to react by creative resistance.
  • 36:40 - 36:43
    So there are dozens of works
  • 36:43 - 36:46
    that are being submitted, some very funny videos
  • 36:46 - 36:48
    or images, some trolls and so on.
  • 36:48 - 36:51
    But beyond that, I think it's about using
  • 36:51 - 36:53
    that freedom of expression
  • 36:53 - 36:55
    and freedom of communication
  • 36:55 - 36:57
    that we have between our hands
  • 36:57 - 36:59
    in an unprecedented way,
  • 36:59 - 37:01
    use it to make governments accountable,
  • 37:01 - 37:03
    use it to make our elected
  • 37:03 - 37:05
    representatives accountable,
  • 37:05 - 37:08
    and that's one key point
  • 37:08 - 37:10
    in the way we campaign
  • 37:10 - 37:12
    at La Quadrature du Net,
  • 37:12 - 37:15
    is to try to increase the political cost
  • 37:15 - 37:18
    of taking the bad decision for policy makers.
  • 37:18 - 37:20
    This is what we can do with our
  • 37:20 - 37:23
    added freedom of expression.
  • 37:23 - 37:25
    I just wanted to add to that
  • 37:25 - 37:26
    and emphasise a point that Susan has made.
  • 37:26 - 37:28
    I think that the biggest thing
  • 37:28 - 37:32
    that we can do is to negate the framing
  • 37:32 - 37:36
    of this conference as « everyone agrees here's
  • 37:36 - 37:38
    what the future of the Internet needs ».
  • 37:38 - 37:40
    And we negate that by first pointing out
  • 37:40 - 37:42
    that « the Internet was not here »
  • 37:42 - 37:46
    one slice of the Internet was here,
  • 37:46 - 37:47
    companies that can afford
  • 37:47 - 37:48
    the hundred thousand euros
  • 37:48 - 37:51
    sponsorship cost and whatever else.
  • 37:51 - 37:52
    They were here, that's fine,
  • 37:52 - 37:55
    but another huge part of the Internet is not here
  • 37:55 - 37:58
    and especially the innovating companies
  • 37:58 - 38:00
    that five years from now
  • 38:00 - 38:02
    will think of this equivalent of Twitter,
  • 38:02 - 38:04
    they were not here and so
  • 38:04 - 38:06
    « everybody was not here », number one;
  • 38:06 - 38:08
    and number two « we all don't agree
  • 38:08 - 38:10
    on the basic principles of what
  • 38:10 - 38:12
    we should be doing going forward »,
  • 38:12 - 38:16
    so I encourage the G8 to think about
  • 38:16 - 38:19
    how to open up a conversation
  • 38:19 - 38:21
    about what the Internet should look like.
  • 38:21 - 38:24
    I think Sarkozy's decision this year
  • 38:24 - 38:26
    to try to do that was a good one
  • 38:26 - 38:26
    but the question is :
  • 38:26 - 38:28
    « how do you do it so it really is the Internet
  • 38:28 - 38:30
    that we're talking about
  • 38:30 - 38:32
    and involve enough of the Internet
  • 38:32 - 38:34
    so they we can begin a conversation
  • 38:34 - 38:37
    towards that policy that would make sense ? »
  • 38:37 - 38:40
    Larry, if I may, you've just said that
  • 38:40 - 38:42
    you thought that it was a good idea
  • 38:42 - 38:44
    that Sarkozy launched this discussion
  • 38:44 - 38:46
    between governments.
  • 38:46 - 38:48
    Don't you see this also maybe
  • 38:48 - 38:50
    as some kind of takeover of Internet governance
  • 38:50 - 38:52
    by government to some extent?
  • 38:52 - 38:56
    Well, if the idea entails,
  • 38:56 - 38:58
    I think as Jeff was putting it,
  • 38:58 - 39:00
    the idea that we should be
  • 39:00 - 39:01
    taking over the Internet in some way, yes,
  • 39:01 - 39:02
    I don't think that's a good idea.
  • 39:02 - 39:04
    But I think that it is necessary
  • 39:04 - 39:08
    that we figure out how we preserve
  • 39:08 - 39:10
    this ecology of the Internet.
  • 39:10 - 39:12
    Like what do we do to make sure that it survives,
  • 39:12 - 39:14
    and we need that conversation
  • 39:14 - 39:15
    to include more people who say
  • 39:15 - 39:18
    « keep your hands off of this part;
  • 39:18 - 39:20
    intervene here, like Yochai was just saying
  • 39:20 - 39:23
    to ensure competition in access
  • 39:23 - 39:24
    at the physical layer ».
  • 39:24 - 39:26
    That's a conversation that's complicated
  • 39:26 - 39:28
    and important to have.
  • 39:28 - 39:30
    And I think that we need to have that,
  • 39:30 - 39:33
    and I think just right that we should have been
  • 39:33 - 39:35
    facilitating that more on our own.
  • 39:35 - 39:36
    We don't quite have the resources
  • 39:36 - 39:38
    that France has perhaps
  • 39:38 - 39:42
    to launch that conversation, but if we did,
  • 39:42 - 39:44
    I'd be happy to have that conversation certainly.
  • 39:44 - 39:47
    Yes, there's a choice between governments
  • 39:47 - 39:50
    only talking about this which is what the eG8 is
  • 39:50 - 39:52
    and a multi-stakeholders approach
  • 39:52 - 39:54
    which would involve civil society,
  • 39:54 - 39:56
    all the Internet users and the idea
  • 39:56 - 39:59
    that the Internet is for everyone
  • 39:59 - 40:01
    and not just for the large incumbents.
  • 40:04 - 40:08
    But I'm... I'm still scared.
  • 40:08 - 40:10
    And I want you to help me.
  • 40:10 - 40:11
    I think it's the right question:
  • 40:11 - 40:13
    « What the fuck do we do? »
  • 40:13 - 40:15
    Right? We can talk here,
  • 40:15 - 40:17
    we can change the framing.
  • 40:17 - 40:21
    But governments have the force of law
  • 40:21 - 40:24
    and companies have the force of the kill switch.
  • 40:24 - 40:28
    And so I'm not sure what it is that we,
  • 40:28 - 40:31
    the people of the Internet, really do.
  • 40:31 - 40:34
    What is the force that we are...
  • 40:34 - 40:38
    I'm a faux professor in journalism
  • 40:38 - 40:42
    so it's ballsy of me to quote Habermas.
  • 40:42 - 40:48
    But the counter to the weight
  • 40:48 - 40:50
    of government that he sought in the salons
  • 40:50 - 40:52
    and coffee houses, that I think is questionable,
  • 40:52 - 40:54
    we do have now, as a counterweight
  • 40:54 - 40:56
    to government and a counterweight
  • 40:56 - 40:58
    because Sarkozy said yesterday
  • 40:58 - 41:00
    that government is the only appropriate
  • 41:00 - 41:01
    spokesman for the people of a nation.
  • 41:01 - 41:02
    God forbid no!
  • 41:02 - 41:04
    Tell that to Wael Ghonim in Egypt.
  • 41:04 - 41:06
    The internet became the means
  • 41:06 - 41:09
    for the true voice of Egypt to come out.
  • 41:09 - 41:13
    And so I really ought to say
  • 41:13 - 41:16
    I don’t know what to do,
  • 41:16 - 41:19
    is there anything else we should be pointing out ?
  • 41:19 - 41:21
    Here is one point:
  • 41:21 - 41:24
    you know, we can romanticize the Internet
  • 41:24 - 41:26
    and I have spent many many years as a cheerleader
  • 41:26 - 41:30
    but the fact is, what the Internet does,
  • 41:30 - 41:32
    what people on the Internet do,
  • 41:32 - 41:36
    is more effective in some places than others
  • 41:36 - 41:37
    So I don't know if you saw
  • 41:37 - 41:38
    when the big bank bonuses were
  • 41:38 - 41:41
    recently announced and Goldman Sachs
  • 41:41 - 41:42
    -- huge bank bonuses.
  • 41:42 - 41:44
    In the United States there was
  • 41:44 - 41:46
    some frustration about it.
  • 41:46 - 41:49
    In Holland there was a twitter campain against,
  • 41:49 - 41:51
    that led to the governement
  • 41:51 - 41:53
    blocking bankers in Holland
  • 41:53 - 41:54
    from taking those bonuses,
  • 41:54 - 41:58
    a kind of unimaginable effectiveness
  • 41:58 - 42:00
    of the Internet to goverment policy
  • 42:00 - 42:02
    by getting involved in having
  • 42:02 - 42:04
    a government listen.
  • 42:04 - 42:04
    And you know,
  • 42:04 - 42:06
    compare that to the United States
  • 42:06 - 42:08
    where we just lost a battle in North Carolina,
  • 42:08 - 42:10
    where after the telecom companies
  • 42:10 - 42:12
    had succeeded into getting
  • 42:12 - 42:13
    the federal government to say
  • 42:13 - 42:15
    « No regulation of telecom companies,
  • 42:15 - 42:17
    not having any of your open access regulation
  • 42:17 - 42:18
    that Yochaim has been arguing for,
  • 42:18 - 42:20
    not even having any effective
  • 42:20 - 42:22
    network neutrality regulation.
  • 42:22 - 42:23
    They then went to the states,
  • 42:23 - 42:25
    because in the states,
  • 42:25 - 42:27
    you have local communities
  • 42:27 - 42:29
    that are building their own high-speed networks
  • 42:29 - 42:31
    much faster, much cheaper
  • 42:31 - 42:34
    than what the telecom monopolies provide.
  • 42:34 - 42:36
    And the telecom monopolies didn’t like that,
  • 42:36 - 42:38
    so what they did is they got the states
  • 42:38 - 42:40
    to pass laws banning
  • 42:40 - 42:44
    this local telecom franchises.
  • 42:44 - 42:46
    So here they do not want any regulation
  • 42:46 - 42:48
    from the federal government
  • 42:48 - 42:48
    but they want state regulation
  • 42:48 - 42:50
    to block some competition from local...
  • 42:50 - 42:52
    So we try to raise a campaign
  • 42:52 - 42:55
    around this and though we get thousands
  • 42:55 - 42:57
    of people calling the governor,
  • 42:57 - 42:58
    the governor doesn't think she needs
  • 42:58 - 43:00
    to pay any attention to
  • 43:00 - 43:02
    the internet community at all
  • 43:02 - 43:04
    So the difference here is not so much
  • 43:04 - 43:06
    the internet: the internet is the same.
  • 43:06 - 43:08
    The difference is the political culture
  • 43:08 - 43:10
    that feels that it needs to pay attention to it.
  • 43:10 - 43:12
    And the only way to force a political culture
  • 43:12 - 43:14
    to pay attention to you
  • 43:14 - 43:16
    is to punish them when they don't.
  • 43:16 - 43:20
    So in France, this three-strikes fact (Hadopi Law)
  • 43:20 - 43:23
    should be a source of extraordinary political
  • 43:23 - 43:25
    organization to punish
  • 43:25 - 43:26
    the French government and obviously...
  • 43:26 - 43:28
    It is, it is
  • 43:28 - 43:29
    ...it is of course. It is!...
  • 43:29 - 43:30
    but the point is when that gets delivered
  • 43:30 - 43:32
    and that had a message,
  • 43:32 - 43:36
    when you go from a 5% return to a 20% return
  • 43:36 - 43:38
    then you're going to see
  • 43:38 - 43:39
    people recognize the internet is a force.
  • 43:39 - 43:42
    But we need to do that everywhere,
  • 43:42 - 43:43
    it is not something we can take for granted,
  • 43:43 - 43:44
    it is really something that's a culture
  • 43:44 - 43:46
    that needs to be built.
  • 43:46 - 43:47
    So what I hear you saying,
  • 43:47 - 43:50
    to oversimplify as is my want:
  • 43:50 - 43:50
    we're not protecting the internet,
  • 43:50 - 43:52
    we're protecting the speech, still.
  • 43:52 - 43:54
    Well, to simplify it even further,
  • 43:54 - 43:56
    when roles and office depend on
  • 43:56 - 43:58
    understanding what the internet is
  • 43:58 - 44:01
    and forwarding the internet's openess,
  • 44:01 - 44:04
    then we'll get the result we need.
  • 44:04 - 44:06
    If we can vote people in or out
  • 44:06 - 44:08
    based on their reaction to the internet.
  • 44:08 - 44:10
    Then we'll be going somewhere.
  • 44:10 - 44:12
    Governments only listen to
  • 44:12 - 44:14
    the people who elect them
  • 44:14 - 44:16
    and the businesses that fund their campaigns.
  • 44:16 - 44:20
    Right? So Larry is taking on the businesses
  • 44:20 - 44:21
    that fund their campaigns.
  • 44:21 - 44:24
    We, the internet people,
  • 44:24 - 44:25
    have to take on their election.
  • 44:25 - 44:27
    This has to become, as it has become in Australia
  • 44:27 - 44:30
    and in Canada, an issue
  • 44:30 - 44:32
    for the electoral politics.
  • 44:33 - 44:34
    Maybe we can ...
  • 44:34 - 44:36
    actually, we are all replying
  • 44:36 - 44:38
    with our own words to the great question of Jeff.
  • 44:38 - 44:41
    Maybe this will be used as a conclusion
  • 44:41 - 44:42
    I don't know, maybe there will be
  • 44:42 - 44:44
    some more questions but ...
  • 44:44 - 44:48
    There will be, there's one more question ...
  • 44:48 - 44:52
    In my view we have to continue
  • 44:52 - 44:54
    what we are doing, doing it more
  • 44:54 - 44:56
    and being more numerous to do it.
  • 44:56 - 44:57
    I've got a few examples
  • 44:57 - 44:58
    with our own campaigning
  • 44:58 - 45:00
    where we really made a difference,
  • 45:00 - 45:02
    whether it is with the amendment 138
  • 45:02 - 45:04
    in the European Parliament
  • 45:04 - 45:06
    that made everybody be shaking
  • 45:06 - 45:10
    with fear of « Internet's freedom issue »
  • 45:10 - 45:13
    we moved the lines in the ACTA agreement,
  • 45:13 - 45:16
    we directly changed some of its contents
  • 45:16 - 45:20
    and when we leaked that letter
  • 45:20 - 45:22
    from Nicolas Sarkozy to Bernard Kouchner,
  • 45:22 - 45:24
    who was at the time minister of foreign affairs,
  • 45:24 - 45:26
    who was to organise a conference
  • 45:26 - 45:28
    about freedom of speech on the Internet,
  • 45:28 - 45:29
    Sarkozy telling him
  • 45:29 - 45:31
    « in the balance of the freedom of speech
  • 45:31 - 45:32
    on the Internet, you'll put the HADOPI
  • 45:32 - 45:34
    and you'll put the civilized Internet »,
  • 45:34 - 45:36
    just leaking that letter
  • 45:36 - 45:38
    and organizing the leak with our Dutch friends
  • 45:38 - 45:40
    from Bits of Freedom made
  • 45:40 - 45:42
    the whole conference to be cancelled.
  • 45:42 - 45:44
    So we have examples already
  • 45:44 - 45:47
    of civil society pressures getting to a result.
  • 45:47 - 45:50
    I think it is the way we use our
  • 45:50 - 45:57
    freedoms of speech or expression.
  • 45:57 - 45:59
    I think it is the way we use it collectively
  • 45:59 - 46:02
    that makes us be citizens,
  • 46:02 - 46:04
    that makes us do our jobs of citizens
  • 46:04 - 46:06
    that makes us participate to politics
  • 46:06 - 46:10
    in the noble antic sense of citizens carrying
  • 46:10 - 46:13
    of the life of the « Cité » and this is exactly
  • 46:13 - 46:15
    what we have to do between two elections
  • 46:15 - 46:18
    and this how we win if you have
  • 46:18 - 46:20
    some volunteer time to contribute.
  • 46:20 - 46:22
    Well said
  • 46:23 - 46:26
    I just want to hear Yochai's answer
  • 46:26 - 46:29
    to Jeff's question first if you don't mind.
  • 46:30 - 46:32
    I don't want to take more time.
  • 46:32 - 46:35
    It's just, the stories you heard
  • 46:35 - 46:37
    tell both that we know how
  • 46:37 - 46:38
    and that it is very hard.
  • 46:38 - 46:40
    There are success stories,
  • 46:40 - 46:42
    there are failure stories.
  • 46:42 - 46:44
    But kinds of civil organisation
  • 46:44 - 46:46
    that were extremely difficult
  • 46:46 - 46:49
    and happened only in great moments of crisis
  • 46:49 - 46:51
    when people came out in the streets
  • 46:51 - 46:53
    are now more feasible
  • 46:53 - 46:55
    at lower levels of activation.
  • 46:55 - 46:58
    Whether it's free software developers
  • 46:58 - 47:00
    organising against software patents
  • 47:00 - 47:01
    at the European level,
  • 47:01 - 47:04
    whether it's the story you just call
  • 47:04 - 47:06
    about the conference on free speech,
  • 47:06 - 47:08
    the level of activation necessary
  • 47:08 - 47:10
    because the effort necessary
  • 47:10 - 47:12
    to participate is lower,
  • 47:12 - 47:14
    allows us more direct participation
  • 47:14 - 47:16
    but the stakes are very
  • 47:16 - 47:18
    very high on the other side.
  • 47:18 - 47:20
    If you look at the net neutrality
  • 47:20 - 47:22
    debates in the United States,
  • 47:22 - 47:24
    we did exactly that, we put it on the,
  • 47:24 - 47:26
    oh you, put it on the agenda.
  • 47:26 - 47:30
    It became a real agenda item, the only thing -
  • 47:30 - 47:31
    « We are unfortunatly not able
  • 47:31 - 47:32
    to provide you the last 3 minutes
  • 47:32 - 47:34
    of the Press conference.
  • 47:34 - 47:37
    See you on Owni.fr »
Titre:
[EN] La société civile s'en va t'en guerre à l' e-G8
Description:

http://owni.fr/2011/05/24/direct-eg8-sarkozy-internet/
Improvised press conference of the civil society during the e-G8 Forum in Paris led by Jérémie Zimmermann (porte-parole de La Quadrature du Net) and with Jeff Jarvis (Professor in Journalism at City University New York) ; Lawrence Lessig (Professor at HArvard Law School, founder of Creative Commons) ; Susan P. Crawford (former ICANN member) ; Jean-François Julliard (directeur de Reporter Sans Frontières) ; Yochai Benkler (co-director of Harvard's Berkman Center for the Internet).
http://owni.fr/2011/05/24/direct-eg8-sarkozy-internet/

plus » « moins
Langue de la vidéo:
English

sous-titres en English

Révisions Comparer les révisions