We need all institutions and all processes that are involved in governance of the Internet to be transparent, to facilitate participation, and participation from all stakeholders, and participation in decision-making, to provide access to information. And this is a very broad -- this does not apply just to ICANN; this applies to all aspects of Internet policy and government. On the themes of the forum, we think there are some key issues. Some of them have been addressed already.

In the security theme, as was said by the chair, unless you link human rights and the right to privacy and other freedoms to security, you can create a less-secure environment rather than a more-secure environment. And we urge the IGF to maintain this link. In the theme of openness, we think there are two primary issues to be addressed.

On the one hand, freedoms, freedom of expression, and the removal of barriers to people being able to use the Internet in any way they want to. And on the other hand, standards.

Increasingly, there are standards being made outside of public spaces that have social implications that limit what people can do with the Internet. And the IGF needs to address this. This touches on issues of intellectual property, interoperability between different applications and devices. And these are things that impact on the cost. Why should blind people pay more for interfaces to read text because they're blind and because someone owns a royalty on making two applications talk to one another? This is wrong.

On the issue of access, I think as has been said, it's really vital. We heard already, five billion people in the world do not have access. We hear proclamations about wireless solutions, about private sector investment and initiatives driven by governments, by intergovernmental organizations. And, yet, there are still five billion people in the world without access. The IGF needs to prioritize this.

And then on diversity, I think what we would say about diversity is that the key to addressing diversity is, it's almost as an equation, if you put openness and access together, you will have diversity. If you remove the barriers that are created by rigid, proprietary intellectual property regimes, you will have more creation, more innovation.

So let's focus on diversity as an issue, and linguistic diversity, cultural diversity. But let's remember that by creating more access and more openness, we will immediately, automatically achieve more diversity.

And then, finally, about ICANN. I think that we would like to commend the IGF for putting critical Internet resources on the agenda. It's an important issue. But there's also a lot more to talk about other than ICANN. And I've already highlighted many of these issues.

So while not avoiding talking about controversial issues, let's not let them dominate the space for the next few days, because there are many other critical issues. And that is why we are here. [ Applause ]

Internet real name law
During the 2005 National Assembly election period, the Internet Real Name Law, passed at the plenary session of Parliament on March 9, 2004, was enacted requiring Internet media and press websites to verify all names and identification numbers of authors who publish articles, comments and messages related to any government election on bulletin boards and chat rooms.

The Internet Real Name Law is an instrument for verification of contributers to Internet sites.

This law is strictly imposed during election periods discouraging citizens from critiquing politicians and their parties

The Internet Real Name Law is now imposed at all times, not only during election periods, targeting all major portals and Internet media sites subjecting users to a name check prior to publication of their comments to these and/or any site including blogs.

The Internet Real Name Law imposes and strengthens self-censorship of the South Korean people.

At the forthcoming 2007 Presidential Election the independent news provider, some Internet media sites, including People's Media Chamsesang will oppose the Internet Real Name Law. It will not establish the instrument that will verify the identity of its users in full knowledge that they will face criminal punishment in doing so.

Act on promotion of Information and communications network utilization and data protection
With the implementation of the “Act on Promotion of Information and Communications Network Utilization and Data Protection” any one, in particular business interests, local and foreign owned companies based in South Korea can demand the removal of articles and comments, on the basis of defamation claims, from any Internet news, trade union and consumer advocacy sites. More specifically, any articles seen to violate national security laws, in particular those relating to North Korea must also be removed. Such requests can be made without any involvement of any judicial authority.

Violation of these new laws, and if taken through the Courts, can see fines of up to USD$11000 imposed and/or a two year jail sentence.

Significant limits to critique of private companies and individuals which can result in defamation claims.

Articles, blog posts and comments that have the possibility to violate national security law, especially those related to North Korea must be removed on request. Not doing so will result in court action.

Requests to remove content, without court intervention, must be adhered to. Not doing so will result in legal action taken out against the hosting provider. The provider would be sued regardless of who had published the original content.

Outcomes
With this new Act available, a private company has demanded Jinbonet delete a blog posting warning it would raise defamation charges if the alleged offending article was not removed. As Jinbonet is opposed to this Act2 it objected to the demand.

This has resulted in a defamation charge being laid against Jinbonet being sued through the South Korean Courts. The trial has already commenced.

In August 2007 The Ministry for Information Communication ordered the deletion of postings related to North Korea from the web sites of the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions, the Democratic Labor Party and 14 other organizations, including 5 organizations who are hosted by Jinbonet.

Some organizations rejected demands and are currently waiting for their trial on the indictment. Jinbonet has yet to receive specific demands to remove related content, but it expects to resulting in further court action.

Data retention act
The Korean National Security Agency has this year driven a legislative process to amend the "protection of communications secrets act". They are seeking to establish a data retention mechanism using the theme of anti-terrorism to impose their requested amendments.

Should these amendments be passed it will require all ISPs to establish wiretapping mechanisms for mobile telephony and Internet communications.

The proposed amendments are currently being debated in the National Assembly.

Biometric ID
The South Korean government are developing plans to introduce a bio-passport. As the United States is demanding South Korea join the Visa Waiver Program (VWP), all biometric data will be available to US authorities.

In addition to standard identification data the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) requires all biometric information include fingerprints which will be a component of the bio-passport.

The South Korean government is willing to share not only its citizens biometric data, but the entire judicial history of domestics under an information sharing agreement with the USA.

Call for support
Private companies, corporations and the South Korean government are attacking and seriously undermining the rights of its people through restrictions imposted on ICTs and furthermore, limiting the freedoms of expression that are the cornerstone of any practicing democracy.

As a result of Jinbonet's advocacy efforts and its stand on these issues faces a serious crisis with threats to existence. For example, Jinbonet has been under investigation by the secret police and is currently under trial and expects to continue to be subjected to the demands of Korean ministerial actions and its judicial system.

Jinbonet calls on the support of APC and its partners, in the interest of the rights of all peoples in all countries, to assist us in our struggles, bringing hope to the maintenance of our civil liberties.

For more information contact:
Jong Hoi Lee, Jinbonet, haje@jinbo.net

For more information: http://www.igfbrazil2007.br/

Read more from Michael Sainsbury's article, Mobile battle over TV formats.

• On Census night, 58% of Australian households reported that they had an Internet connection. Broadband was the most common type of connection (37%), close to double the proportion with a dial-up connection (20%).
• Connectivity rates of households varied by state and territory. The ACT had the highest rates of both broadband (50% of households) and total Internet connections (71% of households). In the majority of states, broadband rates were considerably higher than dial-up rates. However, states with low rates of total Internet connection tended to have similar levels of broadband and dial-up connections. In Tasmania, 52% of households were connected to the Internet (the lowest of any state), with broadband access in 27% and dial-up in 24% of households.
• Total Internet connection rates were higher in capital cities than the rest of the country. In Sydney, for example, 62% of households were connected to the Internet compared to 52% in the remainder of NSW. Broadband connection rates followed a similar pattern, with higher rates in the capital cities. With the exception of the Northern Territory, dial-up rates were lower in capital cities than the rest of the state or territory.
• In each of the capital cities, broadband connection rates were higher than dial-up rates, with rates more than double in several states. For example, in Melbourne, 43% of households had broadband access compared to 18% with a dial-up connection. Outside the capital cities, broadband connection rates were higher than dial-up rates in the majority of states (NSW, Victoria, Queensland, WA and NT) although the differences tended to be much smaller.
• The 2001 Census was the first Census to seek information on Internet use. For the 2006 Census, this topic was reviewed and the question related to the dwelling's connection to the Internet rather than to personal use of the Internet.

For more information:
Australian Bureau of Statistics

For more information see VIDEO SLAM.

(Play video – Eyes on the Fair Use...)

Information and communication technologies are integral to human society. In many cultures today, information retrieval and presentation – the recording of wisdom and history – is still done with the use of speech, drama, painting, song or dance. The use of writing changed this enormously, and the invention of the printing press allowing communication on a massive scale, through newspapers and magazines. More recent innovations increased further the reach and spread of communication...

These innovations, or information communication technologies can be grouped into three categories:

1. Information technologies uses computers, which have become indispensable in modern societies to process data, and some still believe, to save time and effort (tell that to my waist line, aching wrist and elbow).
2. Telecommunications technologies include telephones and the broadcasting of radio and television, often through satellites.
3. Networking, or Online technologies, of which the most widely known is the Internet, but which has extended to mobile telephony, Voice over IP, or VOIP, satellite communications, and other forms of communication such as wireless, bluetooth and so on.

And it's here, online, where unprecedented means for communication are shaping our lives, what and how we create and more importantly, how we make it available.

[SLIDE 2 – Online rights issues]

Ownership – Who truly owns what you publish online? How can you be sure that your content stays online, that the site, or server you are hosting with can remove your content without notice. Australian still has some of the most expensive telecommunications charges in the world. As such, many of us host our content off-shore, but under whose laws are our works protected?

Copying or sharing – Should we care about “piracy”? An un-official survey of New Zealand record company executives and their iPods showed a significant percentage of content on these devices didn't come from your local iTunes store. So tell me, who really are the pirates?

Protections – What is the difference between ALL and SOME RIGHTS RESERVED? Why are some licenses flexible? How much protection do we need given that society “free to borrow and build upon its past is culturally richer than a controlled”, or over-protected one.

Time and format shifting – We can make our work available as Podcasts, Vodcasts and compressed streams. People can elect to listen or watch our work when ever it's convenient for them. Time and format shifting is changing the way we consume media and no doubt how we make it. What are the implications for artists and their audiences in a world of interoperability, of time and format shifting?

Parody and satire – Many of us have become familiar with the term “fair use”. Is there an equivalent in Australia and if so, to what extent does “fair use” protect our need to critique, for instance, our decision-makers and does it protet us when we host our content off-shore?

Copyright Amendment Act 2006 – Enacted on the 1st of January 2007 when many of us were either nursing hang-overs or still wide-eyed and wide-awake.

Copyright laws still dated: expert

Source: The Age, 3 May 2007

Unfortunately, the register is not a complete block against all invasive calls. Those who are exempt from having to check the register include political parties (no surprise there :), religious organisations, charities and market researchers.

So, it's not perfect but at least it is a step in the right direction.

Numbers can be added to the register over the Internet via the "Do Not Call Register" home page. On the first day that this service was made available, the site collapsed under the strain of people rushing to register. It now seems to be working correctly and we urge people to make use of it.

Do Not Call Register

Over a period of 48 hours, from Sunday May 13, 10am to Monday May 14, 8pm, filmmakers, writers, programmers, sound and video artists will slam out a 10-minute digital short from content found largely on the Web.

Video Slam will explore the use of Creative Commons licenses for the creation of original digital content. Based at Horse Bazaar, Melbourne's Digital Arts bar and The Age Cheap Eats Bar of the Year 07, individuals and teams will collaborate to create unique fragments towards a complete narrative, perhaps one editor to each scene, or five composers scoring two minutes a-piece, or three actors performing the same part directed by four directors!

Free Screening & Artist Forum

When: Monday 14 May, 8pm
Venue: Horse Bazaar* 397 Lt Lonsdale St, Melbourne
* Venue is wheelchair accessible
Bookings: artslaw [@] openchannel.org.au or 03 8610 9300

For more information: http://openchannel.org.au/artslaw/

• Shaun Miller (Marshalls & Dent)
• Jarmal Richard (JDR Legal)
• Andrew Garton (OPEN CHANNEL / APC.au)

Date: Wednesday May 9
Time: 7pm - 9pm
Venue: Cinema Nova, 380 Lygon st, Carlton *
Cost: Free

Bookings
Email: artslaw @ openchannel.org.au Phone: (03) 8610 9300

* Venue is wheelchair accessible

About the Speakers

Shaun Miller is a Senior Associate at Marshalls & Dent Lawyers' Media and Entertainment Department. He is currently on the Board of the Victorian College of the Arts Film and Television School Course Advisory Committee. Shaun also lectures in film and entertainment law at Open Channel, VCA, AFTRS and RMIT. Shaun has worked on feature films Ned Kelly, The Rage in Pacid Lake, Gettin' Square and Suburban Mayhem.

Andrew Garton is a writer, producer and composer. He is currently Program Director of OPEN CHANNEL, a Director of APC.au, volunteer Editor of ICT Rights Watch Australia, and Manager of the artist-run Secession Records.

Richard Jarmal is a Governor of the American Chamber of Commerce (AMCHAM), Victorian Chapter, and has presented both to AMCHAM and other organisations including Innovation Victoria (Innovic) and the Australian Trade Centre.

Here's the latest in the ongoing struggle between copyright holders and the private interest that is Google/YouTube.

YouTube's massive copyright suithttp://www.theage.com.au/news/biztech/copyrights-and-wrongs/2007/03/14/1173722521267.html

Source: EFFector 20.05

University of Western Sydney
University of Technology Sydney
Sydney, Australia
April 9 - 13 2007

Full details at http://www.ourmedia07.net/?page_id=4