Subject: [Hrpc] draft charter

From: Niels ten Oever <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 12:24:03 +0200

Dear all,

I hope this email finds you well. Behind the scenes were working hard
on the editing of the film of the recorded interviews we've done at
IETF92 in Dallas, and there is more interesting work coming up, about
which you'll hear more soon.

We've also requested a 90 minutes timeslot for the IETF meeting in
Prague.

In the mean time Lars has asked us to come up with a draft charter,
which would still change if/when the research group would be formally
chartered. This text would be a placeholder and inform people (in the
datatracker) about what this group is proposing to do.

We came up with the following, I  would like to send a finalized
version of this to Lars in a week, I am very much looking forward to
your comments.

Best,

Niels

Background
The Human Rights Protocol Consideration Proposed Research Group is
chartered to research whether standards and protocols can solidify,
enable or threaten user rights. The research departs for the problem
statement that decisive and human rights enabling characteristics of
the Internet might be degraded if they're not properly defined,
described and protected. Not defining these characteristics could
result in (partial) loss of functionality and connectivity.

As stated in RFC 1958, the Internet aims to be the global network of
networks that provides unfettered connectivity to all users at all
times and for any content.  Open, secure and reliable
connectivity is essential for rights such as freedom of expression and
freedom of association, as defined in the Universal Declaration   of
Human Rights.  Therefore, considering connectivity as the ultimate
objective of the Internet, this makes a clear case that the Internet
is not only an enabler of human rights, but that human rights lie at
the basis of, and are ingrained in, the architecture of the network.

Objective
This research aims to expose the relations between protocols and human
rights, and propose guidelines to protect the rights enabling
environment in future protocol development in a manner similar to the
work done for RFC 6973 on Privacy Consideration Guidelines,

Outputs
The research group plans on using  a variety of research methods to
create different outputs including (but not limited to):

- - Internet drafts - (some of which may be put on IRSG RFC track)
These would concern tracking of the project, methodology, and would
define any possible protocol considerations.

- - Policy and academic papers
For in depth analysis and discussion on the relationship between human
rights and the Internet architecture and protocols.

- - Film based on interview with members of the community
To give an accessible insight into the variety of opinions on this
topic represented in the community by .

- - Data analysis and visualization
To research and visualize the language used in current and historic
RFCs and mailinglist discussions to expose core architectural
principles and language and deliberations on end-user rights.

Membership
Membership is open to any interested parties who intend to remain
current with the published documents and mailing list issues.

- -- 
Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital

Article 19
www.article19.org

PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4
                   678B 08B5 A0F2 636D 68E9

---

From: Kathleen Moriarty <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 09:24:16 -0400

The charter looks good, thank you for your work in this area.  I just have a couple of nits inline.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 30, 2015, at 7:20 AM, "Eggert, Lars" <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> Please comment on the [email-masked] list
> 
> Begin forwarded message:
>> 
>> From: Niels ten Oever <[email-masked]>
>> Subject: [Hrpc] draft charter
>> Date: April 30, 2015 at 12:24:03 GMT+2
>> To: "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
>> 
>> Signed PGP part
>> Dear all,
>> 
>> The Human Rights Protocol Consideration Proposed

I assume 'proposed' won't remain in the charter once published, do I'd remove it now to make sure it doesn't get left in there.

>> Research Group is
>> enable or threaten user rights. The research departs
Do you mean departs or something else here?
>> for
Should this be 'from' instead of 'for'?
>> the problem
>> statement
Add 'in'

Or change this opening phrase to 'The research and problem statement state'
>> that decisive and human rights enabling characteristics of
>> - Internet drafts - (some of which may be put on IRSG RFC track)
>> - Policy and academic papers
>> - Film based on interview with members of the community
Was there supposed to be a word after 'by'?  If not, delete 'by'.
>> - Data analysis and visualization

Best regards,
Kathleen 

>> --
>> _______________________________________________
>> Hrpc mailing list
>> [email-masked]
>> https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
>

---

From: Niels ten Oever <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 15:59:56 +0200

Thanks for your suggestions Kathleen, integrated your suggestions and
made some further changes.

Since the Research Group is still a Proposed Research Group that is
not officially chartered yet (this is a decision made by the IRTF
chair), I think that should remain in the title, but please correct me
if I am wrong.

Now it reads:

Background
The Human Rights Protocol Consideration Proposed Research Group is
chartered to research whether standards and protocols can solidify,
enable or threaten user rights. The research group takes as its
starting point the problem statement that decisive and human rights
enabling characteristics of the Internet might be degraded if they're
not properly defined, described and protected. Not defining these
characteristics could result in (partial) loss of functionality and
connectivity.

Objective

Outputs

- - Film based on interviews with members of the community
To give an accessible insight into the variety of opinions on this
topic represented in the community.

Membership

Best,

Niels

Niels ten Oever
Head of Digital

Article 19
www.article19.org

On 04/30/2015 03:24 PM, Kathleen Moriarty wrote:
>>> From: Niels ten Oever <[email-masked]> Subject: [Hrpc]
>>> draft charter Date: April 30, 2015 at 12:24:03 GMT+2 To:
>>> "[email-masked]" <[email-masked]>
>>> 
>>> Signed PGP part Dear all,
>>> 
>>> I hope this email finds you well. Behind the scenes were
>>> working hard on the editing of the film of the recorded
>>> interviews we've done at IETF92 in Dallas, and there is more
>>> interesting work coming up, about which you'll hear more soon.
>>> 
>>> We've also requested a 90 minutes timeslot for the IETF meeting
>>> in Prague.
>>> 
>>> In the mean time Lars has asked us to come up with a draft
>>> charter, which would still change if/when the research group
>>> would be formally chartered. This text would be a placeholder
>>> and inform people (in the datatracker) about what this group is
>>> proposing to do.
>>> 
>>> We came up with the following, I  would like to send a
>>> finalized version of this to Lars in a week, I am very much
>>> looking forward to your comments.
>>> 
>>> Best,
>>> 
>>> Niels
>>> 
>>> Background The Human Rights Protocol Consideration Proposed
> 
> I assume 'proposed' won't remain in the charter once published, do
> I'd remove it now to make sure it doesn't get left in there.
> 
>>> Research Group is chartered to research whether standards and
>>> protocols can solidify, enable or threaten user rights. The
>>> research departs
>>> the problem statement
>>> that decisive and human rights enabling characteristics of the
>>> Internet might be degraded if they're not properly defined, 
>>> described and protected. Not defining these characteristics
>>> could result in (partial) loss of functionality and
>>> connectivity.
>>> 
>>> As stated in RFC 1958, the Internet aims to be the global
>>> network of networks that provides unfettered connectivity to
>>> all users at all times and for any content.  Open, secure and
>>> reliable connectivity is essential for rights such as freedom
>>> of expression and freedom of association, as defined in the
>>> Universal Declaration   of Human Rights.  Therefore,
>>> considering connectivity as the ultimate objective of the
>>> Internet, this makes a clear case that the Internet is not only
>>> an enabler of human rights, but that human rights lie at the
>>> basis of, and are ingrained in, the architecture of the
>>> network.
>>> 
>>> Objective This research aims to expose the relations between
>>> protocols and human rights, and propose guidelines to protect
>>> the rights enabling environment in future protocol development
>>> in a manner similar to the work done for RFC 6973 on Privacy
>>> Consideration Guidelines,
>>> 
>>> Outputs The research group plans on using  a variety of
>>> research methods to create different outputs including (but not
>>> limited to):
>>> 
>>> - Internet drafts - (some of which may be put on IRSG RFC
>>> track) These would concern tracking of the project,
>>> methodology, and would define any possible protocol
>>> considerations.
>>> 
>>> - Policy and academic papers For in depth analysis and
>>> discussion on the relationship between human rights and the
>>> Internet architecture and protocols.
>>> 
>>> - Film based on interview with members of the community To give
>>> an accessible insight into the variety of opinions on this 
>>> - Data analysis and visualization To research and visualize the
>>> language used in current and historic RFCs and mailinglist
>>> discussions to expose core architectural principles and
>>> language and deliberations on end-user rights.
>>> 
>>> Membership Membership is open to any interested parties who
>>> intend to remain current with the published documents and
>>> mailing list issues.
> 
> Best regards, Kathleen
> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- Niels ten Oever Head of Digital
>>> 
>>> Article 19 www.article19.org
>>> 
>>> PGP fingerprint    8D9F C567 BEE4 A431 56C4 678B 08B5 A0F2 636D
>>> 68E9
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________ Hrpc mailing
>>> list [email-masked] https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________ Hrpc mailing list 
> [email-masked] https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/hrpc
>

---

From: Stephen Farrell <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 15:11:45 +0100

Hiya,

For context, I still have no clue what if any outcomes we might see
here, but I very much support the idea of trying to find that out:-)
(Assuming we have enough folks active etc.)

Some comments/questions below:

On 30/04/15 14:59, Niels ten Oever wrote:
> enable or threaten user rights. 

What is a "user right" is it the same as a "human right"? I'd say
lose the former term would be better.

And I think you could start with a pointer to what you think defines
human rights? (The UDHR? [1]) Many IETF type folks won't be familiar
with that so it's worth an explicit reference maybe.

  [1] http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/

> The research group takes as its

Hmm. I'm not sure I agree 100% with the thesis there. But it's
defensible I agree. My issue with it is that I have seen cases
where the act of asking if X is allowed results in X, that used
to be not-disallowed, no longer being allowed;-)

I think you could make a better argument to the effect that we
don't know much about how Internet protocols and human rights
intersect and since the Internet is now quite important, it's
a good idea to study that.

> the basis of, and are ingrained in, the architecture of the network.

"basis of, and are ingrained in," may be overstatement. I think it
would be fair to say that the architecture makes assumptions that
clearly overlap with the UDHR though, even if we don't fully
understand the overlaps.

> - Film based on interviews with members of the community

Maybe education is an objective? Both so HR folks learn more
about real protocol stuff but also vice versa, so pointy headed
protocol developers learn some more about how their work might
influence HR.

Cheers,
S.

---

From: "Alvaro Retana (aretana)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 14:16:54 +0000

>Please comment on the [email-masked] list

Hi!

This looks like very interesting work.

. . .
>> enable or threaten user rights.

The charter should be to be very clear about what Human Rights are.  For
example, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights was mentioned (below),
but just as a reference, and not as the authoritative source.  It may be
obvious to many that it would be the source, but there may be other
interpretations.

Along the same vein of being clear and explicit, the paragraph above
starts talking about human rights, but it ends with ³user rights².  Are
these the same?  Will ³user rights², as in (I assume) users of the
Internet be defined as part of the RG?  Maybe that is what this next part
means:

>> The research departs for the problem

Does this last piece of text mean that Internet connectivity (which means
exactly what?) is (or should be declared) a human right?  I haven¹t read
the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in a while, but I don¹t remember
it talking about the Internet.  Maybe, as you say above, the case is clear
in the relationship between the Internet objectives and Human Rights ‹
but, does it mean that the Internet is just an enabler or should it a
human right in itself?  I know that several countries have put forth
legislation to that effect. I might be getting more into politics at this
point ‹ it seems hard not to..

The point of my comments is:  please be clear on the starting point.

Thanks!

Alvaro.

---

From: Mallory Knodel <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2015 10:35:08 -0400

Hi Neils

My only comment:

> work done for RFC 6973 on Privacy Consideration Guidelines,
Maybe, protect is a strong word and will be taken completely literally.
I don't know if what we are doing is creating "guidelines to protect". I
think guidelines are meant to guide. And ultimately what we are doing is
making a case for human rights as just as an important consideration as
efficiency, interoperability, scalability, integrity, etc. etc.

-Mallory
-- 
Mallory Knodel
Association for Progressive Communications :: apc.org <https://apc.org>
gpg fingerprint :: E3EB 63E0 65A3 B240 BCD9 B071 0C32 A271 BD3C C780