[Manila Principles] Manila Principles draft 0.97 released

[Jeremy Malcolm]

The attached version 0.97 of the Manila Principles, taking into account
comments made over the last few weeks, takes us a step closer to the
version that we will approve in Manila.  Most of the areas of difference
have crystallised very clearly by now.  There are a few points where
further discussion is still needed, which are worth highlighting:

1. There continues to be disagreement about whether only a judicial
order can justify the restriction of content by an intermediary.  In the
latest draft, we remain committed to a judicial order only - but one
option for compromise (the word "preferably") is given in square
brackets, and further discussion is invited.

2. We still need to come up with a better term than "content provider"
to refer to users who upload content.

3. Principle II(c) says "Intermediaries who host content may forward
compliant requests for content restriction received from complainants
... to the content provider".  It was correctly pointed out that this
can lead to abuse - although we do also say later that "Governments may
sanction content restriction requests that are issued with no reasonable
legal justification or basis" and we also say that "Intermediaries
should be allowed to charge private party complainants on a cost
recovery basis for the time and expense associated with processing their
content restriction requests", and it is suggested in the latest draft
that we add "at a rate provided by law". Are these sufficient
safeguards?  Or do we need more?  We don't however want to place
intermediaries in the
position of judges who have to make a legal determination that a content
restriction request is prima facie valid - both because of the burden
that this places on them, and also because they are not qualified and
could make dubious judgments or come under pressure to do so.

You can also find an online version of the 0.97 draft at
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xJ-jjaaSGN7ZQfjuGftgwnWaPeK5JBZeaVA3-oiNAk4/edit#heading=h.2s8eyo1
(but unlike the attached version, it doesn't show the amendments since
version 0.96).

-- 
Jeremy Malcolm
Senior Global Policy Analyst
Electronic Frontier Foundation
https://eff.org
jmalcolm at eff.org

Tel: 415.436.9333 ext 161

:: Defending Your Rights in the Digital World ::

Public key: https://www.eff.org/files/2014/10/09/key_jmalcolm.txt
PGP fingerprint: FF13 C2E9 F9C3 DF54 7C4F EAC1 F675 AAE2 D2AB 2220
OTR fingerprint: 26EE FD85 3740 8228 9460 49A8 536F BCD2 536F A5BD

Learn how to encrypt your email with the Email Self Defense guide:
https://emailselfdefense.fsf.org/en

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.eff.org/pipermail/manilaprinciples/attachments/20150309/58c12dc7/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: IntermediaryLiabilityPrinciples0.97.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 71001 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <https://lists.eff.org/pipermail/manilaprinciples/attachments/20150309/58c12dc7/attachment-0001.pdf>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 244 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <https://lists.eff.org/pipermail/manilaprinciples/attachments/20150309/58c12dc7/attachment-0001.sig>