the issue and engage with foreign governments, but along with the Department of
Justice, the State Department also expressed concern over GOFA. 15 The shortest version of our analysis at the Berkman Center is that GOFA is simply too blunt, impractical, and inflexible: although the GNI may provide the basis for law over time, we
simply do not yet have a clear enough sense of the answers to mandate any particular
approach, let alone the proposed one. 16
European policymakers have likewise been active on issues related to online expression and privacy on both the substantive and the political fronts. The Council of
Europe has offered actionable insights, including fostering understanding and developing useful guidance for the interactions between ICT service providers and law enforcement 17 and providing clear and detailed guidance on human rights issues for ICT
providers. 18 The European Parliament weighed in on security and freedom online, calling for sustained engagement and expressing interest in developing a multistakeholder
initiative. 19 It has also recommended the creation of a code of conduct for freedom of
expression. 20 Parliamentarians from across Europe also introduced a version of
GOFA, 21 leading Viviane Reding, European Commission Lead Member on the Information Society, to express concern over the ‘‘heavy’’ nature of the instruments (including
the prospect of forcing companies to withdraw and leave markets to less scrupulous
competitors) and to place promise in the GNI. 22
Sadly, even as some governments seek to address this problem globally, numerous
competing government efforts are under way that will abridge the human rights others
are seeking to preserve. 23 While problems in developing and transitioning countries
first caught the public eye, it is the disconcerting legislation among early Internet
adopters that has received attention recently. From proposals for national filtering in
Australia to the South Korean government’s requirement for real name registration,
efforts to rein in perceived Internet dangers represent troubling examples for countries
that are just beginning their policymaking efforts related to the Internet.
Stakeholders Unite: Global Network Initiative
Recognizing profound challenges associated with the broad spectrum of laws and
practices related to freedom of expression and privacy in states around the world,
as well as the laws and standards of home countries, employees, shareholders, and
the international community, some ICT companies decided not to continue down
this path in isolation. The initial framing was inspired substantially by the Sullivan
Principles, 24 introduced in 1977 as a code of conduct for U.S. companies doing
business in apartheid South Africa. An industry-code approach offered the potential to
set a higher standard than if companies were left to fend for themselves, allowed them
to benefit from the strength of their numbers, and it recognized the need for even
dread competitors to unite around certain values—all while retaining control of the
expectations.
Protecting Privacy and Expression Online
91
Justice, the State Department also expressed concern over GOFA. 15 The shortest version of our analysis at the Berkman Center is that GOFA is simply too blunt, impractical, and inflexible: although the GNI may provide the basis for law over time, we
simply do not yet have a clear enough sense of the answers to mandate any particular
approach, let alone the proposed one. 16
European policymakers have likewise been active on issues related to online expression and privacy on both the substantive and the political fronts. The Council of
Europe has offered actionable insights, including fostering understanding and developing useful guidance for the interactions between ICT service providers and law enforcement 17 and providing clear and detailed guidance on human rights issues for ICT
providers. 18 The European Parliament weighed in on security and freedom online, calling for sustained engagement and expressing interest in developing a multistakeholder
initiative. 19 It has also recommended the creation of a code of conduct for freedom of
expression. 20 Parliamentarians from across Europe also introduced a version of
GOFA, 21 leading Viviane Reding, European Commission Lead Member on the Information Society, to express concern over the ‘‘heavy’’ nature of the instruments (including
the prospect of forcing companies to withdraw and leave markets to less scrupulous
competitors) and to place promise in the GNI. 22
Sadly, even as some governments seek to address this problem globally, numerous
competing government efforts are under way that will abridge the human rights others
are seeking to preserve. 23 While problems in developing and transitioning countries
first caught the public eye, it is the disconcerting legislation among early Internet
adopters that has received attention recently. From proposals for national filtering in
Australia to the South Korean government’s requirement for real name registration,
efforts to rein in perceived Internet dangers represent troubling examples for countries
that are just beginning their policymaking efforts related to the Internet.
Stakeholders Unite: Global Network Initiative
Recognizing profound challenges associated with the broad spectrum of laws and
practices related to freedom of expression and privacy in states around the world,
as well as the laws and standards of home countries, employees, shareholders, and
the international community, some ICT companies decided not to continue down
this path in isolation. The initial framing was inspired substantially by the Sullivan
Principles, 24 introduced in 1977 as a code of conduct for U.S. companies doing
business in apartheid South Africa. An industry-code approach offered the potential to
set a higher standard than if companies were left to fend for themselves, allowed them
to benefit from the strength of their numbers, and it recognized the need for even
dread competitors to unite around certain values—all while retaining control of the
expectations.
Protecting Privacy and Expression Online
91