Anja Mihr: Public Privacy: Human Rights and Cyberspace의 페이퍼 읽고 메모중

p.3 Ideally these rules, regulations and laws are set up by the citizens for the citizens. That process of setting up common and joint rules and standards by internet-users for internet-users has not taken place in cyberspace, yet

내 고민 – 그 정당성과 책임은 어디에서 나오냐는 건데… … 이론 구성이 생각보다 쉽지 않음.

p.3 Ultimately, what is missing in cyberspace is a quasi-government or governance regime that governs the needs and claims of its citizens through monitoring and enforcement bodies.

정부의 역할과 그 의미에 대한 연결지점이 여기에서도 논의된다.

p.4 privacy in the cyberspace means using the internet as a service tool for private purposes without fearing that third parties, such as governments or companies (i.e. national security agencies, Google+ or Microsoft) are accessing, selling or publically posting our data for security or business purposes without our consent.

프라이버시를 이렇게 정의하는 것은 좁은 의미일까 넓은 의미일까? 현실적인 측면에서 보면 매우 좁아진다. 규범적인 측면에서 보면 매우 넓어질 수 있다.

p.4 It encompasses the right of free expression, which includes the freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without State interference.

프라이버시권과 표현의 자유와의 관계가 만나는 지점

p.5 The fact that basic human rights principles and norms are universal has been reconfirmed in 1993 during the World Conference for Human Rights in Vienna, Austria. It is therefore no longer an issue of international debates whether freedom rights exist or not, but rather how to implement and enforce them into national legislation. During the conference, all UN member states confirmed that all human rights derive from the dignity and worth inherent in the human person, and that the human person is the central subject of human rights and fundamental freedoms, and consequently should be the principal beneficiary and should participate actively in the realization of these rights and freedoms.

이런 일이 있었군.

p.7 All these human rights, to name but a few, are internationally recognized and even though some countries have not ratified these covenants, most of these rights have turned into customary international human rights law. This means that even if countries have not ratified certain international treaties, these human rights are generally valid and applicable, i.e. within national jurisdiction

근거가 뭔가 명확하지 않은 느낌?

p.9

Without the wider cybercommunity, like technical companies, internet providers, or search engines and so on, effective enforcement mechanism will less likely be established. Because the cyberspace is not restricted to states or to any geographical or physical borders, it is thus not bound to any state or inter-state agreement and not to be controlled by state institutions alone.

정부가 힘이 세서가 아니라 정부만으론 힘이 없어서 .

The International Internet Governance Forum (IGF), one of the main forums to tackle these issues, is yet also based on national institutions and their agencies and delegates. It is not truly transnational, although it aims to solve transnational violations of
human rights and privacy

아이지에프에 대한 설명 / 현실정치의 모순성

p.11

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s