[Advocacy Advisors] Wikipedia Zero and net neutrality

[Yana Welinder]

Hi all,

Earlier today, the Senate in Brazil passed the Marco Civil bill, that has
some ambiguous provisions on net neutrality. It was passed on urgent basis
in anticipation of NetMundial, a meeting on internet governance that will
be held in Brazil tomorrow and Thursday.

We have prepared an op-ed (see below) explaining how certain types of net
neutrality laws impact Wikipedia Zero, and we will try to get it published
around the closing of NetMundial. The purpose of this op-ed is to make sure
that there is an accurate portrayal of Wikipedia Zero in the net neutrality
debate, particularly in countries that are relevant to this project.

While we don't plan to take a direct advocacy position on net neutrality at
this point, we will continue to develop a position on Wikipedia Zero. We
would therefore like to hear your thoughts on this topic.

Best,
Yana

---











* Free Access to Knowledge Should Not Be a Net Neutrality Issue In recent
months, lawmakers around the world have been considering net neutrality
rules that aim to preserve the Internet's original promise as an open
forum. But certain provisions of net neutrality laws could threaten the
free spread of information in surprising ways.  In particular, such
provisions could prevent non-commercial initiatives like Wikipedia Zero
from providing truly free access to the online encyclopedia in the Global
South. Legislators must be careful to avoid these unintended consequences.
Net neutrality advocates are right to be concerned that forcing users to
pay for faster data delivery could easily push small and non-commercial
publishers and content creators out of the market. Since its inception, a
key tenet of the Internet has been equal treatment of data from all
sources: Internet service providers must deliver content from blogs or
startups with the same speed as content from major media companies or huge
tech firms.  Allowing Internet service providers to charge more for faster
delivery of certain kinds of content would favor players with deep pockets,
who could then muscle out smaller competitors. But to date the discussion
has largely ignored a potential pitfall: might certain provisions of net
neutrality laws unintentionally hamper the free flow of information they
seek to protect? Just consider the net neutrality law passed by the
Netherlands in 2012, sometimes presented as a model for legislation
elsewhere. The Dutch Telecommunications Act aims to enforce net neutrality,
in part, by prohibiting ISPs from charging subscribers different rates
based on the services they access, for example VoIP or instant messaging.
However the Dutch law would also prohibit ISPs from providing free access
to certain sites, as they would technically be charging different rates (in
this case, nothing) for different services. It's worth noting that not all
net neutrality rules include these provisions: the FCC's previous Open
Internet Rules, for example, simply focused on prohibiting blocking and
unreasonable discrimination against content providers. Similarly, the
current version of the pending Marco Civil bill in Brazil does not prohibit
paid or free Internet connection as long as ISPs do not monitor, filter, or
block the content of data packets. But the Dutch law, and any laws modeled
on it, might interfere with initiatives that rely on zero-rated data, like
the "Wikipedia Zero" program across the Global South, which essentially
aims to have all carriers in a given country zero-rate Wikipedia so it can
become a true public good, with unfettered access for everyone. When
carriers commit to waiving data fees, Wikipedia Zero can provide
schoolchildren with a virtual encyclopedia in places where they don't have
access to books or libraries, spread practical knowledge about agriculture,
sanitation, and wellness, and deliver outside information to people living
under repressive regimes. Eventually Wikipedia Zero will extend to free
editing of entries as well, empowering users in developing countries with a
platform for free speech. Wikipedia Zero isn't the only free service that
could suffer from specific provisions of some net neutrality laws. The
Refugees United mobile app allows victims of political upheavals and
natural disasters to find lost family members and friends free of cost,
also relying on zero-rated data. And Mobilium Africa's Smart Health app,
launched in September 2013, aims to educate Android users in Africa about
HIV, tuberculosis, and malaria, including prevention, symptoms, and
treatment, for free. These initiatives are just the beginning: as the cost
of mobile handsets falls and mobile penetration rises across the developing
world, there will be even more opportunities for creative services that
empower users, raise standards of living, and bring transparency and
accountability to government through free delivery of information. Yet all
these current and future initiatives could be undone by a few lines of
legislation - inadvertently thwarting free access to information in the
name of the free Internet. Net neutrality is undoubtedly a major concern.
As lawmakers craft new rules they must take care not to unintentionally
hinder the very cause they are trying to advance. Net neutrality rules
should focus on enshrining the "end-to-end" principle, which states that
Internet service providers do not distinguish between data flowing over the
network based on its application or content.  Net neutrality rules should
not prevent the zero-rating of non-commercial initiatives, like Wikipedia
Zero, that do not pay for any preferential treatment and do not interfere
with the open Internet. *

-- 
Yana Welinder
Legal Counsel
Wikimedia Foundation
415.839.6885 ext. 6867

NOTICE: For legal reasons, I may only serve as a lawyer for the Wikimedia
Foundation. This means I may not give legal advice to, or serve as a lawyer
for, community members, volunteers, or staff members in their personal
capacity.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/advocacy_advisors/attachments/20140422/f6aa2850/attachment.html>