Issue/News: World Summit + the Digital Divide

So far, this blog has been focused pretty much exclusively on American legal theory and the internet. In my second post, I talked about two perspectives: Lawrence Lessig and Manuel Castells. Thus far, Castells has been neglected, namely because his theory is more, well, theoretical, and less legal.

Today, I wanted to bring the two together with a bit more of a focus on international issues, as a precursor to the upcoming World Summit on the Information Society held in Tunis, held Nov. 16-18, 2005. It is the second of a two part summit, the first held in Dec. of 2003 in Geneva, which resulted in both a declaration of principles and a plan of action. Neither document has many specifics on what actions will be taken on behalf of the World Summit- they are more a general statement of ideals, with the declaration basically a collection of abstract ideals (social justice, enabling the developing world, bridging the digital divide, being eco-conscious, ect.) and the plan being slightly more specific (employment, environment, e-learning) but lacking any actual actions- and having timelines that are far enough down the road to make them ineffectual (for example, half the world should have access to information and communication technologies by 2015).

The second phase of the summit may answer some of the ambiguities left by the first. However, overshadowing the Tunis convention are concerns over Tunis's repressive actions against internet users, as well as analysis that suggests poor countries face tough obstacles to go online.

The bright side? Well, if you take the perspective that the internet is an extension of other information and communication technologies, than the rise of cell phones in developing areas such as Africa gives some indication of how powerful bridging the digital divide can be. One of the most thorough papers on the developing world and the internet comes from the World Bank, which will distribute both Financing Information and Communication Infrastructure in the Developing World: Public and Private and E-Development: From Excitement to Efficiency. They have not yet made the latter document available, but if the former is any indication, there will be a heavy emphasis on private investment and effective regulation, with governments and donor communities (like the WB) playing a supportive role. There is a focus on investment as both philanthropy and of economic benefit (sustainable).

Although this post does not contain any specific legal resolutions or cases, the discussions that will take at the Summit may have far-reaching legal consequences, including:

1. Commerce Regulation: The World Bank report really hammers on the issue of commerce regulation, and how rules concerning foreign investment in information and communication technologies often hamper growth. Scott Wallsten, a former economist at the World Bank, argues persuasively that ISP entry barriers slow down growth. Presented with fairly straightforward evidence that liberalizing technology market regulations improves growth, coupled with possible World Bank loan incentives- the legal framework governing foreign investment in the information and communications technology (ICT) sector may see some changes.

2. Freedom of Speech standards: Castells talks a lot about why networks of communication should be set up with the principle OF communications... although too controversial to get much coverage at the convention, closer relations between countries on internet matters may encourage repressive governments to stop draconian regulation. OR, it could follow in the wake of the controversy with Cisco providing the infrastructure for China to closely control internet content, and push for private companies to do more... but I wouldn't hold my breath. Whatever happens, it'll be interesting to see whether either the market or regulatory bodies do anything about this issue.

3. Internet Domain Control: Probably the most covered issue that will be brought up at the convention- the United States and the EU are battling over control for internet domains. Currently, ICANN controls domain regulation, but the EU and a number of other countries would like that to change and place control in the hands of the U.N.. On one side, U.S. advocates such as Senator Norm Coleman (R-Minnesota) argue that the E.U. is attempting to usurp U.S. power at the cost of a system that is already effective and working. On the other, reform advocates argue that ICANN has bowed repeatedly to the pressures of U.S. corporations, and a solid analysis of the issues reveals that reform has to happen either through an international or U.S. agency, or through 'internationalizing' the current legal structure. A more moderate view, expressed again by Lessig (I don't mean to link to his stuff so much but the guy seems to get interviewed a fair bit and writes a lot about important topics) in a Foreign Policy interview is that although in the past ICANN has behaved badly, and a separation of UN/US regulatory bodies could co-exist, its more hassle than its worth given that ICANN is now pretty good.

4. Cheaper Product: Private corporations have been for some time now developing cheaper technological products aimed at the developing world. One of the most talked about is MIT Professor Nicholas Negroponte's 100 dollar laptop. Such inventions, coupled with freely available software, may make bridging the digital divide a whole lot easier. Hopefully, there will be specific plans that emerge from the summit on these measures.

Will much progress be made? I doubt it... the vast majority of the developing world lacks the infrastructure that enables the potential of information and communication technologies. This hasn't changed a whole lot since Bill Gates made the point in 2000 that a revolution in health care needs to take place before the digital divide can be closed. This is not to say that in some places- India, China, Thailand, Nigeria- that ICT will not help, it certainly will if governments have good regulatory policies. But there are issues like intellecutal property rights, freedom of speech, and economic policy that are extremely stubborn, and a general summit is unlikely to change any of this. Given the sluggish manner in which governments have worked against intellectual property rights standards that bar cheap generic medicines from reaching the developed world, it is doubtful that any significant changes (at least changes that threaten intellectual property rights or the market) will come from Tunis.