Joi Ito's Web

Joi Ito's conversation with the living web.

Hi Howard,

Congratulations. I have great respect for Mr. Idei and wish he could have completed his mission, but I'm sure the decision for him to resign was something that was thoroughly thought through. Personally, I'm glad that they chose you to run the company. I think you understand Sony and have many of the things that Sony needs to become the global company that Mr. Idei wanted it to be. My main concern is that you are quite immersed in the entertainment side of the business and I really believe that Hollywood is taking an unreasonably strong position on the copyright issue and is impinging on the rights of users and amateur creators. In your new role as the head of Sony, I urge you to try to take a more balanced and long-term view on the copyright issues. I suggest you at least listen to the rhetoric of the "other side" and maybe start by reading "The Future of Ideas" by Lawrence Lessig.

I hope you will still do the Sony Open Forum in Hawaii and let me continue to challenge you and your executives. (I promise to practice my golf too.)

Anyway, I look forward to seeing you again and hope your new job doesn't take away your sense of humor. ;-)

- Joi

It should be noted that as with fingerprinting, some countries MAY demand similar action from our citizens entering their country.

Dave

------ Forwarded Message
From: rose
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 08:49:32 -0800 (PST)
To: dave
Subject: "1984" has arrived! DHS demanding on site acccess to email accounts of selected incoming aliens

Hi Dave,

As an attorney, practicing in the areas of international business and immigration law, it has come to my attention through discussions with other attorneys, that DHS is pulling aside "selected" aliens at entry checkpoints and bringing them into a separate room which contains a DHS computer connected to the internet. The aliens are told to bring up their various email accounts on the screen and enter their passwords. DHS then reads the emails for information pertaining to possible unauthorized work or other matters and questions the aliens on these findings. Of course, no attorney can be present at these interrogations! People travelling to the U.S. should be aware that a possible search of them by DHS now also means a search of their email accounts!

Regards,

Rose Robbins, Esq.

This means that I should probably be careful not to have any suspicious looking email on my computer either. This also creates a vulnerability for aliens entering the US because someone could send them a bunch of sketchy email that would get them in trouble when they are about to enter the US...

UPDATE:

From: Kevin Murphy
Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2005 12:38:08 -0500
To: dave
Subject: RE: [IP] comments "1984" has arrived! DHS demanding on site access to email accounts of selected incoming aliens

I find this very difficult to believe.

How many people can remember the hostname, IP address or URL used to access their email, without the benefit of bookmarks or an preconfigured mail client? How many can even remember their password? For most people, their account and client would be set up by their employer or their ISP. They boot up Outlook and it just works. I know I couldn't provide this information, particularly after a long-haul flight, nicotine withdrawal, and standing in line at passport control for an hour.

And how would DHS know what email accounts you have, anyway?

Kevin Murphy

US Bureau Chief
ComputerWire
San Francisco, CA 94103

Atochastation
Atocha Station
Joshua Ramo who was moderating a panel at the Atocha summit asked the question, is the world more democratic since 9/11. Clearly most people thought no. One person in the audience stepped up and said that the elections in Iraq were a good sign and that Iraq was more democratic. A young man from Iraq jumped in and said that he didn't believe that the elections had made Iraq more democratic citing the low turnout and the problems they were having getting started. Then a young Iraqi woman who was working on monitoring elections jumped in and said that she believed it was getting more democratic and that it would take time and people had to be patient. What was striking was the passion that both of these young Iraqi's had and the strength of their words which were based on experience rather than analysis or speculation.

One of the problems with the question about whether the world is more democratic or not is that it is very difficult to measure and the word "democratic" has so many meanings and is ill-defined. What is more interesting, which Kenneth Roth from Human Rights Watch pointed out was to talk about human rights. He made the point that the Bush administration talks about liberty, freedom and democracy, but avoids talking about human rights. Liberty, freedom and democracy are very fuzzy words, but human rights is very specific. It would be easy to define terrorism as attacks against human rights and international humanitarian law forbids attacks against innocent non-combatants which is often the definition used for terrorism. Roth points out that the US has a terrible position on human rights in the name of the war on terror. He pointed out that Alberto Gonzales told the Senate committee the Senate Convention Against Torture treaty doesn't prohibit the use of "cruel, inhuman or degrading" tactics, which makes the US the only country which is not upholding the Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment as a matter of official policy. How can a country which is not upholding basic human rights expect to be respected and supported internationally?

One of the people in the audience mentioned that it was too easy to waste time Bush bashing and maybe there was a bit too much of that. However, someone noted that at yesterday's summit only George Soros criticized George Bush by name.

I just heard some excellent comments by Kumi Naidoo on a panel. I was going to blog them, but I'm sitting next to Rebecca MacKinnon and I looked over her shoulder and noticed that she's taking better notes and is about to post something so I'll link to her instead.

One of the things I'm going to talk about on the panel today is the addition of al-Manar, the satellite TV station of Lebanon-based Hezbollah to the Terrorist Exclusion List on December 17, 2004. The TEL limits immigration for foreigners associated with organizations on the list. This is not the worst of the various lists to be on, but according to Jack Shafer, they are the first media company to be added to this list. My understanding is that al-Manar represents the Hezbollah party in Lebanon. It is an official party with democratically elected politicians. While the content of al-Manar may be objectionable to many people, stifling the voice of a democratically elected party in a foreign country by calling them terrorists goes against the spirit of freedom of expression. The US constitution's First Amendment rights only cover Americans, but I believe that in a democracy the competition of ideas and free speech should combat beliefs that it does not agree with - more speech and debate, not censorship.

Another issue is the chilling effect that this has. Although talking about or talking to people from al-Manar might not land you on the Terrorist Exclusion List, it could easily land you on the no-fly or similar list and cause you to be perpetually harassed when traveling in the US. I imagine that people from al-Manar will have a very difficult time finding anyone to talk to or have lunch with. I feel a chill running down my spine just writing this post.