Exploiters of Internet unaccountability are more organized than advocates for Internet accountability.
The fragmented Internet accountability movement can fix more faster, together than apart.
RUI proposes an Internet accountability coalition to coalesce and accelerate the mindful movement.
Be more holistic, strategic, focused, and influential together than apart.
Align around their common, universal problem – outdated, out-of-control Internet policy — that’s ignored.
Unify around a universal solution that can help resolve every coalition partners’ specific concern.
Galvanize a critical mass of public accountability to deliver universal Internet accountability.
Indefensible problem. For 25 years, the U.S. policy has protected Internet technology and corporation interests with impunity online, by prohibiting protecting people from harms and crimes online.
Defensible Solution. Fully restore Constitutional authority over the U.S. Internet. Same rules offline and online, is the only universal, time-tested, solution that most can support with intended consequences.
America’s Mindful Many: Nine in ten Americans are concerned about cybercrime, and data privacy and social media harms. Seven in ten Americans, the Mindful Many, support Internet accountability.
Reforming U.S. Internet policy holistically is the missing link of the Internet accountability movement.
Outdated U.S. Internet policy: In 1996, Congress holistically set U.S. policy as minimal government online.
Then the U.S Internet was just a communications network, today it’s a comprehensive conduct conduit.
For 25 years, there has been no official holistic review or oversight of U.S. Internet policies’ outcomes.
Internet technology is a uniquely holistic tool. It’s not inherently good or bad.
It is the incentives/disincentives in government policy and law and how the technology is used/misused that determines if it holistically yields good or bad outcomes.
Policy matters. Policy sets purposes, priorities, and principles. Law sets limits, rules, standards, processes.
Universal conduct policy: Today everyone conducts everything everywhere online for life, work, and play.
This positions the U.S. Internet as a most powerful and influential means of comprehensive conduct.
This makes U.S. Internet policy one of the most powerful and influential conduct policies in America.
The extreme experiment of the Internet policy revolution: America’s utopian Internet policy experiment of minimal government online changed from government governing people to technology/firms governing people online.
Thus, U.S. Internet policies de facto enable Internet technology and corporations to govern people with impunity, i.e., without meaningful consent, rights, rule-of-law, access to justice, or due process.
Diametric double-standard policy: U.S. Internet policies de facto create a diametric double standard for legal/illegal conduct, of comprehensive government authority and accountability offline, but ~none online.
Thus holistic U.S. Internet policy practically promotes diametric real vs. artificial selves, realities, and worlds.
Diametric policy of law and order offline vs. lawless disorder online promotes extremes and divisions, i.e., extreme virality, irrationality, incitement, insurrection, sedition, hate, bias, rage, violence, and callousness.
Extreme machine policy: logically extreme inputs can yield extreme outputs, effects, excesses, and enemies.
Socially, extreme policy effects extremism and a nation divided by polarizing people, dividing states, inciting incivility/mobs, trampling truth/trust; dehumanizing, demoralizing, and disenfranchising, the American people; and decivilizing America via a Rotten Rule of — do whatever you wish to others.
Economically, extreme policy of commercial Internet impunity prioritizes profit over people, crony capitalism, a faux market, a cheaters charter, liars license, stealers sanctuary, and a fraud farm.
Security-wise, extreme policy of no U.S. Internet police, protections or borders promotes national-insecurity, public unsafety, a crime-causer, harmers-haven, terrorist-tolerator, and attacker-attractor.
President Dwight Eisenhower in his farewell address presciently warned us of the ‘captive’ problem we face now.
“The prospect of domination of the nation’s scholars by Federal employment, project allocations, and the power of money is ever present and is gravely to be regarded. Yet, in holding scientific research and discovery in respect, as we should, we must also be alert to the equal and opposite danger that public policy could itself become the captive of a scientific-technological elite.”
Each of the U.S. branches of government — legislative, executive, and judicial — has an Internet policy of minimal government authority tailored to their function that apparently is captive to America’s Internet-technological elite.
1. CONGRESS 1996, Communications Decency Act 230. “It is the policy of the United States… to preserve… the Internet and other interactive computer services… unfettered by Federal or State regulation.” [bolded for emphasis]
The practical effect of a no government authority online policy for 25 years on autopilot has been to create an absolutist technocracy where Internet technology firms by default can govern people, conduct commerce, and do whatever they want to people, with impunity.
This extreme double standard of government authority offline but not online, practically promotes love-your-neighbor and duty of care, good conduct offline, while promoting the opposite online in practically promoting harm-your-neighbor, impunity-driven, bad conduct online.
Unfettering Internet technologies and firms from Government in U.S. policy naturally causes commercial corruption and crony capitalism by permanently prioritizing technology over humanity, and profit over people.
1. SUPREME COURT June 26, 1997, Reno v ACLU struck down the Communications Decency Act (CDA) 9-0 for abridging adults’ constitutionally-protected freedom of speech to access p0rn.
This precedent myopically made America’s only Internet law only about speech, not indecency or other conduct.
This absolutist precedent threw out the proverbial baby with the bathwater, in overturning as protected free speech Congress’ Constitutional criminalization of “Coercion and enticement of a minor” for prostitution or sex, in Section 508 of the 1996-passed CDA.
The unintended consequences of this singular Internet policy Supreme Court precedent and outdated 1997 fact-basis on autopilot, de facto has ignored how much the Internet and Internet conduct has changed since 1997, and how it’s Wild West policy has disrupted Constitutional rule-of-law and rights since 1997.
It also has left minors unprotected from sexual predation; confused the constitutional line between protected free speech and unprotected illegal conduct online; and denied others’ Constitutional right to access justice.
This outdated, absolutist precedent for 25 years has myopically misclassified the Internet as only a communications network and speech platform, ignoring the practical reality that it is also an all-purpose technology and hence a comprehensive conduit for commercial and criminal conduct with policy that condones and protects illegal conduct.
Before this precedent, America’s legal system routinely considered some speech not protected from government restrictions, i.e., “incitement, defamation, fraud, obscenity, child porn0graphy, fighting words, and threats.”
Perversely today online, “incitement, defamation, fraud, obscenity, child porn0graphy, fighting words, and threats,” are routine and tolerated online, which is corrupting and criminalizing America’s culture and civilization.
Simply, it helps enable Internet technology firms to govern people and conduct commerce with impunity.
3. EXECUTIVE BRANCH July 1, 1997, Presidential Directive Framework for Global Electronic Commerce: “The private sector should lead. …governments should encourage industry self-regulation.”
It is a universal extreme double standard of government authority and accountability offline but not online.
This corporate self-regulation policy’s practical effect for 25 years on autopilot has been to create an absolutist corporatocracy where Internet technology firms by default can govern people and conduct commerce with impunity via one-sided, terms-of-service, end-user licensing agreements, privacy policies, and accountability-arbitrage-driven, business models.
Corporate self-regulation policy causes corruption of commerce and crony capitalism by permanently prioritizing profit over people i.e., love of money over love your neighbor.