As a timely reminder and example - if we needed one - as to why this subject is important to Internet users in the so-called "Free World", there is this post at Mashable: How Iran Silences Its Citizens on the Web
It's all about totalitarian Fascism
and the negation of freedom and liberty. Read the full post at the link.
Therefore, the general objectives of the exercise would seem to be (as far Internet users in the so-called "Free World" are concerned):
- (a) to protect themselves from any and all government-driven statutory changes/initiatives to increase "cyber-security", implement DRM, copyright and expansion of same, reduce piracy, increase censorship or other means that would effectively lead to controls to govern, regulate or otherwise restrict the freedoms of use of the Internet.
- (b) to protect themselves from corporate lobby-driven statutory changes/initiatives to increase "cyber-security", implement DRM, copyright and expansion of same, reduce piracy, increase censorship or other means that would effectively lead to controls to govern, regulate or otherwise restrict the freedoms of use of the Internet.
- (c) to seek to change the arguably corrupt status quo where corporate lobbies have a stronger voice and a greater say in forming legislation that works towards their commercial/monopolistic advantage and against the interests of the people in general.
This Iranian situation is an example of one of many countries where a totalitarian Fascist regime prevails. The simple truth is that if a free people wish to avoid incremental moves in the same direction ("coming soon to a State near you"), then they will need to be vigilant and fight those people and their artefacts (statutes) that would take us there (QED).
In the case of Internet
fredoms, the Mashable article finishes with this: (my emphasis)
People who work in the tech space in Iran acutely feel the threats posed by this environment. Take for instance the horror confronted by Saeed Malekpour, a Canadian-Iranian facing the death penalty because a file-sharing program he developed was used to upload pornography to the web. His innocuous programming is considered a crime because software developers can be held liable if consumers “inappropriately” use their products.
Being active online today in Iran is fraught with risks that most readers living in democratic societies cannot imagine. This may be the most important reason for world leaders and diplomatic representatives of the free world to put digital freedom on the agenda. Only with sustained pressure can Iran’s netizens get the tools they need to fight for a better future.