FreedomHTML Working Draft

1. Foreword (informative)

About FreedomHTML:

2. Introduction (informative)

3. Motivation (informative)

4. Fundamental rights and ICT standards (informative)

In view of the FreedomHTML work being motivated by a dispute around DRM, it is reasonable to ask to what extent a consensus exists among democratic societies about the relevant policy questions.

Certainly there is no consensus that what DRM proponents demand, namely absolute control of how their publications may be used, would be appropriate.

Copyright law gives them a lot of control, some think it's too much control, others think it's too little. Some think that something must be done to prevent Internet-based phenomena from eroding the economic power of publishers; others think that as the Internet and other technical developments make it much easier for people to create and publish cultural goods, it is only appropriate for the economic power of specialized publishing companies to diminish, and that copyright law should be weakened correspondingly. In any case, the legal situation in every jurisdiction is that there are limits to the scope of legal control granted by law to copyright holders.

To a large extent, national copyright systems are shaped by the principles of the Berne convention which have not been updated for the Internet age. In the view of many people, the resulting laws are simply wrong (in a variety of ways: morally wrong, violating human rights, and failing to achieve the intended purpose) in the context of the Internet age.

These legal systems may therefore not be a good source of inspiration for shaping and building the open web of the future.

Consequently, FreedomHTML aims to be guided directly by the relevant first principles, in particular human rights and other fundamental rights, for which there is a very broad consensus in democratic societies.

4.1 Relevant human rights

4.2 Other relevant fundamental rights

(rights which are also fundamentally important to having a viable ecosystem in the Internet age, even though these rights are of a lesser importance than human rights, and they are also not protected in international law at the level of human rights)

4.3 Threats to human rights and other fundamental rights

4.4 What the Internet techno-ecosystem as a whole should be like in order to appropriately address these threats

4.5 Conclusion: The right to fully control your computer

4.6 Principle of non-discrimination

Internet is a global network designed for enabling communication from everywhere and everyone indepently of their country, cultural heritage or technological capabilities. Due to this, it's not acceptable to do any kind of content access restrictions based on location, operating system, browser or any other kind. It is acceptable to give to the user a customized page based on these identifiers (for example, a language localized version of the page according to the country from it's being connected) but always in a non restrictive or discriminating way and offering the posibility to access to the alternatives versions of the content in a clear and easy way.

4.7 Consequences for ICT standards in general

4.8 Consequences for “web” standards specifically

5. Definitions (normative)

5.1 browser

5.2 website

6. Conformance (normative)

6.1 Strict FreedomHTML website conformance

6.2 Strict FreedomHTML browser conformance

6.3 Experimental FreedomHTML website conformance

6.4 Experimental FreedomHTML browser conformance

7. Assertion of Conformance (normative)

8. Features of Strict FreedomHTML (normative)

9. Features of Experimental FreedomHTML (normative)

10. Analysis of unacceptable features (informative)

10.1 Encrypted Media Extensions (EME)

11. Answers to counterarguments (informative)

12. Fundamental “democracy deficit” problem (informative)

Acknowledgement: Signficant inspiration has been taken from various posts on W3C's public-restrictedmedia mailing list