Many countries recognize that their citizens have access 'rights' to digital services, however the quality of these services are not widely or equally distributed. Government and business have adopted internet based services and the trend is to make the internet the primary delivery agent. The option to communicate using alternate access agents have diminished, been phased out altogether or have become increasingly fee based. Legal rights or human rights aside, should the Internet be declared an essential service such as: the hospital sector, electricity services, the fire-fighting services, etc.? Does it warrant this level of importance?
A definite yes for me, unfortunately after the NSA scandal, it is obvious that the Internet won't be the same in the future, information is already controlled...
No, the internet is a service not a right. Denying you internet does not impede your right to free speech or impede you from pursing life, liberty, or happiness. All of which are possible without the use of modern conveniences. Protection(s) under the law may be required to ensure fair use of these mechanisms or instruments. But this by no means redefines these mechanisms or instruments as rights. Sure its convenient to spread the news by television, radio, or news paper. But you do not have a right to these mechanisms. You can pay to used these mechanisms if they are available. For example, you pay to have an advertisement, job listing or obituary in a newspaper. But you don't have a right to the newspaper. You still have to pay for the mechanism. But laws can be written to ensure fair use of the newspaper or radio.
It is already an essential service. To government, business, academia, down to the home user at the bottom of the heap. Look at the hysteria/anxiety/panic that pervade when there is only a mention of a massive disruption. So how could it not be recognized for what it is?
It's an 100% YES, because it is the way of the future Of course, this is about Internet being declared an essential service, not a free one. Are the water and electricity essential? I'd say they are. Are they free? Nope. That's how it is (or it should be) with the Internet as well.
Legal right? No. Human right? No. Service? Yes. Essential service? Not really. - It's not an absolute necessity. - Plenty of people around the world survive without it. Nice-to-have service? Yes. Obviously. Expected service in developed countries? Definitely. - Accessibility to information, connectivity, and convenience. We are spoilt brats. Sometimes, those of us in the first world get sucked deep into the virtual world, we forget to take a step back into reality. We lose grip of what "essential" really mean.
Agreed. The integration of web services into the normal operations of our lives, jobs, etc. have made it an essential service. I don't disagree and I fully understand what was being implied by the term "essential service". I'm reluctant however to use such a slippery terminology as it invites conjecture as to the actual vs implied intent. When you start adding modifiers, everyone and their grandmother reads between the lines as to what they think it means. Give it enough time, and I'm sure we will have a national market place for internet service plans.
Vint Cerf who is often referred to as the “father of the Internet” claims that internet access cannot be a right in itself. He states: “Technology is an enabler of rights, not a right itself." I understand that Germany has already declared the Internet an essential service. I assume they have specific agreements in place with ISPs. regarding QoS. It would be most interesting to know what happens if an ISP takes a hit that renders the service unavailable for a significant period of time.
Although i would have a hard time without an internet connection, i would say that it should not be declared an essential service.
