The right to privacy and free speech is protected by law in all western countries. In Britain and Europe by the European Convention on Human Rights; in North America by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (section 2) and in the US by the Bill of Rights of 1791; and around the world by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (article 19) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. As well as UCC 1 1-308-308 1-103 and the Rome Statute. Furthermore the right to privacy and to free speech has been affirmed by all members of the United Nations as a fundamental human right. This was made international law by the United Nations General Assembly resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948.
Despite this multinational corporations and their pet governments have been in violation of the forgoing largely with impunity. In fact almost all websites and internet “services” violate these laws regularly, under the assumption that even should you bring a case against them for so doing, you lack both the fiscal and legal resources necessary to proceed against them. Well, it may not be much, but my site (doxpoxia.org) does not keep any information about you at all.
I do not use anything from Microsoft, Apple, Google, Oracle, Baidu, Alibaba, AT&T, Clearnet, Facebook, CloudFlare, Yahoo, or similar corporate/government “enhancements” which have been alleged by some to be antithetical to individual rights and freedoms, as defined in part by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 19) and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
I do not use object tags, DRM, or EME - all invented for and by (primarily) U.S. corporations and enacted by their pet (allegedly bribed) politicians to censor the internet (although they do not call it that).
IMHO it is highly unethicalfor anyone to by any means compromise the privacy of innocent people. Such common practices as placing malware in your browser, altering hardware and software through backdoors, implanting adware, and many other means are often done at the behest of the very governments sworn to protect its citizens from such rights violations. Any means of compromising your privacy without first obtaining yourinformed consent is IMHO, unethical and amoral. And illegal in all civilised nations.
In case you wondered
“Arguing that you don’t care about the right to privacy because
you have nothing to hide
is no different from saying
you don’t care about free speech
because you have nothing to say.” ~ Edward Snowden
If you work with corporations, military, government, or security agencies, may I gently suggest that you read the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (article 19), the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, United Nations General Assembly resolution 217 A (III) of 10 December 1948, and the Nuremberg Transcripts. Please also see my article Psychopaths in power . Then please consider carefully whether your work is aiding humanity or perhaps instead bolstering a tiny handful of self entitled leaders and CEOs who destroy freedom and human rights for their own twisted avarice. Hitler you may recall, was supported and funded by the majority of Germans and almost all of the wealthy industrialists in the United States and Britain.
Thanks for keeping an open mind! Best wishes, ~ Peter (www.doxpoxia.org)
“States cannot ensure that individuals are able to freely seek and receive information or express themselves without respecting, protecting and promoting their right to privacy. Privacy and freedom of expression are interlinked and mutually dependent; an infringement upon one can be both the cause and consequence of an infringement upon the other. Without adequate legislation and legal standards to ensure the privacy, security and anonymity of communications, journalists, human rights defenders and whistleblowers, for example, cannot be assured that their communications will not b e subject to States’ scrutiny...
The right to privacy is often understood as an essential requirement for the realisation of the right to freedom of expression. Undue interference with individuals’ privacy can both directly and indirectly limit the free development and exchange of ideas. … An infringement upon one right can be both the cause and consequence of an infringement upon the other. ...
Communications surveillance should be regarded as a highly intrusive act that potentially interferes with the rights to freedom of expression and privacy and threatens the foundations of a democratic society.” ~United Nations Report on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, GE.13 -13303