While I haven't figure out how Mozilla AMO should do with this add-on,
I must respectfully sound my disagreement with what Benjamin just said
here.

Human rights is a universal concept, apply to everyone, everywhere, in
the same way. The concept also happen to be codified in the United
Nations charters.

There is no different human rights in different contexts, for
different countries. If (by if I mean I don't know if Benjamin think
of that) government censorship (and/or prosecution on individual based
on her/his access of a censored website) is a violation of human
rights, it would always be a wrong thing to do.

What a non-profit organization that promotes the innovation, openness,
and opportunities of the web, deal an action of potential violation of
human right, remain to be debated and decided. After all, the action
to take down an add-on itself, is a form of censorship, on AMO.

(Disclaimer: this email represents opinion of my own even through I
send it with an @mozilla.com e-mail address.)


On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 10:05 PM, Benjamin Smedberg
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On 5/14/2013 3:44 PM, Justin Dolske wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> But if it's being used to feed into a list that unconditionally blocks
>> users in Iran from being able to access reported sites (ie, without any user
>> consent or opt-in), I think that's a significant issue that _does_ run
>> directly afoul of Mozilla's principles and goals -- even if the add-on
>> itself is ok from a technology/code perspective.
>>
>> I'm not terribly familiar with internet censorship in Iran (but a brief
>> skim of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_censorship_in_Iran indicates
>> it's a thing). But the same reasoning would apply to an add-on designed to
>> feed new entries into China's "Great Firewall". If a country wants to filter
>> their internet, I don't think we need to play even a passive role in making
>> it easier to install their reporting software.
>
>
> Which of Mozilla's principles or positions do you think this harms? As far
> as I know, the Mozilla project has never stated that government internet
> censorship is inherently a bad thing.
>
> Most of the project lives in Western democracies and we assume a shared
> context that government censorship is a bad thing. But I don't think it's
> necessarily our role to try and impose that idea of openness onto countries
> which don't currently share that context.
>
> --BDS
>
_______________________________________________
governance mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance

Reply via email to