Yesterday, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) approved a
Recommendation on Principles for Internet Policy Making [pdf].
It contains a set of 14 principles intended as a blueprint guiding Internet policy development for its
34 member states.
Many of these principles uphold core values we have long championed: fostering an open Internet, evidence-based policy-making,
multi-stakeholder policy development, decentralized online decision-making, effective global privacy protections,
and limiting Internet intermediary liability.

But all is not well on the Internet. In spite of this OECD policy framework,
efforts at online censorship and spying abound. Members of the U.S. government are attempting to push through legislation
that would subvert many of these core principles. The Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA)
and PROTECT IP Act (PIPA) enable censorship on a massive scale and threaten to break the Internet,
all in the name of intellectual property enforcement.
These bills could affect any foreign site accessible from the U.S., giving the U.S. government and individuals the ability to leverage
Internet intermediaries to blacklist sites accused of copyright infringement.
Such actions are inconsistent with OECD principles aimed at limiting intermediary liability.
Finally, DNS blocking contemplated by these bills would undermine the DNSSEC security measures intended to secure the DNS system.

Another OECD principle—promoting an open, decentralized, and interconnected network—is similarly undermined.
Karen Kornbluh, U.S. Ambassador to the OECD, remarked at a conference in the French Senate:

"The Internet is so powerful in part because no centralized authority governs it and no nation owns it …
Instead, a decentralized system of public and private actors collaborates to ensure its function and expansion.
What this means is that nations that choose to take a heavy-handed approach to regulating the Internet can reduce
its value for every other nation and user."

SOPA and PIPA would deliver that reduction in value—not only by undermining critical infrastructure security efforts,
but also by contributing to a globally fractured Internet.

U.S. censorship in the name of intellectual property rights is having a secondary effect:
countries like China have taken note,
using this as justification for their own censorship. The U.S. promotes Internet freedom abroad—
in Iran,
Russia—while pushing similar policies domestically.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton asserted
that “Internet freedom and IP enforcement are consistent,” but the overbroad enforcement agenda is not balanced.
Some rights holders now point to China as a model the U.S. should emulate.

This “copyright at all costs” approach threatens to undermine the OECD Internet Principles.
Last summer, U.S.-initiated discussions led to a Communiqué—precursor to these principles—
which EFF and CSISAC opposed
for privileging IP rights over fundamental rights. While yesterday’s Recommendations included the
Communiqué as an appendix “for informational purposes”,
the OECD should be praised for excluding its problematic elements from the final legal Recommendation.

OECD principles such as the Seoul Declaration and the
Guidelines on Transborder Data Flows
will influence interpretation of these new Internet Principles. EFF will continue to battle SOPA, PIPA, and other
harmful legislation, and—together with EDRI, CIPPIC,
EPIC, and civil society groups worldwide—we will fight against
international censorship measures.
We will also pressure the U.S. to stop laundering bad policy into international venues and instead adopt pragmatic policies
for a truly open Internet. EFF remains committed to engaging in the OECD process.