October 10, 2016
Should Internet-based Firms Explain Terms and Conditions to Users?
There are many users of internet based platforms, like Facebook and Google, who are unaware of the existence of the terms and conditions that are available on the platform websites for users to familiarise themselves with and understand. The terms and conditions outline what is expected of both parties in agreement and also what both parties can and cannot do including with private data. Whose responsibility is it to popularise these often long policies to users?
This question was one of the most debated and discussed at the just ended Forum on Internet Freedom in Africa 2016 (FIFAfrica16) which was organised by the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA). Sharing of user data by internet based firms, either upon request by particular governments or other entities has become one of the most worrying factors for many internet users. Users of social media platforms do not entirely have control over who has access to their data, neither do they always have an understanding of the privacy policy associated with using these platforms.
As part of the panel discussion on transparency and accountability of intermediaries at #FIFAfrica16, Ebele Okobi, Head of Public Policy, Africa, Facebook, stated that “terms of service are the main mechanism used by companies to communicate with customers. Read them”. In other words, it is the responsibility of the user to read and understand what the terms of service say. However, most users do not read the terms of service “before clicking accept” and as pointed out by Anriette Esterhuysen of the Association for Progressive Communications (APC), firms hide behind that user ignorance to achieve their strategic goals at the detriment of user privacy.
Do Terms of Service Govern the Relationship?
“Terms of services do not govern the relationship between users and the company,” noted Ms. Okobi. She added that terms of service are the mechanism by which companies communicate with their users on the product. This implies that a firm can take an action that will affect a user with or without his/her permission.
What can be done?
Terms of services need to be in clear language and displayed boldly for users to read and understand. Internet-based firms should also consciously create awareness about the importance of reading the terms of services and also interpreting them to users. The firms should take the first step in explaining to users what the terms of services actually mean and what are they agreeing to for using the products. Terms of service should be simplified for users to understand the risks involved in signing up onto a platform and also outline how their data will be collected and used.
Meanwhile, users need to understand the rights they are giving up to internet-based firms when they check the “I agree” box on terms of service. On an ongoing basis, companies need to communicate with users to help understand why they need to collect their information and assure them the data being collected will be secured and not shared with third parties without their consent.
September 29, 2017
Internet shutdowns in Sub-Saharan Africa have cost the region up to US$ 237 million
Johannesburg, South Africa: Internet shutdowns in Sub-Saharan Africa have cost the region up to US$ 237 million since 2015, according to a report to be released by the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA). Using a newly developed framework, the report estimates the cost of internet shutdowns in 10 African countries, and notes that the economic losses caused by an internet disruption persist far beyond the days on which the shutdown occurs, because network disruptions unsettle supply chains and have systemic effects that harm efficiency throughout the economy.
Despite the increasing benefits associated with access to the internet and the contribution of the ICT sector to GDP in Sub-Saharan Africa, since 2015 there have been state-initiated internet disruptions in at least 12 countries in the region.
While it is clear how internet shutdowns affect users’ fundamental rights, such as the right of access to information and freedom of expression, the impact of disruptions on a country’s economy and citizens’ livelihoods is rarely as clearly articulated due to a lack of verifiable data. That made it necessary to develop a framework that can be used to estimate the economic cost of shutdowns in SSA.
The report shows the losses in USD terms which each of the countries studied lost during the duration of the network disruptions. The report also shows that:
See: A Framework for Calculating the Economic Impact of Internet Disruptions in Sub-Saharan Africa
Disruptions have been witnessed during national exams as was the case in Ethiopia, during elections in countries such as Chad, Gabon, Gambia, Republic of Congo, and Uganda. Public protests have also led to internet disruptions in countries like Burundi, the Central African Republic, Cameroon, DR Congo, Ethiopia, Mali, Niger, and Togo.
Internet shutdowns have been witnessed in countries, some of which have very low internet penetration and usage figures. According to the ITU, Cameroon, Uganda and Niger have internet usage percentages of 25%, 21.9% and 4.4% respectively. The three countries have experienced internet disruptions for 93 days, 6 days and 3 days respectively between 2016 and 2017. The significant contribution of the ICT sector and of more prevalent internet services to the economy and society cannot be disputed. This is more so in most African economies where the contribution of the ICT sector to GDP is on average 5%, a contribution greater than in many countries in Europe and Asia.
The report will be launched today, Friday September 29, 2017, at the Forum on Internet Freedom in Africa which is currently being held in Johannesburg, South Africa.
About the Forum on Internet Freedom in Africa 2017 (FIFAfrica17): This year, FIFAfrica17 is co-hosted by the Collaboration on International ICT Policy for East and Southern Africa (CIPESA) and the Association for Progressive Communication (APC). The two organisations have a history of advocating for the advancement of digital rights in Africa and beyond. The discussions of Forum are built around themes which engage with the 13 principles of the African Declaration on Internet Rights and Freedoms (www.africaninternetrights.org).
Additional information on the evolution of the Forum can be found on www.internetfreedom.africa
By kofi Blog No comments Tags: CIPESA, Forum on Internet Freedom in Africa, Internet Freedom Africa, Internet Shutdown