81
F
REEDOM ON THE
N
ET
2013
U
NITED
S
TATES
Act.
56
In early 2012, the FCC issued a call for public comment on the issue, but as of mid-2013 the
agency had not yet taken further action on the subject.
57
In December 2011, BART adopted a
policy outlining the circumstances under which it could shut down service; the policy did not
require prior judicial approval but, had it been in place, it would not have allowed for the August
2011 shutdown.
58
In 2012, the California State Assembly and Senate approved a bill that would
require a court order before allowing for cell network interruption. Governor Jerry Brown vetoed
the bill in September 2012, citing concerns that requiring law enforcement to make certain
decisions within six hours of interrupting service could divert attention away from resolving the
emergency situation.
59
Although some of the most popular social media platforms in the United States require users to
register and create accounts using their real names through Terms of Service or other contracts,
60
there are no legal restrictions on user anonymity on the internet. Constitutional precedents protect
the right to anonymous speech in many contexts. There are also state laws that stipulate journalists’
right to withhold the identities of anonymous sources, and at least one such law has been found to
apply to bloggers.
61
In April 2011, the Obama administration launched the National Strategy for
Trusted Identities in Cyberspace (NSTIC). The stated goal of the effort is to ensure the creation of
an “identity ecosystem” in which internet users and organizations can more completely trust one
another’s identities and systems when carrying out online transactions requiring assurance of
identity.
62
The plan specifically endorses anonymous online speech.
63
Laws that protect internet communications from government monitoring are complex. While in
transit, the contents of internet communications are generally protected from government
intrusion by constitutional rules against unreasonable searches and seizures,
64
although there is
more legal ambiguity with data stored in “the cloud.” The courts, however, have held that
transactional data about communications—data showing who is communicating with whom and
56
Mike Masnick, “FCC Asked For Declaratory Ruling That BART Shutting Off Mobile Phone Service Was Illegal,” TechDirt (blog),
August 31, 2011, http://www.techdirt.com/blog/wireless/articles/20110830/11591515740/fcc‐asked‐declaratory‐ruling‐that‐
bart‐shutting‐off‐mobile‐phone‐service‐was‐illegal.shtml.
57
“Commission Seeks Comment on Certain Wireless Interruptions,” Federal Communications Commission, March 1, 2012,
http://www.fcc.gov/document/commission‐seeks‐comment‐certain‐wireless‐service‐interruptions.
58
Michael Cabanatuan, “BART Cellphone Shutdown Rules Adopted,” SF Gate, December 2, 2011,
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/BART‐cell‐phone‐shutdown‐rules‐adopted‐2344326.php. See also Gabe Rottman,
“Shutting Down Cell Service During Protests: The Constitutional Dimension,” ACLU of Northen California, May 1, 2012,
http://bit.ly/16Am4bd.
59
Brian Heaton, “California Governor Vetos Cell Service Shutdown Bill,” Government Technology, October 1, 2012,
http://www.govtech.com/policy‐management/California‐Governor‐Vetoes‐Cell‐Service‐Shutdown‐Bill.html
60
Erica Newland, Caroline Nolan, Cynthia Wong, and Jillian York, “Account Deactivation and Content Removal: Guiding
Principles and Practices for Companies and Users,” Global Network Initiative, September 2011,
http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/node/7080.
61
“Apple v. Does,” Electronic Frontier Foundation, accessed August 1, 2012, http://www.eff.org/cases/apple‐v‐does.
62
“About NISTIC,” National Strategy for Trusted Identities in Cyberspace, accessed April 23, 2013,
http://www.nist.gov/nstic/about‐nstic.html.
63
Jay Stanley, “Don’t Put Your Trust in ‘Trusted Identities,’” Blog of Rights (blog), American Civil Liberties Union, January 7,
2011, http://www.aclu.org/blog/technology‐and‐liberty/dont‐put‐your‐trust‐trusted‐identities. See also, Jim Dempsey, “New
Urban Myth: The Internet ID Scare,” Policy Beta (blog), Center for Democracy and Technology, January 11, 2011,
http://www.cdt.org/blogs/jim‐dempsey/new‐urban‐myth‐internet‐id‐scare.
64
Paul Ohm, “Court Rules Email Protected by Fourth Amendment,” Freedom to Tinker, December 14, 2010,
http://www.freedom‐to‐tinker.com/blog/paul/court‐rules‐email‐protected‐fourth‐amendment.
796
How to C#: Basic SDK Concept of XDoc.PDF for .NET XDoc.PDF for .NET supports editing PDF document metadata, like Title, Subject, Author, Creator, Producer, Keywords, Created Date, and Last Modified Date.
remove pdf metadata online; analyze pdf metadata
73
F
REEDOM ON THE
N
ET
2013
U
NITED
S
TATES
when—is not protected by the Constitution.
65
Under a set of complex statutes, law enforcement
and intelligence agencies can monitor communications and access stored information under varying
degrees of oversight as part of criminal or national security investigations. In criminal probes, law
enforcement authorities can monitor the content of internet communications in real time only if
they have obtained an order, issued by a judge, under a standard that is actually a little higher than
the one established by the Constitution for searches of physical places. The order must reflect a
finding that there is probable cause to believe that a crime has been, is being, or is about to be
committed.
The status of stored communications is more uncertain. One federal appeals court has ruled that
the Constitution applies to stored communications, so that a judicial warrant is required for
government access.
66
Currently, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act states that the
government can obtain access to e-mail or other documents stored in the cloud with a mere
subpoena issued by a prosecutor or investigator without judicial approval.
67
As of mid-2013,
Congress was considering a proposed reform to ECPA that would require government officials to
obtain a warrant before accessing any private communications through online service providers.
68
The requirement would cover e-mail and documents stored using cloud services.
69
The Securities
and Exchange Commission (SEC), a civil regulatory agency, has complicated the issue by
attempting to amend the bill to secure the authority to obtain stored e-mail and other documents
directly from service providers.
70
Following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, Congress passed the USA PATRIOT Act,
which expanded some of the government’s surveillance and investigative powers in cases involving
terrorism as well as in ordinary criminal investigations. Three expiring provisions of the PATRIOT
Act—including the government’s broad authority to conduct roving wiretaps of unidentified or
“John Doe” targets, to wiretap “lone wolf” suspects who have no known connections to terrorist
networks, and to secretly access a wide range of private business records with court orders issued
on a broad standard (Section 215)—were renewed for an additional four years in May 2011.
71
In mid-2013, The Guardian and the Washington Post revealed a series of secret documents
72
leaked by
a former National Security Agency (NSA) contractor that provide new information (and raise many
new questions) about surveillance activities conducted by the United States government.
65
“A Brief History of Surveillance Law,” Center for Democracy & Technology, accessed August 17, 2011,
https://www.cdt.org/issue/wiretap‐ecpa.
66
United States v. Warshak, 09‐3176, United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit.
67
Ibid.
68
Greg Nojeim, “Senate ‘Dream Team’ Introduced ECPA Reform Bill,” Center for Democracy and Technology PolicyBeta Blog,
March 19, 2013, https://www.cdt.org/blogs/greg‐nojeim/1903senate‐dream‐team‐introduces‐ecpa‐reform‐bill.
69
“ECPA: About the Issue,” Digital Due Process, accessed April 23, 2013,
http://digitaldueprocess.org/index.cfm?objectid=37940370‐2551‐11DF‐8E02000C296BA163.
70
Leslie Harris, “The SEC’s Power Grab Threatens to Distort the US Justice System,” Center for Democracy & Technology, July
31, 2013, https://www.cdt.org/commentary/sec’s‐power‐grab‐threatens‐distort‐us‐justice‐system .
71
“Patriot Act Excesses,” New York Times, October 7, 2009, http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/08/opinion/08thu1.html.
72
e.g. Glenn Greenwald, “NSA Collecting Phone Records of Millions of Verizon Customers Daily,” The Guardian, June 5, 2013,
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jun/06/nsa‐phone‐records‐verizon‐court‐order.
797
VB.NET PDF: Basic SDK Concept of XDoc.PDF XDoc.PDF for .NET supports editing PDF document metadata, like Title, Subject, Author, Creator, Producer, Keywords, Created Date, and Last Modified Date.
embed metadata in pdf; add metadata to pdf programmatically
73
F
REEDOM ON THE
N
ET
2013
U
NITED
S
TATES
Leaked documents indicate that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISA Court) has
interpreted Section 215 of the PATRIOT Act to permit the FBI to obtain orders that compel the
largest telephone carriers in the U.S. (Verizon, AT&T, Sprint, and presumably others) to provide
the NSA with records of all phone calls made to, from, and within the U.S. on an ongoing basis.
These billions of call records include numbers dialed, length of call, and other “metadata.”
73
Data
are gathered in bulk, without any particularized suspicion about an individual, phone number, or
device. NSA analysts may conduct queries on this data without approval from the FISA Court or an
independent magistrate.
74
Leaks also reveal that under a program code-named “PRISM” the NSA has been compelling at least
nine large U.S. companies, including Google, Facebook, Microsoft and Apple, to disclose content
and metadata relating to e-mails, web chats, videos, images, and documents.
75
PRISM activities
occur under Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which permits the NSA to
target the communications of non-U.S. persons who are reasonably believed to be located outside
the United States in order to collect “foreign intelligence information.”
76
Although the program is
targeted at persons abroad, the NSA is able to retain and use information “incidentally” collected
about U.S. persons.
Critics have raised concern that the secret NSA programs may violate the 4
th
Amendment of the
United States Constitution, which protects people inside the U.S. (citizens and non-citizens alike)
from unreasonable search and seizure, as well as human rights enshrined in international
agreements. In June 2013, a diverse coalition of prominent NGOs and companies submitted a
letter to Congress urging lawmakers to explicitly prohibit the blanket collection of metadata,
investigate actions of the NSA, and hold public officials accountable for unconstitutional
surveillance.
77
Legislators have introduced proposals to narrow the scope of NSA activities.
78
In another concerning case regarding government access to information, the Associated Press
reported in May 2013 that, as part of a national security leak investigation, the U.S. Justice
Department subpoenaed and gained access to two months of phone records for several reporters
following AP coverage of a failed bomb plot in Yemen.
79
Justice Department guidelines specify
that, in the course of an investigation, requests for journalists’ records should be “as narrowly
drawn as possible,” and that investigators should attempt to obtain records directly from journalists
73
For more information on privacy and metadata, see Aubra Anthony, “When Metadata Becomes Megadata: What
Government Can Learn,” Center for Democracy and Technology PolicyBeta Blog, June 17, 2013,
https://www.cdt.org/blogs/1706when‐metadata‐becomes‐megadata‐what‐government‐can‐learn‐metadata.
74
“Comparing Two Secret Surveillance Programs,” The New York Times, June 7, 2013,
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2013/06/07/us/comparing‐two‐secret‐surveillance‐programs.html.
75
“NSA Slides Explain the PRISM Data Collection Program,” Washington Post, June 6, 2013,
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp‐srv/special/politics/prism‐collection‐documents/.
76
H.R. 6304 Sec. 702.
77
Coalition Letter to Congress on U.S. Spying, June 11, 2013, https://www.cdt.org/files/pdfs/CDT‐Coalition‐NSA‐Spying.pdf.
78
Spencer Ackerman and Paul Lewis, “Congress Eyes Renewed Push for Legislation to Rein in the NSA,” The Guardian, August 2,
2013, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/02/congress‐nsa‐legislation‐surveillance.
79
Carrie Johnson, “Justice Department Secretly Obtains AP Phone Records,” National Public Radio, May 14, 2013,
http://www.npr.org/2013/05/14/183810320/justice‐department‐secretly‐obtains‐ap‐phone‐records.
798
C# PDF - Read Barcode on PDF in C#.NET Bookmark: Edit Bookmark. Metadata: Edit, Delete Metadata. Watermark: Add Watermark to PDF. Form Process. Data: Read, Extract Field Data. Data: Auto Fill-in Field
bulk edit pdf metadata; view pdf metadata in explorer
80
F
REEDOM ON THE
N
ET
2013
U
NITED
S
TATES
on a voluntary basis, when possible.
80
The Associated Press has since reported that the
government’s actions have had a chilling effect on sources, discouraging even long-standing
informants from speaking with the AP.
81
In July 2013, the Attorney General tightened the rules on
getting reporters’ data, but did not prohibit the practice entirely.
82
The Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA) requires telephone
companies, broadband carriers, and interconnected Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP) providers
to design their systems so that communications can be easily intercepted when government
agencies have the legal authority to do so.
83
The FBI suggested in late 2010 that the law should be
expanded to impose design requirements on online communications tools such as Gmail, Skype,
and Facebook,
84
and while the FBI continued to push the issue,
85
no legislation has yet been
proposed in Congress.
In April 2013, the House of Representatives voted in favor of the Cyber Intelligence Sharing and
Protection Act (CISPA), a proposed law that would allow ISPs and other corporations to share
cyber threat information with one another and the government.
86
Civil liberties advocates warn
that the bill, in its current form, would allow companies to share citizens’ private information with
the government, including internet records and e-mail content, without first taking reasonable
steps to remove material not related to the threat.
87
The Senate has since shelved the bill and
President Obama has pledged to veto the legislation if it reaches his desk as written, citing concerns
about privacy and civil liberties of internet users.
88
Law enforcement agencies have also begun to use open, public websites and social media to
monitor different groups for suspected criminal activity. One notable example that stoked
controversy in February 2012 was an initiative by the New York Police Department (NYPD) to
monitor Muslim student groups at various universities in the northeastern United States. The
Associated Press reported that, from 2006 onward, the NYPD Cyber Intelligence unit had
monitored blogs, websites, and online forums of Muslim student groups and produced a series of
secret “Muslim Student Association” reports describing group activities, religious instruction, and
80
“Look Who’s Talking: The Administration Seems to Have Trampled on Press Freedom,”The Economist, May 18, 2013,
http://econ.st/YN4N8n.
81
Lindy Royce‐Bartlett, “Leak Probe Has Chilled Sources, AP Exec Says,” The Associated Press, June 19, 2013,
http://www.cnn.com/2013/06/19/politics/ap‐leak‐probe.
82
Charlie Savage, “Holder Tightens Rules on Getting Reporters’ Data.” The New York Times, July 12, 2013,
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/13/us/holder‐to‐tighten‐rules‐for‐obtaining‐reporters‐data.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0.
83
The FCC does not classify Skype as an “interconnected VoIP” service.
84
Charlie Savage, “U.S. Tries to Make it Easier to Wiretap the Internet.” The New York Times, September 27, 2010,
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/27/us/27wiretap.html?pagewanted=all.
85
Declan McCullagh, “FBI: We Need Wiretap‐Ready Websites – Now,” CNET, May 4, 2012, http://news.cnet.com/8301‐1009_3‐
57428067‐83/fbi‐we‐need‐wiretap‐ready‐web‐sites‐now.
86
“Rogers‐Ruppersberger Cyber Bill (CISPA) Passes House,” U.S. House of Representatives Permanent Select Committee on
Intelligence, Press Release, April 18, 2013, http://1.usa.gov/18Aoi6v.
87
“House Passes CISPA,” Center for Democracy and Technology PolicyBeta Blog, April 18. 2013,
https://www.cdt.org/pr_statement/house‐passes‐cispa; Michelle Richardson “CISPA Explainer #1: What Information Can Be
Shared?” ACLU Blog, April 2, 2013, http://www.aclu.org/blog/national‐security‐technology‐and‐liberty/cispa‐explainer‐1‐what‐
information‐can‐be‐shared.
88
“Statement of Administration Policy: H.R. 624 – Cyber Intelligence Sharing and Protection Act,” Executive Office of the
President, Office of Management and Budget, April 16, 2013, http://1.usa.gov/110RWxH.
799
62
F
REEDOM ON THE
N
ET
2013
U
NITED
S
TATES
the frequency of prayer by the groups.
89
The New York City mayor defended the practice by
stating that the NYPD did not break any laws by monitoring websites and online activity that was
already publicly available, although others pointed to the religious-profiling nature of the activity.
Muslim students from across the nation have expressed concern about this type of surveillance and
in late 2012 told Freedom House that they often self-censor when conducting online activities.
Like most other countries, the United States faces the growing challenge of addressing cyberattacks
conducted by both international and domestic actors. China is one focal point of the cybersecurity
discussion, especially following a report by computer security firm Mandiant which stated that
many attacks against U.S. organizations, companies, and government agencies appear to have
originated in an office of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army in Beijing.
90
The purpose of these
attacks is presumably to gain information, but the United States faces other types of cybersecurity
threats as well. For example, the Department of Homeland Security reported a wave of attacks in
mid-2013 that sought to reveal vulnerabilities in infrastructure managed by private energy
companies. The attacks seem to have originated in the Middle East, but the exact source is
unknown.
91
In response to growing concern about cybersecurity threats, President Obama
produced an executive order in February 2013 recognizing the need for improved cybersecurity
measures and calling for a new “Cybersecurity Framework” to address security threats.
92
At the
same time the U.S. military admitted that it is developing the ability to carry out offensive
cyberattacks.
93
The documents leaked by Edward Snowden included a Presidential Policy Directive
describing U.S. “Offensive Cyber Effects Operations (OCEO).”
94
89
Al Baker and Kate Taylor, “Bloomberg Defends Police’s Monitoring of Muslim Student Web Sites,” New York Times, February
22, 2012, http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/22/nyregion/bloomberg‐defends‐polices‐monitoring‐of‐muslim‐student‐web‐
sites.html.
90
David E. Sanger, David Barboza, and Nicole Perlroth, “Chinese Army Unit is Seen as Tied to Hacking Against the U.S.” The New
York Times, February 18, 2013, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/19/technology/chinas‐army‐is‐seen‐as‐tied‐to‐hacking‐
against‐us.html?pagewanted=all&gwh=24BE5E3C317441D6CAB213658308303F&_r=0.
91
David E. Sanger and Nicole Perlroth, “Cyberattacks Against U.S. Corporations Are on the Rise,” The New York Times, May 12,
2013, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/13/us/cyberattacks‐on‐rise‐against‐us‐corporations.html?pagewanted=all.
92
“Executive Order – Improving Critical Infrastructure Cybersecurity,” February 12, 2013, http://www.whitehouse.gov/the‐
press‐office/2013/02/12/executive‐order‐improving‐critical‐infrastructure‐cybersecurity.
93
Mark Mazzetti and David E. Sanger, “Security Leader Says U.S. Would Retaliate Against Cyberattacks,” The New York Times,
March 12, 2013, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/13/us/intelligence‐official‐warns‐congress‐that‐cyberattacks‐pose‐threat‐
to‐us.html?pagewanted=all.
94
Glenn Greenwald and Ewen MacAskill, “Obama Orders U.S. to Draw Up Overseas Target List for Cyberattacks,” The Guardian,
June 7, 2013, http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/jun/07/obama‐china‐targets‐cyber‐overseas.
800
124
F
REEDOM ON THE
N
ET
2013
U
ZBEKISTAN
U
ZBEKISTAN
The government established a new telecommunications regulator with consolidated
powers to control the internet and other information and communications technologies
(ICTs) (see O
BSTACLES TO
A
CCESS
).
Judges declared the leading mobile phone operator, Uzdunrobita (partially owned by
Russian telecoms company MTS), bankrupt, in a case involving potential bribes from
the ruling family and confirming the hostility of the environment for foreign investment
in the telecommunications sector (see L
IMITS ON
C
ONTENT
).
Criminal investigations using trumped-up charges were opened against a popular news
site, Olam.uz, which had been reporting on the corruption allegations surrounding the
Uzdunrobita case (see V
IOLATIONS OF
U
SER
R
IGHTS
).
2012
2013
I
NTERNET
F
REEDOM
S
TATUS
N
OT
F
REE
N
OT
F
REE
Obstacles to Access (0-25)
19
20
Limits on Content (0-35)
28
28
Violations of User Rights (0-40)
30
30
Total (0-100)
77
78
*0=most free, 100=least free
K
EY
D
EVELOPMENTS
:
M
AY
2012
–
A
PRIL
2013
P
OPULATION
:
29.8 million
I
NTERNET
P
ENETRATION
2012:
37 percent
S
OCIAL
M
EDIA
/ICT
A
PPS
B
LOCKED
:
Yes
P
OLITICAL
/S
OCIAL
C
ONTENT
B
LOCKED
:
Yes
B
LOGGERS
/ICT
U
SERS
A
RRESTED
:
No
P
RESS
F
REEDOM
2013
S
TATUS
:
Not Free
801
53
F
REEDOM ON THE
N
ET
2013
U
ZBEKISTAN
In the period of May 2012 to April 2013, internet regulation in Uzbekistan did not improve and the
country remains one of the most restrictive in Central Asia. The Uzbek government has adopted
several programs aimed at stimulating the development of the telecommunications infrastructure
and raising awareness about computer technologies, especially among rural populations. However,
as reported by the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) in 2011, Uzbekistan is on the
verge of being excluded from the global information society due to the still prohibitively high prices
for broadband internet access.
1
In the fall of 2012, the government consolidated regulatory authority over the ICT industry in
Uzbekistan through the establishment of a new telecommunications regulator. The action was taken
after the former telecom regulator, UzACI, was involved in the unlawful termination of the leading
GSM operator, Uzdunrobita (MTS-Uzbekistan) beginning in July 2012. All media regulatory
bodies were integrated into the structure of the new telecommunications regulator.
In 2012–2013, the state-owned telecommunications carrier Uztelecom retained centralized control
over the country’s connection to the international internet, facilitating nationwide censorship and
surveillance. The Uzbek authorities block access to a wide range of international news websites,
human rights groups, and exile publications, while at educational and cultural institutions, access is
strictly limited to the national intranet system, or ZiyoNet. A popular online news site, Olam.uz,
which reported extensively about the Uzdunrobita case, was shut down in January 2013 due to the
politically motivated charges against its owner and editor-in-chief. Additionally, two journalists
reporting for online media are serving long sentences on trumped-up charges.
Direct access to the internet backbone via the Trans Asia Europe fiber-optic cable became
operational in Uzbekistan in 1998.
2
Despite extensive state investments in telecommunications
infrastructure and internet connectivity since 1999, internet penetration reached a mere 9 percent
of the population by 2009.
3
In January 2013, according to the government, the number of internet
users reached 9.8 million, comprising 33 percent of the population—a small increase from 31
1
International Telecommunication Union (ITU), "Measuring the Information Society: 2012," accessed July 30, 2013,
http://www.itu.int/en/ITU‐D/Statistics/Documents/publications/mis2012/MIS2012_without_Annex_4.pdf.
2
Trans Asia Europe, "Historical reference 2005," accessed July 30, 2013, http://taeint.net/en/about/company_history/.
3
United Nations Development Program (UNDP), "Review of Information and Communication Technologies Development in
Uzbekistan: 2005," Tashkent 2006, http://www.undp.uz/en/publications/publication.php?id=19. Also see ITU, "Key 2000 – 2011
country data: Percentage of individuals using the Internet," http://www.itu.int/ITU‐D/ict/statistics/.
I
NTRODUCTION
O
BSTACLES TO
A
CCESS
802
84
F
REEDOM ON THE
N
ET
2013
U
ZBEKISTAN
percent in April 2012.
4
Estimates by the International Telecommunication Union calculated the
internet penetration rate slightly higher at 37 percent for 2012.
5
Digital divides are found across urban, rural, and remote areas of the country, where factors such as
computer literacy and income affect the likelihood that individuals have access to the internet.
Problems with the electrical grid limit the usefulness of the telecommunications infrastructure,
especially in rural and remote areas.
6
A digital divide also exists between the capital, Tashkent, and
the country's 12 regions (viloyati), with the lowest internet penetration rate registered in the semi-
autonomous republic of Karakalpakstan—a home to the Karakalpak, Kazakh, and Uzbek ethnic
groups.
7
Only 8 percent of households were connected to the internet in Uzbekistan by the end of 2011, the
second lowest estimate in the region of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) after
Turkmenistan.
8
Though work seems to be a primary place to access the internet, "collective" or
public access points such as internet cafes remain popular as well. Since December 2010, minors
are officially prohibited from visiting internet cafes without parents or adults between 10:00 p.m.
and 6:00 a.m.
9
Reportedly, since 2011, students are also not allowed to visit internet cafes
between 8:30 a.m. and 7:00 p.m.
10
Public libraries, museums, nearly all of the country’s educational, scientific and cultural
institutions, and youth organizations connect to the internet exclusively via the “unified information
network ZiyoNet,” or intranet, initiated by the government in September 2005.
11
ZiyoNet requires
user identification and employs software protecting against “aggressive internet content.”
12
Given
the role of those institutions in Uzbek society,
13
online resources on the intranet consist mainly of
government sources of information, including state educational but also ideological materials.
14
As
4
State Committee for Communications, Information and Telecommunications Technologies (SC for CITT), "Показатели
развития отрасли: Актуальные статистические данные о состоянии внедрения и развития ИКТ в Республике
Узбекистан,"accessed April 25, 2013, http://ccitt.uz/ru/indicators/.
5
International Telecommunication Union (ITU), “Percentage of Individuals Using the Internet,” 2012, accessed July 30, 2013,
http://www.itu.int/en/ITU‐D/Statistics/Pages/stat/default.aspx.
6
International Telecommunication Union, “Sustainable electricity supply of telecommunications objects in rural and remote
areas,” accessed September 21, 2012, http://www.itu.int/ITU‐D/projects/display.asp?ProjectNo=2UZB11003.
7
UzACI and UNDP Uzbekistan, "Анализ состояния и перспектив развития Интернет в Республике Узбекистан" [Analysis of
the Internet Development and its Prospects in Uzbekistan], 2009, accessed July 30, 2013, http://infocom.uz/wp‐
content/files/otchet.pdf.
8
ITU, “Measuring the Information Society: 2012,” accessed July 30, 2013, http://www.itu.int/en/ITU‐
D/Statistics/Documents/publications/mis2012/MIS2012_without_Annex_4.pdf.
9
"O poriadke predostavlenia dostupa k seti Internet v obschestvennikh punktakh pol’zovania" [On Adoption of the Terms of
Provision of Access to the Internet Network in Public Points of Use], promulgated by Order of the Communications and
Information Agency of Uzbekistan No. 216, July 23, 2004, SZ RU (2004) No. 30, item 350, at Art. 17 (e).
10
"Lyceum students banned from e‐cafes," Uznews.net, May 31, 2012,
http://www.uznews.net/news_single.php?lng=en&sub=top&cid=4&nid=19973.
11
Resolution of the President RU "О создании общественной образовательной информационной сети Республики
Узбекистан" [On the Establishment of the Public, Educational, and Information Network of the Republic of Uzbekistan], No. ПП‐
191, 28 September 2005, SZRU (No. 40), item. 305, at Art. 4.
12
Ibid., at Art. 5.
13
Resolution of the President RU "О государственной программе "Год гармонично развитого поколения"" [On the State
Program "The Year of Harmoniously Developed Generation"], No. ПП‐1271, January 27, 2010, SZRU (2010) No. 5, item 37.
14
"Библиотека" [Library], ZiyoNet.uz, accessed July 30, 2013, http://www.ziyonet.uz/ru/library/.
803
73
F
REEDOM ON THE
N
ET
2013
U
ZBEKISTAN
of January 2013, there were 41,541 of these “approved” online information resources, some of
which are knock-offs of popular social media platforms such as Utube.uz.
Internet connectivity is available via dial-up, ADSL broadband, and WiMax, but no longer via
satellite. Dial-up connections are more common in rural areas than urban areas.
15
In 2011, the
government made a commitment to expand the number of users with a dial-up connection from 3
million to 3.5 million.
16
By 2012, 147,760 users had a fixed-broadband subscription in the
country,
17
which is significantly higher than the national target of 100,000 set by President Karimov
to be achieved by the end of 2011.
18
Given this target, Uztelecom and the Chinese
telecommunications equipment supplier ZTE launched the mass production of ADSL modems and
DSLAM network devices in August 2011.
19
As of February 2013, Uztelecom offered FTTB
broadband internet to 837 buildings in Tashkent. WiMAX broadband is available only in Tashkent
and six regions since it was first introduced on the Uzbek market by a private operator in 2008.
20
As described below, the ban on private ISPs to access the internet via satellite has been in force
since February 2011.
The state-owned JSC Uzbektelecom, established in 2000 and re-branded as “national operator
Uztelecom” in 2011, operates Uzbekistan's telecommunications infrastructure under a state license
renewable every 15 years. In August 2005, Uztelecom took over the internet connectivity
functions from the state data transfer network company, “UzPAK,” which later became its
subsidiary.
21
The latter is claimed to have been only partially successful in maintaining a monopoly
and centralized state control over international internet connectivity since its establishment in
1999.
22
By contrast, due to a favorable regulatory environment, Uztelecom has succeeded in
becoming a pure monopoly over the country's connection to the internet and an upstream ISP, with
private ISPs required to have their international internet traffic routed and transmitted through a
single Uztelecom network gateway (the International Centre for Packet Switching, abbreviated as
MZPK in Russian).
15
Sarkor Telekom, Press Release, December 16, 2011, http://www.sarkor.com/ru/press/news/.
16
Uztelecom, "Рассмотрены перспективы развития телекоммуникационных сетей" [The Prospective for the Development
of Telecommunications Networks Has Been Analyzed], February 21, 2011,
http://www.uztelecom.uz/ru/press/media/2011/141/.
17
ITU, "Key 2000 – 2011 country data: Fixed (wired)‐broadband subscriptions," http://www.itu.int/ITU‐D/ict/statistics/.
18
Report of the President RU to the Government, "Все наши устремления и программы – Вo имя дальнейшего развития
родины и повышения благосостояния народа" [All our aspirations and programs – in the name of the further development of
the motherland and improvement of the welfare of the people], February 21, 2011, http://www.press‐
service.uz/ru/news/archive/dokladi/#ru/news/show/dokladi/vse_nashi_ustremleniya_i_programmyi___1/.
19
Uztelecom, "Запущена в эксплуатацию технологическая линия по производству DSLAM оборудования и ADSL модемов"
[A Technological Production of DSLAM Equipment and ADSL modems Has Been Launched], August 31, 2011,
http://www.uztelecom.uz/ru/press/news/2011/187/.
20
See UzACI and UNDP Uzbekistan, note 9 above.
21
Decree of the President RU "On measures for development of data transfer services and preparation for privatization of JSC
"Uzbektelecom", No. PP‐149, August 8, 2005.
22
Josh Machleder, "Struggle over Internet Access Developing in Uzbekistan," December 3, 2002,
www.eurasianet.org/departments/rights/articles/eav031202.shtml.
804
Documents you may be interested
Documents you may be interested
