白宫|防止网络审查的行政命令

2020年5月29日13:55:57最新动态白宫|防止网络审查的行政命令已关闭评论5753字数 17357阅读57分51秒阅读模式
摘要

第一部分。政策。言论自由是美国民主的基石。我们的开国元勋通过宪法第一修正案保护这一神圣的权利。表达和辩论思想的自由是我们作为自由人民所有权利的基础。

防止网络审查的行政命令

INFRASTRUCTURE&TECHNOLOGY

基础设施和技术

发出日期:2020528

白宫|防止网络审查的行政命令

白宫|防止网络审查的行政命令

By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America,it is hereby ordered as follows:

根据美利坚合众国宪法和法律赋予我作为总统的权力,现命令如下:

Section 1.Policy.Free speech is the bedrock of American democracy.Our Founding Fathers protected this sacred right with the First Amendment to the Constitution.The freedom to express and debate ideas is the foundation for all of our rights as a free people.

第一部分。政策。言论自由是美国民主的基石。我们的开国元勋通过宪法第一修正案保护这一神圣的权利。表达和辩论思想的自由是我们作为自由人民所有权利的基础。

In a country that has long cherished the freedom of expression,we cannot allow a limited number of online platforms to hand pick the speech that Americans may access and convey on the internet.This practice is fundamentally un-American and anti-democratic.When large,powerful social media companies censor opinions with which they disagree,they exercise a dangerous power.They cease functioning as passive bulletin boards,and ought to be viewed and treated as content creators.

在一个长期以来珍视言论自由的国家,我们不能允许数量有限的网络平台手工挑选美国人可以访问和在互联网上传达的言论。这种做法根本上是不美国的,是反民主的。当强大的大型社交媒体公司审查他们不同意的观点时,他们行使了一种危险的权力。它们不再是被动的公告板,而应该被视为内容创造者。

The growth of online platforms in recent years raises important questions about applying the ideals of the First Amendment to modern communications technology.Today,many Americans follow the news,stay in touch with friends and family,and share their views on current events through social media and other online platforms.As a result,these platforms function in many ways as a 21st century equivalent of the public square.

近年来在线平台的发展引发了将第一修正案的理念应用于现代通信技术的重要问题。今天,许多美国人关注新闻,与朋友和家人保持联系,并通过社交媒体和其他在线平台分享他们对时事的看法。因此,这些平台在很多方面都相当于21世纪的公共广场。

Twitter,Facebook,Instagram,and YouTube wield immense,if not unprecedented,power to shape the interpretation of public events;to censor,delete,or disappear information;and to control what people see or do not see.

推特、脸书、Instagram YouTube 拥有巨大的权力,如果不是前所未有的话,可以影响对公共事件的解读;审查、删除或消失信息;控制人们看到或看不到的东西。

As President,I have made clear my commitment to free and open debate on the internet.Such debate is just as important online as it is in our universities,our town halls,and our homes.It is essential to sustaining our democracy.

作为总统,我明确承诺在互联网上进行自由和公开的辩论。这种争论在网络上和在我们的大学、市政厅和家里一样重要。这对于维持我们的民主至关重要。

Online platforms are engaging in selective censorship that is harming our national discourse.Tens of thousands of Americans have reported,among other troubling behaviors,online platforms"flagging"content as inappropriate,even though it does not violate any stated terms of service;making unannounced and unexplained changes to company policies that have the effect of disfavoring certain viewpoints;and deleting content and entire accounts with no warning,no rationale,and no recourse.

网络平台正在进行选择性的审查,这损害了我们的国家话语权。数以万计的美国人报告了一些令人不安的行为,其中包括在线平台"标记"不适当的内容,尽管它没有违反任何规定的服务条款;对公司政策进行未经宣布、原因不明的改变,导致某些观点不受欢迎;在没有警告、没有理由、没有追索权的情况下删除内容和整个账户。

Twitter now selectively decides to place a warning label on certain tweets in a manner that clearly reflects political bias.As has been reported,Twitter seems never to have placed such a label on another politician's tweet.As recently as last week,Representative Adam Schiff was continuing to mislead his followers by peddling the long-disproved Russian Collusion Hoax,and Twitter did not flag those tweets.Unsurprisingly,its officer in charge of so-called'Site Integrity'has flaunted his political bias in his own tweets.

现在,Twitter 有选择地在某些推特上贴上警告标签,这种方式明显反映了政治偏见。据报道,Twitter 似乎从未给另一位政客的推文贴过这样的标签。就在上周,众议员亚当·希夫(Adam Schiff)还在继续通过兜售早已被证伪的俄罗斯串谋骗局来误导他的追随者,而 Twitter 并没有标记这些推文。不出所料,该组织负责所谓"网站诚信"的官员在自己的推文中炫耀自己的政治偏见。

输入密码查看隐藏内容

As a Nation,we must foster and protect diverse viewpoints in today's digital communications environment where all Americans can and should have a voice.We must seek transparency and accountability from online platforms,and encourage standards and tools to protect and preserve the integrity and openness of American discourse and freedom of expression.

作为一个国家,我们必须在今天的数字通信环境中培养和保护不同的观点,在这种环境中,所有美国人都可以而且应该有发言权。我们必须从网络平台上寻求透明度和问责制,并鼓励标准和工具来保护和维护美国话语的完整性和开放性以及言论自由。

Sec.2.Protections Against Online Censorship.(a)It is the policy of the United States to foster clear ground rules promoting free and open debate on the internet.Prominent among the ground rules governing that debate is the immunity from liability created by section 230(c)of the Communications Decency Act(section 230(c)).47 U.S.C.230(c).It is the policy of the United States that the scope of that immunity should be clarified:the immunity should not extend beyond its text and purpose to provide protection for those who purport to provide users a forum for free and open speech,but in reality use their power over a vital means of communication to engage in deceptive or pretextual actions stifling free and open debate by censoring certain viewpoints.

第二节。网络审查的保护措施。(a)美国的政策是制定明确的基本规则,促进互联网上的自由和公开辩论。管理这场辩论的基本规则中,最突出的是《通信规范法案第230(c)条规定的责任豁免(230(c))。《美国法典》第47编第230(c)。美国的政策是,应当澄清这种豁免的范围:这种豁免不应当超出其文本和目的,以保护那些声称向用户提供自由和公开言论论坛的人,而实际上是利用其对重要通信手段的权力,通过审查某些观点,从事欺骗性或前文行为,扼杀自由和公开的辩论。

Section 230(c)was designed to address early court decisions holding that,if an online platform restricted access to some content posted by others,it would thereby become a"publisher"of all the content posted on its site for purposes of torts such as defamation.As the title of section 230(c)makes clear,the provision provides limited liability"protection"to a provider of an interactive computer service(such as an online platform)that engages in"'Good Samaritan'blocking"of harmful content.In particular,the Congress sought to provide protections for online platforms that attempted to protect minors from harmful content and intended to ensure that such providers would not be discouraged from taking down harmful material.The provision was also intended to further the express vision of the Congress that the internet is a"forum for a true diversity of political discourse."47 U.S.C.230(a)(3).The limited protections provided by the statute should be construed with these purposes in mind.

230(c)条旨在处理法院早期的裁决,即如果一个在线平台限制访问其他人张贴的某些内容,它就会成为其网站上为诽谤等侵权目的张贴的所有内容的"出版者"。正如第230(c)条的标题所清楚表明的,该条文为互动电脑服务(例如在线平台)的提供者提供有限责任的"保护",该服务提供者从事"好撒玛利亚人"屏蔽有害内容的活动。特别是,大会力求为试图保护未成年人免受有害内容侵害的在线平台提供保护,并确保不会阻止这些提供者删除有害内容。该条款还旨在进一步推进国会的明确愿景,即互联网是一个"真正多样化政治言论的论坛"《美国法典》第47编第230(a)(3)节。在解释规约提供的有限保护时,应考虑到这些目的。

In particular,subparagraph(c)(2)expressly addresses protections from"civil liability"and specifies that an interactive computer service provider may not be made liable"on account of"its decision in"good faith"to restrict access to content that it considers to be"obscene,lewd,lascivious,filthy,excessively violent,harassing or otherwise objectionable."It is the policy of the United States to ensure that,to the maximum extent permissible under the law,this provision is not distorted to provide liability protection for online platforms that—far from acting in"good faith"to remove objectionable content—instead engage in deceptive or pretextual actions(often contrary to their stated terms of service)to stifle viewpoints with which they disagree.Section 230 was not intended to allow a handful of companies to grow into titans controlling vital avenues for our national discourse under the guise of promoting open forums for debate,and then to provide those behemoths blanket immunity when they use their power to censor content and silence viewpoints that they dislike.When an interactive computer service provider removes or restricts access to content and its actions do not meet the criteria of subparagraph(c)(2)(A),it is engaged in editorial conduct.It is the policy of the United States that such a provider should properly lose the limited liability shield of subparagraph(c)(2)(A)and be exposed to liability like any traditional editor and publisher that is not an online provider.

特别是,(c)(2)项明确规定了免于"民事责任"的保护措施,并规定互动式计算机服务提供商不得因其"善意"决定限制访问其认为"淫秽、猥亵、好色、肮脏、过度暴力、骚扰或其他令人反感的"内容而"负有责任"美国的政策是,确保在法律允许的最大范围内,这项规定不被歪曲,以便为那些远非以"善意"行事以消除令人反感的内容的网上平台提供赔偿责任保护,而是采取欺骗或预先行动(通常与其声明的服务条件相反),扼杀它们不同意的观点。第230条款的目的不是让少数公司成长为巨头,在促进公开论坛辩论的幌子下,控制我们国家话语的重要渠道,然后在这些巨头使用他们的权力审查内容和压制他们不喜欢的观点时,给予他们一揽子豁免权。当交互式计算机服务提供商删除或限制对内容的访问并且其行为不符合(c)(2)(a)项的标准时,它从事编辑行为。美国的政策是,这样的提供者应当适当地失去(c)(2)(a)项的有限责任保护,并像任何传统的编辑和出版者一样承担责任,而不是在线提供者。

(b)To advance the policy described in subsection(a)of this section,all executive departments and agencies should ensure that their application of section 230(c)properly reflects the narrow purpose of the section and take all appropriate actions in this regard.In addition,within 60 days of the date of this order,the Secretary of Commerce(Secretary),in consultation with the Attorney General,and acting through the National Telecommunications and Information Administration(NTIA),shall file a petition for rulemaking with the Federal Communications Commission(FCC)requesting that the FCC expeditiously propose regulations to clarify:

(b)为推行本条(a)款所述的政策,所有行政部门和机构应确保其适用第230(c)条适当地反映本条的狭隘目的,并在这方面采取一切适当行动。此外,商务部长(秘书)应在该命令颁布之日起60天内,与司法部长协商,并通过国家电信和信息管理局(NTIA)采取行动,向联邦通信委员会(FCC)提交制定规则的请愿书,请求 FCC 迅速提出规则,以澄清:

(i)the interaction between subparagraphs(c)(1)and(c)(2)of section 230,in particular to clarify and determine the circumstances under which a provider of an interactive computer service that restricts access to content in a manner not specifically protected by subparagraph(c)(2)(A)may also not be able to claim protection under subparagraph(c)(1),which merely states that a provider shall not be treated as a publisher or speaker for making third-party content available and does not address the provider's responsibility for its own editorial decisions;

(i)230条第(c)(1)款和(c)(2)款之间的相互作用,特别是为了澄清和确定在何种情况下交互式计算机服务提供商以未受(c)(2)(a)项具体保护的方式限制对内容的访问,也可能无法根据(c)(1)项提出保护要求,该项仅规定提供商不应因提供第三方内容而被视为出版商或发言者,而且没有述及提供商对其自身编辑决定的责任;

(ii)the conditions under which an action restricting access to or availability of material is not"taken in good faith"within the meaning of subparagraph(c)(2)(A)of section 230,particularly whether actions can be"taken in good faith"if they are:

(ii)限制获取或提供材料的行动不属于第230(c)(2)(a)项所指的"善意采取"的条件,特别是如果属于下列情况,是否可以"善意采取"行动:

(A)deceptive,pretextual,or inconsistent with a provider's terms of service;or

(a)欺骗性的、伪造的或与服务提供者的服务条款不一致的;

(B)taken after failing to provide adequate notice,reasoned explanation,or a meaningful opportunity to be heard;and

(b)在未能提供充分的通知、合理的解释或有充分机会表达意见后采取的行动;

(iii)any other proposed regulations that the NTIA concludes may be appropriate to advance the policy described in subsection(a)of this section.

(iii)NTIA 得出结论的任何其他拟议规章可能适合推进本节(a)小节所述的政策。

Sec.3.Protecting Federal Taxpayer Dollars from Financing Online Platforms That Restrict Free Speech.(a)The head of each executive department and agency(agency)shall review its agency's Federal spending on advertising and marketing paid to online platforms.Such review shall include the amount of money spent,the online platforms that receive Federal dollars,and the statutory authorities available to restrict their receipt of advertising dollars.

第三条。保护联邦纳税人的钱不被限制言论自由的网络平台所利用。(a)各执行部门和机构(机构)的负责人应审查其机构在支付给在线平台的广告和营销方面的联邦支出。这种审查应包括花费的金额,接受联邦资金的在线平台,以及限制他们接受广告资金的法定权限。

(b)Within 30 days of the date of this order,the head of each agency shall report its findings to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.

(b)在本命令发出之日起30天内,各机构负责人应向管理和预算办公室主任报告其调查结果。

(c)The Department of Justice shall review the viewpoint-based speech restrictions imposed by each online platform identified in the report described in subsection(b)of this section and assess whether any online platforms are problematic vehicles for government speech due to viewpoint discrimination,deception to consumers,or other bad practices.

()律政司须检讨本节第()款所述各网上平台就观点而施加的言论限制,并评估是否有网上平台因观点歧视、欺骗消费者或其他不良做法而成为政府言论的问题载体。

Sec.4.Federal Review of Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices.(a)It is the policy of the United States that large online platforms,such as Twitter and Facebook,as the critical means of promoting the free flow of speech and ideas today,should not restrict protected speech.The Supreme Court has noted that social media sites,as the modern public square,"can provide perhaps the most powerful mechanisms available to a private citizen to make his or her voice heard."Packingham v.North Carolina,137 S.Ct.1730,1737(2017).Communication through these channels has become important for meaningful participation in American democracy,including to petition elected leaders.These sites are providing an important forum to the public for others to engage in free expression and debate.Cf.PruneYard Shopping Center v.Robins,447 U.S.74,85-89(1980).

第四条。联邦审查不公平或欺骗行为或做法。(a)美国的政策是,Twitter Facebook 等大型在线平台作为当今促进言论和思想自由流动的重要手段,不应限制受保护的言论。最高法院指出,作为现代公共广场的社交媒体网站,"可以为普通公民提供或许是最强大的机制,让他们的声音得到倾听。"《帕金汉姆诉北卡罗来纳州》,137 s.ct.1730,1737(2017)。通过这些渠道的沟通对于有意义地参与美国的民主变得非常重要,包括向选举出来的领导人请愿。这些网站为公众提供了一个重要的论坛,让其他人参与言论自由和辩论。参考普鲁内雅德购物中心诉罗宾斯案,447 u.s.74,85-89(1980)

(b)In May of 2019,the White House launched a Tech Bias Reporting tool to allow Americans to report incidents of online censorship.In just weeks,the White House received over 16,000 complaints of online platforms censoring or otherwise taking action against users based on their political viewpoints.The White House will submit such complaints received to the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission(FTC).

(b)20195月,白宫推出了一个技术偏见报告工具,允许美国人报告网络审查事件。仅仅几周时间,白宫就收到了超过16000起关于网络平台基于用户的政治观点进行审查或采取其他行动的投诉。白宫将向司法部和联邦贸易委员会(FTC)提交此类投诉。

(c)The FTC shall consider taking action,as appropriate and consistent with applicable law,to prohibit unfair or deceptive acts or practices in or affecting commerce,pursuant to section 45 of title 15,United States Code.Such unfair or deceptive acts or practice may include practices by entities covered by section 230 that restrict speech in ways that do not align with those entities'public representations about those practices.

(c)公平贸易委员会应考虑根据《美国法典》第15编第45节,酌情采取符合适用法律的行动,禁止商业中或影响商业的不公平或欺骗行为或做法。这种不公平或欺骗行为或做法可能包括第230条所涵盖的实体的做法,这些实体限制言论的方式与这些实体对这些做法的公开表述不一致。

(d)For large online platforms that are vast arenas for public debate,including the social media platform Twitter,the FTC shall also,consistent with its legal authority,consider whether complaints allege violations of law that implicate the policies set forth in section 4(a)of this order.The FTC shall consider developing a report describing such complaints and making the report publicly available,consistent with applicable law.

(d)对于公开辩论的大型在线平台,包括社交媒体平台 Twitter,公平贸易委员会还应根据其法律权限,考虑投诉是否涉及本命令第4(a)节所述政策的违法行为。公平贸易委员会应考虑编写一份报告,说明此类投诉,并按照适用法律公开提供该报告。

Sec.5.State Review of Unfair or Deceptive Acts or Practices and Anti-Discrimination Laws.(a)The Attorney General shall establish a working group regarding the potential enforcement of State statutes that prohibit online platforms from engaging in unfair or deceptive acts or practices.The working group shall also develop model legislation for consideration by legislatures in States where existing statutes do not protect Americans from such unfair and deceptive acts and practices.The working group shall invite State Attorneys General for discussion and consultation,as appropriate and consistent with applicable law.

第五节。对不公平或欺骗行为或做法和反歧视法的国家审查。(a)总检察长应设立一个工作组,负责执行禁止网络平台从事不公平或欺骗行为或做法的国家法规。工作组还应制定示范立法,供现有法规不能保护美国人免遭此类不公平和欺骗行为和做法之害的各州的立法机构审议。工作组应酌情并根据适用法律,邀请各州检察长进行讨论和磋商。

(b)Complaints described in section 4(b)of this order will be shared with the working group,consistent with applicable law.The working group shall also collect publicly available information regarding the following:

(b)本命令第4(b)条所述的投诉将根据适用的法律与工作组分享。工作组还应收集关于下列方面的可公开获得的信息:

(i)increased scrutiny of users based on the other users they choose to follow,or their interactions with other users;

(i)根据用户选择关注的其他用户或他们与其他用户的互动情况,加强对用户的审查;

(ii)algorithms to suppress content or users based on indications of political alignment or viewpoint;

(ii)基于政党联盟或观点的迹象而压制内容或使用者的算法;

输入密码查看隐藏内容

(iv)reliance on third-party entities,including contractors,media organizations,and individuals,with indicia of bias to review content;and

(iv)依赖第三方实体,包括承办商、传媒机构和个人,而这些实体在审查内容时存在偏见;以及

(v)acts that limit the ability of users with particular viewpoints to earn money on the platform compared with other users similarly situated.

(v)限制具有特定观点的用户与其他情况类似的用户相比在平台上赚钱的能力的行为。

Sec.6.Legislation.The Attorney General shall develop a proposal for Federal legislation that would be useful to promote the policy objectives of this order.

第六条。法例。总检察长应为联邦立法制定一项有助于促进该法令的政策目标的提案。

Sec.7.Definition.For purposes of this order,the term"online platform"means any website or application that allows users to create and share content or engage in social networking,or any general search engine.

第七条。定义。在这个顺序中,"在线平台"一词是指允许用户创建和分享内容或参与社交网络或任何一般搜索引擎的任何网站或应用程序。

Sec.8.General Provisions.(a)Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:

8条总则。(a)本命令不得解释为损害或以其他方式影响:

(i)the authority granted by law to an executive department or agency,or the head thereof;or

(i)法律授予行政部门或机构或其负责人的权力;

(ii)the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary,administrative,or legislative proposals.

(ii)管理和预算办公室主任与预算、行政或立法提案有关的职能。

(b)This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.

(b)本命令应依照适用的法律执行,但须视有无拨款而定。

(c)This order is not intended to,and does not,create any right or benefit,substantive or procedural,enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States,its departments,agencies,or entities,its officers,employees,or agents,or any other person.

(c)这项命令的目的不是,也不会产生任何当事方针对美国、其各部门、机构或实体、其官员、雇员或代理人或任何其他人的任何实质性或程序性权利或利益。

来源:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/executive-order-preventing-online-censorship/

zhunbeizhuanbian
  • 本文由 发表于 2020年5月29日13:55:57
  • 除非特殊声明,本站文章均来自网络,转载请务必保留本文链接