Feeds

US spreads Web2.0rhea to Iran, Sudan, Cuba

This Tweet kills fascists

Intelligent flash storage arrays

US citizens are now free to invite Iranian, Sudanese, and Cuban citizens into the Web2.0rhea revolution.

The US Treasury Department's trade sanction management body, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC), announced on Monday that it was amending regulations that had prevented US citizens from exporting internet-based communications software and services to Iran, Sudan, and Cuba.

Licenses can now be granted that allow exports of software and services which enable private citizens in those three countries to engage in private activities such as email, instant messaging, chat, web browsing, social networking, blogging and photo and movie sharing.

"Consistent with the Administration's deep commitment to the universal rights of all the world's citizens, the issuance of these general licenses will make it easier for individuals in Iran, Sudan and Cuba to use the Internet to communicate with each other and with the outside world," said Deputy Treasury Secretary Neal Wolin in a prepared statement.

If you surmise that the recent Twitterification of Iranian protests helped inspire Monday's easing of export rules, you'd be correct. "As recent events in Iran have shown," said Wolin, "personal Internet-based communications like email, instant messaging and social networking are powerful tools. This software will foster and support the free flow of information - a basic human right - for all Iranians."

But the revised regulations don't allow for a wide-open software surge to the three-country Axis of Disagreeableness. The OFAC's 21-page ruling (pdf) specifically states that licenses will be issued only on a case-by-case basis and only for services and software "incident to the sharing of information over the Internet".

And those exports won't go to the minions of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Omar Hassan al-Bashir, or Raul Castro. The new regulations prohibit the export of software or services to those overlords, their governments, or - in the case of the US's Caribbean bête noire - to "a prohibited member of the Cuban Communist Party".

In addition, the new regulations require that the software be used only for services that are "publicly available at no cost to the user".

Although supporting tweets about repressive governments might seem to be striking a blow for the little guy, it's unclear exactly how important these new regulations will be. Although Iran has a high degree of internet participation due to its rising middle class - nearly half of its population are internet users, according to Internet World Stats - Cuba has about 1.45 million internet users among its 11 million–plus souls, and Sudan has about the same percentage, with 4.2 million users among its population of 41 million.

Whether or not Facebook, Flickr, Twitter, and YouTube can save the world from neofascism, the new OFAC regs do illustrate the Obama administration's focus on internet freedom. Recently, in a wide-ranging speech on matters webby, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said: "Countries that restrict free access to information or violate the basic rights of Internet users risk walling themselves off from the progress of the next century."

Clinton's remarks were aimed most specifically at China, but she also rapped the knuckles of Tunisia, Uzbekistan, Egypt, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Vietnam. In addition, although Clinton did emphasize freedom of communications, her remarks had a decidedly business bent. "Countries that censor news and information must recognize that from an economic standpoint, there is no distinction between censoring political speech and commercial speech," she said. "If businesses in your nation are denied access to either type of information, it will inevitably reduce growth."

Although Monday's OFAC announcement was couched in terms of individual and collective freedom, Clinton's argument had a more materialistic moral: squashing the internet is bad business.

Not that we here at The Reg are hardened cynics, but our money is on the financial argument. ®

Internet Security Threat Report 2014

More from The Register

next story
Facebook, Apple: LADIES! Why not FREEZE your EGGS? It's on the company!
No biological clockwatching when you work in Silicon Valley
Lords take revenge on REVENGE PORN publishers
Jilted Johns and Jennies with busy fingers face two years inside
Yes, yes, Steve Jobs. Look what I'VE done for you lately – Tim Cook
New iPhone biz baron points to Apple's (his) greatest successes
Happiness economics is bollocks. Oh, UK.gov just adopted it? Er ...
Opportunity doesn't knock; it costs us instead
Ex-US Navy fighter pilot MIT prof: Drones beat humans - I should know
'Missy' Cummings on UAVs, smartcars and dying from boredom
Facebook pays INFINITELY MORE UK corp tax than in 2012
Thanks for the £3k, Zuck. Doh! you're IN CREDIT. Guess not
Sysadmin with EBOLA? Gartner's issued advice to debug your biz
Start hoarding cleaning supplies, analyst firm says, and assume your team will scatter
Edward who? GCHQ boss dodges Snowden topic during last speech
UK spies would rather 'walk' than do 'mass surveillance'
prev story

Whitepapers

Forging a new future with identity relationship management
Learn about ForgeRock's next generation IRM platform and how it is designed to empower CEOS's and enterprises to engage with consumers.
Why and how to choose the right cloud vendor
The benefits of cloud-based storage in your processes. Eliminate onsite, disk-based backup and archiving in favor of cloud-based data protection.
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Reg Reader Research: SaaS based Email and Office Productivity Tools
Read this Reg reader report which provides advice and guidance for SMBs towards the use of SaaS based email and Office productivity tools.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.