This is exactly what we need to be working on IMO. An abstract petition will never get us the traction to set the stage unless it's codified. And what better way to get mass-exposure than having an actual draft of the IBOR. Perhaps just the process of drafting & editing IBOR could get many constitutional scholars to join in.
Yesterday I posted my own draft version, far from finished. I think it can complement what you've done. I was concentrating more on the freedom of speech without creating an overblown bureaucracy. Also I was trying to frame it in a way that will resonate with those who fear muh Russia interference.
Here's the text from my draft:
Internet Bill of Rights (IBOR)
It’s about time that we bring the security standards that safeguard our democratic institutions to the 21st century. We need protection from international/corporate special interests that might want to subvert our democracy by exploiting social media sites, search engines, etc. Likewise we need anti-trust protection from potential interference in democracy by the tech giants that have become our primary forums for public debate and information flow. As such, these corporations are currently entrusted with unprescedented power with virtually no oversight. Also, we need protetion from our own government that might want to pressure/conspire with tech giants to cheat against democracy. Finally we must protect small tech companies/orgs/public formus with minimal impact on democracies from having to comply with the anti-trust regulations. We have a responsibility to ammend our Bill of Rights with the the digital age in mind, or we may soon wake up as slaves.
We the People Declare the Internet Bill of Rights (IBOR) as a digital extension of our God-given unalienable rights to free speech and privacy.
Every public digital entity (website/app/parent company/etc) that in some way processes at least 10% of a politically relevant national market such as media/social media/search engines/etc shall comply with IBOR’s Anti-Trust Clauses (ATC1 & ATC2).
ATC1: An IBOR-regulated entity shall not in any way restrict service or censor content unless there’s an explicit violation of a non-ambiguous rule that applies consistently & non-discriminately to all users.
ATC2: Every restricted user of an ATC-complient entity has a right to challenge the restriction in court/arbitration.
Law enforcement and intelligence agencies shall not demand any restrictions towards any user from any digital entity, unless they get a warrant, requiring high-likelihood evidence of criminal intent, which may be prevented with the restrictions.
A digital entity can only engage in server-side tracking consentually, and must offer its users the opt-out, “forget-me-now” option.
—
We could sure benefit from a thread dedicated to drafting IBOR