With regard to principles, I like to start with a foundation, vague and ambiguous as it may be, to set a general direction. Below is what I have been proposing for a long time... (By-the-way, this formulation finds its distant ancestor in the US "Hush-a-Phone" case, a rather significant, and somewhat amusing, case that was the start of a sequence that led to the opening of telco circuits to other sues, such as the ARPAnet and Internet.) First Law of the Internet + Every person shall be free to use the Internet in any way that is privately beneficial without being publicly detrimental. - The burden of demonstrating public detriment shall be on those who wish to prevent the private use. - Such a demonstration shall require clear and convincing evidence of public detriment. - The public detriment must be of such degree and extent as to justify the suppression of the private activity. https://www.cavebear.com/old_cbblog/000059.html The general shape of this principle is that one has a freedom to use the net as they please. But that pleasure is subject to the rather cloudy boundary of "public detriment". However, the principle places the burden of proving that "public detriment" on those who complain. And the level and evidence of that proof has to be high, not merely a bald assertion. --karl--