"In an interview with the Guardian, Tim Berners-Lee proposes a bill of rights for the web.
His plan is part of a wider initiative, The Web We Want, a campaign for a 'free open and truly global Internet.'
Berners-Lee suggests that governments need an increased understanding of technology, and a revisiting of legal issues such as copyright law.
More controversially he proposes removal of US control of IANA claiming "The removal of the explicit link to the US department of commerce is long overdue. The US can't have a global place in the running of something which is so non-national". He sees the web at risk of fragmentation into "national silos" if people do not fight for the web.
There is potential overlap here with Article 19 of The Universal Declaration of Human Rights , which states,'Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.' Would an internet bill of rights be successful in nations where the principles of the UDHR are ignored ?
Given the anarchic evolution of the internet, is it possible or desirable to attempt to control it in any way?"
Any replacement architecture for the internet absolutely has to be easy for the nontechnical to use. You can't force everybody to learn the inner workings. "What? You don't know what DNS is? No free speech for you!"
Perhaps more importantly if such a project were to succeed, ordinary people have to be able to get online securely enough that they'll feel confident spending money there. If it becomes a scammers paradise, with financial loss lurking behind every config option, ordinary people won't use it. If there's no large market of nontechnical people to sell to, the project fails when everybody is still forced to work developing the old model just to make a living.