I am amused by the people who are using the argument that there are people who still don't have access to more "basic" rights.

If it is at all possible, Internet access SHOULD be a basic right because that is precisely how those other rights can be guaranteed. The traditional humanitarian model has been widely acknowledged to be basically a failure. The things that are succeeding depend on giving people the tools to solve their basic problems themselves, rather trying to solve 'em for them.

The basic democratic right to vote is already being primarily delivered by Internet-enabled revolutions after all.

Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he will eat for a lifetime. Give a man Internet access and he will build sustainable fisheries for his whole village, blog about it, spread the idea to nearby villages and help the fishery industry bootstrap microfinance schemes, healthcare, education for kids and everything else.

I am not saying the other problems shouldn't be directly attacked as well, just that far from being an either/or, not only is Internet access coupled to other rights, it is a very powerful lever in delivering them.

That leaves of course, the question of whether Internet Access CAN be a fundamental right.

There I have to say I am a pessimist. I don't think it is possible, because the market mechanisms that have delivered and sustain Internet technology aren't friendly to also guaranteeing human rights under conditions of scarcity. A system that drives extreme innovation and gives people like Gates and Zuckerberg billions (fine by me) cannot easily deliver more basic things to everybody.

After all, it's not like something much more basic than Internet access, access to electric power, is not a fundamental right yet.