Albert Wenger, of Union Square Ventures, in response to Vint Cerf’s Op-Ed (which was linked here as well):

the headline for my post it is not the exact inverse of Cerf’s who wrote “Internet Access” – I simply talk about the “Internet” by which I mean a set of ideas that is grounded in these original principles behind the architecture of the Internet.  At their heart all human rights are ideas and highly abstract ideas at that, such as equality and freedom.  How we concretely instantiate these ideas through legislation and social norms has changed dramatically over time and much of that change has been driven by technology.

So when I claim “The Internet is a Human Right” I mean that the legislation and social norms that we use to operationalize abstract rights such as freedom of speech should be embracing not fighting the principles of the Internet. For example, freedom of speech will be a hollow right if movie studios can make entire web sites disappear off the Internet without due process, as is currently contemplated by the legislation known as SOPA. That is the exact opposite of the principle of decentralized control.

It is in essence and extension of Cerf’s argument.

Where Cerf argues that we should focus on the intent of rights rather than their technical enablers, Wenger argues that the internet itself is not just a technology, but rather a set of principles that embody intent.