Human Rights in the Digital Age. OUTLINE Human Rights in the context of the Internet IPRs and the Information Commons SOPA Discussion.

Human Rights in the Digital Age

OUTLINE Human Rights in the context of the Internet

IPRs and the Information Commons

SOPA Discussion

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)

1948 Universal HR gain international acceptance

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) adopted by the UN General Assembly

Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948)

Article 12: No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence . . .

Article 19: 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

Critique of UDHRs Can conflict with other rights, even within Articles

Challenges national sovereignty

Problems of implementation, enforcement (ineffectual)

Implementing UDHRs

UDHRs is a proclamation (non binding)Enshrines rights as guiding principles of government

Yet, needs to be implemented and enforced

Implementing and Enforcing UDHRs

Publicity, Awareness Raising and Education

Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International

Human Rights instruments – legal documents (p. 17)

Covenants (multilateral treaties)

Covenants1. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR,

1966)• Enforced in 1976• Has 167 Countries have signed

2. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR, 1966)

• Enforced in 1976• 160 Countries have signed

International Bill of Rights (IBR)1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR)

2. International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR, 1966)

3. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR, 1966)

UN and Enforcement

1946 Commission on Human Rights w/ 53 member states joined by procedural motions

critics claims states joined to obstruct progress

2006 Replaced by Human Rights Council w/47 by majority of 161 states

UN pushes for Internet Rights The UN General Assembly Resolution 56/183 (21 December

2001) Endorses World Summit on the Information Society

(WSIS) Meet in Geneva 2003 Meet in Tunis 2005

Creates Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG) a UN multistakeholder working group initiated to agree

on the future of Internet governance.

HRs and Internet Governance Working Group on Internet Governance (WGIG)

Divided Internet Governance into 4 sections

1. Infrastructure (mainly the Domain Name System and IP addresses)

2. Internet issues such as security, safety and privacy (including spam and cybercrime)

3. Intellectual property and international trade (including copyrights)

4. Development Issues (particularly developing countries)

Creates Internet Governance Forum (IGF, 2005)

HR and Internet Governance The Internet Governance Forum (2005)

2

2006 Athens, Greece2007 Rio, Brazil2008 Hyderabad, India2009 Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt2010 Vilnius, Lithuania2011Nairobi, Kenya2012 Baku, Azerbaijan2013 Bali, Indonesia2014 Istanbul, Turkey

HR and Internet Governance The Internet Governance Forum (2005)

multistakeholder (government, private, and civil society – users)

Not a deliberative body, doesn’t enforce laws generates dialog on Internet governance policy Guides policy through dialog (soft power)

Principles, norms, and values

Internet Governance Forum Topics IGF Focuses on:

AccessDiversityOpennessCritical Internet ResourcesSecurity

HR in the context of the Internet “The idea is not to disregard or redesign the

human rights framework, but rather to use the values that underpin it as a starting point for dialogue about human values that we would like to see upheld by the Internet” (Senges and Horner, 2009).

HR in context of the Internet Starting point

Technology is not value-neutral Values

Openness (innovation, access, interoperability)

Decentralized Transparency Balanced information exchange Diversity - does not discriminate

against potential users

Our job To learn about Human Rights

Interpret Human Rights in online contexts

To define conditions required to realize human rights online and suggest what different stakeholders should do (users, citizens, companies, governments)

Interpretation of rights1) Established human right Article #12 No one shall be

subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.

2) Interpretation of this right in online context

Privacy online means: Personal data protection; freedom from surveillance; right to anonymity

3) Ways to realize these rights in the online environment.

Users should be given information about breaches in the security of their personal data, and given control over personal data collection, retention, processing, disposal and disclosure.

Small Group Activity Read the UDHRs to discuss in groups of 3-4

What human rights are at stake in the Charlie Hebdo Attack?

Are there competing rights? If so, which should take priority?

Determine how these rights can be interpreted within Human Rights standards (from any of the 30 articles). What values or principles does the attack violate if any?

What actions should be taken by stakeholders: Governments? Media or internet companies? Regular people (users)?

Single mother, digital pirate? Capital vs. Thomas

2007 Jamie Thomas-Rasset from Braynard MI found guilty of downloading 24 songs (2007-8)

2009 Ordered to pay $80,000 per song = $2 million

2010 Award reduced to $2,250 for each of 24 songs she’s said to have downloaded without permission ($54,000)

Judge found the excessive damages awarded to Big Music “so grossly excessive as to shock the conscience of the court.”

IPRs and Information Commons

The ease of copying information has challenged older traditional publishing methods

Copyright law has changed as a result Copyright expansionAnti-circumvention laws (DRM, DMCA) Severe enforcement of IP laws

These changes pose a threat to civil liberties, while hindering the public’s right to use media and to communicate freely

IPRs and Information Commons

Myth #1: Unauthorized copying is equivalent to theft

In actuality, most ordinary copying is not violating the copyright law.

The fair use doctrine protects the use of copyrighted material for personal use, educational use, criticism, research, commentary, parody and other socially important uses. 

All material created before 1923 in public domain

IPRs and Information Commons

Myth #2 Copyright extremism encourages creativity

Consumers are misled by thinking they are rewarding the creators of the work, but actually it’s the distributor who profits because it’s just a massive monopoly.

IPRs and Information Commons

Myth #2 Copyright extremism encourages creativity

IPRs and Information Commons

Central Critique: The more copyright power is given to the copyrights holders, the more power governments have to control the use and restrict the flow of information.

Suggestions Intellectual Property rules should promote not inhibit

creativity Gov should enable public access to information Promote Free & Open Source Software IPRs should shrink not increase the knowledge gap Protect private copying rights Protect intellectual freedom (right to tinker)

Creative Commons

Chapter summary (Ch 1)A statement about the SIGNIFICANCE OF THE RESEARCH

in the chapter in question often stated as a problem or issue that needs to be addressed.

Discussion of the chapter’s CENTRAL THEMES or ways in which to solve the problems addressed in the chapter.

Summary of SPECIFIC SUGGESTIONS offered to address the issues raised.

Discussion of the IMPLICATIONS OF THE RESULTS, possible limitations in the chapter, and suggestions for future research. 

Pose a DISCUSSION QUESTION for the rest of the class to answer