Blockchain and Freedom of Expression
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Blockchain and freedom of expression 2019 Blockchain and freedom of expression 1 ARTICLE 19 Free Word Centre 60 Farringdon Road London EC1R 3GA United Kingdom T: +44 20 7324 2500 F: +44 20 7490 0566 E: [email protected] W: www.article19.org Tw: @article19org Fb: facebook.com/article19org © ARTICLE 19, 2019 This work is provided under the Creative Commons Attribution-Non-Commercial-ShareAlike 2.5 licence. You are free to copy, distribute and display this work and to make derivative works, provided you: 1) give credit to ARTICLE 19; 2) do not use this work for commercial purposes; 3) distribute any works derived from this publication under a licence identical to this one. To access the full legal text of this licence, please visit: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/ by-nc-sa/2.5/legalcode. ARTICLE 19 would appreciate receiving a copy of any materials in which information from this report is used. Contents Executive summary 4 Summary of recommendations 6 Introduction 9 Background to blockchains 12 Key terminology 12 Key characteristics of blockchains 14 International human rights standards and blockchains 16 Right to freedom of expression 16 Right to privacy 17 Internet governance 18 Intermediary liability 18 Blockchains and freedom of expression 20 Decentralisation, disintermediation and freedom of expression 20 Digital access and literacy 21 Security and vulnerability of access points 22 Governance 23 Use case: content dissemination 25 Dissemination of text 25 Dissemination of multimedia and the ‘permanent web’ 27 Blockchain-based social networks 29 Use case: authentication 32 Authentication of individuals 32 Authentication of content (digital notarisation) 37 Use case: personal data and storage of identity-linked information 39 Use case: cryptocurrencies 41 Conclusions and recommendations 43 Recommendations 44 About ARTICLE 19 48 Endnotes 49 Executive summary In this report, ARTICLE 19 examines the impact and implications of blockchain technology for the right to freedom of expression. Blockchains can be generally thought of as a technology to securely store data, using unique properties of cryptography. Unlike traditional forms of record-keeping, they do not rely on a central source to store records, instead distributing data across a network. Blockchains are the technical foundation of digital cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin. Blockchains, both private and public, have a multitude of current and proposed applications beyond transactions – they can be used to authenticate persons and data, as well as serve as a basis for file systems and content distribution. Blockchain technology is a topic of much interest and curiosity across many sectors. Due to its characteristics, which generally include immutability, transparency, pseudonymity, and decentralisation, some proponents of blockchain technology suggest that it has the potential to power censorship- resistant platforms and protect freedom of expression. ARTICLE 19 monitors emerging technologies for their potential impact on freedom of expression, and analyses those impacts; we have done so in recent years for a variety of digital technologies including encryption and anonymity tools. In this report, we examine some key freedom of expression issues implicated by blockchain technology; and also analyse four use cases which have significant freedom of expression implications - content dissemination, content authentication, data storage, and cryptocurrency transactions. Our findings and observations can be summarised as follows: • Technology is never the only solution to protecting and promoting freedom of expression. It is a powerful tool in enabling freedom of expression, but in the wrong hands, technology can also become an instrument of repression. Even where states or other actors promote or permit access to technology (such as blockchain technology), this does not absolve them from meeting their obligations under international human rights law. 4 Blockchain and freedom of expression • Since blockchains are tools through which individuals can exercise their right to freedom of expression, this confers obligations on state and private actors under international law to respect freedom of expression in their implementation. • Censorship-resistance alone does not guarantee that the implementation or governance of blockchain technologies adheres to international standards. While the immutability of blockchains is often presented as a net benefit for freedom of expression, ARTICLE 19 finds that there are instances where it may be necessary to limit free expression where the purposes are legitimate under international law and respecting the rule of law, i.e. where platforms are used for the storage or dissemination of content that can be legitimately restricted under international law. In this respect, blockchain technology may pose challenges for the ability of states to exercise their international legal obligations. • Blockchains impose a shifting of trust to technology and private actors who design, implement, mediate, and govern that technology. The promise of distributed’ and ‘decentralised’ systems is not entirely true in practice. Usage of these technologies is not necessarily trustless but involves placing significant trust in software, those vetting the software, the tools used in accessing that technology, and key players implementing and operating elements of decentralised networks. • Blockchain technology may introduce security risks. While promoted as ‘secure,’ most users - unless they possess considerable technological sophistication - are likely to use some intermediary in order to access the technologies, whether mobile applications, browser extensions, or third party actors. These points of access introduce vulnerabilities: phones and computers can be hacked or stolen, and third parties can be compromised. • Civil society should have a voice in the oversight of technical and economic standardisation. The implementation of blockchain technology introduces questions of governance, including how and by whom these technologies are governed, particularly where technologies are designed by core groups of developers who may be relatively homogenous in terms of gender, ethnicity, and nationality and therefore not representative of the plurality of stakeholder voices. Blockchain and freedom of expression 5 Summary of recommendations To states • States’ obligations to respect, protect, and fulfil human rights, including online, extends to the public’s right of access to blockchain technology. Hence, any restrictions on blockchain platforms, or intermediaries that provide blockchain access, must be necessary, proportionate, and subject to independent judicial review. • States should ensure that providers, coders, and implementers of blockchain platforms are in principle immune from liability for third party data stored on those platforms when they have not been involved in storing the content in question. • States should refrain from measures such as shutdowns on Internet access or restrictions on the encryption technologies that underpin blockchains, particularly through the inclusion of encryption ‘backdoors,’ as these measures represent disproportionate interferences with the right to freedom of expression. • To the extent that states use blockchains to store data of citizens or public records, states should ensure that they adhere to international human rights principles on access to information and data protection. • When coordinating among stakeholders to standardise and implement blockchain technologies, states should ensure that human rights norms are among the key considerations in these partnerships, and that civil society is included in any strategic planning. To private actors in the digital sector • Companies, coders and implementers of technologies should ensure that their technologies are designed in a way that takes into consideration the rights to freedom of expression and privacy. • Companies should ensure that deployment of blockchains is done after careful considerations of all risks, including security and impact on users, and match between blockchain specific benefits and use cases that enable realisation of these benefits. 6 Blockchain and freedom of expression • As crucial intermediaries, companies that provide private blockchain platforms for dissemination or storing of content should be transparent about any internal guidelines for the removal of content in blockchains, where content removal is feasible, as well as the appointment of moderators or validators with authority to flag or censor content. Companies should also provide notice and access to a remedy for individuals who have had their content removed. • Coders and implementers of technologies should ensure that their governance includes a diverse array of voices, including members of civil society, and that non-private platforms are accessible to a plurality of audiences. To all stakeholders • States, private sector and all other stakeholders, should carefully consider the implementation of blockchain technology; in particular: º Whether the issues they are seeking to address do in fact require a technological solution, whether these issues could not be better remedied through a social solution or whether other existing technologies could suffice; and more specifically, whether they specifically need an immutable database distributed across multiple servers; º Where is trust being placed: whether it is in the coders, the developers, those who design and govern mobile devices or