DOCSLIB.ORG

The Charter of Human Rights and Principles for the Internet Table of Contents Introduction 1

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Charter of Human Rights and Principles for the Internet Table of Contents Introduction 1 Internet Rights & Principles Coalition the charter of human rights and principles for the internet Table of Contents Introduction 1 How to Get Involved 3 How the IRPC Charter 4 Came About 10 Rights & Principles 6 for the Internet Charter of Human Rights 8 & Principles for the Internet (Version 1.1) Appendices 28 © August 2014 – 4th Edition Internet Rights and Principles Dynamic Coalition UN Internet Governance Forum This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License Compiled and edited by Marianne Franklin, with Robert Bodle and Dixie Hawtin Design by Zeena Feldman Internet Rights & Principles Coalition 1 Introduction The Internet Rights & Principles Dynamic and other covenants that make up the Coalition is an international network of International Bill of Human Rights at the individuals and organizations working to United Nations (http://www.ohchr.org/ uphold human rights in the online environ- EN/Issues/Pages/WhatareHumanRights. ment and across the spectrum of internet aspx). It is the outcome of work from policy-making domains. It is based at the many people and organisations over UN Internet Governance Forum, an open the years and is growing in stature as “multistakeholder” forum for government, others start to apply its 23 clauses to business, and civil society groups to come specific situations. In 2011, the coalition together to discuss mutual points of con- launched the Ten Punchy Principles cern that fall under the rubric of internet (http://internetrightsandprinciples.org/ governance (http://www.intgovforum.org/ site/campaign), a distillation of ten key cms). values and principles underlying the Charter. This booklet contains both these Since 2008, the IRP Coalition has been documents. At the UNESCO First WSIS active in promoting rights-based principles +10 Review Meeting in early 2013 (https:// for internet governance, at the global IGF www.unesco-ci.org/cmscore/events/51- as well as in regional meetings and related rights-based-principles-and-internet- events. Individuals and organizations in taking-stock-and-moving-forward), the IRP the IRP Coalition come from all walks of Coalition set out on the second phase of life. It has participants from the Global the IRPC Charter, “Charter 2.0”. South and Global North—grassroots groups, international NGOs, researchers, activists, lawyers, businesses, internet and The aim of the Charter 2.0 project mobile phone service providers, technical is twofold: communities, government representatives, 1 To raise more awareness about the and intergovernmental organizations. Charter in light of increasing public concern at the national and international The main work of the Internet Rights levels about the protection and and Principles Coalition (IRP Coalition) to enjoyment of human rights online as well date has been to translate existing human as offline. rights to the internet environment to build 2 To open up participation and input as awareness, understanding and a shared we look to upgrade parts of the current platform for mobilisation around rights and Charter in order to underscore that the human rights and principles contained principles for the internet. in this charter will provide a coherent Our flagship document, the Charter and necessary framework for developing internet governance principles at the IGF of Human Rights and Principles for the and beyond. Internet (http://internetrightsandprinciples. org/wpcharter) covers the whole gambit of human rights drawing on the Universal Declaration of Human Rights ” 2 What do we mean Who is the Charter by Human Rights & of Human Rights & Principles? Principles for the Internet Human rights are international human Addressing? rights as defined by international law. We have translated these directly to Human rights govern the relationship the internet with provisions such as between the State and the individual, freedom from blocking and filtering. so human rights obligations bind These can be identified by the use of states. The Charter is based on existing language such as “everyone has a right human rights and so in practice most to...” and “everyone has a freedom of its provisions will only be binding on to...”. By “Principles” we are talking the State. However there is a growing about those internet policy principles or recognition that the private sector does implementation principles that describe have obligations under human rights features of the system which are required law, as authoritatively outlined in the to support human rights, these can be UN “Protect, Respect and Remedy” identified by the use of language such as Framework. “shall” and “must”. What is the purpose of Charter of Human Rights & Principles for the Internet? The goal of the IRPC Charter is to provide a recognizable framework anchored in international human rights for upholding and advancing human rights for the online environment. This goal breaks down into three main objectives: To provide 1 a reference point for dialogue and cooperation between different stakeholder priorities for the internet’s design, access, and use around the world. 2 an authoritative document that can frame policy decisions and emerging rights-based norms for the local, national, and global dimensions of internet governance. 3 a policy-making and advocacy tool for governments, businesses, and civil society groups committed to developing rights-based principles for the internet. 3 Get “Involved The IRP Coalition is based in the Internet Governance Forum. It is open to anyone who wants to contribute to the work. You can find out more about the IRP Coalition at www. internetrightsandprinciples.org or through the Internet Governance Forum website at http:// www.intgovforum.org/cms/dynamiccoalitions/72- ibr. To get more directly involved you are welcome to: Î Join the IRP Mailing list, http://lists. internetrightsandprinciples.org/cgi-bin/ mailman/listinfo/irp. Î Join the IRP Facebook Group, www. facebook.com/internetrightsandprinciples Î Follow the IRP Coalition on Twitter, @netrights Î Contact the IRP Coalition Co-Chairs, or Steering Committee members Î Attend any of the Internet Governance meetings in your area, or take part by Remote Participation. Information about these events is available on the IGF website (http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/ igf-initiatives), the IRP Coalition website (www.internetrightsandprinciples.org), and Visit us online those of organizations who are part of the for more coalition. information internetrightsandprinciples.org” 4 How the IRPC Charter Came About 5 he idea of translating discussed and contributed to this drafting human rights for process at all stages. The final draft of governance of the the current version (Version 1.1) was internet emerged during opened for wider consultation within the second phase of the the IGF and by external commentators “ World Summit on the a few months after the first full draft Information Society and (Version 1.0) was released at the 2010 was widely endorsed at IGF meeting in Vilnius, Lithuania. At the Tunis Summit in 2005. Two coalitions this meeting a working party formed to Tformed at this time to undertake this condense the longer and legally complex task. The Internet Bill of Rights Dynamic charter into a more accessible format Coalition set out to develop a Charter for outreach, education, and advocacy. of Human Rights, and the Framework The outcome was the aptly titled “Ten of Principles for the Internet Dynamic Punchy Principles” which were launched Coalition that set out to focus on internet online and on the ground in 2011. A governance principles. “translatothon” saw the Ten Principles take shape in 21 different languages with By the third Internet Governance new translations being added all the time Forum meeting in 2008, held in (http://internetrightsandprinciples.org/site/ Hyderabad (India), a consensus campaign). had formed that these two projects, developing human rights and principles The IRPC Charter is a living for the internet, are intimately related: document. In the fast-changing certain principles must be upheld in environment of increasing awareness order to sustain an online environment that online we have rights too, the charter which supports human rights. In early has been a formative contribution to the 2009 these two coalitions merged to form emerging area of internet governance the Internet Rights and Principles (IRPC) principles. It has been a source of Dynamic Coalition in order to combine inspiration for rights-based initiatives their forces and resources within the from civil society, governments, and “multistakeholder participatory model” businesses committed to ensuring that that drives the IGF. The outcome of the online environment is also a place this online and offline “collabowriting” where human rights are sustained and exercise, open to all members of the protected. The 2011 report of the UN new coalition, was the Charter of Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Human Rights and Principles for the Expression, Frank La Rue, and the 2012 Internet. During 2009 and 2010 early landmark decision by the UN Human drafts of the charter were refined, and Rights Council on human rights and the vetted by a group of Human Rights internet have both affirmed the value of experts to ensure that the charter was the Charter. The Charter 2.0 phase looks compatible with international human to consolidate and promote this work to a rights standards. Coalition members wider public. ” 6 10 Internet Rights & Principles “ 7 he Internet offers
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Right to Development and the Origins of the New International Economic Order
    Daniel J. Whelan ‘‘Under the Aegis of Man’’: The Right to Development and the Origins of the New International Economic Order On September 23, 1966, the Senegalese foreign minister Doudou Thiam gave an impassioned speech to fellow delegates assembled in New York for the opening of the 21st Session of the United Nations General Assembly.1 It began as a reflection on the preceding twenty years of UN history. Despite some modest progress that the UN had achieved in meeting its three primary objectives—the maintenance of peace; the liberation of colonized peoples; and the economic and social development of mankind—this period was more notably exemplified by failures and setbacks: the war in Southeast Asia; the failure of decolonization in Southern Rhodesia and South Africa; and the failure to meet the goals of the UN’s first ‘‘Development Decade.’’2 It was on this third point that Thiam ruminated for the remainder of his speech. The achievement of political and legal sovereignty by newly decolonized states did not resolve the existing imbalance of power between the developing and developed worlds. Thiam cited growing inequality in the share of global income between developed and underdeveloped countries: in 1938, the income disparity was 15:1;by1966 it was 35:1, and projected to be 40:1 by 2000. Thiam insisted that this phenomenon of underdevelopment was not determined by geography or race; it was mobile, moving about in time and space. Western pros- perity vis-a`-vis the Middle East, India, and China was historically recent, and the so- called poor nations were not as poor as they were said to be: in 1963 they held 50 percent of the world’s petroleum, nearly half the copper and manganese ore, and 70 percent of the world’s diamonds.
    [Show full text]
  • Content Regulation in the Digital
    Content Regulation in the Digital Age Submission to the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Freedom of Opinion and Expression by the Association for Progressive Communications (APC) February 2018 Introduction 1 I. Company compliance with State laws 2 Terrorism-related and extremist content 3 False news, disinformation and propaganda 4 The “right to be forgotten” framework? 7 How should companies respond to State content regulation laws and measures that may be inconsistent with international human rights standards? 8 II. Other State Requests 9 State requests based on platform terms of service (ToS) and “shadow” requests 9 Non-transparent agreements with companies 10 III. Global removals 11 IV. Individuals at risk 12 V. Content regulation processes 15 VI. Bias and non-discrimination 16 VII. Appeals and remedies 17 VIII. Automation and content moderation 17 IX. Transparency 18 X. General recommendations from APC 19 Introduction The Association for Progressive Communications (APC) is an international network and non- profit organisation founded in 1990 that works to help ensure everyone has affordable access to a free and open internet to improve lives, realise human rights and create a more just world. We welcome this topic because it is current and integral to our work. On the one hand there is a lot of ‘noise’ in the mainstream media about so-called “fake news” and what appears to be a fairly rushed response from platforms consisting of increasing in-house regulation of content. On the other hand, human rights defenders and activists we work with express concern that 1 platforms are removing some of their content in a manner that suggests political bias and reinforcing of societal discrimination.
    [Show full text]
  • American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples
    Approved in Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic June 14, 2016 During the Forty-sixth Ordinary Period of Sessions of the OAS General Assembly AMERICAN DECLARATION ON THE RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES Organization of American States General Secretariat Secretariat of Access to Rights and Equity Department of Social Inclusion 1889 F Street, NW | Washington, DC 20006 | USA 1 (202) 370 5000 www.oas.org ISBN 978-0-8270-6710-3 More rights for more people OAS Cataloging-in-Publication Data Organization of American States. General Assembly. Regular Session. (46th : 2016 : Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic) American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples : AG/RES.2888 (XLVI-O/16) : (Adopted at the thirds plenary session, held on June 15, 2016). p. ; cm. (OAS. Official records ; OEA/Ser.P) ; (OAS. Official records ; OEA/ Ser.D) ISBN 978-0-8270-6710-3 1. American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (2016). 2. Indigenous peoples--Civil rights--America. 3. Indigenous peoples--Legal status, laws, etc.--America. I. Organization of American States. Secretariat for Access to Rights and Equity. Department of Social Inclusion. II. Title. III. Series. OEA/Ser.P AG/RES.2888 (XLVI-O/16) OEA/Ser.D/XXVI.19 AG/RES. 2888 (XLVI-O/16) AMERICAN DECLARATION ON THE RIGHTS OF INDIGENOUS PEOPLES (Adopted at the third plenary session, held on June 15, 2016) THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY, RECALLING the contents of resolution AG/RES. 2867 (XLIV-O/14), “Draft American Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples,” as well as all previous resolutions on this issue; RECALLING ALSO the declaration “Rights of the Indigenous Peoples of the Americas” [AG/DEC.
    [Show full text]
  • Is There a Human Right to Safe Motherhood Within the United Nations Legal System?
    (2015) QMHRR 2(1) ISSN 2059-8092 Is There a Human Right to Safe Motherhood within the United Nations Legal System? Hélène Julien* Abstract The establishment of safe motherhood as a human right that, albeit interrelated with other women’s rights, would be distinct from them, appears crucial to tackle maternal mortality and achieve gender equality. In order to be effective this right has to be framed as a holistic concept highlighting the connections between all the women’s rights referring to the highest attainable standard of living, in the context of pregnancy, childbirth and lactation. Through a feminist lens, this study examines relevant United Nations legal bodies’ initiatives to determine if safe motherhood is efficaciously guaranteed as a human right worldwide. The Committee on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination Against Women’s recognition of a ‘women’s right to safe motherhood’, which relates to the access to maternal health care, is analysed as a central element of the right. This review leads to the conclusion that the human right to safe motherhood exists, but needs to be strengthened, especially through an international acknowledgement of the right to abortion as well as the development of a stronger framework for the protection against mother-foetus/ baby HIV transmission. Keywords Right to Safe Motherhood – Gender Equality – CEDAW – Right to Abortion – Highest Attainable Standard of Living – Health – HIV – Human Rights – United Nations - Motherhood – Women – Feminist Analysis. 1. Introduction ‘Women are not dying of diseases we can’t treat… They are dying because societies have yet to make the decision that their lives are worth saving’.1 This observation appears all the more regrettable, since maternal mortality is an extremely widespread problem.
    [Show full text]
  • A/RES/55/2: United Nations Millennium Declaration
    United Nations A/RES/55/2 Distr.: General General Assembly 18 September 2000 Fifty-fifth session Agenda item 60 (b) Resolution adopted by the General Assembly [without reference to a Main Committee (A/55/L.2)] 55/2. United Nations Millennium Declaration The General Assembly Adopts the following Declaration: United Nations Millennium Declaration I. Values and principles 1. We, heads of State and Government, have gathered at United Nations Headquarters in New York from 6 to 8 September 2000, at the dawn of a new millennium, to reaffirm our faith in the Organization and its Charter as indispensable foundations of a more peaceful, prosperous and just world. 2. We recognize that, in addition to our separate responsibilities to our individual societies, we have a collective responsibility to uphold the principles of human dignity, equality and equity at the global level. As leaders we have a duty therefore to all the world’s people, especially the most vulnerable and, in particular, the children of the world, to whom the future belongs. 3. We reaffirm our commitment to the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, which have proved timeless and universal. Indeed, their relevance and capacity to inspire have increased, as nations and peoples have become increasingly interconnected and interdependent. 4. We are determined to establish a just and lasting peace all over the world in accordance with the purposes and principles of the Charter. We rededicate ourselves to support all efforts to uphold the sovereign equality of all
    [Show full text]
  • Claiming and Reclaiming the Digital World As a Public Space
    Claiming and Reclaiming the Digital World as a Public Space Experiences and insights from feminists in the Middle East and North Africa www.oxfam.org OXFAM DISCUSSION PAPER – NOVEMBER 2020 This paper seeks to highlight the experiences and aspirations of young women and feminist activists in the MENA region around digital spaces, safety and rights. It explores individual women’s experiences engaging with the digital world, the opportunities and challenges that women’s rights and feminist organizations find in these platforms, and the digital world as a space of resistance, despite restrictions on civic space. Drawing on interviews with feminist activists from the region, the paper sheds light on women’s online experiences and related offline risks, and illustrates patterns and behaviours that prevailed during the COVID-19 pandemic. © Oxfam International November 2020 This paper was written by Francesca El Asmar. Oxfam acknowledges the assistance of Hadeel Qazzaz, Manal Wardé, Neus Tirado Gual, Salma Jrad, Joane Cremesty, Suzan Al Ostaz, Fadi Touma and Mounia Semlali in its production, as well as the contributions of the interviewees who participated in the research process. It is part of a series of papers written to inform public debate on development and humanitarian policy issues. For further information on the issues raised in this paper please email [email protected] This publication is copyright but the text may be used free of charge for the purposes of advocacy, campaigning, education, and research, provided that the source is acknowledged in full. The copyright holder requests that all such use be registered with them for impact assessment purposes.
    [Show full text]
  • Freedom of Information: a Comparative Legal Survey
    JeXo C[dZ[b ^h i]Z AVl J^[_cfehjWdY[e\j^[h_]^jje Egd\gVbbZ9^gZXidgl^i]6GI>8A:&.!<adWVa 8VbeV^\c [dg ;gZZ :megZhh^dc! V aZVY^c\ _d\ehcWj_edehj^[h_]^jjeadem_iWd ^ciZgcVi^dcVa ]jbVc g^\]ih C<D WVhZY ^c _dYh[Wi_d]boYedijWdjh[\hW_d_dj^[ AdcYdc! V edh^i^dc ]Z ]Vh ]ZaY [dg hdbZ iZc nZVgh# >c i]Vi XVeVX^in! ]Z ]Vh ldg`ZY cekj^ie\Z[l[befc[djfhWYj_j_ed[hi" ZmiZch^kZan dc [gZZYdb d[ ZmegZhh^dc VcY g^\]i id ^c[dgbVi^dc ^hhjZh ^c 6h^V! 6[g^XV! Y_l_bieY_[jo"WYWZ[c_Yi"j^[c[Z_WWdZ :jgdeZ! i]Z B^YYaZ :Vhi VcY AVi^c 6bZg^XV! ]el[hdc[dji$M^Wj_ij^_ih_]^j"_i_j gjcc^c\ igV^c^c\ hZb^cVgh! Xg^i^fj^c\ aVlh! iV`^c\XVhZhidWdi]cVi^dcVaVcY^ciZgcVi^dcVa h[WbboWh_]^jWdZ^em^Wl[]el[hdc[dji WdY^Zh! VYk^h^c\ C<Dh VcY \dkZgcbZcih! VcY ZkZc ldg`^c\ l^i] d[ÒX^Vah id egZeVgZ iek]^jje]_l[[\\[Yjje_j5J^[i[Wh[ YgV[ig^\]iid^c[dgbVi^dcaVlh#>cVYY^i^dcid iec[e\j^[gk[ij_edij^_iXeeai[[ai ]^h ldg` l^i] 6GI>8A:&.! ]Z ]Vh egdk^YZY ZmeZgi^hZ dc i]ZhZ ^hhjZh id V l^YZ gVc\Z jeWZZh[ii"fhel_Z_d]WdWYY[ii_Xb[ d[ VXidgh ^cXajY^c\ i]Z LdgaY 7Vc`! kVg^djh JCVcYdi]Zg^ciZg\dkZgcbZciVaWdY^Zh!VcY WYYekdje\j^[bWmWdZfhWYj_Y[h[]WhZ_d] cjbZgdjh C<Dh# Eg^dg id _d^c^c\ 6GI>8A: \h[[Zece\_d\ehcWj_ed"WdZWdWdWboi_i &.!IdWnBZcYZaldg`ZY^c]jbVcg^\]ihVcY ^ciZgcVi^dcVa YZkZadebZci! ^cXajY^c\ Vh V e\m^Wj_imeha_d]WdZm^o$ hZc^dg ]jbVc g^\]ih XdchjaiVci l^i] Dm[Vb 8VcVYVVcYVhV]jbVcg^\]iheda^XnVcVanhi 68dbeVgVi^kZAZ\VaHjgkZn Vi i]Z 8VcVY^Vc >ciZgcVi^dcVa 9ZkZadebZci ;gZZYdbd[>c[dgbVi^dc/ 6\ZcXn8>96# ÆJ^[\h[[Ôeme\_d\ehcWj_edWdZ_Z[Wi IdWn BZcYZa ]Vh ejWa^h]ZY l^YZan! b_[iWjj^[^[Whje\j^[l[hodej_ede\ 6 8dbeVgVi^kZ AZ\Va HjgkZn Xdcig^Wji^c\ id cjbZgdjh 6GI>8A: &.
    [Show full text]
  • (2014) 11:3 Scripted 329 BOOK REVIEW FREEDOM OF
    (2014) 11:3 SCRIPTed 329 BOOK REVIEW FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION AND THE INTERNET By Wolfgang Benedek and Matthias C Kettemann Strasbourg: Council of Europe, 2013, 190pp. ISBN 978-92-871-7702-5 (pbk). €29.00. European discussions of internet regulation tend to be dominated by the European Union dimension. This is unsurprising, reflecting as it does the central role of the Electronic Commerce Directive, the extensive case law of the Court of Justice and the large sums which have been spent by the Commission in successive Safer Internet programmes. It does mean, however, that not enough attention has been paid to either the extensive work that has been done through the Council of Europe on protecting fundamental rights online nor to significant judgments of the European Court of Human Rights such as Ahmet Yildirim v. Turkey.1 This book partially remedies that gap in the literature. Although short by the standards of most legal texts (at 190 pages) it provides a solid overview of the issues surrounding freedom of expression online, with a particular focus on the Council of Europe and European Convention on Human Rights aspects. In addition, the book outlines the work of other international actors such as the EU, UNESCO, the OSCE and the UN Special Rapporteur on Freedom of Opinion and Expression, as well as the growing human rights work of civil society and private entities such as the Global Network Initiative. The book opens with an introduction, setting out the general aims and structure of the work and illustrating the general issues presented through the example of the Twitter Joke Trial.2 Chapter two then seeks to identify the content of the right to freedom of expression online.
    [Show full text]
  • Edri Submission to UN Special Rapporteur David Kaye's Call on Freedom of Expression and the Private Sector in the Digital Age
    EDRi submission to UN Special Rapporteur David Kaye's call on freedom of expression and the private sector in the digital age Introduction EDRi is a not-for-profit association of digital civil rights organisations. Our objectives are to promote, protect and uphold civil rights in the field of information and communication technology. European Digital Rights (EDRi) welcomes the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of opinion and expression David Kaye’s public consultation on the role of ICT companies vis-à-vis freedom of expression in the digital environment to identify: I. the categories of actors in the ICT sector whose activities implicate the freedom of opinion and expression; II. the main legal issues raised for freedom of opinion and expression within the ICT sector; and III. the conceptual and normative work already done to develop corporate responsibility and human rights frameworks in these spaces, including governmental, inter-governmental, civil society, corporate and multistakeholder efforts. I. ICT actors with a potential to impact freedom of expression and opinion In order to communicate online, it is necessary to rely on a chain of different service providers, often based in different jurisdictions and with whom one may have no direct relationship at all. For example, if "zero-rating" or even data caps are imposed by Internet access providers in a country and you have no organisational and financial capacity to be "zero-rated", your ability to communicate with people that are using such restricted services is limited and there is no "leverage" with the ISPs that connect your intended audience with the Internet.
    [Show full text]
  • Intellectual Privacy and Censorship of the Internet
    Georgetown University Law Center Scholarship @ GEORGETOWN LAW 1998 Intellectual Privacy and Censorship of the Internet Julie E. Cohen Georgetown University Law Center, [email protected] This paper can be downloaded free of charge from: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/1963 8 Seton Hall Const. L.J. 693 (1997-1998) This open-access article is brought to you by the Georgetown Law Library. Posted with permission of the author. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub Part of the First Amendment Commons, and the Intellectual Property Law Commons 1998 INTERNET SYMPOSIUM INTELLECTUAL PRIVACY AND CENSORSHIP OF THE INTERNET ProfessorJulie E. Cohen Good morning. I would like to thank the Constitutional Law Journal for inviting me to be here today. I am not a First Amendment lawyer. I am not really a constitutional law- yer, so why am I here? I think that after having heard Dan Burk's presenta- tion, you should realize that intellectual property lawyers need to be First Amendment lawyers as well. You have all heard the aphorism that the Internet interprets censorship as a malfunction and routes around it.' You also may have heard that censorship on the Internet is a terrible thing; in particular, you may have heard this in the context of debates about pornography on the Inter- net or hate speech on the Internet. I would like to suggest to you today, how- ever, that the single most prevalent problem involving censorship on the Inter- net has to do with the protection of intellectual property. If you think about it, intellectual property protection, and particularly copy- right protection, is a form of censorship.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Views on Digital Rights and Digital Commons
    Adopted Policy Paper GREEN VIEWS ON DIGITAL RIGHTS AND DIGITAL COMMONS Introduction As information, digital technologies and the internet play an increasingly important role in today’s society, new forms of cooperation and work can emerge, as well as alternative economic models and new possibilities for involving citizens in society and political participation. Meanwhile, a whole array of new laws since the end of the 90s – from “intellectual property” to security – keep raising deep concerns. We Greens are taking a stand to defend individual rights and serve public interests. The European Greens want to take a leading role in building and strengthening digital commons and enabling all people to take part in digital society. As Greens we like to see the internet, the worldwide digital infrastructure as digital commons1. That means a free and open common ground for all citizens to communicate, share and profit from available resources. However, we know that in reality the internet is far from being free, open and for the benefit of all citizens. We also recognise the limits of governmental intervention in a global infrastructure and the dangers of state interference in the free flow of information. But to safeguard digital rights we need the intervention by national states, the European Union and the entire global community. We Greens want to achieve an internet and digital society where civil rights are respected and all citizens can profit equally from the rich amounts of information and culture that are now accessible while acknowledging author rights. In view of rapid technological developments these goals must also be applicable to devices and tools outside the internet where the right to privacy is at stake.
    [Show full text]
  • Transnational Terrorism, Organized Crime and Peace-Building Human Security in the Western Balkans
    Transnational Terrorism, Organized Crime and Peace-Building Human Security in the Western Balkans Edited by Wolfgang Benedek, Christopher Daase, Vojin Dimitrijevic and Petrus van Duyne Transnational Terrorism, Organized Crime and Peace-Building Also by Wolfgang Benedek UNDERSTANDING HUMAN RIGHTS, MANUAL ON HUMAN RIGHTS EDUCATION (Edited) MAINSTREAMING HUMAN SECURITY: Policies, Problems, Potentials (Edited with Matthias C., Kettemann and Markus Möstl) ANTI-TERRORISTS MEASURES AND HUMAN RIGHTS (Edited with Alice Yotopoulous-Marangopoulous) Transnational Terrorism, Organized Crime and Peace-Building Human Security in the Western Balkans Edited by Wolfgang Benedek Christopher Daase Vojin Dimitrijevic´ and Petrus van Duyne Introduction, selection and editorial matters © Wolfgang Benedek, Christopher Daase, Vojin Dimitrijevic ´ and Petrus van Duyne 2010 Individual chapters © contributors 2010 All rights reserved. No reproduction, copy or transmission of this publication may be made without written permission. No portion of this publication may be reproduced, copied or transmitted save with written permission or in accordance with the provisions of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, or under the terms of any licence permitting limited copying issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency, Saffron House, 6–10 Kirby Street, London EC1N 8TS. Any person who does any unauthorized act in relation to this publication may be liable to criminal prosecution and civil claims for damages. The authors have asserted their rights to be identified as the authors of this work in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. First published 2010 by PALGRAVE MACMILLAN Palgrave Macmillan in the UK is an imprint of Macmillan Publishers Limited, registered in England, company number 785998, of Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire RG21 6XS.
    [Show full text]