Cosmonaut

Twitter’s whistleblower problem vs. Elon Musk’s commitment to walk away from his $44bn Twitter deal

Wed, 21 Sep 2022 15:16:50 GMT

DATA POLITICS

Twitter’s whistleblower problem & Elon Musk

Elon Musk points at Twitter's cybersecurity vulnerabilities to cancel $44 bn buyout-deal.

Kamayani

September 21, 2022

Elon Musk has cited whistleblower allegations of widespread negligence on cybersecurity and privacy practices as a justification for terminating the merger agreement of the Twitter buyout, as he further soughts to delay the trial at the Delaware court. In addition to his allegation against Twitter lying about bots, Musk aims to capitalize on these negotiations by using evidence of misdeeds presented by Peiter Zatko, the former head of security at Twitter, and has issued a subpoena to that effect to make his case stronger. This puts Zatko’s complaints at the center of the legal battle Musk has raged against Twitter after he attempted to buy the company and then backed out of the deal altogether.

Zatko’s complaints are regarding the company's continued lax attitude towards cybersecurity practices and user privacy protection . The beginnings can be traced back to the summer hack of 2020 when a 17 year old gained access to several high profile prominent accounts and exposed the platform's vulnerability to data breaches, disinformation, & political & foreign interference thereby compromising user safety. Twitter decided to take action to fix its sloppy security practices by hiring Peiter Zatko, a legend in cybersecurity in 2020. In January 2022, Zatko was dismissed due to ‘poor performance & inefficient leadership ’ and leaked an 84 page document to the press and the government alleging that Twitter has persistently failed to fix the very problem he was hired for, and that the company lacks both the motivation & ability to protect users from harmful security breaches.

In critiquing the very architecture of the company, Zatko argues that Twitter is extremely sloppy in its basic cybersecurity practices. Too many employees have access to critical core systems that harbor troves of sensitive user data. Users do not have updated security patches and servers continue to operate on obsolete and vulnerable software. Consequently, information is rarely stored properly and becomes vulnerable to cyber attacks.

These problems are not new and were addressed in the 2011 FTC order that required the company to implement security protocols to protect users, which Twitter allegedly grossly failed to comply with. In doing so, the company may have made 32 million users vulnerable to data privacy & security breaches. It has currently invited scrutiny from both the FTC and EU data protection authorities for misleading institutions, investors, and regulatory bodies. If found guilty, Twitter can expect imposition of heavy fines for violating orders.

Amongst his more serious allegations is that Twitter has been weaponised by foreign intelligence. Twitter knowingly employed Indian government agents on its payroll, and with the gaping deficiencies in its security ecosystem, government actors having easy access to user data could be misused to target minorities, rival institutions and activists amongst others. Twitter executives knew about previous instances of foreign infiltration , however failed to take action against it. Twitter challenged this, stating that allegations are overstated and at least in the case of India, the company operates in accordance with the law.

Zatko’s complaints also confirm that the discourse on mDAUs and the number of bots on the platform hinges on slippery grounds and the company executives are wary to disclose true figures due to fears of ‘negative valuation.’ So far, Twitter has refuted most claims asserting that a false narrative without proper context is being painted regarding its platform safety systems.. It has defended its security defenses and bot numbers and asserted that Musk has no right to exit from the deal.

For Musk, these claims may bolster his accusations as he subpoenas Zatko and attempts to break away from the deal. However, they may also reflect improper due diligence on his part before committing to the deal publicly. Regardless of whether the deal is a success for either party, the complaints point to a much larger security & corporate governance issue at Twitter, and Musk expresses little desire to revamp the business leaving a question mark on what that means for the company’s platform integrity .

Kamayani has recently graduated with a Masters in International Affairs & Public Policy from the National University of Singapore. She is currently helping build a tech start up and has previously worked in the non profit industry on diverse social impact projects in the areas of gender, healthcare, nutrition, and education.

Only in the Shadows

Wed, 21 Sep 2022 15:01:38 GMT

SEX WORK ONLINE

Only in the Shadows

Sex work is work…unless it’s happening online?

Remy Hellstern

September 21, 2022

Many of us heard about the rise of platforms like OnlyFans, among others in the early days of 2020. Alongside the global health pandemic, Covid-19 had massive impacts on the economy with the International Monetary Fund estimating the median global GDP fell by 3.9% from 2019-2020. Individuals found themselves without a job or precariously employed and turned to sites like OnlyFans as a way to make money from home. OnlyFans saw their user base grow from 2 million in 2016 to 20 million during the pandemic.

Working online offers a safer alternative to engaging in sex work outdoors. According to a systemic review of individuals engaging in sex work in San Francisco, 82% of adults experienced physical assault and 68% had been raped while working. When sex workers are client-seeking outdoors and in-person, the screening process of potential clients is more rushed and leaves them more vulnerable to violence.

Engaging in this work from behind a screen offers a level of safety and separation between the creator and the client. Simultaneously online platforms can act as a medium for younger sex workers and adult entertainers to connect and learn from more veteran individuals. Often, this takes place on platforms outside of OnlyFans, like TikTok and Instagram. However, these companies, like Meta (owner of Instagram), have recently come under fire for shadowbanning sex workers and adult entertainers on their platforms.

The Economist defines shadowbanning as the ability to reduce the ways users gain attention online without blocking the individual’s ability to post or use the network. These users are not told that they have been banned and can continue to receive new messages and followers. However, their username may become unsearchable or their replies and messages may become suppressed. Often, individuals have only discovered this happened because there is a dip in engagement with their content or they are informed of their disappearance on the platform.

Many sex workers have claimed that they have been shadowbanned by online platforms like Meta and argue that this has impacted their livelihood. This has real-world consequences as individuals can go from making $40-$60 USD per day to about $1 a day after getting shadowbanned. Sex workers and adult entertainers rely on platforms like Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and TikTok to direct customers to their adult entertainment platforms like OnlyFans. However , many of these online platforms claim that there is no evidence of shadowbanning on their respective sites.

Recently, this tension between online platforms and adult entertainers has come to a head with three individuals suing Meta for taking bribes from OnlyFans to blacklist their content. The three plaintiffs argue that OnlyFans colluded with Meta to orchestrate a scheme to blacklist creators associated with OnlyFans competitors, like Fancentro. Subsequently , Fancentro also filed a lawsuit against OnlyFans and its owner. The plaintiffs claim that Meta tagged or assigned unique digital fingerprints to their images and shared these with an industry-wide database entitled, “Dangerous Individuals and Organizations”. This database is intended to flag and remove content produced by dangerous individuals or groups, including terrorist organizations, as a means to reduce the amount of violent content found on these platforms. However, the plaintiffs argue that their content was flagged under the same system despite having no connections to terrorist or violent organizations. As a result of this designation on these platforms, the plaintiffs are essentially shadowbanned from these websites.

Shadowbanning is a policy failure that often recreates the same institutionalized violence that sex workers experience daily. Often, these policies are based on arbitrary decisions made by individual content moderators or algorithms based on gender, race, and class. There needs to be careful consideration about the policies being implemented to ensure correct judgments are being made. One way to ensure this is to adopt and implement evidence-based frameworks like Technology-Facilitated Gender-Based Violence, Abuse, and Harassment (TFGBV). According to the Women’s Legal Education and Action Fund, TFGBV: “refers to a spectrum of activities and behaviours that involve technology as a central aspect of perpetuating violent, abuse, or harassement against (both cis and trans) women and girls. This term also captures those who hold intersecting marginalized identities such as 2SLGBTQQIA, Black, Indigenous, and racialized women, women with disabilities, and women who are socioeconomically disadvantaged.”

By implementing this policy framework, in conjunction with collaborations from the community groups like Assembly Four , Hacking // Hustling , Global Network of Sex Work Projects , and Sex Workers Education & Advocacy Taskforce , content moderation policies can provide more nuanced perspective that respects the intersecting identities of sex workers. As the platforms become a more present aspect of everyday life, these decisions impact the lives of people both on and offline. There needs to be engagement with the community of adult entertainers and sex workers to discuss informed policy options and guidelines that are established with the consultation of the community most impacted by the regulatory decision.

Remy Hellstern (she/her) holds a Master’s in Public Policy and Global Affairs from the University of British Columbia, where she focused her research on social change, digital human rights, and the development of equitable policy to support grassroots organizations. She simultaneously earned a graduate-level certification in Information Systems Management from the School of Information at UBC. Her research focuses on the role of emerging technologies in supporting grassroots movements and digital human rights.

The UNFCCC Goes Digital-ish

Wed, 21 Sep 2022 14:49:29 GMT

CLIMATE POLITICS

The UNFCCC Goes Digital-ish

Since the signing of the landmark United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) in 1992 there have been sporadic meetings to discuss amendments and changes to the global response to Climate Change. These COPs have become rather large and important diplomatic events, bringing together heads of state from around the globe. Last year, however, several countries including two of the five largest emitters of CO2 have decided to forgo the usual private jets and closed door meetings for brief virtual meetings instead.

Jeremy Zimmermann

September 21, 2022

COP 26

Last year’s meeting, COP 26, has already seen the effects of a post-covid world having been postponed an entire year due to the importance of in-person discussions. As a result, COP 26 only began on 31 October 2021 in Glasgow, Scotland, with rather ambitious goals ; to reach net-zero emissions by mid-century, to keep global warming below 1.5 degrees, and the establishment of an international carbon crediting regime in order to make these goals possible. Noticeable absences overshadowed Sir David Attenborough 's opening speech such as, President Xi Jinping and President Vladimir Putin. Meanwhile, PM Fumio Kishida of Japan made last-minute plans to attend for only one day following an outcry of criticism. While all three leaders pledged to attend virtually, there is a clear imbalance between the in-person and virtual presence with the leaders expected to only make a one-off token speech.

While those three leaders represent some of the world’s largest emitters, they are not alone in opting for a virtual presence. Numerous leaders cited health concerns including, among others, Pope Francis, Queen Elizabeth, and Mexican President Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador for not attending. Meanwhile President Erdogan of Turkey and Iranian President Ebraham Raisi did not attend due to safety concerns. The COP represents what will likely become the “new normal” of international affairs, one which dips one foot into the digital realm and the other remains footed in the physical world. A new world of “digital-ish” politics.

Consequences of Going Digital-ish

The shift to a semi-virtual format has numerous impacts both environmentally and politically. It brings to light the hypocrisy of using private-jets to attend a conference addressing climate change. A single private flight to COP-26 will emit more carbon in one go than the average person does in an entire year. So with many world leaders forgoing private jets for zoom calls they will dramatically reduce their carbon footprint and avoid the hypocritical complaints from protestors.

While hypocrisy may be avoided, so too are these world leaders seemingly avoiding direct pressure to take action. Without a doubt, holding sporadic short video conferences is no substitute for the types of intense negotiations that go on at these sorts of international conferences. It seems increasingly likely that China, Japan, and Russia will be able to skate by without needing to make any serious commitments. As a result, none of the world’s major polluters pledged to stop coal-powered plants with Japan being criticized for its continual reliance on coal . For them the digital cloak of the conference allows them to hide without criticism.

Clearly going “digital-ish” does not work. While there are certainly benefits to virtual conferences, especially in lower carbon emissions, so long as some people are “in-person” there will be an imbalance in access to information and ability to make an impact. The COP needs to make up its mind on the digital space and make a commitment. Having this half-in half-out approach lets China, Russia, Japan, and others give an air of being present without actually being present for negotiations.

Looking at the Future: Going Fully Digital

The recent advances in international videoconferencing expedited by the COVID-19 pandemic demonstrate that intense international negotiations can be done online and it is argued by some that it should be done online. It is often fantasized by eco-futurists that there will be a miracle invention to solve the climate crisis, and there very well may be someday, yet today seemingly adequate tools already exist to greatly reduce carbon-emissions and inequalities caused by the culture of expensive private jets for environmental and world leaders. Going digital is the tool that can bring climate change mitigation into the future. No more private jets, no more expensive and lavish events, no more bragging about economic off-sets.

It is a direction that was anticipated for COP 26 even before the pandemic with one of the main goals being to resolve one of the main unanswered questions from the Paris Accord: how to find a safe and easy way to audit and finance carbon credits internationally. Many had been arguing that the future of carbon auditing should be done online through a blockchain or crypto process to validate credits. While crypto is far from carbon-free , it seemingly presents a solution to one of the major concerns to an international auditing system for carbon.

While the future of the COP remains uncertain, one thing is very evident: a hybrid event does not work. COP 26 was met with high hopes and very little action made possible by major players evading direct pressure by attending virtually at a venue which placed high priority on those who intended in-person. As anyone who has attended such hybrid events knows, they often don’t work with those not there physically being side-lined. Zoom, Google meet, and a variety of other digital tools can be keys to success for future international agreements, but only if they are utilized in a proper manner that ensures no one is evading accountability.

Closing Remarks

By embracing a digital approach to diplomacy, world leaders could unlock a whole new set of tools to mitigate carbon emissions and put everyone on an even playing field. As so many organizations have gone digital in the last two years, it is unfortunate to see the hesitancy from one of the world’s organizations which has the most to gain. Instead of having off-sets to make a COP “net-zero,” they could lead a beautiful example of how the future of business can be done. Perhaps our world leaders could learn a lesson from Greta Thunberg on how to creatively lead by example. The transition to a net-zero and negative-carbon world is one that will require major changes to our lives and society and one which will undoubtedly coincide with the way our society emerges from this pandemic.

Jeremy Zimmerman is an environmental compliance specialist focusing on environmental and safety regulations. He graduated from a dual degree program between Sciences Po Paris and Columbia University where he studied History and Sustainable Development. He is passionate about environmental justice and the way technology can influence environmental regulations.

TikTok-ing on the National Security Defence

Wed, 21 Sep 2022 14:35:56 GMT

DATA POLITICS

TikTok-ing on the National Security Defence

Time is running out on the National Security defence adopted by the Government of India for the prolonged ban on Chinese based Mobile Applications

Raushan Tara Jaswal

September 21, 2022

Introduction

The defence of ‘national security’, while admittedly under the domain of the sovereign function, has recently been over-used and exploited at the hands of the present regime, even in open Courts under the garb of ‘secret envelops’. The same reasoning has also been given to prohibit the use of some-what frivolous Chinese based mobile- based applications such as TikTok and PUB-G, for almost one and a half years. Without disregarding the rising tensions between China and India, especially since 2017, from the issue of Doklam to the recent Galwan Valley strife during the coronavirus pandemic, however, the prolonged ban of Chinese mobile-based applications seems unjust, arbitrary, and excessive. India is trying to navigate a precarious tightrope considering the decline of digital exceptionalism combined with raising concerns of privacy, informed consent, and political intervention by social media platforms. While exploring the different reasons for the permanent ‘ban’, this article seeks to analyze the constitutionality and sustainability of such bans in light of the reasons stated by the government of India and hopes to suggest alternatives to avoid ‘over-regulation’ and still protect fundamental human rights.

Digital Strike Against China

Tensions between India and China were at an all-time high during the Galwan Valley dispute last year, which left 20 Indian soldiers dead and has been stated to be the most violent clash between the two nations in 45 years. With the world already harboring anti-China sentiments at the time due to the novel coronavirus outbreak, which could be traced to Wuhan Province in China, this clash triggered a fresh wave of anti-China sentiments in India. These rising tensions were followed by the nation’s overall sentiment to boycott Chinese goods/products. It went to the point of the Government also planning to introduce import restrictions on certain Chinese produced goods.

These moves, accompanied by the ban on several Chinese mobile applications, which at a point in time stood at over 250, in the aftermath of the Galwan Valley were a strategic and politically motivated move to curb dependence on ‘anything-Chinese’ . This ban was initiated in a statement in June 2020 by ‘ the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, Government of India under it’s powers under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act read with the relevant provisions of the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking of Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009’ and banned 118 mobile apps. Initially, the Ministry of Information and

Technology attributed the ban to complaints about theft and surreptitious use of users’ data in an unauthorized manner, and data harvesting especially in locations outside of India. The official statement while recognizing such complaints though, banned the applications on the grounds of being ‘prejudicial to sovereignty and integrity of India, defence and security of the State and public order’, without delving into the reasons on how these apps were prejudicial. In more than a year since the initial ban and reduced border skirmishes, the ban continues under different garbs of ‘protection’ . While the anti-China sentiment has reduced over time, the Government has found new reasons to prolong the existing ban on these mobile-based applications. Currently, the renewal of the ban hinges on issues of compliance and privacy . This is also seemingly in consonance with the Information Technology (Procedure and Safeguards for Blocking of Access of Information by Public) Rules, 2009 (Rule 8 and 9) after reviewing responses from these companies and found it still lacking on grounds of compliance and privacy. In fact, it was India’s ban that also prompted the United States Government to ban TikTok and WeChat (an action which has now been reversed) on similar grounds of privacy, compliance, and ‘national-security’. While the United States has ‘paused’ this extreme measure, India has extended the same for a few apps, which still includes TikTok and WeChat.

Outcomes of the Ban

The ban has truly encouraged the Indian digital businesses to be ‘atmanirbhar’ (self- reliant) and Indian apps have mushroomed in the past year. Some have found incredible popularity and alternatives of existing platforms – especially Instagram, YouTube have also gained momentum. However, everything is not as rosy as it seems.

The impact of this prolonged ban has major ramifications on India’s trade obligations under the World Trade Organization. While the intention of the ban finds its reasoning on national security exceptions under its sovereign functions, it does seem politically driven. Such an overarching ban also threatens to have counter-effects on the economy of both nations. While China (through these applications) has not been able to exploit the Indian market which has been the fastest growing mobile market in the recent years, India has risks to lose out on sizable investments by such companies up to the tune of $1 Billion.

The ban also prima facie seems discriminatory, arbitrary, and disproportionate as the reasons recorded in the official statement under Section 69A of the Information Technology Act seem vague. Apart from the vagueness and lack of specificity for each of these apps being banned, as envisaged under Section 69A, this ‘ Digital Strike’ also seems to target one country (without naming ‘China’) and a politically strategic move in the aftermath of Galwan Valley incident. China, while raising the issue of these curbs at the WTO, argued that India’s measures were selective and discriminatory on ambiguous and far-fetched grounds (especially in light of India’s over-use of the ‘national-security’ defence), and abuses the national security exception.

Exploring India’s Defence

The arguments put forth by India, while being extremely valid and carrying merit, seem to be arbitrarily discriminating against one country, especially in the wake of its territorial clash with China. This measure also does not have any reasonable classification and the arbitrariness is further perpetuated by vagueness of the statement under Section 69A. In the absence of a new data privacy law after the Puttaswamy judgement, there is a gap in technology-related policies especially on the touchstone of the fundamental right to privacy. However, this gap has seemingly been exploited by the Indian Government to economically hurt Chinese companies, especially in the light of the competition around emerging technologies. Apart from that, the on-going ban, now under privacy concerns, can also seem hypocritical in the face of the Pegasus Scandal and concerns of users’ privacy in the government mandated – Aarogya Setu. The new Information Technology Rules, which tries to regulate social-media platforms, has been challenged on concerns relating to user’s privacy by WhatsApp. Hence, the Government relying on issues pertaining to privacy and compliance can be seen as insincere and mala fide .

Apart from privacy-related concerns, there is also an argument to be made in respect of freedom of speech and expression. Such restrictions, especially on the internet (and by extension - on such apps) as discussed by the Supreme Court must be for a legitimate aim and must be least restrictive in nature. While the ‘right to the internet’ still doesn’t exist as a fundamentally and constitutionally recognized right, it has been considered an essential ingredient as an instrument to exercise their freedom of speech and expression.

Another line of argument, akin to trade restrictions mentioned earlier, can be made on freedom of trade or business, as most of these apps have had to substantially curtail their India-based offices and operation or shut down completely. Arguments can also be ascribed in China’s favour to view this measure as anti-competitive in nature.

Time is running out for India

Instead of a complete ban, less restrictive measures could have been adopted by the Government of India. Such measures would include requesting company policies on data privacy, data transfer and sharing, data storage by such companies. Recently, Twitter also came under fire in its failure of compliance issues under the new IT Rules. However, Twitter was given ample time to comply and recourse to the domestic Courts to defend its actions, and no complete ban was ever imposed on Twitter. Hence, alternative, and less-restrictive measures such as information sharing, fines, issuing directions, implementing policies to make such applications privacy compliant, are still recourses that should have been adopted by the Government of India.

Proceedings in the WTO aside, these Orders can also be challenged on constitutional grounds within domestic courts of India. However, due to anti-China sentiment persisting (albeit not as strong) in India and the lack of political will to reverse such bans, especially considering the recent over-regulation of social-media platforms, a positive outcome seems overly ambitious. While India’s arguments on the privacy of user’s data seem legitimate, (and similar concerns have been raised by other nations on such apps) its selective targeting of Chinese apps seems political, mala fide, unconstitutional and prima facie does not seem to protect and preserve privacy of its people and in the interest of ‘defence and security of the State’.

This article was first published on the Indian Journal of Law and Technology - https://www.ijlt.in/post/tiktok-ing-on-the-national-security-defence .

Raushan Tara Jaswal is currently a Lecturer at O.P. Jindal Global University, Sonipat and an Advocate at the Supreme Court of India. She has an LLM from the University of Cambridge as a Commonwealth Shared Cambridge Trust Scholar and the is Lead on the cycle of Digital Human Rights at the Institute.

Legal Professional Privilege in the Context of Competition Law: Turkey and Ukraine

Wed, 21 Sep 2022 14:09:16 GMT

COMPETITION IN DIGITAL MARKETS

Legal Professional Privilege in the Context of Competition Law: Turkey and Ukraine

Competition authorities’ frequently obtain information and documents which may be used as evidence in the context of undertakings. Such information could reveal sensitive concerns that are protected under the legal institution known as “attorney-client privilege”. At this point, whether the information arising during the inquiries of the authorities can be protected by this framework of confidentiality has a special importance. As it will be explored in this article, the question on whether the confidentiality principle is violated while competition watchdogs perform on-site inspections, or if such an inspection may entail a disclosure of sensitive information of a client, need to be further discussed. This brief analysis will be framed for the national scopes of both Turkey, and Ukraine. As we are all aware about Ukraine’s current hardship, may this humble piece help us to draw the attention too onto some particularities of its legal system, keeping the hopes for a peaceful outcome for their land and for global democracy.

Gözde Diktas

September 21, 2022

Introduction

In the context of antitrust regulation, legal professional privilege has a rather broad extent. It includes both attorney-client and work product privilege, with materials and documents prepared for litigation, most of these resulting from an antitrust investigation. In the United States, legal professional privilege encourages compliance with the law as it creates conditions where attorneys, both in-house and external, can indulge clients to discuss their plans in a way that allows the attorney to provide guidance about what is permitted and what is not. The United States Supreme Court has noted this as follows: “the privilege exists to protect not only the giving of professional advice to those who can act on it but also the giving of information to the lawyer to enable him to give sound and informed advice.” Similar to the US, in the European Union, legal professional privilege is shaped by the EU regulations and the decisions of the Court of Justice of the EU (“the CJEU”) which are often referred to by Turkish competition law. After first addressing case, AM&S Europe Ltd v European Commission, in the Akzo Nobel Chemicals Ltd and Akcros Chemicals Ltd v. Commission case, the CJEU stated two conditions required to be able to benefit from the legal professional privilege; materials/documents in question of examination (1) shall have been prepared for the purposes of defense, and; (2) shall not cover communication and materials prepared by an in-house lawyer due to the lack of independence of such in-house lawyer resulting from labor relationships with a company even if such in-house lawyer is a member of a national bar (Netherlands bar in this case).

With this decision, the CJEU does not only apply the above mentioned criteria to the documents composed within the investigation process, but it also leaves room for the materials and documents composed before initiating administrative procedure (i.e. an investigation) to benefit from the protection of the legal professional privilege. This is a crucial point if we aim to analyse the Turkish experience and how it differs from the previous picture.

Moreover, while the status of, and access to legally privileged materials both in the US and in the EU is covered by special regulations, Turkey and Ukraine have not yet a particular legal framework directly related to the attorney – client privilege in the competition area.

Turkey

Considering the authorizations of the Turkish Competition Authority (hereinafter referred to as the “TCA”) provided by the Turkish Competition Act No. 4054 (“Turkish Competition Act”), the TCA has quite broad authority in obtaining information and collecting documents. When remembering the expanded authority of on-site inspection by the amendment to the Turkish Competition Act in 2020 and the Guidelines on the Examination of Digital Data during On-Site Inspections, attorney-client privilege gains more importance.

As per Art 14 of the Turkish Competition Act, the TCA may require any information it deems necessary from all public institutions and organizations, undertakings, associations of undertakings to fulfill its duties and officials of these authorities, undertakings and associations of undertakings are obliged to provide the requested information within the period to be determined by the TCA. According to Art 15 of the Turkish Competition Act, the TCA has the authority to exercise on-site inspections in undertakings or associations of undertakings. It should be noted that there is no further explicit regulation on this matter in which cases this authority can be limited. However, one point of view asserts that different branches of law cannot be considered to be independent from each other and hence main principles in criminal law can be adapted to other fields of law such as competition law. Just like the way that the TCA could not ask and legally obtain information by forcing; it also could not ask for any information by violating attorney-client privilege which the Criminal Procedure Act mentions in Art 130.

When taking a look at the decisions of the TCA, it is noticed that there is a diversity in the TCA’s practices due to the lack of specific legislation on this subject. It is possible to acknowledge that the TCA has adopted the approach that allows benefiting from legal professional privilege not in every case but when the certain conditions exist. In other words, the TCA may disregard the legal professional privilege in certain circumstances. As per the TCA’s practice (such as Warner Bros numbered 19-04/36-14 and dated 17.01.2019), Enerjisa numbered 16-42/686-314 and dated 06.12.2016) and, Dow Turkey numbered 15-42/690-259 dated 02.12.2015), the principles attributed to the legal professional privilege in Turkish competition law can be outlined as follows:

-The documents should concern the right to defence (it is mostly in the form of legal advices so far), and;

-This legal advice should be provided by an independent attorney other than in-house lawyers.

In this regard, the Enerjisa brief is worthy of particular attention since the decision of the TCA has been subject to the administration court. According to the TCA’s decision, the legal advice given by an independent attorney on how the Turkish Competition Act can be infringed does not concern a right to defence, and thus the documents cannot take benefit from the legal professional secrecy. In addition to that, the court granted the two criterions of the TCA to follow in the detection of legal professional privilege, it held that such sort of legal advice is towards the purpose of the compliance process of the undertaking, and thus it helps the undertaking avoid an anti-competitive behavior rather than providing with a way to breach the law. Therefore, this legal advice can be considered to concern the right to defence.

However, the District Administrative Court revoked the decision of the administrative court on the ground that there was no present case brought into court arising from an investigation by the TCA when the report of the independent attorney was composed, so the report is not directly concerning the right to defence. Apart from this decision, there are not many cases which were made subject to administrative courts, so it should be known that the topic still remains unclear under Turkish law.

In spite of this blurriness in interpreting the context of the right to defence, the TCA keeps following its approach on legal professional privilege in recent cases. In Huawei’s docket, numbered 19-40/670-288 dated 14.11.2019, because the independent attorney is added into only “cc” section in the emails between the in-house lawyer and the employee of the undertaking, the TCA did not consider the information given as legal advice to be between undertaking and an independent attorney, so it did not find adding in “cc” enough to take advantage of attorney-client privilege. In another case in 2020, Çiçek Sepeti decision numbered 20-32/405-186 dated 02.07.2020, the TCA dismissed the demand of giving the legal letters, obtained during on-site inspections, back to the undertaking as it was emerged that the attorney was working under a labor contract.

Ukraine

The criteria of legal professional privilege in antitrust investigations in Ukraine, is also quite vague. Unlike specific procedural rules in the EU and the US, but similar to Turkey, competition law provides the Antimonopoly Committee of Ukraine (the AMCU) with a huge access to confidential information of undertakings and there is no detailed regulation on this issue provided further. Thus, the AMCU has almost absolute power to demand from companies any documents, or information, including those with restricted access, and in case of failure to provide the information when requested, the undertaking would be fined by the AMCU.

On the other hand, legal professional privilege is generally regulated by the Law of Ukraine On Advocacy and Advocatory Practice in Ukraine (“Advocacy Law”) . Nevertheless, it does not include the provisions on the status of privileged data when it is requested from a client within official proceedings. Advocacy Law also remains silent about whether legal privilege may apply to an in-house lawyer if she or he is admitted to the bar. In consequence, there are different interpretations on what the competent authorities can assert in the case of disclosure of information directly from an investigated undertaking.

This normative gap in Ukrainian Law gives rise to a significant legal risk of involuntary disclosure of privileged data especially when considering the fact that only qualified attorneys have the authority for the representation in court. In addition, the trend which grants authority in court representation to qualified advocates relates only to litigation proceedings, thus any other official proceedings are totally out of the scope. That means investigations of the AMCU are also not covered. According to Ukrainian competition specialists , preservation of the legal privilege in AMCU investigations needs special regulation since such investigations involve commercially sensitive matters as well as extensive powers of the AMCU to investigate such as the right to seize documents, servers, and search premises.

Conclusion

Whereas the status of legally privileged materials both in the US and in the EU is covered by special regulations, Turkey and Ukraine have not yet a particular regulation directly related to such legal privilege in the competition area. However, unlike the AMCU, the TCA has been evaluating legal professional privilege and following an approach similar to that of the European Commission. Accordingly, in order to deem the information privileged, the attorney must be independent and the information collected must be associated with the right to defence.

It is important to note that, although the CJEU leaves a margin for the materials and documents composed before initiating an investigation to benefit from the protection of the legal professional privilege, Turkish District Administrative Court took the documents composed before an investigation out of the scope of right to defence. However, it must be remembered there is no precedent on this topic to date.

In Ukraine, legal professional privilege is only regulated by the Law of Ukraine On Advocacy and Advocatory Practice in Ukraine, but since Advocacy Law is applicable to only qualified advocates in litigation proceedings, other proceedings such as investigation of the AMCU are regarded as uncovered by the law.

Gözde Diktas is a qualified lawyer admitted to the Istanbul Bar Association in Turkey. She experienced an international traineeship on Information Technology Law and Data Privacy (based on GDPR) in Ukraine and currently work in Malta for an international tech company. She studied the US. Common Law during her bachelor’s program, and she has published in the field of competition law and an international report on internet censorship with the endorsement of the Council of Europe. She is a researcher in Big Data & Antitrust Research Cycle in the Institute for Internet & the Just Society. She is fluent in English and Turkish, and can communicate in French.

Australia’s ACCC taking on Google’s ad tech business

Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:57:38 GMT

COMPETITION IN DIGITAL MARKETS

Australia’s ACCC taking on Google’s ad tech business

This article is a follow-up to “ Showdown Down Under? ” which was published here last year. As our cycle aims to explore jurisdictions outside the EU and North America, we will further dive into Australian competition law by outlining its basic structure, introducing the relevant actors and give an insight into the pursued policies in the realm of digital markets with a particular focus on “ad tech”.

Marco Schmidt

September 21, 2022

Australian Antitrust Laws

Australian antitrust law is governed by the Competition and Consumer Act of 2010 (CCA, former Trade Practices Act of 1974), mainly in its Part IV which deals with restrictive trade practices. Notably, since 2009, cartel conduct can constitute a criminal offense which will be severely punished, including prison sentences. Just recently, for the first time ever, an individual pleaded guilty to criminal cartel conduct. This is naturally accompanied by the common private procedures that can be brought against cartelists. The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC, chairman until March 21, 2022: Rod Sims, then to be followed by Gina Cass-Gottlieb ) is in charge of enforcing the CCA, therefore not only dealing with matters of antitrust law but also with consumer protection as the name already indicates. This gives the ACCC a wide range of competences which might make it an “ economic super-regulator ” in the eyes of some. Indeed, sector inquiries, like the 2019 Report on Digital Platforms, pave the way for further regulation like the News Media Bargaining Code, which triggered the conflict with Facebook/Google and the Australian government earlier in 2021 (c.f. “ Showdown Down Under? ”). In fact, the News Media Bargaining Code was even drafted by the ACCC. As the head-organization of the ACCC is the Australian Treasury (“the Australian Government’s pre-eminent economic adviser ”), the strong influence of the ACCC on Australian legislation is caused by the way the authorities are structured and interlinked. At the same time, the ACCC’s competences are, of course, not limitless as the specialized “ Australian Competition Tribunal ” decides upon appeals against decisions of the ACCC, for example when a merger was prohibited.

Current focus

Unsurprisingly, and just like in many other jurisdictions, Australia will focus further on digital (platform) markets. With the News Media Bargaining Code the country was one of the first to seriously take on the players in Big Tech and the ACCC has no intention of losing its drive. ACCC Chairman Rod Sims considers ex ante regulation of digital platforms in a speech given in October 2021 and refers to all the other ongoing efforts with regards to updating antitrust legislation all around the world, such as the Digital Markets Act and Digital Services Act in Europe. One also needs to consider that regulation in Australia will not only focus on questions of competition but also on privacy and consumer data , especially since the ACCC is the authority responsible for consumer protection and competition at the same time. This development is also not new per se as, for example, the German Federal Cartel Office (Bundeskartellamt) has brought a case against Facebook considering questions of the protection of consumer’s data. It might raise some eyebrows though how influential the ACCC is in advocating for certain policy goals and, later on, drafting legislation. The ACCC pushes for more regulation and hence for more competences for itself, something that at least needs to be critically looked upon.

Ad Tech Inquiry

As outlined above, the ACCC has a strong focus on current digital developments and does not refrain from taking on the players in Big Tech like Facebook or Google. In September 2021, the ACCC fired again some serious shots against Google, by publishing its “Digital advertising services inquiry”. In that regard, digital advertising includes the usage of ad tech services which facilitate the buying, selling and delivering of digital display advertisement , meaning ads that are shown to consumers that visit a website or use an app. Publishers, in a digital context for example a platform like Facebook or Youtube, sell their advertising space (so-called ad inventory ) to advertisers. The inquiry of the ACCC though did not focus on a closed display channel like Facebook that uses its own system to sell ads directly to advertisers but on display advertisement through open channels .

In open channels, publishers sell their inventory with the support of ad tech services. The report acknowledges the complexity of the ad tech supply chain which is why a closer look shall be taken at one specific concern: As outlined above, in the advertisement market, publishers and advertisers are the two counterparts to the transactions. While this is the only dimension in the case of closed channels, open channels are defined by the need for intermediaries to connect publishers and advertisers.

Both publishers and advertisers make use of ad tech services for the sale or purchase of ads. It is worth tokeep in mind that advertising space is subject to transactions that occur in real time and fully automatically, especially through auctioning processes which then lead to the delivery to the consumer. A consumer visiting a publisher’s site triggers a request for bids that goes through the supply-side platform(s) (SSP) a publisher uses. This bid can contain information on the consumer herself as well in order to get better targeted ads. The bid is then transferred from the supply-side platform to the demand-side platform (DSP) of advertisers where it is decided which bids will go back to the publishers’ SSP. If several DSPs have submitted bids, the SSP will conduct the auction and pass on the winning bid to the publisher which is then shown to the consumer.

c.f. ACCC’s Digital advertising services inquiry, p. 29, https://www.accc.gov.au/system/files/Digital%20advertising%20services%20inquiry%20-%20final%20report.pdf

Google is the dominant player in ad tech

Along the steps of the described supply chain, the ACCC found that Google is omnipresent. Google’s browser Chrome continuously feeds consumers with ads while spending time on Google-owned platforms like Youtube. Moreover, Google operates SSPs and DSPs and several other ad tech services throughout the entire supply chain. The ACCC carefully considers efficiencies that could arise out of this vertical integration but eventually comes to the conclusion that there is potential for conflict of interests (c.f. p. 89f. of the final report ). When Google conducts an auction in one of its SSPs but also participates as a bidder, there is an inherent incentive to prefer its own bid. Another example is that YouTube’s ad inventory is only offered to advertisers through platforms that are owned by Google , raising an incentive for Google to drive up prices for ad space.

The ACCC found Google to be dominant “as more than 90 percent of ad impressions traded via the ad tech supply chain passed through at least one Google service in 2020.” The vertical integration of Google in combination with its almost monopolistic market power raises serious concerns at the ACCC, with the chairman stating that adverse effects like “ higher costs for both publishers ” and a reduced quality in the online content shown are probable consequences of an inefficient ad tech market. This trend might have also been reinforced by the Covid-19 crisis as “ the reliance on technological platforms...has entrenched [their] power ”.

Self-preferencing of vertically-integrated digital firms is a problem that has been recognized in many jurisdictions, so the findings of the ACCC do not constitute an exception. Germany explicitly prohibited self-preferencing earlier this year with the introduction of § 19a (para. 2) of the Act against Restrictions of competition, a provision that is particularly focused on firms with a “paramount significance for competition across markets”. Shortly after, the Bundeskartellamt has launched investigations into Google, Facebook, Amazon and Apple, all under this new provision § 19a. This concern has also been considered already by the U.K.’s newly created Digital Markets Unit as self-preferencing is an “ exclusionary tactic ” that prevents new tech firms from successfully challenging the incumbents.

Consequences?

So what is the conclusion the ACCC drew from its findings? In the light of the competitive deficits that were found in the Australian ad tech market, the ACCC pointed out that the existing provisions of competition law are not sufficient to address the issues at hand. Rather the report established a need for new, sector-specific regulatory measures “ for the benefit of business and consumers ”. According to ACCC chairman Rod Sims this is in line with findings of other regulation agencies abroad with which the ACCC is “ engaging very closely ”.

Indeed, the U.K. has also conducted a study on the digital advertising market with the subsequent establishment of the aforementioned Digital Markets Unit. France’s competition watchdog L’Autorité de la Concurrence seems to be ahead of everybody, handing down a substantial fine of €220 million to Google in the summer of 2021 as a result of a settlement that Google requested ( press release in French ). The fine addressed Google granting preferential treatment to its own services in the ad tech sector, so it remains to be seen if (or rather when) other competition authorities follow suit and investigate Google’s behavior in that regard. Google naturally tries to escape new regulations, pointing out the positive effects of its ad tech services on the Australian employment market and economy. All those points were made in a press release the day before the ACCC’s final report was published (mind the timing…). The report might eventually lead to new regulation, just like in the case of the News Media Bargaining Code but it should be noted critically that the ACCC will not only maintain but reinforce its strong position in the Australian regulatory landscape. After all, the ACCC is making politics and could therefore create a situation of overregulation by advocating for new legislative actions.

Conclusion

As can be seen, Australia’s antitrust regime is mainly driven by the powerful ACCC which is in step with the times and certainly not afraid to take the GAMAs (former “GAFA” as Facebook rebranded to Meta) on. Due to the complexity of the supply chains in ad tech, it might take some more time until additional jurisdictions follow what the ACCC has already initiated in Australia: a call for stricter, more specialized rules in order to foster competition in the ad tech market.

Marco Schmidt holds an LL.M. in Law and Economics at the University of Utrecht, the Netherlands. He is particularly interested in matters of antitrust law and plans to pursue a career as a competition lawyer. Together with the Big Tech & Antitrust cycle, he investigates and researches current issues in digital antitrust. Being a German native, he is also fluent in English and Spanish and knows some basic French.

Brazilian Antitrust and Vertical Integration in Streaming Platforms

Wed, 21 Sep 2022 13:38:18 GMT

COMPETITION IN DIGITAL MARKETS

Brazilian Antitrust and Vertical Integration in Streaming Platforms

A brief look into competition in streaming platforms in Brazil.

Juliana Novaes

September 21, 2022

Brazil is a large middle-income country facing many of the economic challenges of developing nations. Its antitrust ecosystem is structured around an independent authority called Administrative Council of Economic Defense (CADE), which was formally established in the second half of the 20th century.

During its relatively short existence, CADE has built a consistent history of competition law and enforcement, having decided on cases that concern different sectors of the economy. Recently, new cases have been brought up in the antitrust ecosystem in Brazil, many of them inserted into digital markets and the technology industry as a whole, challenging the traditional approaches to antitrust and shedding light to the whole of the agency in the Digital Era.

This article will present a brief overview of the antitrust system in Brazil and review a case in the digital entertainment context, tracing a parallel between the case and the current trends of vertical integration involving online streaming services.

A brief overview of antitrust in Brazil

In Brazil, competition law evolved along with Constitutions. In the beginning, a clear rule of economic liberalism was foreseen, with full exercise of property rights. Subsequently, the State became no longer a simple enabler of economic activity, but started to have a more active role in organizing and ruling the behavior of economic agents.

The antitrust authority in Brazil (CADE) was formally created in 1962, but only in 1994 it became an independent agency working together with other regulatory bodies responsible for competition law and policy enforcement, investigating and judging violations to the economic order, as well as analyzing acts of economic concentration.

The “Claro-iMusica” Case

Over the last few years, the music market has undergone a great transformation. The way to consume music has mostly gone digital and platforms were created for the intermediation between the user and music, through downloading and streaming. The Brazilian digital music market is the 10th income music market according to the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry ("IFPI") . Listening to digital music is part of the Brazilian way of life and, in 2019, 34% of Brazilians listened to songs on the internet every day, or almost every day .

It is in this context of growing importance of digital platforms that the Claro-iMusica case emerged in 2014, still in the early stages of large platforms such as Spotify. The case started when Claro S.A., a telecommunications company of the Mexican-origin group América Móvil, decided to acquire iMusica S.A., a digital music company (download and streaming) controlled by the Brazilian group Ideasnet and with a significant market share at the time.

The acquisition was presented as an opportunity to generate gains in agility in offering new products to consumers, as well as to facilitate logistics in digital music sales. However, considering the fact that Claro is a company that provides telecommunications services and iMusica is an aggregator and develops white-label streaming platforms, the acquisition represented a vertical integration.

Vertical integrations in digital entertainment markets are a subject of concern, especially when they involve companies in the telecommunications sector, due to the essentiality of such providers to the infrastructure that is involved in digital services, which puts them in a privileged position to conduct discriminatory practices and pose entry barriers to other market competitors.

In this sense, concerns were presented by other competitors, such as other telecommunications corporations, who had contracts with iMusica and alleged that, following the approval by CADE, iMusica would then refuse future contracts with other competitors and significantly compromise the variety and quality of the content offered to them. At the same time, other companies in the music aggregation sector were concerned that exclusivity contracts would be formed by Claro-iMusic with artists and relevant record labels, significantly reducing competitors’ capacity to offer varied and high-quality content for their remaining clients.

However, after analyzing the case, it was understood that, despite the high market share of both companies, other competitors would be able to replace their role in case there was refusal to contract. The outcome was an approval.

Why is this case relevant?

Although the case itself led to an approval from the Brazilian authority without much controversy due to the existence of other competitors in the market at the time, this case is relevant as it represents one of the first deep looks into digital platforms and the streaming ecosystem by CADE.

The Claro-iMusic case is dated from 2014, but the discussions regarding antitrust in the streaming market are still in trend as the international market is currently facing a move towards vertical integrations. Companies in the telecommunications sector have massively invested in creating their own streaming platforms and joining other traditional media conglomerates to enter the digital market. This is the case, for instance, with the recent announcement that AT&T is to combine WarnerMedia business with Discovery in a deal to create a new streaming service.

At the same time, Spotify and Netflix, which have a significant market share, have become much more than intermediaries in the last few years and are progressively turning their businesses vertical. For instance, Spotify - representing 320 million total monthly active users- has recently spent almost $900 million on exclusive content. From the audiovisual streaming perspective, Netflix - the leading platform - has invested over 17 billion in content creation in 2021.

We see, therefore, that vertical integrations in the digital entertainment market are becoming increasingly common. There are concerns that this trend might raise entry barriers and originate discriminatory conducts from the players in this market, with special concern to vertical integrations that involve companies that have control over Internet infrastructure.

In this sense, the Brazilian case represents a small insight from an acquisition from a past not so far away that involved what now represents a trend in the digital entertainment industry and whose long-term consequences for other competitors and also for consumers is still unknown.

Juliana Novaes is a Law Student at the University of Sao Paulo also enrolled in a double-degree program at the University of Lyon. She is a researcher in the law and technology field and a digital rights activist. She is currently part of the Directive Council of the Internet Society’s Youth Observatory (Youth SIG) and is an Internet of Rights Fellow at ARTICLE 19. Her main topics of interest are infrastructure regulation, digital economy and freedom of expression.

Regulatory Sandboxes & AI Innovation

Wed, 17 Aug 2022 18:51:32 GMT

ABOUT

How to effectively regulate AI innovation without stifling it? The EU Commission’s draft AI Act provides in Article 53 for 'regulatory sandboxes' as a possible answer. 'Regulatory sandboxes' ('Reallabore' in German) allow for a rules-based environment to facilitate the development, testing and validation of innovative AI systems for a limited period of time before they are placed on the market or put into service. Both regulators and innovators can gain insights into how the technology functions, where possible compliance risks lie and also recognize and predict regulatory loopholes early in the process. What does the framework of a regulatory sandbox look like? How does the envisaged co-creation of regulation and innovation work in practice? How do regulatory sandboxes fit into the European and German AI strategies? And what are the current developments in the field, especially in healthcare and climate tech?

SPEAKER

Dr. Konstantin Kolloge is the Head of the Coordinating Office for Regulatory Sandboxes at the German Federal Ministry of Economic Affairs and Climate Action.

LIVESTREAM

Ideology

Tue, 24 May 2022 08:19:14 GMT

Kittiwake

tech culture society

Ideology

Whether we (really) have a choice or whether it is chosen for us?

By Saishreya Sriram

May 24, 2022

How would one describe freedom today? Is freedom good for us? In the Brothers Karamazov (1880), Dostoyevsky says “nothing has ever been more unendurable to man and human society than freedom” (329). However, generally and historically speaking, freedom has meant the complete control of one’s possessions ( sans judgement or interference from others). The only variable that (seemingly) changes is what’s deemed a possession in that circumstance – be it animals killed for meat, wives abused by husbands, slaves owned by the Confederates, etc.

Isaiah Berlin argues – in his article Two Concepts of Liberty – that there are two concepts of freedom that exist: positive and negative. Well, let’s start with the latter. Negative freedom is the freedom from interference, restrictions, and coercion which are imposed by external entities, authorities, or people (OpenLearn, 2021). This happens when one’s TV time is restricted, or when one is being punished for dissent, or put in jail for certain conduct. Meanwhile, the concept of positive freedom is slightly complicated. It’s the freedom to do something; and any decision is a product of the battle between the two selves – our higher and lower self. For instance, if you’re a student, the higher self is supposedly working hard; while the lower self succumbs to distractions, desires, and impulses. Further, Berlin believes that true positive freedom is choosing the higher self and constraining this lower self by studying (while you have the choice to use it for distractions); it’s a “matter of achieving your potential, not just having potential” (OpenLearn, 2021). Berlin argues that positive freedom is susceptible to misuse when the higher self gets identified with a higher social group – race, religion, or state, for instance. And that the notion of being free is felt only when the lower self – that sees any limitation, disagreement, dispute, or difference from the social group – gets suppressed entirely (Kasmirli, 2019).

This can be clearly seen in the case of Martin Heidegger – a man whose mind was once deemed one of the most brilliant in the 20th century – who ended up joining the Nazi Socialist Party in 1933 to become rector of the Freiburg University. Moreover, the celebrated philosopher and the author of Being and Time spoke of revolutionizing the university, hosted propaganda lectures across Germany, and even yelled “Heil Hitler!” in his addresses (Lilla, 21). By then, it was clear that he had made his choice by himself and wasn’t in any way coerced. He’d further cut off contact with his Jewish colleagues and friends. When Karl Jaspers got the wind of it, he was alarmed. In The Reckless Mind: Intellectuals in Politics, Mark Lilla describes Jasper’s interaction with Heidegger:

“ After they returned to Jaspers’s house Jaspers tried to draw Heidegger out, remarking that surely his friend could not agree with the Nazis on the Jewish question. Heidegger: “But there is a dangerous international network of Jews.” Jaspers: “How can such an uncultivated man like Adolf Hitler govern Germany?” Heidegger: ‘Culture doesn’t matter. Just look at his marvelous hands’. . .” (Lilla 22)

I argue that Heidegger, being the venerated philosopher he was, had the freedom to make the right choice –in this case, not join the Nazis– yet he made the indisputable evil choice. His higher self as German had dominated and achieved mastery over him, allowing no leeway for doubt or dissent. He made self-justifications for all that constituted the Nazi rule and their legitimacy and saw Germans as higher and Jews as inferior, infernal, and deserving genocide.

The irony here is that what impinges on your freedom is actually the freedom of others. A stark example in this case is the ideology of the Confederacy who defended their freedom to hold slaves as part of their culture, as it was defended by the United States Constitution. What got legitimatized was “. . . that the negro is not equal to the white man; that slavery, subordination to the superior race, is his natural and moral condition” ( Stephens, 1861).

In making sense of how evil got bureaucratized, engulfed, and even unnoticed in the everyday, Hannah Arendt argues,in her report Eichmann in Jerusalem (1964) , the existence of the banality of evil . According to her, evil came from. a fundamental failure to think or “ non-thinking ” (Butler, 2011). However, I argue that only after the positive choice of ideology – by removing individual difference or dissent – evil can be accepted as a part of everyday life and become banal.

It is quite evident, and inevitably observed in totalitarian regimes, that the state intervenes on one’s negative freedom. In 1983 a Soviet officer saved the world from a nuclear war, when he wasn’t supposed to. Yes, that’s right. When the USSR’s missile attack system got a warning alert with a display and instruction asking him to “LAUNCH”, Stanislav Petrov and his team went against the protocol, suspecting that to be a false warning (Matthews, 2019). The scale of casualties or even the planet’s survival from a nuclear war would have been unimaginable. Even though he was right in his judgement, he was continuously interrogated and was never even acknowledged by the Soviets. Had it not been for his display of individualism, there wouldn’t even be a world to imagine – let alone incarcerate him for treason. An example of another whistleblower closer to memory would be that of Dr. Li Wenliang, the Chinese doctor who tried issuing warnings about the COVID-19 outbreak on 30th December 2019. Four days later, he was accused of “making false comments” and that he had “severely disturbed the social order” (BBC News, 2020). Anything that disrupted or damaged the social order as perceived by the CCP is punished. His death sparked immense outrage across China.

The more insidious form of negative freedom that gets violated today is done by the private sector. Shoshona Zuboff diagnoses this new economic order as surveillance capitalism that is defined as “ A new economic order that claims human experience as free raw material for hidden commercial practices of extraction, prediction, and sales ” (Zuboff “Age of Surveillance Capitalism” 8). Simply put, it profits from catering buffets of our intimate secrets, vulnerabilities, and behaviours for businesses to know us better, to know what to sell us, and when to do so. Surveillance capitalists sell certainty. They are not just assaulting our attention, but even aiming to manipulate and modify our behaviour. Ergo, it’s not simply our right to privacy that is violated, but even and especially our right to autonomy and agency.

While these technology companies know us inside out, we don’t know an ounce of what they know or collect about us. This creates, what Zuboff calls, an epistemic inequality wherein one’s fundamental epistemic rights to learn about what is learnt about one’s own life don’t exist. Only if we knew this was under attack, we’d act on it. For instance, a right to breathe doesn’t exist because breathing hasn’t been denied yet and thereby, doesn’t need to be a law (Zuboff “Caveat Usor” 177).

But how does this occur? Surely, we would have noticed this and put a stop to this. However, surveillance capitalists have succeeded in their models by confirming to their consumers that they are the center of the universe, making them conform, and always claim that these platforms operate on individual freedom. Facebook was perceived and portrayed as the innocent app that “connected” friends and acquaintances online. Moreover, people have no real alternatives to these services, and they aren’t aware of the extent of its operations and their implications (Zuboff “Caveat Usor” 209). And most of all, the truth is boring. In that way, these private entities, supposedly championing themselves as representatives of the free markets that democratise information flows, actually exist only for their own freedom to operate and dominate us. George Orwell’s words echo: “Freedom is slavery”.

However, the real genius of surveillance capitalism isn’t in violating our negative freedoms. It’s in making us believe we violate our positive freedoms – rather making arguments like we ourselves violate our right to privacy.

We now see a reality that is chosen for us, transforming us into Trumans while these companies run the show, create our universe, and derive profits from our failure to even comprehend – let alone question – what’s behind the dark screen. In Margaret Atwood’s novel, The Handmaid’s Tale, Offred’s character says that “Nothing changes instantaneously: in a gradually heating bathtub you'd be boiled to death before you knew it.” This creates the unfortunate yet inevitable social amnesia of not knowing how one arrived here. Surveillance capitalism is actually well underway in propagating not just the utopia of certainty – but an ideology of certainty in itself. Moreover, as Offred’s character in The Handmaid’s Tale poignantly captured: “Knowing was a temptation. What you don’t know won’t tempt you.” In this way, we are fed an illusion of understanding more than we actually do.

In a commencement speech in 2005, David Foster Wallace made a case that education is “. . everything to do with simple awareness; awareness of what is so real and essential, so hidden in plain sight all around us, all the time, that we have to keep reminding ourselves over and over. .” (Wallace, 2005) of reality. I believe, not just education, but real freedom as well as awareness. It’s the awareness of who benefits from different ideologies. It’s the awareness of all the ideologies that are presented to us so that we don’t lose every display of individualism, every doubt, and all irony.

Works Cited

Atwood, Margaret “The Handmaid’s Tale” 1985
Dostoyevsky, Fyodor “The Brothers Karamazov” 1880
Biddle, Sam “In court, Facebook blames users for destroying their own right to privacy” The Intercept 2019 https://theintercept.com/2019/06/14/facebook-privacy-policy-court/
Butler, Judith “Hannah Arendt’s challenge to Adolf Eichmann” The Guardian 2011 https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2011/aug/29/hannah-arendt-adolf-eichmann-banality-of-evil
Kasmirli, Maria “Tools for thinking: Isaiah Berlin’s two concepts of freedom” Aeon 2019 https://aeon.co/ideas/tools-for-thinking-isaiah-berlins-two-concepts-of-freedom
Matthews, Dylan “36 years ago today, one man saved us from world-ending nuclear war” Vox https://www.vox.com/2018/9/26/17905796/nuclear-war-1983-stanislav-petrov-soviet-union
News “Li Wenliang: Coronavirus kills Chinese whistleblower doctor” BBC 2020 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-china-51403795
OpenLearn “Two concepts of freedom” Open University Accessed on 29 May 2021 https://www.open.edu/openlearn/ocw/mod/oucontent/view.php?printable=1&id=1747
Stephens, Alexander H. “Modern History Sourcebook: Alexander H. Stephens (1812-1883): Cornerstone Address, March 21, 1861” Fordham University https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/1861stephens.asp
Wallace, David “This is Water: By David Foster Wallace” FS 2005 https://fs.blog/2012/04/david-foster-wallace-this-is-water/
Zuboff, Shoshana“Caveat Usor: Surveillance Capitalism as Epistemic Inequality” SSRN 2021 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3809169
Zuboff, Shoshana “The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future At The New Frontier of Power” 2019

Saishreya Sriram is a Research Assistant at the Department of Computer Science at Ashoka University. She is a Young India Fellow ‘21 whose interests lie at the intersection of liberal arts, and tech — especially digital humanities and new media.

Queer ID 2

Fri, 29 Apr 2022 04:12:47 GMT

Kittiwake

tech culture society

Access to Existence

More often than not we think about what accesibility means. In this article I challenge the idea of access in broader sense for queer people both on and offline.

By Andrés Cortés

April 28, 2022

Welcome to another edition of Queer ID, this time we’re going to explore access that has been given to marginalised communities.

So the story goes, since the dawn of time humans have invented divisions to be able to live in communities and societies, some philosophers even argue private property is the beginning of the demise of humankind also known as the noble savage myth. These divisions have evolved over time, sometimes being as radical as segregation and sometimes as superficial as what we now call microaggressions. You know all those ‘’jokes’’ your co-worker tells about how a marginalized group is different in some way others aren’t, perpetuating a certain view of society in a very subtle manner.

In these divisions we have invented, the group we refer to as white people invented categories to divide men, races, colours, earnings, sexual orientation, character, social status and so on… Each being a distinct box where you needed to have certain requirements to get in, both literally for physical spaces, and metaphorically for constructed ideas. For instance, if you were born to Spanish parents in 1600 Latin America, you were considered as superior to indigenous people, and you were entitled and granted access to land, position of power and titles. In present times, segregation has much more insidious yet dangerous ways of separating humans, one is sexual orientation and how it’s portrayed and perceived.

Dissident identities have existed throughout history with different levels of acceptance, the muxes in Mexico for example have always been a third gender option for people and have always been accepted. Nowadays, LGBTQ people still fight to gain access to some sections of society, as the way we present to society is often challenging. Therefore, dissident and specially queer identities have had to make a choice, either express themselves and fall into categories such as: queen, butch, masc among many other or closet themselves and hide behind fake appearances of pretending otherness. Losing in this process the ability to live an authentic life, being segregated from places of empowerment and development because difference is marginalised and punished. Making some areas of society unattainable because of arbitrary boundaries drawn by things such as your clothes. Making access and holding certain places in society hard, in addition to making living authentically almost impossible because existing outside those boundaries feels forbidden.

Whether it is women deciding to wear pants instead of skirts, or men deciding to kiss in the street regardless of fear of punishment by the authorities, access to existence has been denied many times. Today, I invite you to think of which ways you have access other people don’t have. Maybe you have access to family secrets no one else has, maybe you can wear a ponytail where you work and it’s not a big deal. Maybe you can kiss your partner in the streets and not feel in danger, maybe you feel unsafe walking alone at night regardless of where you live. Maybe you have never gone to bed without a meal because the fridge has always been there, or maybe you have never heard a slur thrown at you that has shaken you to your core.

I want you to think, especially in this time, of all the places you can create access to people in need. When can you step up for someone when another is taking advantage of the disability of a friend. When by being the first person doing it, create a safe space for people behind you to do it. How by stating your pronouns online you’re helping bridge the gap for trans people, or how coming out as straight might take some pressure from your queer peers to disclose their sexual preference.

I challenge you to fight fear and those unwritten rules and become, even if it is for a little while, a dissident of the social rules, on and offline.

I'm Andrés Cortés,Colombian, 24 years old, curious and hardworking. Professional translator, artivist and polyglot. Among my interests are etymology, linguistics and every day ethics. How can philosophic knowledge can be applied on an everyday basis. Apart from Kittiwake I also manage the artistic collective La Mesa and teach corporal theater to Colombian companies. I am fluent in Spanish, English, French and Italian and can communicate in German, Portuguese and Catalan.

Artificial Intelligence Transforming our Societal Structure - The Rise Useless Class

Fri, 22 Apr 2022 16:42:44 GMT

Kittiwake

tech culture society

Artificial Intelligence Transforming our Societal Structure - The Rise Useless Class

Yuval Noah Harari argues that when artificial intelligence pushes many out of work, we must forge new economic, social, educational systems. Those people who will become unemployed will create a “useless class” which will need to be redirected, as opposed to the remaining “working class” which will be entrusted with the operating of the machinery. The article provides few ideas on how to prepare for the rise of the “useless class.” Looking at the consequences of the AI revolution, possible solutions that will change our societal structure are discussed.

By Sofia Ghezzi

April 22, 2022

I ntroduction

Harari argues that when artificial intelligence will push many out of work, in order to deal with that part of the community, which could risk being marginalised, we must forge new economic, social, and educational systems. With the rise of Artificial Intelligence (hereinafter “AI”) and the use of algorithms, it is inevitable that computerised devices will be invented to perform working functions in the form of hardware or software-based routines that will consequently force a huge portion of the population out of work. Automation will inevitably substitute many jobs causing the rise of a new “ useless class ,” as it is called by Harari, transforming the current societal structure.

Who will be part of the useless class?

In the aftermath of the AI revolution, “ just as mass industrialization created the working class, the AI revolution will create a new unworking class .” The useless class, or “Homo Inutilis”, will be composed by those people working jobs that can easily be automated. In society, we will see a polarisation between two classes: i) a class that will remain as the only workforce in the society, who will take care of the functioning of the machines, and continue driving innovation, and ii) a useless class, that deprived of work, will not have any source of revenue. In this scenario, the military, tailors, factory workers will be substituted by machines; doctors will not be required anymore to perform surgeries or provide diagnosis as a machine will take their place, as well as robots will be able to find the best arguments to win a case instead of lawyers. By contrast, innovation, research, and creativity will arguably remain entrusted to humans. However, realistically we will have to deal with the portion of the society which will become unemployed, and possibly, unemployable.

The challenges of the useless class

Clearly, the useless class is a threat to the peace of the community for two main reasons: i) they will need a stream of revenue to survive, and ii) they will need a new purpose in life. The creation of the two classes will drive inequality even further and this would possibly give rise to malcontent and disorder within a community. Moreover, even with assured revenue streams provided by governments to the unemployed, the human psychology of this class needs to be considered. Can humans live happily without purpose in their life? How can we deal with the boredom of the useless class? According to Harari, “… nobody has any idea what kind of jobs or skills people will need in 30 years. Which means that we have absolutely no idea what to teach our children at school today ( Speech by Harari , 2020). He continues claiming that even if the AI revolution would create new job opportunities, those opportunities would be for high-skilled jobs and most of the unemployed mass departing from less-skilled jobs will not be able to make the transition. So, what to do with the newly established useless class, “which has no military or economic usefulness, and therefore no political power?” and what to do with the new socio-economic bias created by the AI revolution?

Universal Basic Income Programs

A solution to the loss of revenue stream is to urge governments to implement Universal Basic Income programs. Social policy reforms are surely needed to deal with the changing society structure and to avoid excessive inequality. Universal Basic Income programs provide for the government to tax big corporations and the rich, and subsequently use the revenues collected for every adult in society. Every citizen in society would receive a certain amount of money during the year to sustain themselves. Proponents of basic income claim that it is the best way to combat poverty and inequality ( Samuel , 2020).

Along these lines, Paul Mason , a British commentator, proposes the transition of society towards a new form of socialism (Post-Capitalism, 2015). Mason believes that in the face of the issues of the digital age, the reality is that capitalism cannot continue forever: the State must do more to tame private finance, and individuals must do more to bypass it. Several countries, such as Finland between 2017 and 2018, have been starting to toy with the idea of introducing a basic income; and so far, the evidence suggests that the programs introduced increased happiness, health, school attendance, trust in social institutions, and reduced crimes ( Samuel , 2020).

Societal revolution

Nonetheless, loss of revenue stream for the unemployed class is not the only problem which the AI revolution will bring. We will also need to deal with the boredom of the useless class including mental health implications. New socio-economic systems need to be created; we need to redirect or altogether forge new economic, social, and educational systems that will permit us to deal with the issue. A complete reform of the educational system seems obvious, although it is not as obvious what should be taught. According to Murky Waters there will be no need to teach any more data to our children, but we will need to focus on liberating their creativity.

Conclusion

With the rise of the AI revolution and the imminent challenges that will be experienced by the useless class, new ethical principles, laws, social and labour market reforms will be needed ( Van Duüren , 2020). As the useless class will have virtually no political power, as economically and military useless, should the values in the society be recalibrated? Can character and creativity become more important than knowledge for the success of a person? One thing that seems clear is that we need to brace ourselves for this transition, help each other, and be open-minded in light of future societal changes.

References & Links

Speech by Harari, J. N. (2020). Workplace automation & the ‘Useless Class. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OMDlfNWM1fA .
Harari, J. N. (2017). Reboot for the AI Revolution. 550 Nature 324-327.
Harari, J. N. (2017). The rise of the useless class. Ideas TED. Available at: https://ideas.ted.com/the-rise-of-the-useless-class/ .
Samuel, S. (2020). Everywhere basic income has been tried in one map. VOX. Available at: https://www.vox.com/future-perfect/2020/2/19/21112570/universal-basic-income-ubi-map .
Runciman, D. (2015). Post capitalism by Paul Mason review: a worthy successor of Marx? The Guardian. Available at: https://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/aug/15/post-capitalism-by-paul-mason-review-worthy-successor-to-marx .
Murkey Waters (2020). Yuval Noah Harari’s “Useless Class”. Available at: https://murkywater.medium.com/yuval-noah-hararis-useless-class-1207bf9c457e .
Van Duüren, O. (2020). The birth of the Homo Inutilis: the useless class, the unemployed, and the unemployable. Available at: https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/birth-homo-inutilis-useless-class-unemployed-olivier-van-du%C3%BCren/ .

Sofia Ghezzi holds a LLB in European Law from Maastricht University, and a LLM in European Competition Law and Regulation from the University of Amsterdam. She worked as an intern in the team of Integrity & Compliance at AkzoNobel in Amsterdam, and she is currently pursuing a master’s degree in Climate Change Law at Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam. Sofia is passionate about the intersection of law, technology, and culture, and the underlying influences of society in law. She is fluent in Italian, English, and can communicate in French.

NFTs: what they are and how they are transforming the art world?

Tue, 12 Apr 2022 19:27:58 GMT

Kittiwake

tech culture society

NFTs: what they are and how they are transforming the art world?

For the first time, during the lockdowns, people were forced to rely only on their digital identities . During the pandemic that impeded our daily lives, technology innovation found itself to advance to a speed never witnessed before and to adapt to the new urgency of people. From this stream of innovation in the digital world, a new phenomenon emerged: NFTs. In a few months, NFTs conquered creators, art collectors, and investors from all over the world.

By Nathalie Aqualti Bonisoli

12 april , 2022

What is an NFT?

“NFT” stands for “Non-Fungible Token” and it can be thought of as the certificate of ownership of a digital asset. Non-fungible means that it maintains a specific economic and social identity that does not consent to any modifications and cannot be replaced with something else. Interestingly, they are different from bitcoins, which are fungibles and can therefore be traded one for another ending up with the exact same thing. One example of non-fungible assets are paintings such as the Mona Lisa, which is deemed non-fungible as it is one of a kind: people can take pictures or buy replicas and prints, but there will only ever be one original Mona Lisa. However, digital files can be easily and endlessly duplicated, the NFT serves for this purpose to create a digital certificate of ownership that can be bought and sold.

NFTs are tied to unique codes, and they can be bought and sold through cryptocurrencies on special portals. These digital objects can constitute real economic and cultural properties. Every token is considered unique, even though its content can be copied, screenshotted, and downloaded. For example, the “Nyan Cat'' meme has been shared thousands of times, however, its creator sold it as NFT for almost 600.000 dollars. NFTs are acquired and sold through cryptocurrencies on platforms such as SuperRare and OpenSea . NFTs rely on blockchain technology which guarantees that these certificates are safe and traceable. Blockchain is a public database that produces a certificate in open-source, safe and decentralized. It’s the same system that operates cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin and Ethereum.

The first NFT transaction that started its popularity in the media can be traced back to February 2021, when Canadian artist Grimes sold some digital art pieces under the form of NFT for 6 million dollars in less than twenty minutes. A few days later, the CEO and co-founder of Twitter, Jack Dorsey, auctioned the first Tweet published on the platform for 3 million dollars . It has to be noted that, even though the NFT phenomenon became a trend only recently, the first time they appeared was in 2017 when Cryptokitties , an online game, was developed. In this game it was possible to buy, collect and take care of virtual kitties. Every kitten is an NFT, unique and of property of the buyer who acquired it through the game with cryptocurrencies.

Digital Fashion & NFT

NFTs comprise a wide range of products, from art pieces, videos, memes, and haute couture. As a matter of fact, NFTs, after having revolutionized the art world, are conquering also the fashion world, with the digitalization of clothes and accessories and the creation of marketplaces and platforms dedicated exclusively to the virtual world (reference to Suzanne’s article).

One of the first brands that have a digital representation of its brand is Gucci, in particular, the art piece “Gucci Ghost” NFT product created by artist Trevor Andrew. Another mention in this context, is the collaboration between Dolce & Gabbana and UNXD and their hybrid fashion line constituted by IRL and NFT, “Collezione Genesi” , launched in August 2021.

Collections and elite society: an evolution of fine art collecting

In a world of couture fashion and limited edition products, NFTs can constitute the latest trend that represents a certain economic and social status comparable to collection items sold by Sotheby’s or Christie’s. In fact, Beeple sold an NFT for 69 million dollars during an auction at Christie’s. According to the auction house, this sale positions him among the three most valuable living artists. The fact that a prestigious auction house which sold some of the most famous paintings in history, is arguably legitimizing NFT technology as a form of art is crucial in adding hype for potential art collectors.

Sustainability

This new phenomenon, also gives rise to issues, which include sustainability. NFTs use the same blockchain technology as some energy-hungry cryptocurrencies and they end up using a lot of electricity and generating a lot of greenhouse gas emissions. The rising concern about the impact of NFTs and Bitcoin technology on the environment lead representatives of the industry to find solutions which could help to move forward into a greener future.

Conclusion

NFTs entail a wide concept as they can be anything that is digital, but it is currently mostly used to sell art. As an artist, NFTs can be interesting, as they give you a way to sell work that otherwise would not have a proper market. As a buyer, you will financially support artists you like, and have access to some basic usage rights, like being able to post the image online or set it as your profile picture. But mainly, you will gain bragging rights that you own the art, with a blockchain entry to back it up. NFTs are still perceived as controversial by the public, with a large portion considering that the NFTs phenomenon is a bubble that does “make no sense” .

Sources

My name is Nathalie Alquati Bonisoli, I am twenty-two years old, and I am currently completing my Master of Laws degree in European Competition Law and Regulation at the University of Amsterdam. As an undergraduate, I studied European Law at Maastricht University, where I graduated with the Business Law specialization. During my bachelor I also participated in the Erasmus program in London where I studied English law at the Westminster University. I recently interned in a legal firm in Cremona (Italy) specialized in civil and criminal law. I am fluent in Italian and English and can communicate in Dutch, French and Chinese.

Queer ID

Mon, 28 Mar 2022 15:40:48 GMT

Kittiwake

tech culture society

Queer ID

Welcome, here we will explore what does it mean to be LBGTQ+ online in the 21st century. May you be yourself, authentic, awesome and Queer!

By Andrés Cortés

October 18, 2021

In the last 10 years or so, the LBGTQ+ community has developed a lot in the Digital Cosmos. In fact, live or face to face encounters tended to be intimidating at the very least if not dangerous and life-threatening. Some countries forbid people of the same sex expressing any kind of affections like holding hands or kissing one another. I call these identities dissident or alternative identities which question the status quo and are un-erasable.

Dissidence in public spaces is viewed as an anomaly, as a mistake that many take into their own hands to “correct”. These methods often disregard basic decency, human rights and legal procedures in pro of “curing”, eliminating what’s “wrong” in order to restore the person to the social group that rejects them. It comes as no surprise that people belonging to these so called dissident or alternative identities, take refuge in behind-the-screen interactions. After all, other than strong language and slurs, their physical integrity is safe, although the psychological damage can also be huge. Forbes magazine accounts to 350 murders of people belonging to the Trans and Gender-queer community in 2020. Being Queer more than a political dissidence is frequently a death-defying act.

This problem is worthy of further research and this is the reason I will be exploring this aspects, such as: how toxic masculinity affects gay dating apps? How does Patriarchy portray feminine as inferior and pejorative? And how does it affects human interaction, both on and offline? What does it mean to be queer in the 21st century?

In this column series, I will share a light in all the themes that to my opinion require a deeper understanding and discussion. Welcome to Queer ID hopefully together we can map what does it mean to be queer in the 21st century.

I'm Andrés Cortés, Colombian, 24 years old, curious and hardworking. Professional translator, artivist and polyglot. Among my interests are etymology, linguistics and  every day ethics. How can philosophic knowledge can be applied on an everyday basis. Apart from Kittiwake I also manage the artistic collective La Mesa and teach corporal theater to Colombian companies. I am fluent in Spanish, English, French and Italian and can communicate in German, Portuguese and Catalan.

Digital Fashion

Mon, 28 Mar 2022 15:38:57 GMT

Kittiwake

tech culture society

On Trend and Online - The case for Digital Fashion

The relationship between fashion and social media has become undeniably intertwined. From brand presence to content creation, social media has enormous potential to influence shoppers and fashionistas worldwide. As fast fashion continues to be a trend, an alternative has emerged: digital fashion has landed.

By Suzanne Flynn

October, 2021

What is digital fashion ?

Digital fashion is described as the application of digital technology in its many forms for the production and consumption of fashion apparel and services. (1)This means that when an item of digital clothing is bought, it isn’t in the form of a tangible product. A customer cannot try the item on, nor can they feel the product or alter it. This is because the article of clothing is a virtual product. For consumers, “wearing” digital clothes is similar to how filters on Snapchat and Instagram work. Customers upload a picture of themselves and the digital item of clothing is edited on, with the end product hopefully showing an outfit that doesn’t look like a bad photoshop attempt. In addition, there are no size constraints, as a garment doesn’t have to be made to order - only digitally created and photoshopped onto the model.(2) The result is “insta-worthy” outfits that don't require the manufacturing process and supply chain thread that regular clothes do. But who does this appeal to and what is the cultural context of the market for digital fashion?

Culture and Fashion - An interdependent relationship

Pop culture cannot be discussed in 2021 without mentioning social media. In the fashion world, Instagram and Pinterest are the most influential platforms for fashion brands to advertise and create. Vogue’s Instagram account boasts 34 million followers, fashion brands such as Ralph Lauren and Tommy Hilfiger hold over 12 million followers each. Brands such as Pretty Little Thing, Boohoo and The North Face have Influencer ambassadors who receive free items of clothing in exchange for promotion on social media accounts and commission on clothes purchased under an affiliate link. Some of pop culture’s biggest icons of all time are known for their style even though their profession may have been unrelated, such as Madonna and David Beckham. This exemplifies how important fashion is in culture, regardless of the influence of social media. When someone dresses in a striking way, the world watches. In terms of digital fashion, social media platforms have opened up a new market, which makes the concept of non-physical clothing so appealing.

DressX is an example of a digital e-commerce outlet, founded by Daria Shapovalova, Natalia Modenova, and Julie Krasnienko . The company has over 1000 items from 80+ designers. Dress X’s website launched in July 2020, which, despite the global pandemic, had a positive impact on trade for the start-up. (7) Shapalova also remarked in an interview with L’Officiel that after 15 years in the traditional fashion industry, including the organisation of the Mercedes Benz Fashion Week in Kyiv Ukraine in 2009, she wanted to contribute to a more sustainable, affordable, and digital future. (7) DressX’s business model can be summarised by looking at their slogan “Steal the show on your social media '' and “Don't shop less, shop digital fashion”.

Sustainability - Combating Fast Fashion

The environmental effects of the fast fashion industry have been hotly debated. The fashion industry is one of the most polluting industries globally, contributing more to climate change than the annual emissions of air travel and sea travel combined. (4) In addition, culturally, the “wear it once” (5) mentality means that people will wear an outfit once and never again - mainly because a picture of the outfit has already been posted on their social media platforms and repetitious content is considered undesirable. This leads to waste rather than recycling and re-wearing of clothes. Shapovalova of DressX (3) states that the creation of a digital piece of clothing generates 97% less CO2 emissions than the product of a physical garment.

Digital fashion provides an alternative for those who are inclined to wear an outfit once on a social media platform and never again. Rather than buying an outfit and contributing to the fast fashion craze, a digital wardrobe may offer a more eco-friendly alternative, although it is not a product that will appeal to most. The cheapest item on DressX currently is just under €18 for a t-shirt, while the most expensive costs over €1,100 for a “Tech couture” one piece suit. (6) There are two questions to be considered in relation to the workability of the digital fashion business model. Firstly, how willing consumers will be to pay for an item that is not physical and exists only as a digital commodity. Secondly, how the price range of digital fashion pieces will compete with websites such as “everythingfivepounds.com” and other low prices offered on Pretty Little Thing and similar retail outlets. It is submitted that it is unlikely the guise of eco-friendly digital fashion items will catch on for this reason within that age group, but this does not mean that digital fashion is not an option for the wider global market.

Conclusion

The fact social media has perpetrated an online environment which encourages the exposition of outfits and fashion from arguably unethical retailers, is telling of what we value in our culture today. Keeping up with appearances is a main component of social media culture, but the after-effects of this on the environment and e-commerce are worth considering. Shapovalova is confident that in 5-10 years time, every major retailer will have a digital fashion collection available to consumers. (3) This means that we could see a lot of consumers, who are usually fast fashion inclined, turning to digital fashion for a more eco-friendly way of expressing their style. Whether this will pan out in reality depends on whether the digital fashion trend will truly catch on and challenge public perception of the true meaning of fashion.

References

https://www.speetrads.com/digital-fashion-the-advantages-of-3d-simulation/ Access October 20th
https://youtu.be/qVfJheBp7Ys Access October 1st
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKBePuTOB6U Access 14th of October
https://www.elle.com/uk/fashion/a28166986/digital-fashion-dressing-virtually/ Access 20th of October
https://www.refinery29.com/en-gb/instagram-outfits-wear-once Access 28th of October
https://dressx.com Access 1st of October

( https://www.lofficiel.cy/fashion/dressx-new-fashion-reality ) Access November 2nd

Suzanne Flynn is an LLM Candidate in Law and Technology in Europe at Utrecht University. She graduated with a joint honours degree in Law and German from Trinity College Dublin in 2020. Suzanne is researching for Kittiwake with the Institute and is fluent in English and German.

Music and Artificial Intelligence

Mon, 14 Mar 2022 15:55:05 GMT

Kittiwake

tech culture society

Music and Artificial Intelligence

How do computers and Artificial Intelligence challenge artists and musicians methods of composing new music? What are the consequences of this?

By Eugenia Borgonovo

October 8, 2021

Picture Credit: Supreme Laser Tag Birthday Party

Humans feed thousands of songs to artificial intelligence. By use of neural networks, namely mathematical models that mimic biological neural networks, and machine learning, specifically deep learning, these songs are fragmented and studied. Deep learning is a subcategory of Machine Learning that is also able to infer meanings without human supervision. The machine is able to extract the basic information and recognize patterns that can be used to create original works, similar to those that any artist might compose.

How do music and artificial intelligence work?

The first fear among artists and composers is that their work might be replaced by a machine. The second fear concerns music itself and the music industry, challenged by the fact that machines are now able to create music more and more similar to that created by humans. The first to move in this direction was Alan Turing when in 1951 he created a machine the size of a room that could emit three simple melodies. In the 1990s, several musicians experimented with computers: Brian Eno and David Bowie for pop music and David Cope for classical music. The latter created Emi , a program that allows new music to be written in the style of Bach. Then there is Aiva , created by two engineers from Luxembourg, which allows creating original compositions along the lines of the greatest composers of classical music.

What are the instruments available today?

There have been several advances in artificial intelligence devices and software applied to music. One example is LyricJam , a real-time system that uses artificial intelligence to generate text lines for live instrumental music and was created by members of the Natural Language Processing Lab at the University of Waterloo, Canada. To date, the work has led to the creation of a system that learns artists' musical expressions and generates lyrics in their style. Other experiments in this field include Amper , an open-source programme that allows anyone, even non-professionals, to create music by indicating parameters such as genre, mood, and tempo.

Similarly, Sony created the Flow Machines system that led in 2016 to the release of Daddy's Car , a track openly based on Beatles songs. This system is capable of analysing the composer's primary idea and assisting them by generating ideas during the virtual composition. The basic idea is not to automate the creative process of the human mind but to combine it with an algorithm that can suggest melodies and chords according to the genre.

Another great invention is Jukedeck , now owned by Tik Tok. This AI platform works very easily: in order for it to create a new piece, the user just selects the desired composition genre (folk, rock, electronic, ambient), the mood (upbeat or melancholic), the tempo (beats per minute) and sets the desired duration. After a few seconds, artificial intelligence elaborates and processes and then provides a preview to be downloaded. Jukedeck solves the copyright problem and each user can create new personalised music. Basically, users can pay as little as $0.99 for a royalty-free license, which is a very democratic price compared to the ones that the market is offering now.

One last AI instrument that is worth mentioning is Lo-Fi Player , a tool created by Google’s Magenta. Lo-Fi Player is a virtual room where fans can create and mix lo-fi and hip-hop tracks for free. It works by changing the objects in the room. For example, by changing the view out of the window, you can change your background sound (be it rain, a beach, or the chaos of the city) and if you change the animal you change the beats per minute (BPM). Also, there are instruments such as bass, piano, synthesizer, or guitars to change the background sound. Despite these advances, no one has yet created a machine capable of writing chart-topping songs.

Most musicians use artificial intelligence to achieve what they could not do on their own. An example of this is Yacht, an American pop group that has used AI to break out of their comfort zone and try to create something new from their previous discography. The result is their new album “ Chain Tripping ”. The album was released in 2019 and contains 10 songs, among which (Downtown) Dancing is the mos popular one.

Not only AI is used to produce music, but it is also used to produce virtual artists. Famous digital artists such as the pop star Hatsune Miku or the band Gorillaz are very popular today, but they have a human apparatus behind them that is responsible for their music. A few months ago, the artist Ask Koosha designed and created a 3D band of characters with different personalities who produce their own music. However, the creator claims that 'human creativity will always be substantially different from that of machines because we have a different biological nature, needs and intentions.’

So what is the challenge now?

The challenge will be to evolve in two parallel directions: on the one hand, human artists need to be stylistically unique and exceptionally competent, and on the other, they should understand how to use these new tools to enhance their creativity and explore new frontiers. Perhaps the future role of the human artist will be to focus on emotions, leaving the execution work to machines. But the answer to these questions is not obvious.

References and useful Links

Scippa, G. (2020). Intelligenza artificiale per creare musica, il punto di vista degli artisti. Lifegate. Available at https://www.lifegate.it/intelligenza-artificiale-musica

Dannenberg, R.B. (2018). Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, and Music Understanding. School of Computer Science and College of Art Carnegie Mellon University. Available at https://web.archive.org/web/20180823141845/https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/f275/4c359d7ef052ab5997d71dc3e9443404565a.pd f

Santin, F. (2020). Nasce Lo-Fi Player, lo strumento di Google per creare musica chill, lo-fi con pochi click. Everyeye.it Available at: https://tech.everyeye.it/notizie/volete-mixare-musica-chill-lo-fi-questo-strumento-google-caso-vostro-466910.html n )

Eugenia Borgonovo holds a bachelor’s diploma in Economics and Management for Arts, Culture and Communication from Bocconi University and is currently attending a master’s in management at ESCP Business School. Eugenia is researching for Kittiwake institute.

Emojis and Digital Communication

Wed, 09 Mar 2022 21:39:16 GMT

Kittiwake

tech culture society

Emojis and Digital Communication

Digital communication has changed rapidly since the onset of the digital age but emojis have only gone from strength to strength since their inception in the late 1990s. This article will cover the impact emojis have had on language and culture. It will conclude with a comparison of hieroglyphics and emojis and what this development tells us about in culture and language in the digital age.

By Suzanne Flynn

June 5, 2021

Introduction - Emojis and Culture

The �� goes �� in �� and it's ��️ in ��.. If you can understand this sentence, you might be fluent in the world's fastest growing language (1). Emojis have become commonplace in our communication over text and social media in particular. It is arguably an unsurprising development given the universal nature of the emoticons, which have spawned merchandise and memes, resulting in a simplified form of pictorial communication. The first emojis were created by Japanese artist Shigetaka Kurita in 1999. These rigid gameboy-esque symbols would become the blueprints for the nearly 3,000 emojis that exist today.

Double meaning in emojis

According to the documentary “The Emoji Story”(2) released in 2019, emojis are often associated with positive use, with the most popular emoji being the “face with tears of joy” ��. What this indicates emotionally and linguistically is significant. Is it the case that if someone is expressing negative sentiment that they feel an emoji desensitises or devalues their human emotions? Are words better equipped than emojis to convey sadness, rage, jealousy and so on? It could certainly be argued that if someone sends the “angry face” emoji �� , this is not taken as seriously as someone typing “I am angry with you”. Societal interpretation of what emojis mean also intersects with emojis and culture. While most people can agree that the smiley face emoji invokes positive connotations, there are some emojis which carry double meanings. The most obvious examples being the association of the eggplant/aubergine emoji with male genitalia and the nail painting emoji carrying the implicit meaning of “sass, fanciness, nonchalance, or self-confidence across a variety of digital contexts.” according to dictionary.com.(3)

Status as a language

Se technologiesThe aforementioned quote regarding emojis as the world's fastest growing language may not hold firm in the eyes of linguists. Verbs cannot be conjugated, adjectives are difficult to convey and it is nearly impossible to come up with a full sentence using only emojis, as I illustrated in my introductory statement above. In addition to these concerns, there has been doubt expressed as to the permanence of emojis as a tool for communication in the digital age (4). If their status as a language fails, one could argue that they are certainly aids that can be used to break down language barriers, as emojis are universal symbols which the majority of the population will understand almost immediately. Much of what makes up a culture revolves around language. Ireland for example retains its native language “Gaeilge” on all national road signs, public transport infrastructure and official state documentation, and is still considered an integral part of Irish culture, despite the fact English is the primary language spoken by the majority of citizens. Many cultures also hold their language and often dialects as a particularly proud element of their identity, so where do emojis fit into our culture? In addition to our nationality, our friends and family and how we communicate in our social groups, do emojis belong to our digital culture and identity?

Unicode - Emoji approval process

In considering the meaning and interpretation of emojis in culture, Unicode plays an essential role. Bringing the human element back to digital communication is at the forefront of Unicode's work. The organisation serves as the “World Standard for Text and Emoji “with the aim of modifying text to create a “universal code” which all users, whether they operate on Apple or A ndroid software, are looking at the same content when data transmission occurs.

Unicode also oversees the approval of new emojis. The aforementioned documentary “The Emoji Story” looked particularly at the approval process surrounding submissions for argentinian mate, headscarf ��(5) and period emojis. All of these submissions were ultimately successful, having met the criteria to produce an emoji that was globally relevant, but these submissions are exceptional. The emoji creation process takes around 2 years according to the new chair of Unicode Jennifer Daniel (6). A particularly positive development in the emoji vocabulary in the last 5 years was the introduction of female emojis. The fact that it did take until 2016 for the female option to be included despite the fact that women are heavier emoji users than men (1) could arguably say a lot about our culture and how the lack of representative emojis speaks volumes about how women are perceived in particular.

Regression from words to pictures - High Speech to Hieroglyphics?

In regard to whether emojis can be considered as elevating modern language and communication, we have to look at an average conversation online. Much of today's conversations online consist of pictures and even text speak which rose in popularity in the early 2000s and still remains a common element of a lot of people’s communication today, with acronyms such as LOL, BTW and TTYL (7) still very much in use. When we look at ancient Egypt for example, one of the most advanced societies of its time, hieroglyphics were the main form of language and can be described as similar to emojis in their aesthetic. Will we regress back to pure hieroglyphic-like communication, purely through symbol and picture, or are we seeing something more akin to the Book of Kells? The ancient writings originating from 800 AD intriguingly depict intricate drawings in the middle of sentences throughout the transcription of the New Testament, not dissimilar to how emojis are used today. What is interesting to consider is to contrast the fact that emojis are generated by just one tap on a phone screen or keyboard, while hieroglyphics require hours of transcribing. In the modern world when there is an emphasis on speed, progression, user friendly interfaces, it is interesting to consider the appeal of emojis. What better way to communicate than just by sending a small byte sized picture of exactly what we want to say?

References and Links

Caroline Criado-Perez (2019), Invisible Women: Exposing Data Bias in a World Designed for Men, Vintage Publishing
< https://www.theemojistory.com/ >
< https://www.dictionary.com/e/emoji/nail-polish-emoji > access 20.38pm 22nd of June
https://this.deakin.edu.au/society/is-emoji-the-language-of-the-future#:~:text=Emoji%20breaks%20down%20language%20barriers,regardless%20of%20their%20native%20tongue . Access 17.56 June 29th 2021
https://www.wbur.org/hereandnow/2021/01/14/the-emoji-story-hijab Access June 29th
https://www.technologyreview.com/2021/05/11/1024802/jennifer-daniel-unicode-the-woman-who-will-decide-emoji/ Access 18.11 June 29th 2021
Acronym (colloquial) Talk to You Later

Suzanne Flynn graduated with a joint honours degree in Law and German from Trinity College Dublin in 2020. She is currently working in the insurance sector but will be pursuing an LLM in Law and Technology at Utrecht University in September 2021. Suzanne is researching for Kittiwake with the Institute.

Rules are necessary: Data Feminism and its seven principles

Wed, 09 Mar 2022 21:38:59 GMT

Kittiwake

tech culture society

Rules are necessary: Data Feminism and its seven principles

In my previous articles, I mentioned the concepts of Big Data and Data Feminism and the importance of these concepts. In this article, I will try to explain the principles of Data Feminism by presenting my own perspective under the lead of the Data Feminism book .

By Sibel Dinç

July, 2021

A look at the seven principles of Data Feminism

The seven principles were put forward by D'Ignazio and Klein, authors of Data Feminism. Each item should be considered in order to ensure the equal visibility and application of the concept of feminism and mainly labour in the digital environment. As it is known, the concept of feminism is more than just a simple struggle for equality between men and women. Feminism is an umbrella phenomenon used for all disadvantaged groups except the powerful men of male-dominated societies.

The phenomenon of inequality that we encounter in our daily lives has been transferred to the digital environment, technological devices and software alongside with our entry into the digital age. This necessitates the examination, research and production of solutions in the digital field of feminism.

The seven principles identified are “Examine Power, Challenge Power, Elevate Emotion & Embodiment, Rethink Binaries & Hierarchies, Embrace Pluralism, Consider Context and Make Labour Visible”. Let's take a closer look at these items and try to raise awareness.

What is the purpose of the principles?

SpeakinData science deals with issues of interest in terms of quantity. However, in order to understand the root causes of the issues, the sides outside the quantitative framework should also be considered. In other words, it is a big mistake to consider data science only as number science. Each observation that can be described as a number -it can be a living thing or an inanimate object sometimes- (it) has qualitative outputs as well as quantitative outputs. At this point, the qualitative aspects of the data obtained should be handled with certain concepts.

In terms of Data Feminism, the seven principles determined were created to ensure that each subject examined is handled correctly in terms of data science. Let's take a closer look at the principles:

1 - Examine Power

It is argued by D'Ignazio and Klein that the purpose of studying power is not only to study power but also to dominate it. Knowledge is power and the field of data science allows to contain and analyse existing knowledge. At this point, examining the power will enable us to learn who has the power and whether it is manipulated, that is, to learn the current situation and to take an appropriate step.

2 - Challenge Power

When we look at the world order, the existence of disadvantaged groups at all times protects the interests of those who hold power. Here, the authors emphasize the importance of examining the struggle with power as a second principle, and therefore the struggle with the phenomenon of inequality, in the data set.

3 - Elevate Emotion & Embodiment

Scientists accept that the objective studies are reliable. Because they assume that there is not any emotional opinion in objective studies. But every single study in data science involves much more than a simple quantitative figure. In order to increase the impact and awareness of the studies carried out, it should be shown that there is more than just a number or a set of figures. For example , it is necessary to look at how a visualization example, in which the emotion phenomenon mentioned by the authors, changes their perspective on the event. The authors mention that two different visualization techniques and the effect of the news can create differences in an armed attack in a school in the USA in 2012.

From the perspective of feminism, we still have not been able to overcome some prejudices, no matter how much we object. One of them is that the phenomenon of emotion is associated with the female gender. And as it is known, where there is prejudice, the excluded group or groups are ignored. This situation prevents these groups from obtaining equal rights alongside the powerful and at the same time being represented to the required extent.

The perception among scientists that addressing emotions discredits studies is common, but human beings are emotional beings and events always have an emotional side. This emotionality should be accepted to the extent that it does not affect the objective point of view. The fact that emotionality is included in studies does not mean that the study is biased and lacks reliability. With the third principle of “Elevate Emotion and Embodiment”, the authors point out that the lack of emotion in data science studies and the devaluation of emotion is a deficiency.

4 - Rethink Binaries & Hierarchies

The most basic action for the representation of a group, namely its visibility, is to be counted and processed, that is, to participate in statistics. However, it is seen that stereotyped binary systems are still used in some cases in the field of data science and “other” segments are excluded. In fact, this both affects the representation and questions the accuracy of the data obtained. From the point of view of gender, although we use binary coding as a biological gender, it is necessary to include the concepts of sexual orientation, gender identity and sexual expression, depending on the suitability of the study. It should be taken into account how the person defines himself/herself, how he/she feels and how he/she wants to be represented. It may be right to do this without committing to an option for it. Facebook's step in this direction can be given as an example.

The fourth principle emphasizes the importance of classification and that hierarchical structures should be reconsidered in data science studies. As mentioned by the authors, “While classification and hierarchy are powerful methods of enumeration, they are also smart weapons used to dominate, discipline and exclude certain groups”.

On the other hand, I think that although classification is important for data science, it actually creates a labelling and thus supports discrimination between certain groups (gender, race, religion, language, etc.). However, I know that there is no clear step to be taken at this point, at least at the moment. Classification is the scaling technique underlying categorization science and data science. Classification is still used as the most basic statistical method to understand the current situation. Providing more options for accurate representation or obtaining open-ended responses from observations that received responses for the study will yield more accurate results, at least until other methods are found.

5 - Embrace Pluralism

The fifth principle refers to the necessity of pluralism. From the point of view of statistics, the selected sample should represent the population well so that the population can be understood. For representation, each group should be given equal weight in the sample. In fact, this principle is a generalization of basic statistical methods. By embracing pluralism, ignorance of any group is prevented, and real results are obtained for the research of interest.

6 - Consider Context

In the sixth principle presented by the authors, it is said that data feminism is biased and contains subjective judgments. It is claimed that the main reason for this is due to unequal social relations. It is mentioned that instead of seeing data sets as a structure consisting of numbers only, we should look at our research question and the context of our field of study as a "mine". However, as it manifests itself in all principles, it is known that knowledge is in the hands of the dominant group or groups and can be shaped as desired. As the authors point out, data cannot speak for itself. For this reason, it is important to understand their contents well.

Another handicap is the open data concept, which makes the use of datasets accessible to everyone. This concept adopts the free presentation of data to the public without certain restrictions (copyright, patent, etc.). Although providing information freely and free of charge is a positive step, if it is not processed in the right hands, the outputs will be extremely biased and misleading. Open data can also mean a data set that is easy to manipulate. However, from another point of view, sharing the data sets with the public without any restrictions can also create a collective trend for social consciousness, awareness and solution stages for the solution of some events. The striking examples of sexual assault cases presented by the authors also demonstrate that the concept of open data provides a serious impetus for faster handling, analysis and presentation of data sets. In other words, presenting the data in an open way is still an extremely controversial issue for now.

7 - Make Labour Visible

Making the work visible is the last item of data feminism principles. In this regard, discrimination based on gender is also present in the digital environment. According to a study conducted through the GitHub site in 2016, it is seen that the gender-based acceptance of the contributions published on the site for code development differs. It has been determined that the acceptability of the female workforce in this field is at a low level compared to the male workforce. Apart from that, a similar example applies to technology companies . Although they have demographic content that includes discrimination in terms of race and gender, the efforts of the excluded group in the field of data science are undeniable.

What have the studies taught us? And what can be done?

D'Ignazio and Klein's book Data Feminism addresses the seven principles of data feminism and the necessities of these principles with the help of examples. The common theme that all the principles of this book, which raises awareness about the studies in this field, are addressed, is the power imbalance and its reflections in data science. This does not only cover gender-based discrimination. There is also racial discrimination.

At this point, the first thing to be done is to raise awareness to the public on this issue, as is done now. While the principles of data feminism contribute to this awareness; the application of these principles to the works will be effective in creating more accurate strategies, thus using time, effort and money at an economic level, recognizing hidden labour and minimizing power imbalances.

Let's think together! What other studies can be done to raise awareness in this area?

The Digital Transformation of Public Administration

Wed, 16 Feb 2022 20:07:42 GMT

ABOUT

Today, governments are increasingly committed to digitizing public services and their administration, with the aim of making administrative procedures simpler and more accessible. Overall, this digital transformation of public administration can have consequences going beyond a simple modernization of the state, transforming the traditional models of governance, by being an instrument of open government. Indeed, the digital transformation of administrations can enable states to evolve towards a more horizontal model of governance relying on transparency and openness of public data, as well as promoting collaboration with civil society in the design of public policies. We aim at addressing the digitization of public action, for example by evoking the design of public services, the co-creation process with citizens, the use of artificial intelligence in administration, but also the challenges linked to the dematerialization of public services.

SPEAKERS

Christian Djeffal is Assistant Professor for Law, Science and Technology at the Technical University of Munich. At the TUM School of Social Sciences and Technology, he researches and lectures on the relationship between law and technology, focusing on new technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) and the internet of things (IoT).

Gerhard Hammerschmid is Professor of Public Management and Director of the Centre for Digital Governance at the Hertie School in Berlin. His research focuses on public management reform, comparative public administration, public sector innovation and government digitalization. Gerhard Hammerschmid has more than 20 years of experience in communicating research findings to high level government officials and policy makers and has been contributing to several cross-European research projects and expertises.

Luísa Franco Machado is a researcher studying the responsible use of digital technologies in the public sector and investigating ways to overcome AI bias and achieve data justice in public administrations. She holds a Bachelor's degree in Political Science and Latin American Studies from Sciences Po Paris and a Master's degree in Digital, New Technology and Public Policy from the same institution. She is currently pursuing a Master of Public Administration at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). She has previously worked at the OECD.AI, the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA), the Institute for Internet and the Just Society and she is currently a fellow at EuroDIG.

Massimo Pellegrino is a Partner at Intellera Consulting where he works on projects related to the digitization of the public sector. He was Partner at PwC for the Digital Strategy & Innovation Practice. In the PwC network, he also held the role of Global Data & Analytics Leader for the Industrial Products market. Prior to joining PwC, Massimo was the Global Vice President of Hewlett-Packard's Enterprise Information Services Business Unit. He has gained significant experience in international IT Strategy, Artificial Intelligence, Machine Learning, Cloud Computing, Internet of Things and Open Innovation projects. Massimo has a degree in Political Science and a Masters in Business Administration from CUOA Business School.

MODERATORS

Maximilian Richter is an Associate at PUBLIC where he helps GovTech startups transform the public sector. Prior to joining PUBLIC, he interned at PD-Berater der öffentlichen Hand GmbH, Global Berlin Advisors, the German Parliament and the German Embassy in London. He holds a Bachelor's in Politics and Economics from Bamberg University and a Master's in Digital, New Technology and Public Policy from Sciences Po.

Sonia Sangiovanni is a young professional, specialized in Technology and Public Affairs. During her Master’s in International Security at Sciences Po, she studied the social and political impacts of big data and AI. Her Master Thesis focused on the digitalisation and privatisation of Intelligence services in the UK and investigated companies such as Cambridge Analytica, Black Cube and Hakluyt. After her graduation, Sonia started her career by working as consultant for the French Public Sector.

LIVESTREAM

Challenges and Opportunities of AI in Outer Space

Sun, 16 Jan 2022 17:41:29 GMT

SPACE POLICY

Challenges and Opportunities of AI in Outer Space

How AI is enabling new frontiers in Mars exploration.

Linda Jaeck

January 16, 2022

Stephen Hawking once said, that AI will either be the best thing that's ever happened to us, or it will be the worst thing (Hawking, 2017). It is undeniable that the impact of Artificial Intelligence (AI) on the future of technologies has become a topic of high relevance already - also in space. Its extensive development makes AI even more attractive to researchers as its potential provides a variety of opportunities for the space realm.

This article lays out the current challenges and opportunities in Mars exploration and foreshadows what the applications of AI in the space sector could potentially entail. In the past 60 years, AI has become increasingly important in computer science, enabling machines to autonomously perform tasks with simple human intelligence input (Anastassov, 2021). Since then, the term ‘Artificial Intelligence’ has gone through a variety of different interpretations being related to several activities and technologies (Boulanin et al., 2020). It is a highly convergent “general-purpose technology that does not stand alone but enhances or adds functionality” (Verbruggen, 2020, p. 12) when integrated into systems.

Those systems are mostly taught by humans, writing in a set of codes or, in the case of machine learning (ML), are fed into the algorithm and adjusts itself over time (European Space Agency, 2021). Within ML, the specialized deep learning (DL) technique uses multi-layered artificial neutral networks to learn by itself and is often used in spacecraft (ibid.). Especially in Mars exploration, where humans are exposed to extreme conditions, AI is considered an appropriate supplementary tool to perform tasks humans wouldn’t be able to perform.

Recent history of AI and Mars exploration

With the beginning of the 21st century, AI has made a steady progress in Mars exploration, becoming increasingly institutionalized (Liu et al., 2018). The successful implementation of new and innovative tools was long overdue as the space sector had to deal with economic restrictions and increasing criticism, despite all its outstanding achievements (Krichevsky, 2018).

In the following, the author demonstrates the challenges and opportunities AI poses to robotic and human exploration of Mars by means of selected examples. The first ever case of AI being used in space exploration is the Deep Space 1 probe, a technology demonstrator conducting the comet Borrelly and the asteroid 9969 Braille in 1998. The algorithm used during the mission was called Remote Agent (Havelund et al. 2001) and diagnosed failures on-board (Williams & Braddock, 2019). In a similar vein, AI has successfully been used in space rover system software to enhance the communication between the rover and Earth during missions in outer space (Soroka & Kurkova, 2019).

Looking more precisely at the functioning of AI and machine learning, scholars argue that both enable quick decision-making and help satellites to manage these systems without external help from humans. Through the implementation of AI systems these cognitive technologies can enable communication networks to both work more sustainably and efficiently (Soroka & Kurkova, 2019). For instance, the signal between a Mars rover and Earth takes up to 24 minutes to pass during a Mars exploration. To shorten this period, engineers are increasingly taking advantage of space robots, which make decisions autonomously when it comes to collecting and analyzing data and deciding which information should be send back to Earth.

In the case of an autonomous system called Curiosity rover, which NASA sent to Mars in 2016 in order to explore the Gail crater, the AEGIS (Autonomous Exploration for Gathering Increased Science) system was used (Good, 2017). By helping to zap dozens of laser targets on the Red Planet, it inherently changed how Mars is studied. AEGIS was also used as part of the ‘Mars 2020’ mission for autonomous target selection, identifying geological targets in images from the rover’s navigation camera and choosing targets for itself without the permission of Earth (Francis et al, 2017; Good, 2020). This led to a favorable time reduction during the mission as both parties, the robot and Earth did not have to wait for mutual actions.

Challenges and opportunities for Intelligent Autonomy in Mars exploration

Robotic systems have proven to be well suited for repeated tasks in harsh and hazardous environments (Campbell, 2010). Previous studies have shown that with AI, the level of automation can be increased far beyond operational automation in robotics facilitating the performance of Mars exploration (Williams & Braddock, 2019). One major issue, however, is the ability to implement AI reliably for complex tasks in software in space exploration.

This article offers a comparative overview of selected key achievements of AI and Mars exploration, examining the challenges and opportunities of AI in this context. As Campbell (2010) argues, the level of deep intelligence humans perform is difficult to emulate in software. The mismatch between perception has primarily been examined from a deterministic perspective, leading to reactive rather than intelligent behavior in robotics in aerospace. For instance, cooperative unmanned air vehicles (UAV) whose main task is to search and track objects of interests (Campell & Whitacre, 2007) tend to lose track of extreme-target then they move out of sight during missions. To solve this problem, systems like UAV require improved linkage between sensors, perception and planning (Thrun et al. 2005) while the first step should be converting data to information.

Solving connectivity issues of UAV’s is just one out of many challenges, space exploration faces. One great challenge which affects the success and failure of future deep and space exploration missions and Mars expeditions is On-Orbit construction (Biswal & Annavarapum 2021). Potentially volatile circumstances such as the effect of zero gravity on physical health or the exposure to solar flare and solar irradiance expose humans to extremely rough circumstances and therefore make on-orbit assembly challenging for humans. A solution would be AI robots for on-orbit construction to remedy the above challenges. Space entities like NASA or ESA are currently working to ready AI robots for on-orbit constructions in order to assure 100% secure assembly, thereby eliminating physical health problems or the exposure to solar irradiance (Rybus, 2018).

Another major challenge for voyaging astronauts is spaceship management (Biswal & Annavarapum 2021). Due to microgravity and special radiation environment, health issues may arise and could eventually peak in the inability to manage the spacecraft. AI-based automated robots could be the answer to this issue given their robust electronic structure and their potential to minimize [EM1] threats to health on long missions (Chien et al., 2006). AI may be especially useful for long-duration missions to Mars and other places beyond the Earth-Moon system involving a large-scale numbers of crew members, autonomous navigation and communication systems. (Daniela & Dario, 2007). The crew would stay inside the space capsules for many months, potentially kept in a state of artificial hibernation, while not being subject to higher level of radiation. According to NASA’s Glenn Research Center, a ‘cognitive radio’ could be used to transmit space data during the flight. This technology combines cognitive computing and machine learning while handling huge volumes of communication traffic.

Conclusion

As argued above, AI is already playing a key role in assisting with space exploration. Due to the increased length and complexity of future missions, improved handling of management and coordination tasks is required. Systems like AEGIS providing automated targeting essentially contribute to easing processes, as to explore the crater landscape of Mars. With applications ranging from decision-support to navigation in long-duration missions, AI can significantly support human capabilities, such as in on-orbit constructions and secure human health and well-being.

However, despite its potential in handling heavy volumes of sensitive data and contributing to complex tasks, AI should be considered as a means of assisting to missions, as it has not yet reached the desired point of technological maturity. Dynamic joint human-robotic operations will be one of the most arduous problems in Mars exploration. Nonetheless, the next step of digital revolution is just around the corner and AI will be a huge part of it. Critically checking reality and objectively working on interdisciplinary solutions on how to implement AI in the most ethical, solution-oriented way needs to be of uttermost importance in future research on AI in Mars exploration.

References

Anastassov, A. (2021). Artificial intelligence and its possible use in international nuclear security law. In: Humanities and Social Sciences, 8, 92-103. http://www.papersofbas.eu/images/Papers_2021-1/Anastassov.pdf
Biswal M, M. K., & Annavarapu, R. N. (2021). Human Mars Exploration and Expedition Challenges. In AIAA Scitech 2021 Forum (p. 0628).
Boulanin, V., Saalman, L., Topychkanov, P., Su, F. & Carlsson, M. P. (2020). Artifical Intelligence, Strategic Stability and Nuclear Risk. Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).
Campbell, M.E., and W.W. Whitacre (2007). Cooperative tracking using vision measurements on SeaScan UAVs. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology 15(4): 613–626.
Campbell, M. (2010). Intelligent Autonomy in Robotic Systems. Bridge , 40 (4), 27-34.
Chien, S., Doyle, R., Davies, A. G., Jonsson, A., & Lorenz, R. (2006). The future of AI in space. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 21(4), 64-69.
Daniela, G., Dario, I. (2007). Artificial intelligence for space applications, Intelligent Computing Everywhere , 235-253.
Francis, R., Estlin, T., Doran, G., Johnstone, S., Gaines, D., Verma, V., ... & Bornstein, B. (2017). AEGIS autonomous targeting for ChemCam on Mars Science Laboratory: Deployment and results of initial science team use. Science Robotics , 2 (7).
Havelund, K., Lowry, M., Penix, J. (2001). Formal analysis of a space craft controller using SPIN, IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 27, 749-765.
Krichevsky, S. (2018). Super Global Projects and Environmentally Friendly Technologies Used in Space Exploration: Realities and Prospects of the Space Age. Philosophy and Cosmology , Volume 20, 92-105. https://doi.org/10.29202/phil-cosm/20/8
Liu, J., Kong, X., Xia, F., Bai, X., Wang, L., Qing, Q., & Lee, I. (2018). Artificial intelligence in the 21st century. IEEE Access , 6 , 34403-34421.
Rybus, T. (2018). Obstacle avoidance in space robotics: Review of major challenges and proposed solutions. Progress in Aerospace Sciences, 101, 31-48.
Soroka, L., & Kurkova, K. (2019). Artificial intelligence and space technologies: legal, ethical and technological issues. Advanced Space Law , 3 (1), 131-139.
Thrun, S., W. Burgard, & Fox, D. (2005). Probabilistic Robotics. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.Wongpiromsarn, T., U. Topcu, & R.M. Murray (2009). Receding Horizon Temporal Logic Planning for Dynamical Systems. http://www.cds.caltech.edu/~utopcu/images/1/10/WTM-cdc0.pdf
Verbruggen, M. (2020). The extensive role of artificial intelligence in military transformation. In The Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Strategic Stability and Nuclear Risk: Volume III South Asian Perspectives (pp. 11-16). Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI).
Williams, M., & Braddock, M. (2019). AI case studies: potential for human health, space exploration and colonisation and a proposed superimposition of the kubler-ross change curve on the hype cycle. Stud Humana , 8 (1), 3-18.

Webpages

Hawking, S (November 6, 2017). Stephen Hawking says A.I. could be ‘worst event in the history of our civilization’ . Accessed: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/11/06/stephen-hawking-ai-could-be-worst-event-in-civilization.html
European Space Agency (March 3, 2021). Artificial Intelligence in space. Accessed: https://www.esa.int/Enabling_Support/Preparing_for_the_Future/Discovery_and_Preparation/Artificial_intelligence_in_space
Good, A. (June 21, 2017). Laser-targeting A.I. Yields More Mars Science . Accessed: https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/laser-targeting-ai-yields-more-mars-science

Linda is a graduate student in International Affairs at Hertie School of Governance where she specializes in security. She studied her undergraduate degree in communication with a focus on European foreign policy at the University of Vienna and KU Leuven. She has gained further experience with NGO’s in Austria, Czech Republic and Belgium and worked for the Vice-President of the European Parliament. Linda currently works as a program assistant at the Aspen Institute.

Transforming Public Action - eGovernment in France

Sun, 16 Jan 2022 12:53:11 GMT

DIGITAL GOVERNMENT

Transforming Public Action - eGovernment in France

An overview of the digital transformation of French public services.

Marine Dupuis

January 16, 2022

E-government or digital government refers to the use of new technology in administrations to achieve a better government by making public services more accessible and procedures simpler (OCDE, 2003). A pioneer state in this field is Estonia since its citizens can realize almost all of their administrative procedures online. In 2017, the former French Prime Minister Edouard Phillippe affirmed that "the Estonian reality is the French objective in terms of e-administration by 2022", and consequently launched a program to rethink the model of public action in France, called "Public Action 2022". A few months before the end of Emmanuel Macron's mandate, has France evolved and become a leading country in the field of digital administration? And heretofore, what were the pivotal moments in the French digital transformation?

Some insights on the development of France's e-administration

The stake of the modernization of the public service in France induces to disrupt the complex and rigid procedures in a country of bureaucratic tradition, to evolve towards a modernized and agile administration. The French strategy for the digital transformation of the state dates back to the early 2000s. Thus, one of the first upheavals in the field was the creation in 2000 of the service-public.fr website, allowing individuals to have online access to practical resources on the realization of their administrative procedures.

After this simple period of online information, a second step in the digital transformation of public services took place with a real process of dematerialization of essential administrative procedures, spurred on by three action plans in 1998, 2004, and 2008. Afterwards, in 2013, within the framework of the law "enabling the Government to simplify relations between the administration and the citizens", France adopted multiple measures to simplify administrative procedures. It was therefore particularly necessary since, in 2014, the Global Competitiveness Report of the World Economic Forum revealed that France was ranked 121st out of 144 countries in the world in terms of administrative burden.

Here, the notion of administrative simplification is central and constitutes the third point in the french digital transition of public services. Actually, the establishment of a digital administration is not limited to the simple transposition of the usual procedures in the online space but relies on the improvement of the citizen experience. The administration is indeed seeking to modernize itself for better efficiency, but the key point here is to reshape the relationship between citizens and the public service.

Furthermore, in 2014, a decree developed the " state as a platform" project , aiming to make the state an interface between administrations, where the digital interoperability of information systems in the administration is reinforced. This decree was of great importance since it induced the pooling of all infrastructures, networks, and software between the different administrations. Back in 2015, France passed a law "for a Digital Republic". This digital bill was a major breakthrough in the digital transformation of public services since it allowed easy access to administrative documents, but also initiated the open share of public data on the platform www.data.gouv.fr . The sharing of data held by the administrations was therefore made available to the public for better transparency of public action while giving the possibility to the French to enrich the available data.

The Macron mandate: a turning point for the modernization of public services?

In 2017, candidate Emmanuel Macron vowed to make the “French administration at the service of innovators'', and emphasized “I would like to be able to proceed very quickly to a profound change in the administration”. Became president, it is no wonder that the government chose to quickly embark on a major reform of the state. The " Public Action 2022 " program was therefore set up, the aim of which was to dematerialize by 2022 the 250 most used administrative procedures in France. To ensure the enforcement of the program, the French interministerial directorate for digital affairs ( DINUM ) was created, with a focus on the information systems of French administrations. The DINUM works jointly with the already existing DITP (Inter-ministerial Directorate for Public Transformation) on the three-layer objective of this program: improving the quality of public services for users, controlling public expenditure for tax-payers, and modernizing the status and working conditions in the public service for civil servants. We, therefore, see here a will for a multi-scalar transformation of the administration, taking into account all the stakeholders. So a few months before the deadline, what are the outcomes of the “Public Action 2022” program?

As of today, 212 of the 250 most common procedures in France such as the declaration of income, the payment of taxes and fines, the request for identity papers, the request for housing assistance, and access to the certificate of Covid-19 vaccination are fully available online. It is therefore clear that France has experienced a clear acceleration in its digital transformation in recent years, despite the pandemic. Thus, what could have represented a roadblock paradoxically reinforced the digital transformation of the state. In fact, as part of the " France Relance " economic recovery plan, aimed at reviving the French economy, following the economic crisis linked to the Covid-19 pandemic, an envelope of 1.7 billion euros, in support of the digital transformation of the state, was allocated.

France: a digital champion at the international scale?

But how can we determine whether these developments have enabled France to become a leader in the field of e-governance? One of the solutions is the #EDGI indicator, created by the UN to study the development strategies of digital administration in the world. EGDI is a composite index between 0 and 1 used to determine the performance of e-governments. It is calculated by the average of three indices, quantifying respectively: the use of NTIC's for public services, the degree of telecommunication connectivity in the country (internet access), and the human capacity of citizens (human capital).

Currently, France is ranked 19th and has lost 10 places compared to 2018; despite a high index of 0.87180. France remains ninth at the European level, behind countries like Denmark, Estonia, or Finland which are at the top of the ranking (both European and international). France's EGDI ranking had never been so low given that since 2008, the French state had always been in the world's top 10 for e-government. The index, therefore, shows that compared to other countries the deployment of e-government in France is becoming slower.

The digital divide in France: Those left behind in the digital transformation of the state

France’s EDGI index is indeed showing us that the maturity of the French e-government is not completely optimal, especially concerning connectivity and Internet access. And in fact, the digital transition of public services, despite its obvious benefits, has a major limit, since it can counterproductively constitute a breach of equality in access to the public service, by excluding people in difficulty with technology . First, more than 7.5 million people in France do not have quality access to the Internet connection, especially in the countryside and ultramarine territories. In addition, access to computer equipment is also a factor of discrimination in the realization of dematerialized procedures since 19% of French people do not have a computer at home. Finally, the dematerialization of procedures can also be a source of difficulties for people who are unable to use digital tools: a third of French people (18 million) consider themselves to be little or not competent to use a computer.

The digital transformation of the administration, therefore, comes up against problems of territorial, economic and cultural inequalities. As such, the example of France is interesting insofar as a large part of the social disputes is based on the bad relations between citizens and administration. Indeed, the lack of access to public services and their scarcity in the rural areas was one of the reasons which triggered the “ yellow vests '' movement, a protest movement that resulted in numerous demonstrations in 2018 and 2019. France, therefore, faces a paradox and is on a crest line where digital administration can offer great possibilities in terms of accessibility and access to rights for all, but at the same time carries a risk of exclusion for many citizens, who are isolated and not digital literate.

Digital administration: a move towards open democracy ?

This article aimed to paint a non-exhaustive picture of the process of digitization of French public services. Yet, the study of some of the milestones of the French public action reforms, and in particular the “Public Action 2022 program” reveals a will of decision-makers to embrace digital technology and its methods as a lever for modernizing the state. We have seen that the question of digitization increasingly reconfigures legislation and the state is showing initiative in the creation of new frameworks and tools for digital public administration. But this digitization is not limited only to a simplification of the daily life of French citizens but provokes a profound change in terms of governance, by being an instrument of open government . Indeed, the introduction of the digital in the public sphere contributes to redefining the doctrine of governance, towards a more horizontal model relying on the exigence of transparency and the openness of public data, as well as promoting collaboration with civil society in the design of public policies. Algan et al. (2010) summarize well the potentialities of this concept: “The way in which public services are produced must be rethought by encouraging the use of “agile” methods and experimentation within public services and by involving users in the co-production of these services through participative processes (…) to adapt the social contract between the citizens and the State to this new digital era. ".

In striving for digital leadership, France must therefore continue to encourage a citizen-oriented approach in the design of new public services; which would make it possible to overcome administrative rigidities and the traditional vertical aspect of the French administration, while taking better account of the needs of its citizens. The central issue is therefore to avoid a “forced march” transformation of public services, weakening the French people who are the most distant from digital.

References & Link

Government and official publications

Cour des comptes (French Court of Audit). (2015). Relations aux usagers et modernisation de l’État vers une généralisation des services publics numériques. https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/Portals/egovkb/Documents/un/2020-Survey/2020%20UN%20E-Government%20Survey%20(Full%20Report).pdf
Défenseur des Droits (French Defender of Rights). (2019a). Annual Activity Report 2018. https://www.defenseurdesdroits.fr/sites/default/files/atoms/files/raa18-eng-num-19.06.19_0.pdf
Défenseur des Droits (French Defender of Rights). (2019b). Dématérialisation et inégalités d’accès aux services publics. https://www.defenseurdesdroits.fr/sites/default/files/atoms/files/rapport-demat-num-21.12.18.pdf
French Government. (2014). Simplifying French people’s relations with the authorities. Gouvernement.Fr. https://www.gouvernement.fr/en/simplifying-french-people-s-relations-with-the-authorities
French Government. (2015). Openness of public data | Gouvernement.fr. https://www.gouvernement.fr/en/openness-of-public-data
French Government. (2016). The Digital Bill. Gouvernement.Fr. https://www.gouvernement.fr/en/the-digital-bill
French Government. (2021). Public Action 2022: for transformation of public service. Gouvernement.fr. https://www.gouvernement.fr/en/public-action-2022-for-transformation-of-public-services
L’observatoire de la qualité des démarches en ligne. (n.d.). Observatoire – L’observatoire de la qualité des démarches en ligne. https://observatoire.numerique.gouv.fr/observatoire/
Vie-publique.fr. (2019a). E-administration: Du PAGSI au programme Action publique 2022. Vie publique.fr. https://www.vie-publique.fr/eclairage/18925-e-administration-du-pagsi-au-programme-action-publique-2022
Vie-publique.fr. (2019b). E-administration: Quelle politique pour les exclus du numérique ? Vie publique.fr. https://www.vie-publique.fr/eclairage/18930-dematerialisation-quelle-politique-pour-les-exclus-du-numerique
Vie-publique.fr. (2021). Transformation numérique de l’action publique: Les risques de la dématérialisation pour les usagers. Vie publique.fr. https://www.vie-publique.fr/parole-dexpert/278016-risques-de-la-dematerialisation-pour-les-usagers-des-services-publics

International reports

OECD e-government Studies : The e-government imperative. (2003). OECD http://pavroz.ru/files/egovimperetive.pdf
Digital Public Administration Factsheet 2020 France. (2020). European Union. https://joinup.ec.europa.eu/sites/default/files/inline-files/Digital_Public_Administration_Factsheets_France_vFINAL.pdf
UNITED NATIONS E-GOVERNMENT SURVEY 2020: Digitial government in the decade of action for sustainable development. (2020). United Nations. https://publicadministration.un.org/egovkb/Portals/egovkb/Documents/un/2020-Survey/2020%20UN%20E-Government%20Survey%20(Full%20Report).pdf

Reports

Babinet, G. (2020). Enjeux numériques des territoires: Le citoyen-utilisateur au centre des réflexions. Institut Montaigne. https://www.institutmontaigne.org/blog/enjeux-numeriques-des-territoires-le-citoyen-utilisateur-au-centre-des-reflexions
Babinet, G. (2020). The French Government on Digital—Mid-Term Evaluation. Institut Montaigne. https://www.institutmontaigne.org/en/blog/french-government-digital-mid-term-evaluation
Borc, M. (2021). La France et le développement de l’e-gouvernement—Artimon. https://artimon.fr/. https://artimon.fr/perspectives/la-france-et-le-developpement-de-le-gouvernement/

Journal articles

Algan, Y., Bechache-Beauvalet, M., & Perro, A. (2016). Digital administration. Notes Du Conseil d’analyse Économique, 34. https://www.cairn-int.info/article-E_NCAE_034_0001--digital-administration.htm
[19] Beuve, J., Cristofini, O., & Gimenez, J. (2021). La transformation digitale du secteur public Atteindre les promesses et éviter les désillusions. Chaire EFPP, 6. https://www.chaire-eppp.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/02/Policy-Papers-6-La-transformation-digitale-du-secteur-public.pdf
Boughzala, I., Assar, S., & Isckia, T. (2011). Étude exploratoire sur les perspectives d’évolution de l’e-gouvernement à l’ère de l’innovation ouverte et du Web 2.0. AIMS,20 . https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-02414253
Roux, L. (2010). L’administration électronique: Un vecteur de qualité de service pour les usagers?.Informations Sociales, 158. https://www.cairn.info/revue-informations-sociales-2010-2-page-20.htm

Online press articles

Fondation Ifrap. (2019). Une fonction publique plus flexible sera-t-elle bientôt réalité? LEFIGARO. https://www.lefigaro.fr/conjoncture/2019/03/13/20002-20190313ARTFIG00001-une-fonction-publique-plus-flexible-sera-t-elle-bientot-realite.php
France is aiming to reach Estonian e-governance level by 2022. (2017). E-Estonia. https://e-estonia.com/france-is-getting-to-estonian-e-administration-level-by-2022/
Hirigoyen, S. (2020). Transformation digitale des services publics: enjeux et état des lieux. https://www.digitall-conseil.fr/transformation-digitale-des-services-publics-enjeux-et-etat-des-lieux/
O’Brien, C. (2019). What France’s efforts to transform government can teach other late digital starters. VentureBeat. https://venturebeat.com/2019/11/14/what-frances-efforts-to-transform-government-can-teach-other-late-digital-starters/
Pommier, A.-H. (2021). Le gouvernement dévoile les avancées de son plan de numérisation des services publics. LEFIGARO. https://www.lefigaro.fr/conjoncture/amelie-de-montchalin-satisfaite-de-la-numerisation-des-demarches-administratives-20210905

Marine Dupuis is a third year student, completing her Bachelor Degree in Social Sciences in Sciences Po Paris. She is majoring in Political Humanities and minoring in International Relations. She is spending her third year abroad, in the University of Tartu, Estonia. She realized several internships in Paris in the field of public relations and is currently a research assistant for a French sociologist, Dominique Cardon, specialiazed in big data.She is fluent in French and English, can communicate in German, and is currently learning Russian.

Why a Small Town in Upstate NY Banned Cryptocurrencies

Fri, 22 Oct 2021 14:10:05 GMT

CRYPTO EMISSIONS

Why a Small Town in Upstate NY Banned Cryptocurrencies

Cryptocurrencies have captured the world by storm with some touting its success as “ magic internet money ” and others criticizing it as a “ bubble waiting to burst ”. One thing is for sure: crypto can have a significant impact on the environment, and the small town of Massena, NY, home to the world’s largest crypto data center , has been caught in the crossfires going so far as to ban them temporarily.

By Jeremy Zimmerman

October 22, 2021

Gary Stevens

Crypto Background

But before we discuss how a sleepy town in upstate New York became at the center of the latest disputes over crypto, it’s important to understand how it works and how we got here. Modern cryptocurrencies can be traced back to the 1990’s but it was BitCoin in 2009 that revolutionized the field with its blockchain technology. BitCoin’s use of blockchain shifted away from a centralized banking system and instead became peer-to-peer verified. This new type of peer-to-peer verification is secure and is only possible because blockchain uses a Proof of Work consensus to verify the transactions legitimacy. As a result, the work is done one each individual’s machine or server spread out all over the world instead of at some central server which can be monitored or controlled by a central authority.

All of this technical jargon can certainly be intimidating, but it is important to understand that crypto transfers the power from centralized banks to individuals. This transfer of power is why crypto currencies are sometimes seen as great equalizers as theoretically anyone in the world can take part despite their nationality, sex, location, criminal history, etc so long as they have a server.

At first glance, it appears to be a wonderful way to give power back to the people but quickly it can become a huge problem for local communities. See, when BitCoin started it was relatively easy to verify transactions or “mine” BitCoin but as time has gone on and the value has skyrocketed the amount of work to verify a meaningful amount of bitcoin has also skyrocketed . And just as the “cloud” has a physical footprint left on the environment, so too do these “crypto mines” and it's a rather significant one.

Crypto’s Carbon Footprint

Research done at Cambridge highlights the impact of cryptocurrencies on the global environment. Bitcoin alone, uses more power than the entire countries of Finland and Belgium and uses more electricity than all of the lights in the United States. While these stats highlight the significance of crypto’s impact it is important to highlight that on a global scale they still pale in comparison to power giants like China and the United States . Crypto’s threat isn't, at this point, a global environmental issue but rather a local one which can greatly alter a local community. These localized effects are serious because crypto mining tends to group in similar areas with cheap electricity, and small Massena in upstate New York with ample amounts of cheap hydroelectricity became a new hive for crypto miners.

Why Massena?

With a population of only 12,000 residents, Massena faces significant threats from an inondation of crypto miners. This threat is highlighted by pre-existing economic disparities in the region with a poverty rate more than double the national average and a higher unemployment rate. The town is also home to a significant Mohawk (Kanienʼkeháka) minority who have historically been impoverished and discriminated against in the region. These two factors together make Messina an area prone to threats of environmental injustice and exploitation. The most evident being threats to Massena’s cheap electricity rates which would significantly increase the average family’s household budget aggravating poverty in the region.

But these servers do more than just use electricity, they have a physical impact on the environment. Oftentimes these servers are stored in shipping containers which have popped up across the town plighting the land both aesthetically and destroying the natural environment and lands held sacred by the native Kanienʼkeháka . Furthermore, once the “mine dries up” and electricity prices become too high these servers are often left as e-waste for the local community to deal with, leaving Massena with a destroyed environment and inflated electricity costs with minimal economic benefit. As a result, Massena has temporarily banned cryptocurrencies while it attempts to find a way to regulate them.

Massena is not alone in this issue, with nearby Plattsburgh, NY doing a similar ban and regulation in 2018 creating a patchwork of cryptocurrency regulations across towns in upstate NY and other areas with cheap electricity as attempts to create a statewide ban failed. While this patchwork can help these local communities in the short term, it does little to alleviate the underlying pollution that comes from crypto. And since crypto has no centralized oversight, it is flexible and can, and has, moved from town to town in order to find the cheapest rates and the friendliest regulations. Until there is some comprehensive regulation over the environmental degradation from cryptocurrencies, towns will continue to be taken advantage of by eager crypto capitalists.

Closing Remarks

The need for regulation of cryptocurrencies demonstrates a fundamental problem with a decentralized currency which is based upon the notion of peer-to-peer verification vis-à-vis environmental protection. The cryptocurrency issue highlights why environmental regulation is still so essential and falls under a greater umbrella of the need for broader regulation of the digital space. While the independence of the internet is an essential part of its beauty, regulation and oversight are essential to protect the people who are unintentionally caught in the environmental fallout.

Jeremy Zimmerman has recently finished a dual degree program between Sciences Po Paris and Columbia University. At Columbia he studied Sustainable Development and focused especially on environmental justice and policy. Recently he has worked for the Center of Resilient Cities and Landscapes focusing on mapping the impacts of last-mile deliveries from Amazon, UPS, and other e-commerce centers in Brooklyn. He is passionate about keeping the internet a fair place and believes it can be used as a vehicle to help better justice, equality, and the environment. He is fluent in English, French, and American Sign Language and in his free times loves playing video games and going on hikes.

Consuming Deepfakes with Awareness

Fri, 22 Oct 2021 13:58:37 GMT

DIGITAL LITERACY

Consuming Deepfakes with Awareness

To stop the spreading of deepfakes, we would need to shut down the internet, which is not really a viable solution.

By Tuuli Säynätkari

October 22, 2021

We no longer need to poke around the dark corners of the internet to come across deepfakes, instead they are constantly taking space in new areas. To stop the spreading of deepfakes, we would need to shut down the internet, which is not really a viable solution. Therefore, we need to keep our eyes open, and when seeing is no longer believing, our minds need to be ever so alert.

This article argues that we can protect ourselves from the ill-intended actors using deepfakes by improving our media literacy skills and increasing our awareness regarding deepfakes. The aim is to increase awareness of the many arenas in which deepfakes are present, and to remind that deepfakes continuously extend their presence in yet-unknown fields.

The Evolution of Deepfakes

The first deepfakes emerged in face-swap porn videos of celebrities. Within less than five years from their first appearance, deepfake technology has been used for politics , helping ALS patients , creating multilingual information campaigns , and disseminating mis- and disinformation . Each new way of employing deepfakes brings new concerns and questions.

Even if deepfake porn amounts to over 90% of deepfake content online, we should not ignore the other areas in which deepfakes are present. The moment deepfakes enter a new area and our focus is elsewhere, it can disturb the way we construe truth and facts online by simply ignoring the possibilities of deepfakes’ presence in a given area. One of the latest additions to the series is deepfake satellite images . If we are not aware of the possibilities of deepfake technology altering those images , we might not challenge the content as much compared to had we known that deepfakes are present in that field as well. For example, some actors might choose to downplay the damages of terrorist attacks or natural disasters for their own benefit by using synthetic geographical pictures.

What has been done and what can be done

Since we cannot shut down the internet, we need to come up with other solutions. Several different initiatives for deepfake detection have emerged during the past couple of years.[1] In addition to companies taking upon the task to develop tools for identifying the nature of digital content, states have also started to push forward laws to prohibit non-consensual pornographic deepfakes and political deepfakes during electoral campaigns . Regardless of the corporations’ and states’ actions, there is no global legal coverage or consensus of a singular detection method, nor are there any generally accepted authentication means for online content. Hence, I urge that we rely on ourselves. It is not to say that the legal, detection, or authentication methods would be useless, rather that without global agreement of the means to do so, we cannot rely on isolated ways to perform these procedures.

While we are waiting for initiatives to gain broader support, we need to program our minds to function as filters. It is no new information that fake news has a presence on online platforms, and our information literacy skills can help to spot these fakes. I propose that by being alerted and aware of the possibilities of deepfakes existing everywhere, we can consume content more carefully.

This is not to say that we should implement an automatic imaginary fake-label for every single post we come across online. If we were to do so, I strongly believe that this would diminish the reach of truth and authentic content; by automatically denying everything, the truth would need to work double as hard to be credible in the viewer’s eyes. And if everything would automatically be considered as fake, many ill-intended individuals could enjoy this protection and be less concerned of the consequences of their actions, simply by relying on the public to automatically deny the truthfulness of any content.

Conclusion

My goal is not to paint a horror picture of deepfakes being only used in a malicious way. Deepfakes have positive uses as well, and medicine and entertainment branches are one of those who can lead the way towards a more positive discussion of the use of deepfakes. When the use is seen as positive and/or beneficial, it is more likely that these industries will openly disclose the use of deepfake technology. When the ones using deepfake technology choose to disclose the information in a clear enough manner, the individuals no longer bear the full burden of taking upon the task of identifying the reliability of the content.

But currently we cannot hide from deepfakes, and we still lack consensus on how to tackle them. The best tool we currently have is awareness, and by choosing to have a blindfold on, we give space for the ill-intended actors to exploit the digital content consumers. By acknowledging that deepfakes can be everywhere - and keeping this in mind when consuming digital content - the ill-intended actors are worse off. While we can wait for broader educational initiatives to implement media literacy to schools across the globe, there are plenty of tips available online on how our own media literacy skills can be improved.

Tuuli Säynätkari is a King's College London Master's graduate from Intellectual Property and Information Technology Law studies. Tuuli has obtained her bachelor degrees in law from The Hague, Netherlands, and in national economics and political sciences from Stockholm, Sweden. During her studies, she did an exchange in Beijing, China, getting to know the Chinese legal and political system. Most recently, she been working for few years in an operative HR team at CGI. Tuuli is a native Finnish speaker, and is fluent in English and Swedish. Tuuli enjoys reading, sailing, and discussing about deepfakes.

Competition Law and Promoting Frugal Innovation in India

Fri, 22 Oct 2021 13:48:35 GMT

BETTER WITH LESS

Competition law and promoting frugal innovation in India

The super wicked nature of the current pandemic needs a multipronged strategy to tackle intricately related issues like recession, inequality, and climate change in a holistic manner. In this context, rebooting the Indian economy based on “frugal innovation” in which social entrepreneurs constantly work on the idea of cheaper, user-friendly transformations that cater to social needs is the path forward.

By Devanshu Jha & Nidhi Singh

October 22, 2021

‘Frugal Innovation’ can be defined as the mechanism through which we bring down the cost and complexity of a good and its production processes. So, the essence of frugal innovation is based on a less resource intensive approach and providing higher value to a bigger group of people at lower cost. For rebuilding the economy, we need to promote frugal innovation so that we can guide our attention towards creating better social, ecological and economic values simultaneously along with reforming the efficient use of resources.

In the present VUCA (Volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity) times, we need a transformation in the way businesses; institutions and common masses think to tackle the pervading challenges in the Indian ecosystem. Scholars like Navi Radjou have insisted on creating mechanisms for building circular value networks, simplification of organization structures, crowdsourcing solutions and developing citizen centric innovation networks in emerging economies like India to promote frugal innovation. India can be a cradle for frugal innovation in terms of need and opportunity. It's not surprising that circular economy and value networks have been a part and parcel of traditional lifestyle. Further building innovation networks can be very beneficial as a quantum of opportunities are available.

For instance, only 30 % of wastewater is recycled in India. This is because “frugal innovation (jugaad)” has been regarded as an important social value in India since ages. The unique selling proposition of the Indian workforce lies in the presence of skilled workers, artisans and craftsmen in rural areas. This talent can be used further in recycling, repackaging , establishing a new customer base and serving at the bottom of the pyramid of society. As per Hofstede model India tends to move towards collectivization of society. This makes the art of collective intelligence like “crowdsourcing” easier in Indian society. These factors can be very important while promoting India as the leading market in frugal innovation with the advantage of cost (across different professions and industry), high demand and skilled professionals.

In present circumstances when demand, consumer sentiments and capacity utilization (63%) are low, people are trying to save more in emerging economies including India. The pressure on households, government and company budgets has been increasing.There has been a rise of total tax burden on households to 75 % from 60% in 2011. Further retail inflation at 6.3% in May (high fuel and food prices) present tough challenges and demand side issues in the economy. As per FICCI report, more than 80% of the companies have cash flow issues and more than half are having operational issues. Dunn & Bradstreet has stated that about 80% of the small business had a negative impact like less finance (34%), market access (42%) and productivity (37%) in the Covid era. So, organizations have to “think big with few resources'' through B2B platform sharing and new regeneration methods. One of the biggest challenges is tackling the institutional voids as institutions are failing to provide the basic support to business operations.

Further, with a mission to promote social equality and reduce ecological degradation we need to prevent monopolies, economies of scale through mass production (for pollution control and resource optimization), and zero sum business games. This will require a quantum leap towards disrupting the multi company business model and rejuvenating the entire entrepreneurship and skills-based business ecosystem in India. In this era of rentier capitalism, undesirable monopolistic trends have been evolving in the economy in the last few years. For example the telecom sector has become a near duopoly while other players are going bankrupt. Further important sectors like aviation infrastructure have also developed monopolistic trends with six airports going to one group in 2019 auctions. We must realize that greasing the wheels of the Indian economy through frugality also requires social sustainability as the need of the hour. Frugal innovation is the best means to serve the bottom of the pyramid population in India by providing them affordable goods and promoting a sense of self-dignity.

These efforts shall require encouraging small business and creating a level playing field for all the firms. Thus, the role of Competition policy of the government becomes pivotal in ensuring greater consumer welfare and promoting competition at the lowest level of the economy. The Competition policy encourages even the small traders to adopt such practices that promote competition and does not cause appreciable adverse effect on competition in the market. By adopting such methods, the consumer gets access to competitive prices and better quality of products. What frugal innovation does is achieve “continuous process industries”, which keeps on evolving with time in terms of scale and scope. It helps improve innovation, offers the consumer with more choices and as a result enhances economic growth. However, it is imperative that the innovators should be allowed to reap benefits of their innovation but not at the cost of unfair monopolistic pricing leading to abuse of dominant position. The government needs to strike a balance between not discouraging the new players entering the market such that they are able to recover their R&D costs and also promoting equitable competition at the same time.

The Indian Competition Act, 2002 seeks to prohibit anti-competitive agreements and abuse of dominant position under section 3 and 4 respectively. The objective is to regulate such unwarranted restriction in production and supply of goods that curbs unhealthy competition in the market. It also prevents companies and large corporations from engaging in such practices that may hinder effective competition. The purpose is to punish those kinds of business conduct that undermines innovation and harms consumers. For example: Several Indian enterprises in the past have been found to be indulging in such unfair trade practices like price-fixing, cartelisation, tying & bundling, resale price maintenance, predatory pricing and abuse of dominant position that has the effect of foreclosing competition in the market. The enforcement under these sections have become all the more challenging with the increasing dominance in online platform markets.

The Chairperson of Competition Commision of India has recently remarked “Digital markets are the epicenters of technological progress and innovation…unchecked dominance and high concentration is the result of presence of certain characteristics which makes market power in the digital space uniquely durable”. Frugal innovation has this unique characteristic of challenging the traditionally established markets by offering the same product at cheaper and a more economical price that could even be more climate-friendly. Regulating by products of such innovation in the name of competition could be detrimental if the Competition Commission of India does not chalk a proper strategy. Instead of seeing their practice as predatory in nature, it is essential to distinguish between players who want to escape competition and who intend to compete through innovative business strategies like frugal innovation.

The current law needs to take into account the innovation such that the current emerging innovators are able to thrive in a sharing economy. Prices in the sharing economy tend to be lower than the usual market. Therefore, sharing economy business models including frugal innovation can go a long way in ensuring competitive advantage. Even the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has recently acknowledged that growth of the sharing economy can boost growth in the economy “by encouraging entrepreneurship and promoting more productive and efficient use of assets.”

It will not be legally fallacious to acknowledge that the time during which the Indian competition regime was designed, it was written with the conventional business in mind. Therefore, it is crucial for the apex antitrust body to acknowledge and design strategies in line with the new business models and their impact on emerging markets and interface with the extant regulatory landscape.

Devanshu is an MSc Philosophy of the Social Sciences (Major in Economics) Candidate at London School of Economics & Political Science, U.K and Nidhi is a JSM Candidate & SPILS Fellow at Stanford Law School, USA

Facial Recognition

Sat, 28 Aug 2021 10:21:10 GMT

COSMONAUT

S E R I E S

Facial Recognition

Itay Alon

Definition

Formally, facial or face recognition is defined as “the science which involves the understanding of how the faces are recognized by biological systems and how this can be emulated by computer systems” (Martinez 2009). It is a biometric technique to uniquely identify a person by comparing and analyzing patterns based on their "facial contours"; in other words, it is a method of identifying or confirming a person's identity from their face. Other types of biometric software include voice recognition, fingerprint recognition, and retinal or iris recognition.

Orenda Graphic

Recruitment

While the use of facial recognition technology could help recruiters streamline some processes, it is hard to believe that the long-standing issues of recruiting could be solved through algorithms knowing that existing datasets could perpetuate or even worsen the current biases that a human recruiter can have.

Maksim Turkov

Policing

Law enforcement officials around the world are using Facial Recognition Technology (FRT) to identify suspects, conduct arrests, and determine guilt through system matches. It is also being used as a tool for border control purposes, to perform identity verifications, and to monitor the safety of people in public spaces. The use of FRT by police and other law enforcement officials, however, has been pointing out the problems regarding the fairness and legitimacy of this tool.

John Romeio

Education

The use of facial recognition technology has increased recently and has been implemented in different levels of our societies, including education. Several schools in different countries have been adopting this technology. However, the use of this tool can be dangerous because of the inaccurancy of this method and for normalizing surveillance, especially in an environment such as schools.

Premast

Our Series

Facial Recognition & Recruitment

Fri, 27 Aug 2021 10:28:24 GMT

AI & FAIRNESS

Facial Recognition & Recruitment

By Gabriel Obando-Chacon & Yannick Stadtfeld & Betül Çolak

August 27, 2021

Imagine you are applying for your dream job at your dream company. You write a cover letter to explain why you are the perfect fit for the job, polish up your resume and line up people to be references. You submit your application and some days later you receive an interview invitation. But you are not interviewed by a recruiter, you have to use the camera of your smartphone or laptop to record your answers to several questions. Your answers will be assessed by an algorithm that judges your voice, your body posture, your enthusiasm, or some other feature that you do not know about. This may sound futuristic but depending on where you live its reality.

Facial recognition technology (“FRT”) is increasingly used in the recruitment processes, particularly with the rise of video interviews during the Covid-19 pandemic by both public and private sector. Around 700 companies, including Vodafone, Hilton and Urban Outfitters have tried it out . For example, Unilever uses AI systems both taking job applications and making pre-interview. So FRT is mainly used for candidate screening. If an applicant would be successful then a human recruiter has an interview with the candidate.

The market for recruiting-technology and hiring-solutions is growing exponentially ( Source 1 , Source 2 ), as many companies try to leverage predictive analytics in their recruiting process. Countless start-ups and corporations compete for this market. They advertise their solutions as fair and ethical, but many lack transparency of their systems and independent audits.

Standards for recruiting

There are several standards for psychological and aptitude testing available which can inform the recruitment process, but none sets definite criteria. The ISO norm 10667 is as close as it comes to a global standard. It defines “Procedures and methods to assess people in work and organizational settings”. It formulates requirements and guidelines for tests and methods of job-related aptitude assessment of individuals, groups, and organizations. The norm demands an evidence-based approach underpinning the decision for the chosen aptitude diagnostic procedure and the procedure needs to be checked regularly for their purpose. It also discusses questions about the combination of data and the decision rules. (The second edition of this norm which was released last year explicitly includes AI systems but has, to our knowledge, not been used to audit an AI system up to now.)

No organization is forced to comply with these standards, which is also evident even if no AI systems are used. Some organizations make obscure hiring decisions, which leads to discontent applicants and the organization misses out on recruiting the best person for the job. The increasing adaptation of facial recognition in recruitment leads to concerns that this lack of standardization and best practices will be built into FRT systems used for recruiting.

The Implementation and Concerns of The Use of Facial Recognition in Recruitment

Thanks to FRT, many employers save their time, eliminate repetitive tasks and find the most appropriate candidates. However, FRT may have bias in its data sets. The reasons behind that can depend on data sets, developers or the failure of AI systems to take account of changing circumstances. In the system, race, gender and age-related bias can lead to discrimination and unfair consequences among candidates regardless of their cause or type. This poses a great risk for employers to violate the obligations imposed under human rights and equality legislation. On the other hand, a human employer has bias against candidates too. For instance, black workers are twice as likely to be unemployed as white workers overall ( 6.4% vs. 3.1% ) in the US.

Furthermore, FRT is not always unambiguous. The use of complex AI systems in FRT puts it at a disadvantage in terms of transparency or interpretability. Especially in FRTs where deep neural network algorithms are used, which are the main actors of the black box problem, it is generally not possible to explain what cause bias, injustice and discrimination. However, one of the important components of ethical AI is the “explainability”. This is mentioned also in the draft Regulation on artificial intelligence of the European Commission by stating that the processes of high-risk artificial intelligence systems should be transparent (Art. 13). Failure of companies to explain the problems arising from FRT will cause them to lose their reputation in the face of the importance attached to the issue.

Another issue about FRT is whether the candidates can adapt their actions regarding the criteria. The technology analyzes things like keywords, intonation, and body language, and makes notes on them for the hiring manager. It is an effective way to find an ideal candidate. However, that may lead to the rejection of talented and innovative people. For example, a candidate who does not smile at the right moment or cannot adjust his/her tone of voice correctly for a moment may be eliminated by the system. Well, can candidates adapt their behavior to avoid being eliminated by the system? Considering that the systems used in the queries are quite less likely to be mistaken, it can be said that it is not possible for the candidates to deceive the system.

The added value question

Now that we have analyzed the pros and cons of implementing FRT as a tool in personnel selection, we should take a look at its added value. Just because the technology exists doesn’t mean that it will necessarily improve the HR recruitment process. The bottom line is: what do recruiters gain by using FRT? Like every cutting-edge technology, it’s not easy to answer this question right now, as its deployment is limited, and examples are scarce. Nevertheless, in an attempt to answer this question, we can make some broad inferences based on its current uses.

FRT systems will likely create added value for recruiters that (i) have the capacity to determine exactly what they want to assess through facial recognition and (ii) have the means to collect data sets and tailor the algorithms to their specific needs. On one hand, recruiters have to know what they are looking for with the use of FRT technologies. They need to determine whether they want to assess the behavior of the prospective employee in a hypothetical scenario or whether they want to assess the degree of truthfulness of the responses, or any other output, otherwise the exercise becomes futile. The algorithm design process will force recruiters to think about what they want as output, to program the systems to obtain the desired result.

On the other hand, recruiters must have the capacity to work hand in hand with engineers to build and tailor the algorithms around the existing data sets. Most recruiters do not collect biometric information (in some jurisdictions it could even be illegal) that is required to run a facial recognition algorithm, but those who can collect these data sets still need to evaluate if the information is enough to meet the desired output. This will require assembling a team of experts, including data analysts and engineers that gap the data with the desired output.

Taking into account the above, it is not surprising that Big Tech has taken the forefront in the use of FRT systems for recruitment purposes. For example, Google and Amazon have in-house engineering teams that can work hand-in-hand with the HR departments and are able to make adjustments on the fly. On the contrary, medium-sized and small recruiters will likely not turn to facial FRT any time soon.

Wrapping it up!

In conclusion, facial recognition is making its way into recruitment processes. It is likely that recruiters turn to collecting more information (including biometric data) from prospective employees to use it in the design, building and training of facial recognition algorithms in the future. While the use of these technologies sounds exciting and could help recruiters streamline some processes, we are wary of some of the implications of using this type of technology without the proper standards of care. It is hard to believe that the long-standing issues of recruiting could be solved through algorithms knowing that existing datasets could perpetuate or even worsen the current biases that a human recruiter can have.

Nevertheless, the use of FRT is at the same time forcing recruiters to become aware of their flaws and follow standards for profound assessment methods which have long been in existence. While it is still early, there is no reason not to see facial recognition as an opportunity to ensure fair and equal recruitment processes for employees in the future.

Yannick completed his bachelor’s degree in Psychology at Trier University. Currently he is pursuing his master’s degree in Psychology (Human Performance in Socio-Technical-Systems) at the Technical University of Dresden with a focus on Human Factors and Economic Psychology. As a research assistant in various research groups he gained experience in the application of qualitative and quantitative research methods. Yannick interned at the German Aerospace Center (DLR) where he conducted research on group behavior in aerospace teams. He is currently interested in the application of computational social sciences methods.

Gabriel recently graduated from McGill University, where he pursued an LLM. His research focused on privacy concerns related to the collection of data by governmental agencies to implement judicial AI. Before that, he obtained an LLL from the University of Costa Rica with a concentration in Human Rights Law. He has worked in BigLaw and boutique firms in Costa Rica. Most recently, he joined Nelson Champagne Avocats in Montreal where he's part of the class actions team. He's fluent in English and Spanish, and proficient in French.

Betül Çolak holds a bachelor’s degree in Law from the University of Bahçeşehir. She, also, studied law at University of Jean Monnet in France within the Erasmus program for a semester. She worked as an intern on data protection law, immigration law and the corporate law in the United States and in Turkey. She is a lawyer specialized on data protection law and intellectual property law in Turkey. She is a member of the Artificial Intelligence Working Group at Istanbul Bar Association. She writes news and articles on data protection regulation and AI. Her academic interest lies in the regulation of data-driven technologies, in particular, the challenges they impose to democracy, data privacy and human right. She is fluent in Turkish, English and can communicate in French.

Facial Recognition & Policing

Fri, 27 Aug 2021 10:15:12 GMT

AI & FAIRNESS

Facial Recognition & Policing

By Daniel Rodríguez Maffioli & Alice Bryk Silveira

August 27, 2021

One of the major concerns of this AI-based technology is that they are inaccurate and induce racial profiling. As will be presented in this article, this was the case of Robert Williams; a 43-year-old African-american father in Detroit who was wrongfully arrested based on a miss identification done by the Police, which relied solely on FRT evidence.

Mapping of subjects and purposes

In the past years, law enforcement agencies worldwide have been using Facial Recognition Technology for criminal investigation and policing purposes. For instance, according to the Department of Justice (DOJ), in the United Stated this technology has been used in the criminal justice system to help generate suspect leads and to identify victims. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) uses FRT to support state and local law enforcement and their investigation through programs such as the Next Generation Identification–Interstate Photo System (NGI-IPS) and the Facial Analysis, Comparison, and Evaluation (FACE) program. And although the FBI claims that the use of those systems cannot be used solely to make an arrest, there remain reservations on the veracity of those claims.

In the United Kingdom, the Metropolitan Police in London also employs live facial recognition cameras. However, in 2020, the use of this technology by the South Wales Police was ruled unlawful by the Court of Appeal of England and Wales . The case was brought by civil rights group Liberty and the affected citizen, Ed Bridges, arguing that the use of automatic facial recognition (AFR) by the South Wales Police violated Brigdes’ right to privacy, which is enshrined in article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights. The decision concluded that there was indeed a violation of the right to privacy, since there was “too broad a discretion” left to police officers in applying the technology and that the force failed to properly investigate whether the software presented any race or gender biases.

Furthermore, a company named Clearview AI has been in the news for the past two years for creating a massive database comprising millions of faces that were scraped from the web . The company scrapes photographs voluntarily uploaded by people on sites such as Google, Facebook or Instagram and sells to law enforcement an AI-based "face finder" with the aim of identifying criminal suspects and child abusers. Some authorities, like Canada’s privacy commissioner , have stated that what Clearview AI does is illegal, since people who uploaded their faces to the web did not consent to the processing of their biometric data for the purposes for which the company is using it.

The most frightening cases of facial recognition, however, come from the East. China has become the most outrageous example of a surveillance state in which privacy and civil liberties are nothing more than a pipe dream. The country has developed a national surveillance system that exploits the capabilities of facial recognition and artificial intelligence to identify and monitor the movements of its citizens, both in the real and virtual world, and to rate them in a social scoring system according to their behaviour.

Threats and challenges of FRT in policing

Facial Recognition Technology can result in an inaccurate match, or false positive , which occurs when there is an inaccurate association between images from two different people. These inaccurate matches can result in incorrect investigative leads, wrong accusations and arrests. The case of the wrongful arrest of Robert Williams brings attention to the abusive use of FRT by law enforcement agencies.

Robert Williams was falsely identified by the Michigan State Police department’s facial recognition software as a shoplifting suspect. He was arrested in front of his wife and two little daughters (ages 2 and 5) and was interrogated by detectives and held in custody for 30 hours before his release. This is real evidence on the fact that, when these systems are trained with insufficient and unrepresentative data of the population's diversity, they risk incurring in discriminations against minorities.

But the use of FRT for policing, especially live biometric identification, is troubling for many other reasons too.

Constant surveillance has an oppressive and invasive effect, as human beings do not act the same when they are being watched. In addition, it turns any person freely moving in a public space into a potential suspect of a crime, which reverses the elementary presumption of innocence and lessens civil liberties. Even if we all agreed to allow FRT in policing for the sake of public safety, risks of false negatives -that a criminal is not correctly identified- are significant, so the cons of using this technology continue to outweigh the supposed benefits.

On the other hand, this technology compromises the fundamental right to privacy and data protection, since -according to the General Data Protection Regulation (art. 9)- biometric data qualifies as a “special category” of personal data. This means the data subject should give consent to the processing of its biometric data or, at least, the processing should be expressly authorized by law, and provide “for appropriate safeguards for the fundamental rights and the interests of the data subject”. In short, the most elementary freedoms that derive from the human condition are being sacrificed at the expense of a broad and very abstract notion of "public safety".

Regulatory Initiatives

Criticism from civil society and calls for banning or regulating the use of FRTs have not been long in coming. In the United States, many cities have opted to impose a moratorium or ban the use of these technologies for criminal or policing purposes. Even tech companies such as Amazon, Microsoft and IBM have announced moratoriums on the sale of their own FRT systems to law enforcement, at least until federal regulation is enacted.

Some states in the United States have already passed legislation seeking to address the above concerns. Massachusetts, for example, will have a law that requires police to obtain a judge’s permission before running a face recognition search and limits the authorities that can access the system.

But the most comprehensive regulatory initiative so far has been the " Proposal for a Regulation laying down harmonised rules on artificial intelligence ", announced by the European Commission on April 21, 2021. In this risk-based regulation proposal, the Commission rightly points out that the use of AI systems for “real-time” remote biometric identification for the purpose of law enforcement is considered particularly intrusive in the rights and freedoms of the concerned persons, “to the extent that it may affect the private life of a large part of the population, evoke a feeling of constant surveillance and indirectly dissuade the exercise of the freedom of assembly and other fundamental rights”.

Therefore, the Proposal prohibits the use of those systems for the purpose of law enforcement, except in three narrowly defined situations:

(i) the targeted search for specific potential victims of crime, including missing children;

(ii) the prevention of a specific, substantial and imminent threat to the life or physical safety of natural persons or of a terrorist attack;

(iii) the detection, localisation, identification or prosecution of a perpetrator or suspect of a criminal offence punishable by 3 years imprisonment or more.

Each of those exceptions should be subject to an specific authorisation by a judicial authority or by an independent administrative authority, prior assessment of the specifics and the evidence brought up in each case

There are some important loopholes, though, that should be addressed. The scope of the prohibition is too limited, because it doesn’t extend to law enforcement’s use of facial recognition on databases of “pictures or video footage” gathered previously or scraped from the web, or to other biometric identification types other than “real-time”. Besides, the exceptions to the prohibition are too broad and might be subject to different interpretations across countries and authorities.

Closing remarks

The use of remote biometric identification and, especially, Facial Recognition Technologies for policing purposes is a controversial issue. The risks to fundamental rights, privacy and democratic values are indisputable.

The imposition of moratoriums that some US states and countries have established is a proper measure as long as they are indeed temporary and allow for a calm debate between civil society and policy makers. The European Union's proposal, for its part, is a perfect basis for starting the conversation. While there are some gaps and opportunities for improvement, it is important to remember that the Proposal includes multiple safeguards for the use of high-risk artificial intelligence applications. Therefore, even in the three restricted scenarios in which the use of FRT is allowed those measures must be implemented. For example, the police will need to certify that the systems put in place are accurate and that the data serving as input is sufficiently representative, in order to prevent racial or gender biases and discriminations.

As in everything, extreme approaches fail to identify the right questions. In this case, the right policy debate is not whether to allow or prohibit the use of facial recognition by law enforcement authorities, but what should be the democratic regulations that will allow FRTs to be deployed responsibly and in line with fundamental rights, liberty and human dignity. The regulatory initiatives being laid out globally around this topic are definitely a good start.

Alice Bryk SIlveira is a Brazilian lawyer, member of the Brazilian Bar Association and she recently completed her LLM in International Law & Human Rights at Tel Aviv University. She holds a Bachelor's Degree in Law from Pontifícia Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS). During Law School, she has been an intern at the Federal Public Defender’s Office of Brazil and the State Public Defender’s Office. Also, she has been a volunteer at ACRI - The Association for Civil Rights in Israel doing legal research, where she has done research about the privacy impacts of Facial Recognition Technology. Her research interests are the intersection between human rights and technology. She is fluent in Portuguese and English and can communicate in in French and Spanish.

Daniel is a lawyer from Costa Rica, specializing in Public Law and Technology Regulation. He holds an LLM in Regulation and a Diploma in EU Law, both by the Universidad Carlos III de Madrid (UC3M). Also, he recently obtained a specialization in Data Protection and Algorithmic Regulation by the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE). Currently he practices as Senior Associate at the Public Law and Regulation practice of a full-service law firm in Costa Rica. Daniel is a member of the Ibero-American Association of Regulation Studies (ASIER) and a lecturer on technology regulation matters. He also runs algoritlaw.com, a Latin-American blog and podcast on AI regulation, privacy and internet governance. He’s fluent in English and Spanish

Facial Recognition & Education

Fri, 27 Aug 2021 09:57:32 GMT

AI & FAIRNESS

Facial Recognition & Education

By Luísa Franco Machado & Alice Bryk Silveira & Betül Çolak

August 27, 2021

Schools in the United States have adopted facial recognition technology in order to prevent shootings and to identify unauthorised intruders. Moreover, some schools have been using it to monitor attendance. For instance, in India where the fraudulent attendance issue is common. In addition to campus security, facial recognition has also been applied in the “virtual context”, as online courses to control the access to the online education content.

However, there are some critical points to the use of this technology in education. As already mentioned before (here mention the introductory article) , facial recognition technology can lead to racial bias. And in this case, we are already talking about a vulnerable population: children. To intensify the vulnerability of marginalized groups as black people during childhood is a dangerous matter. Furthermore, another concern is the fact of normalizing surveillance and the authority that the school has over the students, which can characterize an abuse of power.

To illustrate, in 2019, a school in northern Sweden has conducted a project with facial recognition to monitor the student’s attendance in school. As a result, the Swedish Data Protection Authority (DPA) has fined the Skelleftea municipality 200 000 SEK(approximately 20 000 euros). The Swedish Data Protection Authority (“DPA”) concluded that the project violated several articles in GDPR (arts, 5, 9, 35 and 36), that the school process of sensitive biometric data was unlawful and failed to do an adequate impact assessment including seeking prior consultation with the Swedish DPA. The school has used the argument of consent, nonetheless the Swedish DPA considers that consent was not a valid legal basis since students’ consent could not be freely given because the school administration has a moral authority over them.

In addition to the clear unequal relation between the students and the school administration, another issue of FRT in education is normalizing surveillance and the sense of criminalization of children. Students can feel powerless with their right to privacy not being respected and also for the feeling of being constantly surveilled. This criminalization by the school has negative psychological impacts on the children, and again can have even worse impacts on marginalized groups such as black and latin students.

The facial recognition system is being used in school to provide security on campus, follow the attendance to lessons, prevent the attacks and shootings. Although the system has some advantages, it actually brings more disadvantages in its train especially for young students. This situation has catched attention of both parents and Data Privacy Authorities. As such a couple of DPAs imposed hefty fines. Some states have even decided to ban facial recognition systems in schools due to unethical and bias-based practices. Considering these decisions, it is better to use the technology after doing an adequate data protection impact assessment. If there is a high risk as a result of assessment, school administrations should not use the facial recognition system.

Luísa Franco Machado is currently pursuing a Master’s degree in International Public Management and Human Rights at Sciences Po Paris. She holds a Bachelor’s degree in Political Science and Latin American Studies from the same institution. She has worked at the Division for Public Institutions and Digital Government of the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs (UNDESA), monitoring the progress of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by governments and institutions worldwide. Before working at the UN Headquarters, she has worked at the Organization of American States (OAS), the City Council of São Paulo, and the Federal Public Defender’s Office of Brazil. She has volunteered at Vivonne's Detention Center, in France, and at Casa Monarca, a migrant shelter in the US-Mexico Border. Her research interests are the intersection between public policy, human rights, and technology. She is fluent in Portuguese, English, French, and Spanish and can communicate in German.

Facial Recognition: An Introduction

Fri, 27 Aug 2021 09:48:02 GMT

AI BIAS

Facial Recognition: An Introduction

Facial recognition technologies are an application of artificial intelligence and machine learning, thus they are not exempted from showing biases that in some cases have led to discriminatory results.

By Elena Beretta & Nasir Muftić

August 27, 2021

The era of Big Data and Automated Algorithms

The last few decades have been a flourishing period for technology. Thanks to the increasing amounts of data regarding a variety of fields and the growing computational power, actors from both public and private sectors have been facing an exciting opportunity to capture human behavior. This unprecedented availability is offering the opportunity to help humans in several tasks and to improve services in such different ways: for instance, to optimize business value chains, to provide personalized service, or to automate decisions.

Big-data and automated algorithms represent a good call to implement some kind of technologies that actively help humans in making better decisions. The majority of these technologies are based on Machine Learning and Artificial Intelligence algorithms. ML and AI are defined as the study of methods for programming computers to learn. Computers are applied to a wide range of tasks, and for most of these it is relatively easy for programmers to design and implement the necessary software.

The benefits that machine learning and artificial intelligence have brought are undeniable. On the one hand, they have allowed the design of applications that can explore every part of the world that humans cannot visit. For example, in the field of space exploration, artificial intelligence’s machines explore parts of the universe that are totally hostile to human beings. Intelligent robots are programmed to excavate mining of fuel. On the other hand, they have been employed in several fields with the purpose of helping humans decision-making, i.e., supporting decision-based medical tasks.

However, in recent years several researchers, programmers, and academics have found these technologies to be discriminatory, especially against disadvantaged groups. A recent and striking example is the case of Google Vision AI, Google's image labeling tool. During the COVID pandemic, when images of people holding a thermometer started to spread, it has been found to produce different results depending on skin color, correctly labeling the image as "electronic device" if there was a white person in it, while as "gun" if there was a black person in it. Image labeling is the basis of one of the technologies that has shown the most striking improvements, facial recognition. Since facial recognition technologies are an application of artificial intelligence and machine learning, they are not exempted from showing biases that in some cases have led to discriminatory results. The goal of this blog series is to explore the light and shadow of facial recognition through the investigation of some case studies in different fields.

A focus on facial recognition

The pioneers of facial recognition took their first steps in the 1960s. In those years, although the recognition technique was supported by manual marking of facial points, it was demonstrated that biometric recognition was possible. The 1980s marked the entry of linear algebra as an application for solving facial recognition problems, laying the foundation for future development of the technology. The first commercial use of facial recognition was in the early 90s, during which the Face Recognition Technology (FERET) program was launched by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST); the project involved the collection of a database containing images of faces. Nowadays, this technology has undergone considerable development since its origin. In fact, facial recognition systems can be used to identify people in photos, videos, or in real time.

How it works?

Many people are familiar with facial recognition technology thanks to Face ID, which is now widely used in the mobile market. Typically, facial recognition doesn't use a huge database of photos to determine a person's identity; it merely identifies and recognizes one person as the sole owner of the device, limiting access to others. Facial recognition systems are used in several domains today, but in general they follow this type of operation:

Step 1: Face Detection

The camera detects and locates an image of a face, either alone or in a crowd. The image may depict the person looking straight at the camera or in profile.

Step 2: Face Analysis

The face image is captured and analyzed. The software examines the geometry of the face and some key factors, which include variables such as the distance between the eyes, the depth of the eye sockets, the distance between the forehead and the chin, the shape of the cheekbones and the contour of the lips, eyes and chin. They aim to identify the main features of the face and are essential to distinguish it.

Step 3: Convert the image into data

The face capture process transforms the information about the face into a set of digital information. This set of information is stored in the form of a numeric code called a faceprint. A person's faceprint is as unique as their fingerprints.

Step 4: Finding a match

The subject's faceprint is compared to a database of known faces. For example, the FBI can access up to 650 million photos from various government databases. On Facebook, any photo tagged with a person's name is entered into Facebook's database, which can be used for facial recognition. If the facial fingerprint matches an image in a facial recognition database, identification is performed.

Opportunities and Risks

Facial recognition promises great benefits for individuals and the communities. Feedback from the law enforcement in the states where it is already present shows that great hope for improvement of policing lies in this technology. It should enable easy identification of suspicious persons thereby increasing the safety of the entire community. It provides great convenience to individual users. There might no longer need for long and complicated passwords or keywords one has to memorize. A one’s face would give it exclusive access to confidential contents. The technology would allow for automating matching between faces and persons, thereby saving time for people who are searching for persons online, whether they do it while tagging friends on a Facebook photo or doing a search via an online engine. The range of possible applications is great, and the popularity of this technology would certainly increase it even more.

But the great benefits do not come without great risks. The main concern lies in the potential of abuse in the public sector. An account of abuse of facial recognition by public authorities has already been recorded in China where it has been used for racial profiling and control of Uighur Muslims. China, however, is not the only state which employs facial recognition in the public sector. For instance, Russia, France, the UK, and Israel have either expressed interest in this idea or are already employing facial recognition for security purposes or law enforcement. The problem with the use of such suprême technology is that it enables a state to effectively surveil individuals. Described in the New York Times as « one of the most powerful surveillance tools ever made” , it enables a state to identify protestors, receive information about the movement of individuals, and track their every public appearance.

The potential of abuse exists as well in the private sector. The value of personal data in today’s digital economy has made possible the rise of some of the biggest and most influential companies in the history of the world. Modern multinational companies have enormous power due to the vast amounts of data in their control, backed up by suprême algorithms and world-class scientists and experts. Biometric data used in facial recognition, create a great range of potential ways to use this technology by the private companies, thereby undermining the data privacy of individuals.

Another risk born by facial recognition is its accuracy. In case it fails to match the face with the right person, it might have devastating consequences, especially in sensitive areas of application such as law enforcement. Although the technology is rapidly improving, it is still not completely trustworthy, especially in the real world where the conditions for face identification are not perfect. While the accuracy might not be that critical in the case of Instagram’s search engine, the bank transfers supported by facial technology need to be almost impeccable. Therefore, the lack of accuracy has different importance contingent on the field of application.

The inaccuracy might have various causes as well as create consequences of different gravity. The term algorithmic bias refers to types of inaccuracies that create unfair outcomes as a consequence of a systematic error in the technology or the ways it is used. There are many ways to render the technology inaccurate. One might feed it with the data that reflects the personal preferences of persons providing it, or the design of the algorithm might be erroneous. An existing record demonstrates a history of sexism, racism, and discrimination based on ethnicity connected to the use of facial recognition.

Although the benefits of facial recognition are undeniable, so are the risks. The potential magnitude of the risks has even made some of the lawmakers around the world consider banning the technology altogether. For instance, the US and the EU are currently considering what should be done to curb the risk. The potential measures range from a time-limited moratorium, a ban of the use of facial recognition in sensitive sectors such as law enforcement, to a complete ban.

This is an introductory blog post in the series on facial recognition by the Internet & Just Society. The topic deserves a more extensive insight that is contingent on the area where the technology is to be applied. For this reason, the following blog posts in this series will be devoted to facial recognition in specific sectors where its impact might be the most striking.

Bibliography

Martinez A.M. (2009) Face Recognition, Overview. In: Li S.Z., Jain A. (eds) Encyclopedia of Biometrics. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-73003-5_84

Elena Beretta received the M.Sc. in Economics and Statistics from University of Turin in September 2016 by working on an experimental thesis investigating the diffusion of innovation by agent-based models. She earned a second level Master degree in Data Science for Complex Economic Systems at the Collegio Carlo Alberto in Moncalieri (TO), in June 2017.
From April 2017 to September 2017 she got involved in an internship at DESPINA - Laboratory on Big Data Analytics at the Department of Economics and Statistics of the University Study of Turin – working on the NoVELOG project ("New Cooperative Business Models and Guidance for Sustainable City Logistics"). In November 2017 she’s starting to collaborate as PhD student, and effective member, with Nexa Center for Internet & Society at Politecnico of Turin and with Fondazione Bruno Kessler (Trento), by working on a project on Data and Algorithms Ethics. Her current research focuses on improving the impact of automatic decision-making systems on society through the implementation of models involving data on human behavior. Specific fields of interest include data science, machine learning, recommendation systems and computational social sciences.

Nasir Muftić is a Ph.D. student at the Faculty of Law of the University of Sarajevo. His research interests include legal regulation of artificial intelligence with a focus on liabilitiy. He graduated from the Faculty of Law of the University of Sarajevo in 2016 and obtained an LL.M. degree in International

Business Law from the Central European University in 2017. He completed traineeships at the Constitutional Court of Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Supreme Court of Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Prior to the commencement of his doctoral studies, Nasir worked as a legal assistant at BH Telecom JSC in fields of media and telecommunications law, civil litigation, intellectual property law, commercial contract drafting, and regulatory compliance.

Computational Antitrust

Tue, 24 Aug 2021 14:53:33 GMT

ABOUT

What is the current shape of Competition Law and Policy in the Digital Era? This session shall explore the contours of Computational Law & Computational antitrust. Computational antitrust is as such a specialist field of computational law that purports to improve antitrust analysis and procedures by assistance of legal informatics. The implementation of computational methods is essential to improve the overall functioning of antitrust agencies. This is particularly important in light of the recent cases against the Big Tech. This conversation also aims to cover the current efforts by regulators when assessing Big Tech companies in their relevant markets and analyzing data-intensive markets. We also intend to jump back to some classic examples of tech-based antitrust case law to reconsider if regulators and enforcers use lessons from the past in shaping their reactions to contemporary challenges in digital markets.

SPEAKERS

Prof. Dr. Thibault Schrepel is an Associate Professor of Law at VU Amsterdam, and a Faculty Affiliate at Stanford University’s CodeX Center where he has created the “Computational Antitrust” project that brings together over 55 antitrust agencies ( see our websit e ). He holds research and teaching positions at the University Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne and Sciences Po Paris, he is a Harvard University’s Berkman Klein Center alumnus, a member of the French Superior Audiovisual Council’s scientific board, and an expert appointed to the World Economic Forum. These last couple of years, he has been focusing most of his research on blockchain antitrust ( see her e ). He has written the world’s most downloaded antitrust articles of 2018 (“ The Blockchain Antitrust Paradox ”), 2019 (“ Collusion by Blockchain and Smart Contracts ”), and 2020 (“ Blockchain Code as Antitrus t ”). Last but not least, he is passionate about nineties rock music, free jazz, Seinfeld, and B movies.

Digital Education? Bring It On.

Mon, 09 Aug 2021 20:55:20 GMT

DIGITAL EDUCATION

Digital Education? Bring It On!

The European Union pushes for a Digital Education Plan. Belatedly.

By Giota Bertsima

August 9, 2021

Shakuro

The Commission demands more transparency and responsibility from the social media platforms. Through the adoption of these frameworks, the EU engaged in a long race of safeguarding human rights and democratic values online, while combating the spread of untrustworthy information. Unfortunately, as ambitious and prosperous these frameworks might seem, they were proven to be quite controversial.

The attempt to impose a form of control on the digital sphere has created mixed feelings both for civil society and for the organizations advocating for free speech and access to information. The EU has offloaded much of the responsibility for content moderation to the platforms, while the vague distinction between illegal and harmful content has brought great confusion regarding the sources that should be accessible to users.

Additionally, the newly introduced co-regulating system is having even more implications for fundamental freedoms, as the private companies tend to over-comply with the demands of the institution resulting in the removal of potentially legal content from their platforms. In that sense, the issue that the EU is attempting to solve is actually reinforcing the problem in a different context. The Commission has long ago made its commitments to protect the freedom of expression in the effort to tackle disinformation and avoid any practice resembling censorship. At the end of the day, the principle of promoting fundamental freedoms is located at the core of the institution. However, the core is far from the surface and sometimes what lies underneath might be concealed and thus underprioritized.

The infodemic that accompanied the Covid-19 pandemic made matters even worse. WHO defined the infodemic as the spread of large bulks of unreliable sources, mainly in regards to the virus. The primary risk that used to derive from disinformation was the impact on democracy. Now, the costs of disinformation and fake news are actually counted in human lives, as the former was thereon posing a direct threat to public health. The lockdowns created a form of digital disruption that was accelerated at an astronomical pace. Under these circumstances, misleading information could reach everyone way easier than before.

At the face of these challenges and the shortcomings of the established practices against disinformation, the best approach would be to address the root of the problem. Firstly, by providing a proper digital education for the European society and secondly by embracing citizen participation in the decision-making process more actively. The Commission has actually come up with a very effective answer to the former.

The Digital Education Action Plan (DEAP) introduced in 2018 and updated in 2021, will concentrate on strengthening the areas of digital capacities for education and training systems, digital literacy, and competencies as well as the digital ecosystem of education content and tools.

As promising as this might sound, the plan should have been implemented several years ago. In the midst of the pandemic and the major changes that have been brought to our everyday lives and activities, educating and training citizens to navigate safely by enriching their critical thinking and ameliorating their filtering capacity, should have been a priority. Much of the frustration that was created due to the infodemic could have been avoided, had the Commission invested more in prevention rather than countering mechanisms. In that case, the EU’s a posteriori approach was not fruitful for containing the bulk of untrustworthy sources and acting as a shield. Admittedly, the Internet is a chaotic environment that needs to be tamed under certain values and governed by the rule of law. Nevertheless, the digital sphere is simultaneously a great asset that democracy holds in its quiver. To this end, too much control can create a backsliding effect.

The second issue refers to citizen participation and equal representation. Alemanno in his recent article points out that “all individuals affected by a given EU action should be able to have an effective equal chance to “have a say” in the decision-making process”. Thus far, the public consultations are not as representative as they should be in a democratic system.

Adding to that, the Algorithmic Watch stipulates that the procedure of public consultations favors the private companies, while the lobbying games are also adding to this fact. In regards to the operations of the online world, the citizens should be at the center of the decision-making process and not mere actors who barely contribute to the policy formation. Many of the controversial provisions of the current policies that tackle disinformation could have turned out less consequential if the citizens participated more actively in the policy-making process. The content moderation mechanism might have been more effective and targeted, while the vague term ‘harmful content’ that features in the DSA may have been less ambiguous. What civil society needs is the 2021 DEAP. For the moment, the Plan is neither binding for the member states nor includes regulatory dimensions. Ceteris paribus, it should.

Moderate solutions are not enough to respond to the rapid changes taking place online. Will we be ready for another infodemic coming from a future historical event? Let that be a pandemic, a natural disaster, or a financial crisis. The future is always uncertain. After the Covid-19 crisis, we can’t simply go back to normality. We need to renegotiate the terms and conditions. However, it remains a collective responsibility for the younger generations to create safeguards for responding to the challenges ahead and building the foundations for a just internet society.

Giota Bertsima is a senior student at Leiden University in the Advanced MSc in International Relations and Diplomacy. She holds a bachelor’s degree in Political Sciences from Aristotle University of Thessaloniki. Her main interest lies in the field of AI and society, digital democracy and governance.

Showdown Down Under?

Mon, 09 Aug 2021 20:55:16 GMT

FACEBOOK/GOOGLE v. AUSTRALIA

Showdown Down Under?

By Marco Schmidt

August 9, 2021

Introduction

Earlier this year, it appeared that Australia was going to set an impressive precedent by regulating major digital platforms like Facebook and Google. Both platforms were flexing their muscles in the light of the “News Media Bargain Code” that the government eventually ended up passing into law. The Code now allows Australian news outlets with a revenue over 150,000$ to apply to enter into negotiations with Big Tech platforms about a remuneration for their content that is shared on said platforms. In addition, it is also possible to force platforms into an arbitration process with local news outlets in case the earlier negotiations were not successful. How did Australia get to this point, what has happened in response and which developments can be expected in the near future?

Status Quo

After an inquiry conducted by the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (ACCC), it was clear that Google and Facebook were both dominating the media and advertising markets. Out of every 100$ spent on online advertising, Google takes more than half , Facebook another quarter. Google and Facebook should initially be the only companies to which the Code is applicable, with the option of adding other platforms that prove to be dominant market players at a later point in time. Its goal is to ensure remuneration of news outlets for content they generate that ends up being distributed via Facebook or Google. Content from different news media outlets is gathered on said platforms, keeping consumers rather on Facebook than actually visiting the website of, for example, a local newspaper. As a consequence, such outlets incur substantial financial losses as consumers read news articles (or brief summaries) on one of the major platforms, where, at the same time, revenue through advertising is created.

Consequences

While Google reached licensing agreements with major news companies like Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp (after threatening to shut down its search engine), presumably to avoid being forced into an arbitration procedure foreseen in the Code, Facebook gave proof of its potent position in the market. Arguing that its platform actually was a factor to increase traffic on websites of other news outlets, Facebook decided to ban domestic and international news altogether. Accidentally, the pages of the Australian Department of Fire and Emergency Service and other educational pages were blocked, causing severe criticism, especially in the light of wildfires and Covid.

There is also some evidence that misinformation flourished after trustworthy news outlets were banned. The ban was only upheld for a few days as Facebook and the Australian government reached an agreement , in particular regarding the arbitration clause which will become effective after a period of two months of mediation between platforms and other publishers. Yet, it showed clearly that platforms would fight tooth and nail against such kinds of regulations.

Criticism

That deal was subject to criticism from the Australian opposition, accusing the government of caving in and creating a situation in which the code would hardly be applied to big platforms as they could conclude their own agreements with other players. Therefore, the so-called “ blanket deals ” would certainly not benefit smaller players in the Australian news media market. Primarily companies of the size of News Corp could strike their own deals to get remunerated. The intended “significant contributions to the sustainability of the Australian news industry” would merely help a few. A publisher with a turnover below the threshold of $150,000 per year cannot even apply to be paid for content under the code, which overall raises another difficult point: Does the Code prevent any anticompetitive behavior or is its purpose a mere transfer of wealth from the platforms to traditional news outlets?

Anti-competitive behavior?

The ACCC and therefore the Australian government have mainly focused on the increasing concentration in the markets. While a quarter of traditional newspaper jobs disappeared, the digital media sector exploded, with Google and Facebook taking 80% of the growth in digital advertising in the period between 2016 and 2019. At the same time, the ACCC still conducts inquiries and is working on determining whether the platforms actually engage in anticompetitive behavior. This in fact does underline the suspicion that the Code is mainly driven by protectionist motives rather than reaction to certain anti-competitive behavior. Because, in all fairness, this development can be monitored in many different countries, traditional news outlets like newspapers lose significant market shares as people nowadays search for information mostly online. It is therefore rather questionable if Big Tech platforms are actually engaging in anti-competitive actions and if the Australian legislation is the adequate response.

International

What happened in Australia also raises the question if legislators elsewhere are inspired by the Code. Australian Senator Rex Patrick put it rather bluntly after Google threatened to pull out of the market: “It’s going to go worldwide. Are you going to pull out of every market, are you?”. And indeed, similar legislation is supposedly prepared in Canada and New Zealand.

In the United States, around the same time, the “Journalism Competition and Preservation Act” was introduced by Senator Amy Klobuchar (and supported , in an unlikely alliance, by Republican Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell) which is also supposed to help local news businesses to strengthen their negotiating position with Big Tech platforms. And considering that Facebook and Google are both based in the U.S., it does not seem likely that they engage in such drastic tactics like temporarily shutting down services on their home turf.

The EU is working on its Digital Markets and Digital Service Acts and first agreements with French publishers have already been signed by Google. It seems that tighter regulation around the globe is just a matter of time and that, at the moment, forcing Big Tech to remunerate other news outlets is the most common approach.

Conclusion

Regulation is gaining more traction all over the place but it is uncertain if the Australian News Media Bargain Code will become a role model for legislation in other places. There are several weaknesses to the Code and after all, it is not clear if paying publishers for their content will really alter the high levels of market concentration. One has to recognize on the other hand that the Australian government sought confrontation with platforms and had them prove the very point the government was trying to make: Big Tech has become extremely powerful and intends to maintain the status quo. Indeed, a smart move and a case from which legislators in other nations will be able to learn from before getting into other “showdowns” with Big Tech.

Marco Schmidt just finished his law degree at the University of Trier, Germany. He is particularly interested in matters of antitrust law and is going to pursue a LL.M. in Law and Economics at the University of Utrecht, the Netherlands. Being a German native, he is also fluent in English and Spanish.

Myanmar's Keyboard Warriors

Mon, 09 Aug 2021 20:55:12 GMT

DIGITAL ACTIVISM

Myanmar's Keyboard Warriors

The perseverance of Myanmar’s youth to fight for freedom is proving to be the key to the country’s democratic future.

By Theint Theint Thu

August 9, 2021

On February 1st, Myanmar’s military staged a coup d’état, citing election fraud in the November elections which saw an overwhelming support for the National League of Democracy, the democratic political party in Myanmar and the military’s primary opposition party. Since then, the effects have been devastating. From the documented terror on civilian lives, to the cultivation of fear, and the crackdown on dissent , most people in Myanmar are reminded of the conditions they were forced to endure in 1988 and 2007. Among this, the digital space has emerged as a channel for democratic activism and hope.

Putnam’s Bowling Alone

Drawing upon the conceptualizations of civil society, in Robert Putnam’s book Bowling Alone, he writes how the increasing “individualization” of leisurely activities have impeded the natural formation and maintenance of civil society, which can only be imagined to be exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Indeed, the decrease in social capital during the pandemic is a concerning development, particularly for those who are convinced of Putnam’s argument. Yet, Myanmar's recent democratic movement has challenged Putnam, by revealing the potential of the digital space for organizations, activism, and conversations under an authoritarian rule.

Fighting for Democracy

The rise of the internet in Myanmar has only increased in the last decade. Cellphones and SIM cards are now more widely available than they were in the pre-2012 era. Facebook has become synonymous with the internet, and it would not be a surprise anymore that the ordinary person has a facebook account. Yet, despite only the recent introduction of social media, the social networking site has been a medium for organizing protests, spreading live information, and expressing dissent.

Interestingly, the term “keyboard warriors'' were initially utilized as a derogatory term to refer to people who expressed their anger online, with a perceived lack of real substantive value in the real world. Yet, this particular use of the term negates the contributions of online activists to real world democratic struggles. In the post-coup era in Myanmar, keyboard warriors in the democracy movement are seen with high regards, responsible for using what little access the nation has to the internet to promote the democracy movement.

During nights, Facebook Live was used to document unrest; online neighborhood watch groups were set up to alert people nearby and hinder arbitrary arrests by the police and military. The internet was flooded with hashtags of #whatshappeninginMyanmar, #SaveMyanmar, #PrayforMyanmar, and many others led by “keyboard warriors” on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram who risked their lives to inform the world of the atrocities. From the online blue shirt campaign for current political prisoners, to the red lips campaign for the International Day for the Elimination of Sexual Violence in Conflict, the people of Myanmar have utilized social media to pour visualizations of creative dissent; using the internet as a medium of resistance, and urging others to join the fight from the shadows of the junta. Like the three finger salute by democracy fighters in the country, the hashtags reveal symbols of resistance of the Myanmar people against the military coup in the digital era.

Evidently, at a time when isolation is expected due to the dangers of going out during an authoritarian crackdown and COVID-19, Facebook has been a crucial pillar for Myanmar’s civil society to reinvigorate and thrive. Despite these individualized actions and what Putnam would essentially describe as a decrease in social capital, civil society and anti-regime activism is thriving in Myanmar. The internet demonstrates a novel threat to the military regime, which has relied on outdated modes of surveillance and tactics. In response to the rise of the digital space as an instrument of anti-regime activism, the junta have also actively arrested and targeted social media influencers, musicians, poets, and journalists who are vocal on the internet.

Conclusion

Indeed, civil society alone has only been truly studied in the past few decades. Within this realm, the digital space has been looked at less as an opportunity to foster the growth of civil society, and more as a hindrance to democratic maintenance. Yet, I argue, using the case study of Myanmar’s 2021 democracy movement, that this is an unfair and dangerous assumption to make.

Despite the nightly internet blackout and arbitrary shutdown of internet services, Myanmar’s youth have utilized the digital space to share atrocities, art, poems, and live feeds of what is happening on-ground. They have used innovation and humor to artfully convey messages of democracy. The military has severely underestimated the role of young people and the digital space in this new wave of regime resistance. The current fight for democracy in Myanmar relies on their access to the internet, and the international community, at the very minimum, must ensure that the internet remains accessible. As evident, the creativity, determination, and perseverance of Myanmar’s youth to fight for freedom is proving to be the key to the country’s democratic future.

Theint Theint is an MSc student at the London School of Economics and Political Science. She is interested in exploring the intersection of human rights, law, and health within the context of Southeast Asia. She has led multiple health initiatives in Myanmar and partakes in pro-bono legal human rights work. She is interested in exploring the power dynamics between civil society, the internet, and authoritarian regime.

Challenges of Digital Vaccine Passports

Mon, 09 Aug 2021 20:55:07 GMT

PRIVACY & COVID-19

Challenges of Digital Vaccine Passports

Undeniably, digitization has been our saviour during the COVID 19 pandemic. However, major concerns must be addressed before making digital passports our ticket to our pre-COVID lives.

By Srishti Nair

August 9, 2021

Fernando Ron Pedrique

Introduction

As countries like Canada, Brazil, and Germany continue to battle the third wave of COVID-19,it is clear that the global pandemic has not only claimed millions of lives but has also had a sweeping impact on the social, political, economic and legal narrative of the global community. In view of the same, several mechanisms have been introduced to aid better adjustment to the “new normal”. One such aiding tool that is becoming increasingly popular is the vaccine passport. It aims to certify the vaccination status of an individual and requires the inclusion of details such as date of vaccination and the kind of vaccine that was administered .

Need For Digital Vaccine Passport

The primary objective of developing a digital passport has largely been to facilitate return to the pre-COVID-19 era without endangering public health. For the past year, countries have been employing different testing requirements to navigate domestic as well as international travel and the digital vaccine passport is being seen as another means to an end i.e., an additional instrument to make travel safer . Given the lack of trust and faith in the present system of paper-based vaccine cards owing to the increasing cases of black marketing, fake certificates etc. the development of digital documentation has become important. It will allow the consumers to avail proof of their vaccination status and assist in serving the growing public interest of getting access to their workplace and other public spaces while ensuring their physical safety.

What Are The Countries Planning?

As countries fight to restore normalcy in the lives of their citizens, an increasing faith and reliance is being placed on digital vaccine passports. Examples include:

DENMARK : The Nordic country has launched a vaccine passport named “Coronapas” which is linked to the already existing secure digital ID system called NemID, which grants the citizens of Denmark access to different online platforms, including their health records and test results. Upon completion of vaccine administration for all the high-risk groups, the vaccine will be used as a proof of vaccination status, earlier infection or a recent negative test which will be necessary to gain access to public places like cinemas,restaurants etc. This will also aid in international travel across the 27 member states of the European Union.

EUROPEAN UNION : The EU proposes a “Digital Green Certificate” which will serve as a proof with respect to an individual’s vaccination status. It will contain information such as an individual's vaccination status, test results and whether or not they have tested negative post recovering from COVID-19. It will further be reinforced with a QR code which will allow the free movement of individuals within the member states. The said certificate will be made available to EU citizens and their families, non-EU citizens whose residence is in the EU and visitors.

ISRAEL : Israel has launched the “Green Pass”, a digital vaccine passport which acts as a proof for individuals who have been fully vaccinated or have recovered from Covid-19. The application links individuals to their personal health ministry data and allows access to public spaces. . Furthermore, it also opens up doors to international travel as Israel has entered into agreements with Greece and Cyprus , allowing Israeli citizens with passes to travel to those two countries.

Ethical And Legal Issues

While proof for immunization is a path that we have walked down before during the yellow fever, what needs to be considered is the difference in the mode of transmission and the resulting amplified likelihood of the virus spreading .Further, while most countries are focused on returning to normalcy, we must not forget that the passport is not an isolated public health measure, rather, it is a part of the growing digital infrastructure which brings with it a range of ethical and legal issues, some which are highlighted below:

Discrimination

Unequal access to public places

The suggested use of digital passports is not limited to international travels but is also linked to access to everyday social activities. While from a utilitarian perspective, community welfare will be facilitated better if inoculation is prioritised on the basis of factors such as age, health, social status etc. but it can also have a debilitating impact on the existing inequalities and discrimination. In the words of the UK Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), “ COVID certificates/passports could amount to unlawful discrimination, creating a two-tier society of the vaccinated and unvaccinated.”

Given that vaccine passports are turning into a prerequisite for participation in socio-economic public activities, transformation of the same into a license for discrimination is highly likely. For example: The brunt of India’s technology driven vaccination policy which prioritised the 45+ age group and the subsequent unavailability of vaccine had to be borne by the younger age groups as well as the informal workforce in terms of their safety as well as employability.High rates of unemployment will be especially brutal for the socially and economically marginalised communities which will further push towards the edge.

Thus, it is clear that revival of the pre-COVID era founded on digital vaccine passports will not be identical given the higher probability of discrimination to be inflicted upon groups which cannot get inoculated as well as those who should not get inoculated .Consequently, these groups will be left behind and be denied access to basic facilities such as workplaces, parks, supermarkets etc. which will not only prove to be harmful for the excluded individuals but also deepen the existing socio-economic disparities.

Discrimination between countries

While vaccines rollout has been experiencing high success rates in countries like United States of America, the developing and least developed countries continue to struggle to acquire sufficient quantity of vaccines. Moreover, rapid inoculation of the population heavily relies on technological infrastructure such as access to smartphones, reliable internet connection etc. The profound digital divide prevalent across the globe in specific sections of people including the rural population, socially and economically marginalised communities, refugees, the digitally illiterate etc . will cause these individuals to either be left out or be the last to be inoculated thereby, aggravating the existing disparities.

Moving forward, the difference in vaccine administration rates can also lead to indirect discrimination between nations. The starking contrast in factors such as health infrastructure, access to health care facilities and digital infrastructure can impact the inoculation rates in different countries thereby, exposing their citizens to discrimination especially with respect to international travel. This situation will be further worsened by vaccine acceptance rules being set by different countries. For example: Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic plan to use the Sputnik V vaccine, which while is equally effective as its European counterparts has failed to enjoy equal prestige in the European Union and is even unacceptable on the grounds of merely being of non-European origin . Thus, vaccine passports approved on the basis of such vaccines might as well be invalid and non-existential.

Data Protection

Highly vulnerable to cyberattacks

Since the advent of the COVID 19 pandemic, personal information of individuals including sensitive health data has been placed at the disposal of public and private entities for different purposes. Bringing such extensive data into the public domain is proving to be a goldmine for cybercriminals as evidenced by the data leak of a health laboratory in France in February 2021, where information relating to approximately 500,000 persons was compromised.

Additionally, with travel restrictions being reduced, the number of people travelling and wanting to pass through security without any hassles is also increasing which could possibly have a snowball effect on creation of fraudulent certificates and passports. Thereby, raising the question of how will real time verification of immunity status be ensured ? Further, the outdated encryption technology, lack of an open-source code for majority of the application etc. also contribute to increasing the fear and wariness in the community about the safety of their personal data.

Privacy and Transparency

One of the most critical and worrisome steps involved in the development of vaccine passports is the need to create a system collecting and storing extensive data relating to individuals so as to facilitate effective working of the passports. This would involve tying up with the vaccination databases of different states via their medical records leading to mounting dread of the likelihood of privacy violation especially in countries which either have a weak data protection framework or even worse, none at all. In the absence of a proper system of checks and balances, there is nothing holding back the big tech conglomerates such as Microsoft, Oracle etc. leading the development of digital vaccine passports from exploiting the information made available to them for purposes such as product development, marketing, selling it to third-parties, surveillance etc. Furthermore, given that data protection regulations in most of the non-EU countries are inadequate, cross-border sharing of such highly sensitive data could prove to be a nightmare for both the authorities as well as the general public.

Tool for mass surveillance

The development of vaccination passports will require the creation of a technological infrastructure which will categorise (vaccinated and unvaccinated) and track the health data of different individuals.A trove of such data when combined with sensors and digital systems take away any possible territorial restraints thereby, enabling mass surveillance . Digital passports are being viewed as the future of travel however, the nature and volume of information that will be required into developing an efficient passport system raises several red flags including the purposes for which such information will be utilised, whether or not it’s usage will be limited to the pandemic and if in the post pandemic world, it would aid and intensify shadowing of our private lives by public as well as private institutions.

Purpose and Storage Limitation

The present data protection regulations across the globe are known to have followed the footsteps of the European Union’s GDPR thereby, making the basic principles such as storage limitation, purpose limitation amongst others the cornerstones of these rules and regulations. The purpose limitation principle requires that the data must be collected for only specific and legitimate purposes and it’s processing too must be limited to the purpose for which it was consented to be used by the individual. Similarly, the storage principle also requires that the data should only be stored for a time period which is necessary for fulfilling the specific purpose for which it was collected. The volume of information collected and being processed in the development of creating a vaccine passport system is colossal thereby, making it imperative for the passport developers as well as the governing authorities to ensure that function creep is avoided by designing within the passport system a framework that would collect, process and retain data for only essential usages.

Conclusion

It is undeniable that digitization has been our saviour during the COVID 19 pandemic, from relying on e-commerce websites for daily provisions to social media platforms aiding in relief work, technology has been a blessing in disguise for mankind during these dire circumstances. However, we must remember that once a new technology begins to control us, no longer are we the masters. Thus, it is vital that we be diligent and ensure that the new normal with digital vaccine passports does not begin with us being rolled into the road itself.

Given that the development of a digital passport system is evolving into a global phenomenon it is necessary that the countries come together to develop a comprehensive and standard approach with deep data points agreed upon to ensure effective functioning of the system and also unanimously develop a certain scientific standard that each vaccine will have to pass so as to be recognised universally. Further, there is also a need to pay heed to basic epidemiological questions revolving around the efficiency of a vaccine against different strains of the SARS-CoV-2 virus, the duration of effectiveness of inoculations and probability of inoculates individuals being spreaders of the virus .

Additionally, in view of the issues relating to privacy and data protection, the application developers could be mandated to adopt privacy by design by adopting regulations which would enable the collection of the minimum amount of data while allowing the parties to verify the actual inoculation status of different individuals. Different methods that could be adopted for the same could include authentication via digital signatures to prevent fraudulent passports, use encryption in transit, minimisation of storage etc. They can also oversee the use of the data collected and require the app developers to not undertake any kind of activity including using the information for marketing without obtaining explicit and informed consent of the individuals.

Srishti Nair is a fourth-year law student from Symbiosis International (Deemed) University, India. She is interested towards exploring the intersectionality between law and technology especially protection of privacy and digital rights of the community.

Social Media and Iran – A Messy Relationship?

Mon, 09 Aug 2021 20:55:00 GMT

DIGITAL ACTIVISM

Social Media and Iran - A Messy Relationship?

Despite being an authoritarian regime, Iran has an interesting (albeit conflicted) relationship with social media. Although Iranian authorities often see social media as a threat, Iranian politicians are increasingly using social media as a way to appeal to voters.

By Lucas Pinho Martins Nacif

August 9, 2021

Although Iran is known for imposing restrictive measures aimed at curtailing internet freedoms (particularly social media use), recent experience shows that social media is actually embraced in Iran. Indeed, politicians are known to use social media to mobilise supporters – including the Supreme Leader himself and newly-elected president Ebrahim Raisi . The purpose of this article is to explore the often complicated relationship between the Iranian political system and social media, and the potential implications of Ebrahim Raisi’s victory in the 2021 presidential elections.

Iran and state censorship

According to Freedom House, Iran’s regime falls short meeting democratic standards due to the overarching influence of its clerical establishment in key institutions, such as the judiciary and security forces, which plays a key role in suppressing dissent. Indeed, Iran’s state censorship is notorious, with social media networks such as Facebook and Twitter being officially blocked . State censorship is further strengthened by the 2009 Access to Information Law , which enables the Government to withhold information under vague grounds – such as protection of state interests and public security. In addition, media freedom in Iran is extremely limited given the overarching influence exercised by Iran’s clerical elites and security forces.

The Iranian regime has extensively attempted to control the public’s access to information online. Following protests organised by University of Tehran students in 1999, the Iranian state has adopted increasingly restrictive attitudes towards the internet. For example , the Iranian regime has extensively sought to constrain or limit access to the internet (to stifle dissent). Examples include making its internet service providers operate on reduced speed, disabling messaging platforms and using denial of service attacks to disable websites operated by activists.

Popularity of social media in Iran

Iran’s restrictive measures towards media freedom and internet use is ineffective, as millions of Iranians nonetheless stay connected via social media. This is largely attributed to proxies and VPNs which enables young Iranians to bypass restrictions.

Social media use is not solely attributed to young Iranians and as a means for the opposition and liberal newspapers to flourish , however. Politicians in Iran have been increasingly embracing social media platforms to appeal to voters and mobilise supporters. For example, the reformist faction successfully used the messaging app Telegram to mobilise voters, which led to the ‘Hope List’ winning 121 out of 290 seats in the 2016 parliamentary elections. More recently, Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Zarif used the social media app Clubhouse to defend Iran’s strategic cooperation pact with China. That an Iranian minister openly used Clubhouse to engage with an Iranian audience shows that the Iranian government is trying to use social media platforms for their own political gain.

2021 Presidential Election

Ebrahim Raisi, Iran’s current Chief Justice, won the presidential elections held this June with 62% of the votes (though the vote was marked by a low turnout). Raisi’s election win means that hardliners now control all branches of the Iranian state since 2013. As Chief Justice, Raisi is notorious for being a repressive judge – from handing down heavy prison sentences against activists, to pressuring journalists that are critical of the regime.

Given Raisi’s reputation as a hardliner, it might be anticipated that the Iranian government will attempt to impose even more repressive measures against media freedom and social media use. This is a trend which has been long underway, given that Iranian authorities in recent years have imposed internet shutdowns by blocking the nation’s inbound and outbound internet traffic after demonstrations in 2019, as well as seeking to develop a centralised national “intranet” called the “National Information Network”, otherwise known as SHOMA, in order to police content and limit Iranian’s access to information.

Following Raisi’s election, a proposed bill from the Iranian parliament was introduced, seeking to “regulate social media messengers” by requiring the Ministry of Communication to uncover the names of all users and ban the use of proxies and VPNs, as well as requiring social media platforms to register to a regulatory and supervisory board which will include representatives of the intelligence ministry and the Revolutionary Guards.

However, despite expressing hostility towards media freedom and social media use, hardliner politicians such as Raisi have used Twitter to bolster political support. For example, Raisi has used Twitter during the 2021 presidential election to declare that the fight against “poverty, corruption and discrimination” were his priorities if elected. Raisi even pledged to provide free internet to people from the lower strata of Iranian society (although based on the recent bill proposed by the Iranian parliament, it seems that his intention is to provide free access to a heavily censored internet, or even to SHOMA, if the intranet is launched.

Concluding remarks

Iran has at best, a contradictory relationship with social media. Although the government has historically attempted to impose restrictive measures against social media use, such measures have been at times ineffective thanks to an increasing use of proxies and VPNs among Iranians (though these measures are incapable of overcoming measures such as internet slowdowns and mobile data blackouts). In addition, Iranian politicians – both reformists and hardliners – have recently embraced social media use as a means of mobilising supporters.

Although Raisi’s recent presidential election victory indicates that the Iranian government might attempt to impose further measures to repress social media use, it is difficult to comprehend the regime’s hostile stance towards social media when even their Supreme Leader is an active Twitter user.

Lucas Nacif is a Bar Vocational Studies candidate at City Law School and has recently completed his LLM at St Edmund’s College, University of Cambridge. He also holds a LLB degree from King’s College London. During his legal studies, Lucas has done internships in various commercial barrister chambers in London.

How to Facilitate International Space Cooperation with China?

Mon, 09 Aug 2021 20:54:57 GMT

SECURITY CHALLENGES IN OUTER SPACE

How to Facilitate International Space Cooperation with China?

China’s growth as a prominent space-faring power necessitates staunch engagement with the CCP. The encroachment of private actors in the space domain also begs the questions as to how all these different actors will engage with each other in a seemingly lawless realm. This article lays out the current most pressing challenges in space pertaining to the US, the EU, and China, and cases of successful and unsuccessful Chinese cooperation with other state and non-state actors.

By Eiza Marot

August 9, 2021

Outer-space is emerging as the final frontier: a unique dual-use realm that oversees approximately 3,372 operational satellites, and this number is expected to grow much larger with the encroachment of non-state actors like Space X’s Starlink Constellation. (Union of Concerned Scientists 2021). Space is a critical domain for both civilian and military purposes as earth-based critical infrastructure has become extremely dependent on the secure data flows between earth-based ground control centres and satellites. For the United States, space is a key domain that has allowed it to integrate advanced space systems into its military operations as well as project power from a great distance.

Space also houses space assets essential to civilian livelihoods including communications, navigation, meteorological, and observation satellites. Outer-Space is a critical domain for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), not just in a security sense, it is a matter pertaining to national pride. Space, from the Chinese perspective, is the ultimate higher ground, militarily speaking, and is envisioned to play a key role in attaining the ‘Chinese Dream’ to create a more prosperous and stronger nation. China has ambitious plans in space including orbital, lunar, and deep-space activities. In 2022, China plans to build its very own Tianhe space station, just as the International Space Station (ISS) has announced it will be closing shop by 2024. Space experts assert that the ISS could remain operable by 2033 but if it is indeed decommissioned, Tianhe could fill the global demand for an operating space station (NASA Spaceflight 2021).

With a growing number of actors in orbit, space is becoming increasingly crowded, weaponized, and we are witnessing an absent global regime on arms control. There are currently no tangible laws in existence that regulate the weaponization, nor are there any international laws that address the proliferation of space debris. Space is increasingly at risk of becoming a volatile, hostile environment, and the cost of a space conflict is all but to high given the global dependence on space assets. To face the ‘wicked’ problems there will need to be a global consensus and international cooperation to tackle space security, moreover, China’s growth as a prominent space-faring power necessitates staunch engagement with the CCP.

The encroachment of private actors in the space domain also begs the questions as to how all these different actors will engage with each other in a seemingly lawless realm. Nevertheless, this policy paper will layout the current most pressing challenges in space pertaining to the US, the EU, and China, and cases of successful and unsuccessful Chinese cooperation with other state and non-state actors.

Current Challenges Facing Outer-Space

There are several challenges that need to be addressed on space: the proliferation of space weapons, the lack thereof a definition, the weaponization of space, deadlocks on the international treaties, the encroachment of non-state actors (both malicious and well-intentioned), and space debris.

Space weapons and the weaponization of Space

One of the biggest challenges to instituting in outer space regards the issue of the weaponization space. Each of the major space faring powers each have their own specific reasons for pursuing anti-satellite capabilities (ASATs). To put simply, China does not have the same nuclear posture as the US and perceives space as the higher ground that it can leverage against the US, whilst Russia perceives ASAT capabilities as being a useful deterrence strategy against the US and China. Meanwhile, the US assessment of its ASAT capabilities is that ASATs are essential to protecting their space assets and hegemony in space and deterring the Sino-Russian axis (Weeden 2020).

Absence of a comprehensive legal framework

At an international level, the current legal framework regarding peaceful use of space is unfortunately rather lacking other than the Outer Space Treaty (1967), the Proposed Prevention of an Arms Race in Space (1985), both of which refrain parties from placing objects carrying any type of weapon into orbit, installing weapons on celestial bodies, and threatening to use force against objects in outer space (UNIDIR 2002). Meanwhile, the only space arms control proposal currently on the table, the Russian and Chinese-backed Draft Treat on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapons in Outer Space (PPWT) has been staunchly disregarded by the US due to conflicting conceptions on the definitions of ‘space weapons’ outlined in the Draft Treaty (Samson & Weeden 2020). There are also voluntary measures that space faring powers can take to regulate space activities called Transparency and Confidence Building Measures (TCBMs). TCBMs are perceived as a practical alternative to conventional treaties in the sense that they fill in many of the gaps within existing mechanisms and treaties like the OST. However, given the nature of these non-legally binding measures, a party’s activities are more difficult to verify.

‘Space congestion’ and lack of communications amongst stakeholders

An additional roadblock to building an international legal regime on arms control in space is the lack of communication between state actors, state actors and non-state actors, and between non-state actors themselves. Space experts assert the lack of communication between increasingly powerful private entities to be quite alarming, the recent case of the SpaceX’s satellite and the British-owned OneWeb satellite were 60 m away from colliding into each other in orbit. Reports later indicated that SpaceX had disabled its AI-powered collision avoidance system to allow OneWeb to steer its satellite out of the way (Roulette 2021).

Fortunately, Space X and OneWeb were able to coordinate just in time to manoeuvre their satellites, but this collision could have resulted in catastrophic emissions of space debris in an already extremely congested orbit.

Proliferation of space debris

This case invokes the most pressing environmental/ security issues in space: the proliferation of space debris. More than 20,000 trackable pieces of space junk orbit the planet and is presented as a more problematic threat due to the sheer speed at which space debris travels, even the tiniest fragment could render a satellite inoperable. The European Space Agency calculated that an aluminium ball of even one centimetre in diameter collides with a satellite, it has the energy of a mid-range car (Brzozowski 2019).

Non-state actors pertaining to private corporations, researchers, universities, and malicious non-state actors, are taking up more space in orbit, which will undoubtedly pose a massive strain on space traffic, the viability of space assets, as the domain remains sadly unregulated. The barriers to entry in space are lower than ever through cyber and physical means into orbit, which could leave space in a state of disarray, the wild west.

US Threat Perception of Chinese Space Development

The US position on Chinese assertion in space perceives Chinese advancements in space, both civilian and military, to be a threat to its national security. According to a recent report published by the US Intelligence Community (2021), China’s space program was assessed as the top security concern for the US and stated that “Beijing is working hard to match or exceed US capabilities in space to gain the military, economic, and prestige benefits that Washington has accrued from space leadership” and noted the soon to be commissioned China’s space station as a possible threat.

Space policy experts have argued that the report’s conception of the security threats posed by Chinese activities in space conflated the military and civilian space pursuits. Victoria Samson from the Secure World Foundation (SWF) questioned why the report classified China’s space station as a threat at all, even though it had been in the works for over decade (2021).

In addition, the geopolitical rivalry between the US and China is compounded by the stringent Wolf Amendment which forbids NASA from cooperating in any shape, way or form with China due to fears of espionage, intellectual property theft. Space experts have argued that it is high time to consider repealing the Wolf Amendment and that while it does not directly prohibit working with Chinese counterparts, the effect of the bill certainly does.

On the other hand, Kevin Pollpeter argues that China has gradually been building more war fighting footing for its space program and that US concerns on heightened Chinese counter-space capabilities are a valid qualm as the PLA could use its civilian space program as a guise for its military space developments (Pollpeter, Anderson, Wilson 2015).

China’s rapidly improving capabilities and investments in ASATs are indeed of great concern, intelligence suggests that Beijing is developing up to three different ASATs, with the more recent development of robotic arm technology which the US Defense Intelligence Agency has determined could be used as a weapon. All space experts would agree that the escalation of weapons in space is detrimental to the securitization of space but the key to resolving conflict involving dual-use nature of technology implemented in orbit, like Beijing’s robotic arm, is intent , therefore, there needs to be more emphasis on assessing the extent to which actors carry responsible behavior in space (Samson 2021).

Moreover, Brian Weeden’s testimony to the US-China Economic and Security Review Commission expresses that China has indeed complied with the existing legal principles and norms from the four main space treaties and that there is no evidence suggesting China would contradict these legal frameworks. The US has noted while some of China’s rendezvous and proximity operations (RPO) activities may have been precursors to co-orbital ASAT capabilities Weeden states that they have been entirely consistent with international law (2019).

EU: Strategic Autonomy and Ambitions in Space

Space, for the EU, is vital to its pursuit of strategic autonomy as it aids situational awareness, decision-making, connectivity of technological systems and to its diplomacy toolbox, however, the EU’s space policy currently stands fixed at a crossroads as it needs to ensure it can enhance its space presence and push technological frontiers without disrupting its industrial supply chains and strategic autonomy (EU Directorate General for External Polices of the Union 2020).

Space is a strategic domain and therefore there exists an inherent political ambition to enhance the EU’s autonomy in space to ensure the EU’s economic and defense prosperity, as affirmed by the European Council (Grevi 2019). The reason why the EU is so fixed on building its strategic autonomy in space is due to the rise of geopolitical competition in space, as global competitors invest heavily in space defense technologies given that the EU is unfortunately lacking in this area. The EU does not have its own space-based space surveillance and tracking (SST) capabilities or collective ASAT warning capabilities (Fiott 2021). Even the EU and its member states’ military systems are highly dependent on functional satellites, for example, the Future Combat Aircraft System (FCAS) depends on space assets for communications and positioning.

Satellites, being vulnerable to hacking, jamming, or even weaponization, need resilient defense systems to withstand the plethora of risks in space, security on the ground demands it. Between the US-China standoff, the mounting deadlocks on international treaties, and emboldened private entities, the EU will have a unique part to play as a shaping, mediating power. As it currently stands, the neither the US nor China consider the rules-based order to be a central focus to their respective strategies (Grevi 2019). Strategic autonomy is space means resilience for the EU and its member states in space and on Earth, which cannot occur without engaging with China (Foust 2019).

Multilateral Cooperation with China

China’s Perspective on Space

China’s objectives for its space program are rooted in its nationalistic Chinese Dream which will give it the opportunity to gin more economic and political, domestic legitimacy, and international prestige. China has outspent every country in 2020 regarding space activities, but in comparison to the US, Beijing’s $ 8.9 billion simply cannot compare to the US’ $48 billion budget (CSIS 2021). China’s ambitions for space power are similar to nuclear power as space capabilities are used for deterrence, however, these they are distinguished by the threshold for space power is lower than for nuclear weapons.

Chinese scholars refer to space war or tian zhan (天站), as military confrontations occurring in space, integrating military defensive and offensive operations in space, and engaging with targets from space and air space (Bowe 2019). The Chinese perspective on space power sees the domain as having two uses: for deterrence and real war fighting capabilities. Space from the Chinese perspective is the ultimate high ground as American military capabilities are hugely contingent on the sophisticated yet exposed networks of communications, command, control, surveillance, and computer intelligence through space assets (Tellis 2007). Incidentally, in the face of US obstruction China set to build its very own space station, Tianhe , after its request to join the ISS was rejected by the US.

China and the ESA see eye to eye on Space

China formally launched its manned space program called Project 921 in 1992, the critical component of which was the development of Tiangong space labs which were critical testbeds for configuring the CSS. Chinese engineers, building on the successes of Tiangong-1/-2, were able to build the core module of the CSS (CSIS 2019). While smaller in size, Chinese engineers stipulate that Tianhe could be expanded through international cooperation. The ESA and the National Remote Sensing Centre of China (NRSCC) launched the fourth phase of their collaborative Dragon programme in Wuhan which identified the overall drop in water levels in the Poyang Lake over a decade (ESA 2016).

ESA astronauts also trained with their Chinese colleagues in 2017 to prepare to fly on the CSS. The collaboration represented a decent milestone in establishing the ESA as a partner in space (ESA 2017). The ESA have also collaborated on the Double Star project which was signed in 2001 and marked the first time the ESA board its own experiments on Chinese satellites (ESA 2021). More recently, in 2019, the Solar wind-magnetosphere-Ionosphere Link Explorer (Smile), unlike Double Star, was envisaged as being a joint ESA-China mission from the very start (ESA 2019). In addition, the ESA has also assisted the recent Chang’e-5 and ongoing Mars Tianwen-1 missions.

Sino-Russian cooperation in Space

Russia has been a long-time collaborator in space alongside its US colleagues, though in the last decade China and Russia have criticised US’ weaponization of space by preparing to place weapons in orbit. Beijing and Moscow linked arms to draft the PPWT which invoked criticism from the US for the treaty’s lack of clarity on space weapons.

More recently, Russia and China have signed on to build a work on an International Scientific Lunar Station orbiting the Moon which will rival NASA’s Gateway program, moreover, Russia declined the offer to partner with the US on Gateway. This strategic partnership means that the two nations will be able to pool together their resources and signals that both parties do not perceive the US plight to be the only means of cooperating in space (Goswami 2021).

Not to mention, the US did not extend an invitation to Russian counterparts to join in on the Artemis Accords, an agreement that includes the ESA and several other nations (Australia, Japan, Canada, Luxembourg, Italy, Ukraine, the UK, and the United Arab Emirates). The agreement seeks to establish norms for exploration and behaviours in space however Russia and China find the accords to be too ‘US-centric’. A new geopolitical divide appears to be emerging in space: the Russia-China axis against the rest, a dynamic that will make multilateral cooperation to address space security even more difficult.

Recommendations for facilitating engagement with China

Space debris removal and regulatory frameworks

There are no current international laws that ban the proliferation of space debris in orbit, and in accordance with the Kessler Effect (cascading effect of debris) that occurs when debris is emitted: the more debris is created, the higher risks of collisions, and the higher number of debris remains in orbit. This is dangerous for the safety and wellbeing of all space assets, future missions, astronauts, and poses risks to the critical infrastructure on Earth that is reliant on satellites. This global wicked problem could motivate not just the space faring powers, but the non-state actors in China, the US, Russia, Europe, to mobilize space debris removal programs, and build norms that deter the proliferation of such debris.

Cybersecurity vulnerabilities: information sharing between space industry and researchers

Public and private actors in China and the US should learn to collaborate and hold each other accountable to an agreed set of cybersecurity standards, policy makers should endeavour to establish a separate body, facilitated by a state agency, that can mediate between public and private entities. To reiterate, there needs to be more communication and information sharing between the private and public sector in space as private sector entities like SpaceX begin to take on a bigger role in the industry.

Regulating the quantity of space objects in orbit

There is currently no legal framework regulating who and how many satellites can be launched into space, and unfortunately, the current environment in orbit is getting busy and messy. Policy makers need to establish rules for all actors involved, both in the private and public sectors, whether in the form of soft law like a TCBM, or even through an extensive from the Artemis Accords. More traffic means more risk of collisions between space objects.

Repeal the Wolf Amendment

Any cooperation between NASA and the CNSA is deadlocked by this amendment. While not directly prohibitive, the amendment first requires certification from the FBI. To that effect, collaboration is prohibited. The purpose of the Wolf Amendment initially was to shape Chinese behavior in space and has been largely ineffective in this regard. This step is essential to take if the US decides to undertake joint civil missions with their Chinese counterparts.

Conclusion

The stakes in space could not be any higher, the implications of utilizing weapons or weaponizing space could not be more catastrophic for the viability of future operations and for critical infrastructure on earth dependent on dual-use satellites. Space infrastructure has also become highly exposed to cyber and physical vulnerabilities from malicious or violent non-state actors. China is extremely motivated to tackle the issue of space debris, though the recent wreckage of the Chinese rocket that plummeted to Earth on April 8th led to the pointing of fingers and has exacerbated the geopolitical rift between China and the US (South China Morning Post 2021). It should be noted that the uncontrolled deorbit of the SkyLab space station partially hit Australia, despite the US’ assertions that the debris had fallen into the Indian Ocean.

Nevertheless, the impetus for multilateral action in the sphere of space security and sustainability necessitates all space faring powers and actors in establishing responsible uses of space. International treaties may be too slow moving to keep up with the rapid changes occurring in space, it may be more prudent to look to private entities to begin establishing acceptable norms and rules of behavior to build safer and more sustainable space exploration.

References

Reports

[1] Bowe, Alexander. China’s pursuit of space power status and implications for the United States. US-China Economic and Security Review Commission, 2019. https://www.uscc.gov/sites/default/files/Research/USCC_China's%20Space%20Power%20Goals.pdf

[2] Fiott, Daniel. The European space sector as an enabler of EU strategic autonomy . European Parliament, 2020. https://www.iss.europa.eu/sites/default/files/EUISSFiles/EXPO_IDA%282020%29653620_EN.pdf

[3] Fiott, Daniel. Securing the heavens: How can space support the EU’s strategic compass? European Union Institute for Security Studies, 2021. https://www.iss.europa.eu/sites/default/files/EUISSFiles/Brief_9_2021_0.pdf

[4] Grevi, Giovanni. Strategic autonomy for European choices: The key to Europe’s shaping power. European Policy Centre, 2019. https://wms.flexious.be/editor/plugins/imagemanager/content/2140/PDF/2019/190719_Strategicautonomy_GG.pdf

[5] Harrison, Todd, Johnson, Kaitlyn, Roberts, Thomas G. Space Threat Assessment 2018 . Washington D.C: Centre for Strategic and International Studies, 2018. https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/publication/180823_Harrison_SpaceThreatAssessment_FULL_WEB.pdf

[6] Harrison, Todd, Johnson, Kaitlyn, Young, Makena, Defense Against the Dark Arts in Space . Centre for Strategic and International Studies, 2021. https://csis-website-prod.s3.amazonaws.com/s3fs-public/publication/210225_Harrison_Defense_Space.pdf?N2KWelzCz3hE3AaUUptSGMprDtBlBSQG

[7] Pollpeter, Kevin, Anderson, Eric, Wilson, Jordan, Yang, Fan. China Dream, Space Dream: China’s progress in space technologies and implications for the United States . US-China Economic and Security Review Commission, 2015. https://www.uscc.gov/sites/default/files/Research/China%20Dream%20Space%20Dream_Report.pdf

[8] Porras, Daniel, Eyes on the Sky: Rethinking Verification in the Sky . UNIDIR, 2019. https://www.unidir.org/sites/default/files/2019-10/Eyes%20on%20the%20Sky%20%7C%20Rethinking%20Verification%20in%20Space_1.pdf

[9] UCS Satellite Database . The Union of Concerned Scientists. Union of Concerned Scientists, 2021. https://ucsusa.org/resources/satellite-database?_ga=2.206523283.1848871521.1598077135-464362950.1598077135

[10] UNIDIR. “Prevention of Outer Space Arms Race, Ratification of Nuclear Test Ban Treaty Among Issues Addressed by Texts Introduced in First Committee.” Published October 15 2002. https://www.un.org/press/en/2002/gadis3233.doc.htm

[11] US Office of the Director of National Intelligence. Annual Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community . Published April 9, 2021. https://www.odni.gov/index.php/newsroom/reports-publications/reports-publications-2021/item/2204-2021-annual-threat-assessment-of-the-u-s-intelligence-community

[12] Weeden, Brian, “Current and Future Trends in Chinese Counterspace Capabilities”, Proliferation Papers , IFRI, November 2020, https://www.ifri.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/current_and_future_trends.pdf

Webpages

[13] Barbosa, Rui. 2021. “China preparing to build Tiangong station in 2021, complete by 2022.” NASA Spaceflight. March 1 2021. https://www.nasaspaceflight.com/2021/03/china-preparing-to-build-tiangong-station-in-2021-complete-by-2022/

[14] Brzozowksi, Alexandra. “Europe aims to clean up the space graveyard.” September 3 2019. https://www.euractiv.com/section/global-europe/news/europes-aims-to-clean-up-the-space-graveyard/

[15] Chen, Stephen. 2021. “China-SU tensions move to space as rocket debris heads for Earth.” South China Morning Post. May 8 2021. https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3132702/china-us-tensions-move-space-rocket-debris-heads-earth

[16] ESA. 2016. “ESA’s cooperation with China extended to 2020.” ESA. July 8 2016. https://www.esa.int/Applications/Observing_the_Earth/ESA_s_Dragon_cooperation_with_China_extended_to_2020

[17] ESA. 2017. “ESA and Chinese astronauts train together.” ESA. July 8 2017. https://www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Human_and_Robotic_Exploration/Astronauts/ESA_and_Chinese_astronauts_train_together

[18] ESA. 2021. “Double Star Overview ESA. https://www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Space_Science/Double_Star_overview2

[19] ESA. 2019. “ESA gives go-ahead for Smile mission with China.” ESA. March 5 2019. https://www.esa.int/Science_Exploration/Space_Science/ESA_gives_go-ahead_for_Smile_mission_with_China

[18] Erwin, Sandra. 2021. “Analysts: China’s space programs are a security concern to the US but not all are nefarious.” Space News. April 16 2021. https://spacenews.com/analysts-chinas-space-programs-are-a-security-concern-to-the-u-s-but-not-all-are-nefarious/

[19] Gehrke, Joel. 2021. “Intel chief : China to put space station in orbit during Biden presidency.” Washington Examiner. April 14 2021. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/intel-chief-china-to-put-space-station-orbit-during-biden-presidency

[20] Goswami, Namrata. 2021. “The strategic implications of the China-Russian Lunar Base Cooperation Agreement.” The Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2021/03/the-strategic-implications-of-the-china-russia-lunar-base-cooperation-agreement/

[21] Ni, Adam. 2019. “Yearbook 2019: China Dreams, Dreams in Space.” The China Story. https://www.thechinastory.org/yearbooks/yearbook-2019-china-dreams/forum-projecting-the-dream/dreams-in-space/

[22] Roulette, Joey. 2021. “OneWeb, SpaceX satellites dodged a potential collision in orbit.” The Verge. April 9 2021. https://www.theverge.com/2021/4/9/22374262/oneweb-spacex-satellites-dodged-potential-collision-orbit-space-force

[23] Samson, Victoria & Weeden, Brian. 2020. “US should start space security talks with Russia, China.” Breaking Defense. May 21 2020. https://breakingdefense.com/2020/05/us-should-start-space-security-talks-with-russia-china/

[24] Samson, Victoria. 2021 “Threats to space aren’t just weapons.” Trends Research. February 24 2021. https://trendsresearch.org/insight/threats-to-space-arent-just-weapons/

Journal articles

[25] Tellis, Ashley. 2007. “China’s military space strategy.” Global Politics and Strategy , vol. 49, issue 3: pp. 41-72. https://doi.org/10.1080/00396330701564752

Eiza is an international security specialist and is very passionate about researching current trends regarding space security. She believes it is essential that we maintain that space is indeed used for peaceful purposes. She is also a Star Wars fan.

Are Dystopian Novels a Cautionary Warning?

Mon, 09 Aug 2021 20:54:31 GMT

SURVEILLANCE

Are Dystopian Novels a Cautionary Warning?

During the Covid-19 pandemic, we have witnessed how our life passed under the watchful eye of the state and how easily our rights could disappear in a crisis. In this respect, dystopian novels constantly remind us of the impermanence of reality where nothing is as secure as we think.

By Nathalie Alquati Bonisoli

August 9, 2021

In dystopian novels, authors describe a world where certain trends in contemporary societies are taken to extremes exposing their underlying flaws, and sometimes, we can draw a parallel between the threats that our society is facing and the fictitious world described in these novels. Nowadays, the COVID-19 pandemic has exposed the precarity of our systems of government and the contrast between the privileged classes and the working class. As citizens, we have witnessed how our life passed under the watchful eye of the state and how easily our rights could disappear in a crisis. In this respect, dystopian novels constantly remind us of the impermanence of reality where nothing is as secure as we think.

Dystopia refers to an imaginary place or state in which everything is extremely bad or unpleasant. The dystopian fiction is arguably defined as a subgenre of science fiction that employs a negative portrayal of an alternative society as a way to generate a new perspective of real-word societies. In the dystopian novels, hegemonic ideologies imposed by totalitarian regimes are described as an attempt to create docile, conformed bodies that further allow the regime to sustain and maintain its power over society. The notion of societies controlled by constant surveillance and monitoring raises several political and ethical questions related to privacy and data protection. Many dystopian novels such as 1984, A Scanner Darkly and The Circle all portray an imaginary futuristic surveillance society, which could be seen as foreshadowing a future where surveillance is not limited and citizens are controlled by their governments. Nowadays, we can see a parallel that exists in relation to contemporary surveillance societies and their application of technological devices through which the government interferes and limits the private life of its citizens.

Seventy years ago, the classic novel 1984 by English author George Orwell was published, and from that moment onwards the famous line “Big Brother is watching you!” became an integral part of popular culture. However, the trends of surveillance, power, and control present in the novel are still relatable themes in our society today. Today, during the COVID-19 pandemic, it is almost impossible not to draw a connection between the world portrayed in dystopian novels and the new surveillance methods enacted to limit the spread of the virus.

After the first news about a virus that originated in China spread around the world, new laws to contain the infection rate appeared from every government. From the implementation of social distance rules and the mandatory requirement of wearing face masks to the border closures, the virus changed our society. The fear of being infected forced people to obey authority and get used to this situation in a really short time, also when it involved the restriction of fundamental rights. For these reasons, our current situation is proof that the world that dystopias offer us is not far from reality. In particular, many governments are considering the use of facial recognition or tracking devices to slow the spread of the virus, for example, Italy and Germany have opted for a phone storage-centric model which forgoes the use of GPS charting. However, these measures could lead to the creation of a surveillance society that will strip away people’s personal liberties.

In the case of the pandemic, what is controversial is the fact that surveillance is enacted towards a specific purpose which is to prevent worldwide disease. During the pandemic, governments around the world have employed different surveilling tactics in an attempt to restrict and manage the virus. By implementing social monitoring, governments around the world can track the coronavirus and further uphold the state-induced quarantine.

For example, China has increased its use of surveillance, by installing cameras that point directly to the front door of people’s homes or even within their homes. Following the lift of the coronavirus lockdown, China created a color-coded health system that identifies the health status of people through a questionnaire with details such as health and body temperature. Based on the information provided, people get assigned a color. People with a green code are permitted to move unrestrictedly, people with a yellow code may be asked to stay at home for seven days, while people with a red code are required to self-quarantine for two weeks.

At the same time, city authorities in Moscow ordered its 12 million citizens to remain indoors with only a few exceptions. To enforce this measure, the government provided its citizens with an app that tracks their movements outside their homes, as well as a QR-code containing personal data which must be presented to the police upon request.

The increased surveillance and data collection have contributed to people’s concerns on the growing digital arsenal which the governments are acquiring and likely will continue to have also when the pandemic finally ends. According to UN Special Rapporteur Joseph Cannataci : “Dictatorships and authoritarian societies often start in face of a threat […] that is why it is important to be vigilant today and not give away all our freedoms”. This does not necessarily mean that people have to fight any kind of surveillance during this pandemic, but instead that society should ensure that once the pandemic has passed, the data collected and the surveillance techniques are erased and abolished. If governments will be able to honor these promises, the surveillance needed during this pandemic won’t be considered wrong and that will make our reality different from all the dystopian novels.

Nathalie is completing her Master's degree in European Competition Law and Regulation at the University of Amsterdam. As an undergraduate, she studied European Law at Maastricht University. During her studies, she lived in London for a semester and attended Westminster University. She worked as an intern in a law firm in Italy, and she is currently working at Alber & Geiger in the EU Governmental Relations team. She is fluent in Italian and English and can communicate in Dutch, French and Chinese.

Emojis and Digital Communication

Mon, 09 Aug 2021 20:54:28 GMT

DIGITAL CULTURE

Emojis and Digital Communication

By Suzanne Flynn

August 9, 2021

Double Meanings in Emojis

According to the documentary “ The Emoji Story ” released in 2019, emojis are often associated with positive use, with the most popular emoji being the “face with tears of joy” ��. What this indicates emotionally and linguistically is significant. Is it the case that if someone is expressing negative sentiment that they feel an emoji desensitises or devalues their human emotions? Are words better equipped than emojis to convey sadness, rage, jealousy and so on? It could certainly be argued that if someone sends the “angry face” emoji �� , this is not taken as seriously as someone typing “I am angry with you”.

Societal interpretation of what emojis mean also intersects with emojis and culture. While most people can agree that the smiley face emoji invokes positive connotations, there are some emojis which carry double meanings. The most obvious examples being the association of the eggplant/aubergine emoji with male genitalia and the nail painting emoji carrying the implicit meaning of “sass, fanciness, nonchalance, or self-confidence across a variety of digital contexts.” according to dictionary.com .

Status as a language

The aforementioned quote regarding emojis as the world's fastest growing language may not hold firm in the eyes of linguists. Verbs cannot be conjugated, adjectives are difficult to convey and it is nearly impossible to come up with a full sentence using only emojis, as I illustrated in my introductory statement above. In addition to these concerns, there has been doubt expressed as to the permanence of emojis as a tool for communication in the digital age. If their status as a language fails, one could argue that they are certainly aids that can be used to break down language barriers, as emojis are universal symbols which the majority of the population will understand almost immediately. Much of what makes up a culture revolves around language.

Ireland for example retains its native language “Gaeilge” on all national road signs, public transport infrastructure and official state documentation, and is still considered an integral part of Irish culture, despite the fact English is the primary language spoken by the majority of citizens. Many cultures also hold their language and often dialects as a particularly proud element of their identity, so where do emojis fit into our culture? In addition to our nationality, our friends and family and how we communicate in our social groups, do emojis belong to our digital culture and identity?

Unicode - Emoji Approval Process

In considering the meaning and interpretation of emojis in culture, Unicode plays an essential role. Bringing the human element back to digital communication is at the forefront of Unicode's work. The organisation serves as the “World Standard for Text and Emoji “with the aim of modifying text to create a “universal code” which all users, whether they operate on Apple or Android software, are looking at the same content when data transmission occurs.

Unicode also oversees the approval of new emojis. The aforementioned documentary “The Emoji Story” looked particularly at the approval process surrounding submissions for argentinian mate, headscarf �� and period emojis. All of these submissions were ultimately successful, having met the criteria to produce an emoji that was globally relevant, but these submissions are exceptional. The emoji creation process takes around 2 years according to the new chair of Unicode Jennifer Daniel . A particularly positive development in the emoji vocabulary in the last 5 years was the introduction of female emojis. The fact that it did take until 2016 for the female option to be included despite the fact that women are heavier emoji users than men [1] could arguably say a lot about our culture and how the lack of representative emojis speaks volumes about how women are perceived in particular.

Regression from words to pictures - High Speech to Hieroglyphics?

When we look at ancient Egypt for example, one of the most advanced societies of its time, hieroglyphics were the main form of language and can be described as similar to emojis in their aesthetic. Will we regress back to pure hieroglyphic-like communication, purely through symbol and picture, or are we seeing something more akin to the Book of Kells? The ancient writings originating from 800 AD intriguingly depict intricate drawings in the middle of sentences throughout the transcription of the New Testament, not dissimilar to how emojis are used today.

What is interesting to consider is to contrast the fact that emojis are generated by just one tap on a phone screen or keyboard, while hieroglyphics require hours of transcribing. In the modern world when there is an emphasis on speed, progression, user friendly interfaces, it is interesting to consider the appeal of emojis. What better way to communicate than just by sending a small byte sized picture of exactly what we want to say?

References

1.Caroline Criado-Perez (2019), Invisible Women: Exposing Data Bias in a World Designed for Men, Vintage Publishing.

Data Feminism

Sun, 06 Jun 2021 15:21:30 GMT

Kittiwake

tech culture society

Data Feminism: What is it and why is needed?

In my previous post, I introduced the concept of big data, the importance of big data, the relationship of big data with statistics and the concept of GDPR. In this article, I will talk about the relationship between the concept of data, which is a broad topic, and feminism, that is, the concept of data feminism, and the purpose and importance of data feminism.

By Sibel Dinç

June 6, 2021

Tiny Intro: In my previous post, I introduced the concept of big data, the importance of big data, the relationship of big data with statistics and the concept of GDPR. In this article, I will talk about the relationship between the concept of data, which is a broad topic, and feminism, that is, the concept of data feminism, and the purpose and importance of data feminism.

Feminism: Starting with a smooth transition!

Feminism is essentially based on the principle that each individual has equal access to equal social, political, legal, and economic rights regardless of gender. It advocates the idea of equally distributing the available public power not only to male individuals but to all individuals. In order to achieve this, this awareness must be present in every field. In the field of "data science", which is considered to be the most valuable object of our age, studies on behalf of feminism should be done to reduce discrimination.

When we look at the history of feminism, we see that feminism has reached the present day in three periods . The first period is the early period covering the struggle for votes in the 19th century. In the second period, women struggled for equal rights, after the suffrage struggle started to be a win in certain countries. After the last quarter of the 20th century, which was accepted as the last period, it was understood that the occupations of feminism included only certain women's groups and efforts were started to spread it over a wide area. When we came to 2017, with the Harvey Weinstein scandal, the eyes turned more intensely to the feminism movement again. However, as can be seen from this brief summary, there is still a long way to go.

Innocent Data! Who said data could not be feminist!

Speaking of the history of feminism, there are a lot of reason to move on. While human studies have been transferred to the digital environment, they have dragged people's bias and perceptions with them. From the sexist translations of Google Translate to sexist responses in voice command services ( Siri, Alexa, etc.), many discriminations in the digital environment have entered our lives with the digital age. Considering that existing technologies are man-made, it is clear that technologies are also shaped by the perceptions and biases of the people who design the technologies.

Trust me, as a senior statistician, I tell you that the data are used, and they are extremely innocent ☺

Data Feminism: Who is it for? Why is it necessary?

When I do research on Data Feminism, I would like to introduce you to two prominent researchers on this subject. Catherine D'lgnazio and Lauren F. Klein wrote the book "Data Feminism" in 2020, and after this highly attention-grabbing book, they have been the guest of many events and podcasts. The authors draw attention to the issue of manipulation of data with the statement “Data does not speak for themself” in the book introduction article . In addition, they point out that the book can contribute to a fairer environment for feminism, and in this respect, they will offer important strategies to both feminists and data scientists who direct their focus to this field. In the book, the authors also focus on what data feminism does with power, who has that power, and what power is possessed. At this point, data science is seen as a tool, and both reveal the current situation and helps to plan the actions to be taken.

“Data Feminism is for everyone” is the strongest statement in the authors' manifesto of Data Feminism, here the writers clarify that this movement is not linked to one gender. Data feminism is for anyone at a disadvantage. As is known, all discrimination feeds on each other and it is a big mistake to handle and evaluate them separately.

Systematic discrimination occurs between groups when power is not evenly distributed. In this context, the segment holding power in the field of digital technologies is an elite, typically portrayed by heterosexual, straight, white, able-bodied, cisgender men. The essence of the matter, and the means to resolve these problems, is the even distribution of power. The underlying reason for each type of discrimination is that the side that is in power wants to withhold their position and then intimidates the side that has no access to power with various pressure factors.

The fact that data can be used for certain purposes in line with the interests of the government shows that the data should be processed and controlled in the right hands, otherwise it is quite open to manipulation. For this reason, data feminism is necessary for a more just, free, strong and healthy society.

Last News: Events, Podcasts and Books in the Data Feminism Field

On this topic, many events have been held. You can find the next event from this link �� Data Feminism by Spread the Word, June 2021 (Free) ( Eventbrite )

Podcasts on data feminism and related topics �� Data Feminism Podcasts by Lauren F. Klein and Catherine D’Ignazio ( link )

Data Feminism Reading Group Videos ( Former ) ( link )

In addition, these books can get your attention:

Data Feminism by Catherine D’Ignazio and Lauren F. Klein, 2020 ( amazon )
Invisible Women: Exposing Data Bias in a World Designed for Men by Caroline Criado Perez, 2020 ( amazon )

Next Post: In my next post, I will introduce the 7 principles of data feminism by touching on the concept of Data Feminism a little more.

Big Data: A New Era

Sun, 06 Jun 2021 15:21:22 GMT

Kittiwake

tech culture society

Big Data: A New Era

With the cumulative growth of data sets increasing by the day, the classical data concept has been replaced by big data. Today, big data is an integral part of many areas of our lives. So, what is the difference between data and big data?

By Sibel Dinç

June 6, 2021

With the concepts of computers and the Internet that came into our lives in the last quarter of the 20th century, data sets were transferred to the digital environment. This process has gained momentum since the beginning of the 21st century, and the new datasets we have increasing by the day have become impossible to analyse with classical analysis tools. In this respect, what differentiates big data from data is its enormous data set which exceeds computability limits.

From Data to Knowledge or Vice Versa?

Well, have you ever thought about why we give so much importance to data? Why should data, which is usually made up of numbers but mostly from texts, pictures, videos and so many different sources, make sense to us? Because these data sets lead us to the concept of "Knowledge", and as Thomas Hobbes said already in the 17th century: " Knowledge is Power ". Based on this concept, having power in an area means domination in that area, and power is derived from knowledge and vice versa.

It is a fact that we acquire information from the data. What about the opposite? In order to test our competence in a subject we think we know, we need to go back to data, and as we will understand here, this is a vicious cycle. Data is hungry for knowledge, and knowledge is hungry for data. This whole philosophy gives us the subtext of the meaning attributed to the data. Because each data obtained brings us one step closer to the big picture. This means getting one step closer to seeing the original.

Let's Get to Know Big Data a Little

Big Data Types are divided into three categories: structured, semi-structured and unstructured. When it comes to data, most people think of a quantitative data set; in other words, numeric data sets consisting of numbers. However, when we say big data, most of them consist of unstructured data sets. There are many sources of unstructured datasets ranging from text files to image files. The analysis of these data sets cannot be done with classical data analysis methods. First of all, powerful analysis tools should be used in order to introduce these data sets to big data analysis tools, and often even to be subjected to coding and analysis. As of 2021, 15 of the big data analysis tools are listed here . The most famous of these are undoubtedly Hadoop, Knime, RapidMiner, Tableau and R. Especially in recent years, it has been seen that the Tableau program is frequently preferred for data visualization.

Mini TIP! If you need a data set for your study or if you want to contribute to the dissemination of information by sharing your data set with other researchers, you can use the Kaggle website, which many researchers frequently use.

Big Data is Killing Statistics Science!

In fact, it would not be wrong to say that big data surpasses statistics in a way. Data analysis has been conducted through the methods employed in statistics science for years. However, as it is known, statistics do not work with the whole data set and analyses are made with the fittest sample obtained from the population. Of course, since statistics does not work with the entire data set, a margin of error should always be included. At this point, instead of choosing a sampling from the big data population, use the population directly and actually resets the concept of margin of error if there is no systematic error .

Areas of Use

We know that big data is used in many areas. However, we can say that the greatest momentum in terms of digital society has been achieved with the increase in the use of social media platforms. Recognizing the importance of people's behaviour and preferences is essential for many companies that try to increase their consumer base and gain loyal consumers through social media tools.

The most striking example in this regard is Facebook. As a result of the research conducted by Cambridge and Stanford University's researchers in the news published by The New York Times , it has been concluded that Facebook knows us better than ourselves because of the data it has. Here's a spooky part of big data! On the bright side, while social platforms such as Spotify and Netflix also gather user data, the use of such data is intended exclusively for recommendation purposes. This is the good news for us!

What About the Data Privacy?

If an application knows us better than ourselves, it means that there is a lot of data about us. So how much of this data was taken with our permission? Also, are we sure that this data is not shared with other companies or third parties? Lots of problems are pending in this regard. Data privacy is a very important concept. Although the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) regulation of the European Union aims at tackling certain issues, this data protection framework has validity for limited countries and still has deficits in many areas.

The concept of data privacy in the digital medium is an issue that should be given utmost importance and still maintains its warmth. On the other hand, if we do not go far enough in data protection, it will lead to the exploitation of the data of each individual using the internet, not only in a specific area but also in many areas to be used for malicious purposes. For an up-to-date article on this topic, see here .

Finally, to take a broad perspective on the concept of Big Data, I recommend you take a look at the following watch list:

What is the Big Data? (1:48)
Big Data (5:43)
Big Data Needs Big Privacy (5:50)
Big Data is Better Data (15:43)
More Than a Number: How Big Data Can Predict Our Future But Never Understand Our Story (16:39)

Art Fruition & Digital Space

Sun, 06 Jun 2021 15:21:19 GMT

Kittiwake

tech culture society

Art Fruition & Digital Space

Finding a larger audience.

By Sofia Ghezzi

June 6, 2021

Since the beginning of the pandemic, the majority of places of culture, such as national theatres, museums and cinemas have been closed, in order to keep the infection curve under control and limit the spread of the disease. In doing so, artistic and cultural organizations, for example, in the US, have had a total financial loss of $1,763,206,825, and a national financial cost of $15,2 billion ( Americans for the Arts Center, 2021 ).The art world found itself in a destabilizing condition of battling with the impact of travel ban, social distancing, and lockdowns. For this reason, cultural organizations, museums, and art galleries have decided to change their approach to art fruition, to generate revenue and keep engaging with an audience that was not allowed to visit those places anymore.

How did art fruition change?

Cultural activities responded to the crisis massively moving online, making use of the digital space and virtual reality more than ever. The digital media has permitted to retain the audience, engage actively with them, as well as expand to new audiences. On the concept of art and the digital space, some people are convinced that the availability and use of the virtual will replace all visits to physical places; other people think the digital space brings about new experiences that cannot replace direct experience, thus the interaction of both spaces complete the understanding of art ( Grandi, 2020 ). In particular, the chief curator of the Kiran Nadar Museum of Arts (NDMA), Roobina Karode believes that “the physical and the digital space cannot substitute each other” but online resources permit a democratization of the art by finding a new and possibly larger audience ( Datta, 2020 ).

Theatres

Several theatres’ business models have changed significantly since the start of the pandemic. An example of this is the increased availability of theatrical performances on video streaming. Even though theatres may be closed, several national theatres have decided to produce performances live on streaming or make registrations available on their websites. This is the example of the National Theatre in London which offered a streaming service for British theatre available to watch from home. The service is offered after the payment of a fee, but they have also uploaded certain plays for free on their YouTube channel , filmed by the National Theatre Live. Similarly, other national theatres such as ITALive , the International Theatre of Amsterdam, have offered the option of watching performances from home, in their case they offer live streaming instead of registrations.

Those business ideas have been very successful during lockdown, and to some extent they have secured a place for the industry as well as they have expanded it. Moreover, often theatrical performances, in addition to providing the performance via streaming as a way of reaching its audience, have also incorporated the issues of the pandemic in their art. This is the example of the Gate Theatre and the performance ‘Letters’ , where two artists read to each other letters written during the lockdown live via Zoom.The performance is a funny and attentive reflection of the pandemic we find ourselves in, and it deals with different themes connected to self-isolation.

Artists and Art Galleries

Certain art galleries also transferred into the digital space. La Galleria Degli Uffizi in Florence, uploaded videos available for free on their website explaining some of their artworks, and produced storytelling audio-videos for twelve Uffizi’s masterpieces available on their website.

Moreover, other art galleries in addition to transfer into the digital space focused specifically on the pandemic themes: for example, the Sunaparanta Centre of Arts in Goa launched a surviving self-quarantine programme calling out to its artists to share their strategy of surviving lockdown ( Khanna, 2020 ). One of their artists, Pallavi Paul answered the call and produced a video series named share you quiet series This series is now available in the YouTube channel of Sunaparanta.

The artist asked people to share with her 10 seconds of their quiet during the pandemic, and composed a series of videos. With her work, she engaged with her audience via media and incorporated the audience itself in the artwork. Her artwork helped people feel engaged and cope with the quarantine, as well as it represented the “new everyday” of people.

Global art world’s response to the pandemic was astonishing. By changing their business model and fruition, and by engaging with new audiences over the digital space, their response beautifully reflected a sense of kinship and willingness to engage during lockdown. It remains to be seen whether the digital experience will completely replace the direct experience or not.

References

Americans for the Arts. The Economic Impact of Coronavirus on the Arts and Culture Sector. Available at: https://www.americansforthearts.org/by-topic/disaster-preparedness/the-economic-impact-of-coronavirus-on-the-arts-and-culture-sector
Grandi, R. (2020). The fruition of culture in the post pandemic, between new challenges and cultural hubs. BBS Center for Sustainability and Climate Change . Available at: https://www.bbs.unibo.eu/the-fruition-of-culture-in-the-post-pandemic-between-new-challenges-and-cultural-hubs/
Datta, E. (2020). How the art industry is responding to the Covid-19 pandemic. The Hindu Business Line . Available at: https://www.thehindubusinessline.com/blink/watch/how-the-art-world-is-responding-to-the-covid-19-crisis/article31702299.ece
Khanna, J. M. (2020). How the global art world is responding to the Covid-19 lockdown. Architectural Digest. Available at: https://www.architecturaldigest.in/content/how-the-global-art-world-is-responding-to-the-covid-19-pandemic/

Sofia Ghezzi holds a Bachelor’s degree in European Law from Maastricht University, and she is currently pursuing a Master’s degree in European Competition Law and Regulation at the University of Amsterdam. Sofia is passionate about the intersection of law and culture, and the underlying influences of society in law. At the Institute, she is a researcher for the Kittiwake project.

Protecting democratic content and the UK Online Safety Bill

Sun, 06 Jun 2021 15:21:10 GMT

ONLINE SPEECH

Protecting Democratic Content and the UK Online Safety Bill

The idea behind protecting ‘democratic content’ within social media providers is a thought-provoking one and shows how the UK is committed to protecting diversity of political opinion within democratic debate. It may be proven unworkable, though.

By Lucas Pinho Martins Nacif

June 6, 2021

For better or worse, social media companies such as Facebook possess a lot of control over our access to information. This can be illustrated by the proliferation of fake Covid-19 information spread through platforms such as Whatsapp to Facebook even taking the drastic measures of temporarily blocking news to Australians on its platform amid a dispute over a proposed law in Australia which would force it and Google to pay news publishers for content. In addition, social media companies are able to cut off a politician’s platform – for example, Donald Trump being banned by Twitter and suspended by Facebook and YouTube following the US Capitol riots in January.

The UK recently unveiled the Online Safety Bill (“the Bill”), which proposes tough measures requiring social media companies and technology companies, among others, to protect online users. The Bill intends to combat illegal and harmful practices online, whilst also protecting freedom of expression and democratic debate. The Bill aims to address various aspects of ‘online safety’ and freedom of expression , though the purpose of this article will be to focus specifically on the Bill’s proposal to protect ‘democratic content’ on social media websites such as Facebook. This article will argue that although the proposed Bill presents potentially ground-breaking regulation over social media content moderation, it might prove to be highly unworkable and uncertain for the digital economy sector in the UK.

Scope of the Bill

The Bill is broad in scope, having extra-territorial reach to services that have “links” with the UK (i.e. significant number of users based in the UK) and applying to internet services that allow users to share user generated content and providers of search engines. It also incorporates a tiered approach to the obligations placed on online platforms and services. The Bill envisages a three-tiered approach to regulation, with ‘Category 1’ services (user-to-user services, expected to cover popular social media sets such as Facebook) subject to greater regulation than service providers that fall under the other two categories.

Despite the seemingly broad scope, however, the Government maintains that the proposed regulatory framework is proportionate, with fewer than 3% of UK companies falling within the scope of the Bill, as the Bill provides for a list of exemptions , such as email and telephony providers, and services managed by educational institutions that are already subject to regulatory frameworks that addresses online harm.

Protecting democratic content and its shortcomings

One of the various objectives of this proposed legislation is to uphold freedom of speech and expression by imposing a duty on ‘Category 1’ services to protect content of ‘democratic importance’. Clause 13(6) of the Bill defines ‘content of democratic importance’ in relation to Category 1 services as “regulated content” or “news publisher content” (as defined in clause 39 of the Bill) that “is or appears to be specifically intended to contribute to democratic political debate in the United Kingdom or a part or area of the United Kingdom”.

Specifically, clause 13 imposes a duty for ‘Category 1’ services to have systems and processes in place which considers the importance of upholding “the free expression of content of democratic importance” when making decisions related to content moderation, such as taking down such content or suspending/banning a user for generating, uploading, or sharing such content.

The Explanatory Notes of the Bill states that examples of “content of democratic importance” includes “content promoting or opposing government policy and content promoting or opposing a political party”. The Government’s press release shows that clause 13 of the Bill might have a significant impact for social media providers’ content moderation policies – for example, if a “campaign group…release[s] violent footage to raise awareness about violence against a specific group…[T]he [social media] company might choose to keep that content up, subject to warnings, but it would need to be upfront about the policy and ensure it is applied consistently”.

Although the concept of protecting “content of democratic importance” might seem like a compelling solution to counter the ever-growing influence that social media companies have on political debate, this idea is subject to criticisms . Protecting political speech (whilst also being required to protect users against lawful but harmful content ) will complicate how social media services shape their content moderation policies, as extremist groups could seek to “launder” their hate speech and abuse as “political opinion”, so that their hateful or abusive speech becomes “content of democratic importance”.

In addition, if the proposed Bill subsequently becomes legislation, and the duties imposed are either too uncertain or unworkable, this might backfire against the Government’s “unashamedly pro-tech” ambitions of creating an “inclusive, competitive and innovative digital economy for the future”, especially since the Bill intends on granting the Government’s telecommunications regulatory body, Ofcom, with a new enforcement powers to fine companies that fail to fulfil their duties of care – of up to 10% of a company’s annual turnover or £18 million (whichever is higher); see clause 85(4) of the Bill.

Concluding remarks

The idea behind protecting ‘democratic content’ within social media providers is a thought provoking one and shows how the UK is committed to protecting diversity of political opinion within democratic debate (even if, it seems, the political opinion is “extreme”). However, there is a possibility that the duties imposed in the Bill might prove to be unworkable, which, combined with proposed enforcement powers to Ofcom, might be detrimental to the Government’s ambition of developing an innovative digital economy in the UK.

Given that this Bill was only recently introduced in draft form, much will depend on what happens when the Bill becomes subject to pre-legislative scrutiny by a joint committee of Members of Parliament, as well as the content of future Codes of Practice that Ofcom must publish to assist companies in complying with their obligations (see clause 29 of the Bill).

Challenges of mHealth

Sun, 06 Jun 2021 15:21:00 GMT

DIGITAL HEALTH

Challenges of mHealth

Mobile health is rapidly transforming the healthcare sector holding invaluable potential for global health. With big players entering the arena, ethical, social and political challenges inevitably arise.

By Konstantinos Tsakiliotis

June 6, 2021

Back in 2011, WHO defined mHealth[1] as medical and public health practice supported by mobile devices, such as mobile phones, patient monitoring devices and other wireless devices ( WHO 2011 ). At present, mHealth accounts for a global market size valued at USD 45.7 billion in 2020 with projected annual growth rate of 17.6 % from 2021 to 2028 ( G.V. Research 2014 ). It involves a plethora of “mobile devices with digital sensors, including clothes, sports shoes, wristbands, adhesive patches or bathroom weight scales or mHealth software, such as mobile phone apps” ( Hendl et al. 2020 ). Approximately, over 320.000 health apps are available on all major app stores ( Mulder 2019 ).

mHealth as a force for good

By lifting geographical barriers, enabling global scientific collaboration based on health-related data analysis and scaling health care services at a lower cost reaching rural areas -where physical medical access is a scarce commodity- mHealth exerts a transformative force for global healthcare and medicine ( Free et al. 2013 ).

According to WHO ( 2018 ), mHealth applications can inter alia increase access to quality health services thus reducing maternal, child, and neonatal mortality, and decrease premature mortality from noncommunicable diseases (e.g. obesity). Apart from its health-related impact, scholars observe that mHealth consolidates a shift to a rather preventive and more 'patient-centric' focus by empowering individuals with stronger self-awareness or 'self-determination' rendering healthcare egalitarian, participatory and democratic ( Burr et al. 2020 ; Hendl et al. 2020 ).

'Googlization' of Healthcare

Many key market players have strategically entered the arena of mHealth and biomedical industry benefiting either from massive data processing generated insights or their healthcare and insurance expertise. Apple maintains since 2015 ' ResearchKit ', an open source platform allowing scientists to analyze health-related data collected by iPhone Apps. In February 2020, Apple and Johnson & Johnson announced a joint study called 'Heartline' to research whether Apple Watch can detect atrial fibrilation (AFib) thus reducing the risk of stroke ( Haselton 2020 ).

Earlier in 2021, Google completed its acquisition of Fitbit, a health/fitness smartwatch provider, after it was approved by the European Commission contingent on commitments on Google’s part including not to use health data for ad targeting, ensuring the right for EEA users to opt-out from the processing of their data shared with other Google services and fairly handling third-party competition within Android ( Porter & Statt 2021 ; European Commission 2020 ).

In April 2021, AXA, an insurance provider, partnered with Microsoft to provide a digital healthcare platform including in its pilot phase 'a self-assessment tool, teleconsultation and a medical concierge' ( AXA 2021 ). Only just recently, Google announced its partnership with US national hospital chain HCA operating across 2.000 locations in 21 states to develop healthcare algorithms using patient data ( Evans 2021 ). Amazon is also exploring opening pharmacy stores in U.S. ( Reuters 2021 ). Apple CEO Tim Cook emphasized back in 2019 Apple’s societal contribution via eHealth: “If you zoom out into the future, and you look back, and you ask the question, ‘What was Apple’s greatest contribution to mankind?’ It will be about health” ( Gurdus 2019 ).

Their market position renders these actors not only essential facilitators of health research but rather agenda setters with scholars accordingly describing the phenomenon as 'Googlization of Health Research' ( Sharon 2018 ). Characteristically for a disruptive force, mHealth applications also raise ethical, social and political questions at the interface of technology and society. How each issue is framed can influence its scientific analysis reflecting preferences, embedding biases and -inevitably- blindspots ( Djeffal 2019 ).[3]

Still these questions should not be approached from limiting dichotomy of public interest versus corporate gain ( Sharon 2018 ). Sharon ( 2018 ) draws five different moral repertoires based on constructivist tradition as justifications for the variable vision of the common good (Table I): the civic which approaches the common good as the collective wellbeing connoting notions of solidarity and equality; the market focusing on economic growth and competition, the industrial highlighting efficiency; the project that considers mhealth as an innovative/ disruptive necessary force; and the vitality summarizing narratives propagating the inherent advantages of mhealth as it allows for a healthier population.

Friction between moral repertoires results in ethical, social, political questions (and answers respectively) regarding applications of mhealth.

Ethical challenges

Throughout the evolution of literature regarding ethical aspects of ehealth ( Caiani 2021 ), data protection has unsurprisingly gathered special attention. Due to the sensitive nature of health data collected in private/intimate settings, ethical issues around data ownership, security and consent arise ( Burr et al. 2020 ). Do governments and the private sector comply with data protection rules?[4] How anonymous are anonymized data sets?

Bächle ( 2019 ) observes that even in non-profit research environments anonymized data can be re-identified and data security breaches cannot be excluded despite any precautionary measures.

To better understand the challenges around data protection one needs to take a closer look at the concept of purpose limitation. Accordingly, personal data can only be processed for the purpose they were originally collected. Data protection regulations such as the GDPR (Article 9, Recital 35) require a higher threshold for the processing of health-related data. However, all personal data are potentially health-related ( Bächle 2019 ).[5] Especially data transfers have a higher potential for illegal context transgressions, whereby data transcend different contexts and are processed against their original purpose ( Sharon 2018 ).

Against this background, it is reasonable to ask whether data subjects are duly informed when consenting to data processing since at this preliminary stage it is not yet clear what purpose exactly their data will be processed for ( Bächle 2019 ; Mulder 2019 ; Wild et al. 2019 ). mHealth also enables the 'transfer of care' from professional healthcare providers to self-monitoring patients with disruptive implications for the traditional doctor-patient relationship. This raises questions of accountability -meaning who should be held accountable for mHealth errors since patients’ autonomous decisions exert a strong influence on any possible outcome?- and of accessibility to digital illiterate populations ( Burr et al. 2020 ).

Scholars also draw attention to possible depersonalizing effects of self-monitoring applications in contrast to their praised potential for stronger patient’s empowerment. The mHealth-promoted constant self-tracking can create unrealistic body, health and lifestyle images that lead to 'higher social pressures, disempowerment, exclusion or decreasing solidarity' among already disenfranchised groups (Ibid.) Intrusive effects in highly personal choices related with nutrition and sexuality can have a harmful impact on mental health, causing 'feelings of bad conscience, guilt, shame', while increasing the risk of depression (Ibid.) Constant performance updates can also be addictive (Ibid.). An increasingly 'quantified' self-perception can create 'data doubles' causing a chasm between our physical and digitally simulated self ( Hendl et al. 2020 ).

Still, disadvantaged groups do not fulfill the socioeconomic conditions (e.g. free time, money) necessary for self-tracking and least self-optimization raising ethical and social questions regarding accessibility (Ibid.). The same problem applies to scoring systems: intuitively a healthy person should get a better insurance deal, but exactly this contradicts the social character of insurance systems based on solidarity (Ibid.).

Surveillance capitalism & digital health

Social challenges also arise out of the discordance between patients’ altruistic motives to provide their health data and companies’ monetization thereof ( Sharon 2018 ). Remunerating patients for their data will lead to a rigid commercialization of eHealth ( Bächle 2019 ). This economic model of 'unexpected and often illegible mechanisms of extraction, commodification, and control that effectively exile persons from their own behavior while producing new markets of behavioral prediction and modification' is defined by Zuboff (2015) as surveillance capitalism.

Algorithms are value-laden embedding discriminatory biases ( Hendl et al. 2020 ; Bächle 2019 ; Sharon 2018 ). Thus, gender and racial disparities in the ICT sector are inevitably reflected in the design and content of mHealth applications, e.g., when male developers design woman-focused apps like period trackers or when dating and sex monitoring apps propagate gender stereotypes excluding transgender persons ( Hendl et al. 2020 ).

Disparities in global health policy

Whereas social challenges extend to the political realm, this part only focuses on the political challenges of mHealth on the interface of international relations regarding global health policy with an eye at disparities between developed and developing countries. Germany passed in late 2019 the Digital Health Care Act (Digitale-Versorgung-Gesetz) which -unprecedently for digital health policy- provides for cost reimbursement of approved apps by German statutory health insurance providers ( Stern et al. 2020 ; Gerke et al. 2020 ).

While mHealth holds great promise for transforming the healthcare sector especially in developing countries, it is exactly these countries that struggle the most to implement global health initiatives due to lack of resources and expertise ( Malvey and Slovensky 2017 ). Health policy makers face critical policy dilemmas 'for such basic life needs as adequate drinkable water and food, and education' that a startup incubator for mhealth may sound luxurious, whereby ICT access is a definitive factor for mHealth potential (Ibid.).

As a result, e-health silos are established between countries that further decelerate the implementation of cross-border mHealth initiatives (Ibid.). Another political challenge is rooted in global competition. Actors like the EU are concerned about policy risks due to the dominant market position of foreign big data corporations (see Madiega 2020 ) and increasingly weaponize competition rules on grounds of digital sovereignty[6] to assess mergers and acquisitions related with data transfers thereby risking to further demarcate global health policy.

As a disruptive force for good, mhealth holds great promise for global health. However, to stay afloat, we should cautiously navigate around the ethical, social and political challenges in the horizon.

Footnotes

[1] Digital health or ehealth is an umbrella-term referring to the employment of information and communication technologies to deliver health-related[1] information, resources, and services (Bächle and Wernik 2019). Applications of digital health cover a wide spectrum of practice: from telehealth services, health records processing software, interoperability enabling technologies, the most topical tracking of disease and epidemic outbreaks to mobile health (mHealth) including self-tracking devices (WHO 2016).

[2] In the following, I frame arising conflicts according to their addressees and their normative proximity to individual human dignity. Ethical questions aspire to set a moral code for the individual. Under this category fall questions regarding privacy, autonomy, de- or personalization and others related to the “transfer of care” based on the doctor-patient relationship. Questions inherent in the social phenomena framed as surveillance capitalism like data valorization, universal datafication and discriminatory biases fall into the social basket. Issues on the interface of digital sovereignty, international relations, national and global health policy are considered political since they primarily address governance actors.

[3] A 2017 controversy around the data transfer between NHS and Deepmind of 1.6 million patients for the purpose of developing an app that identifies patients at risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) indeed raised data protection concerns, after the Information Commissioner’s Office established a data protection breach due to lack of proper legal basis (Sharon 2018).

[4] Recital 35 GDPR: Personal data concerning health should include all data pertaining to the health status of a data subject which reveal information relating to the past, current or future physical or mental health status of the data subject. This includes information about the natural person collected in the course of the registration for, or the provision of, health care services as referred to in Directive 2011/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council¹ to that natural person; a number, symbol or particular assigned to a natural person to uniquely identify the natural person for health purposes; information derived from the testing or examination of a body part or bodily substance, including from genetic data and biological samples; and any information on, for example, a disease, disability, disease risk, medical history, clinical treatment or the physiological or biomedical state of the data subject independent of its source, for example from a physician or other health professional, a hospital, a medical device or an in vitro diagnostic test.

[5] Floridi (2020) identifies various levels of sovereignty: between states; citizens and the state; citizens and corporations; states and corporations. On the latter level he distinguishes the cybernetic sovereignty of state actors and the poietic sovereignty of corporations. On the EU level, there is a conflict between national and European sovereignty.

References

AXA 2021. Press release: AXA collaborates with Microsoft to create the next generation standard of health and well-being services: AXA. AXA.com. Available at: https://www.axa.com/en/press/press-releases/axa-collaborates-with-microsoft-to-create-next-gen-health-well-being-services [Accessed May 28, 2021]
Bächle, T.C., 2019. On the ethical challenges of innovation in eHealth. In: Bächle, T.C. and Wernick, A. 2019. The Futures of E-Health. Social, Ethical and Legal Challenges. Berlin. Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society. [Accessed 27 May 2021].
Bryman, A., 2007. The Research Question in Social Research: What is its Role? International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 10 (1), 5–20 [Accessed 29 May 2021].
Burr, C., et al. 2020. The Ethics of Digital Well-Being: A Thematic Review. Science and engineering ethics, 26 (4), 2313–2343. Available from: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s11948-020-00175-8.pdf [Accessed 27 May 2021].
Caiani, E., 2021. Ethics of digital health tools. [online] Available from: https://www.escardio.org/Journals/E-Journal-of-Cardiology-Practice/Volume-18/ethics-of-digital-health-tools [Accessed 27 May 2021].
Djeffal, C., 2019. AI, Democracy and the Law. In: A. Sudmann, ed. The Democratization of Artificial Intelligence. Net Politics in the Era of Learning Algorithms. Bielefeld: transcript Verlag, 255–284.
European Commission, 2020. Press release. Mergers: Commission clears acquisition of Fitbit by Google, subject to conditions. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_20_2484 [Accessed May 28, 2021].
Evans, M., 2021. WSJ News Exclusive | Google Strikes Deal With Hospital Chain to Develop Healthcare Algorithms. The Wall Street Journal. Available at: https://www.wsj.com/articles/google-strikes-deal-with-hospital-chain-to-develop-healthcare-algorithms-11622030401 [Accessed May 28, 2021].
Free, C., et al., 2013. The effectiveness of mobile-health technology-based health behaviour change or disease management interventions for health care consumers: a systematic review. PLoS medicine, 10 (1), e1001362. Available from: https://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA71/A71_20-en.pdf [Accessed 27 May 2021].
Floridi, L., 2020. The Fight for Digital Sovereignty: What It Is, and Why It Matters, Especially for the EU. Philosophy & Technology, 33 (3), 369–378.
Gerke, S., Stern, A.D., and Minssen, T., 2020. Germany's digital health reforms in the COVID-19 era: lessons and opportunities for other countries. NPJ digital medicine, 3, 94. Available from: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41746-020-0306-7.pdf [Accessed 27 May 2021].
Gurdus, L., 2019. Tim Cook: Apple's greatest contribution will be 'about health'. CNBC. Available at: https://www.cnbc.com/2019/01/08/tim-cook-teases-new-apple-services-tied-to-health-care.html [Accessed May 28, 2021].
GV. Research 2014. MHealth Market Analysis and Segment Forecasts to 2020. San Francisco. Grand View Research.
Haselton, T., 2020. Apple and Johnson & Johnson team up on new study to see if Apple Watch can reduce risk of stroke. CNBC. Available at: https://www.cnbc.com/2020/02/25/apple-and-johnson-johnson-launch-study-to-predict-stroke-risk-with-apple-watch.html [Accessed May 28, 2021].
Hendl, T., Jansky, B., and Wild, V., 2020. From Design to Data Handling. Why mHealth Needs a Feminist Perspective. In: J. Loh and M. Coeckelbergh, eds. Feminist Philosophy of Technology. Stuttgart: J.B. Metzler, 77–103.
Madiega, T. 2020. Towards a more resilient EU. EPRS Ideas Paper. European Parliamentary Research Service. Brussels. European Union. Available at: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2020/651992/EPRS_BRI(2020)651992_EN.pdf [Accessed May 28, 2021].
Malvey, D.M., Slovensky, D.J. Global mHealth policy arena: status check and future directions. Mhealth. 2017. Sep 22;3:41. doi: 10.21037/mhealth.2017.09.03 . PMID: 29184893 ; PMCID: PMC5682366.
Mulder, T., 2019. Processing Purposes. In: Bächle, T.C. and Wernick, A. 2019. The Futures of E-Health. Social, Ethical and Legal Challenges. Berlin. Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society. [Accessed 27 May 2021].
Nissenbaum H. 2010. Privacy in Context. Stanford. Stanford University Press.
Porter, J. and Statt, N., 2021. Google completes purchase of Fitbit. The Verge. Available at: https://www.theverge.com/2021/1/14/22188428/google-fitbit-acquisition-completed-approved [Accessed May 28, 2021].
Reuters, 2021. Amazon looking at opening pharmacy stores in U.S. - Insider [online]. Available from: https://www.reuters.com/business/amazon-weighing-entry-into-physical-pharmacy-stores-insider-2021-05-26/ [Accessed 28 May 2021].
Sharon, T., 2018. When digital health meets digital capitalism, how many common goods are at stake? Big Data & Society, 5 (2), 205395171881903 [Accessed 27 May 2021].
Stern, A.D., et al., 2020. Want to See the Future of Digital Health Tools? Look to Germany [online]. Harvard Business Review. Available from: https://hbr.org/2020/12/want-to-see-the-future-of-digital-health-tools-look-to-germany [Accessed 27 May 2021].
Sharon, T., 2018. When digital health meets digital capitalism, how many common goods are at stake? Big Data & Society, 5 (2), 205395171881903 [Accessed 27 May 2021].
Wild, V., et al., 2019. Ethical, legal and social aspects of mHealth technologies: Navigating the field. In: Bächle, T.C. and Wernick, A. 2019. The Futures of E-Health. Social, Ethical and Legal Challenges. Berlin. Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society. [Accessed 27 May 2021].
World Health Organization 2021. Global strategy on digital health 2020-2025. Geneva. World Health Organization. Accesible at: https://www.who.int/health-topics/digital-health#tab=tab_1 [Accessed May 28, 2021].
World Health Organization 2018. Report by the Director-General. mHealth. Use of appropriate digital technologies for public health. Geneva. World Health Organization. Accesible at: https://apps.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/WHA71/A71_20-en.pdf [Accessed May 28, 2021].
World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe, op. 2016. From innovation to implementation. EHealth in the WHO European region. Copenhagen: World Health Organization. Regional Office for Europe.
World Health Organization 2011. mHealth. Second Global Survey on eHealth. Geneva: World Health Organization.
Zuboff, S. 2015. The Age of Surveillance Capitalism: The Fight for a Human Future at the New Frontier of Power. New York: PublicAffairs.

Konstantinos Tsakiliotis specialized in Law & Technology at the Humboldt University of Berlin. He provided pro bono service at the Humboldt Internet Law Clinic. He is an alumnus of Harvard CopyrightX and was a judge at the Price Media Law Moot Court in Oxford. He worked at Bundestag and interned at Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer LLP. At the Humboldt Institute for Internet and Society, he researched on Global Constitutionalism and the Internet. He founded and currently presides over the Institute for Internet and the Just Society. Konstantinos is interested in digital constitutionalism, deliberative democracy and behavioral game theory especially analyzing irrational actors.

Fighting Against Revenge Porn

Sun, 06 Jun 2021 15:20:53 GMT

PRIVACY

Fighting Against Revenge Porn

An Italian case study of online content moderation, regulations and women’s rights.

By Sonia Sangiovanni

June 6, 2021

The conversation over online content moderation often focuses on issues like freedom of expression and misinformation. Yet, another type of harmful content that deserves attention from regulators and platforms worldwide is "Revenge porn". This growing phenomenon exploits the internet's lack of moderation to produce harm and perpetuate a culture rooted in misogyny and slut-shaming. This article will look at the Italian case to present the difficulties of fighting against this crime.

What is revenge porn? And why is it a pressing issue in Italy?

The term " revenge porn " is an informal expression used by the media to describe the act of sharing intimate and sexual content of someone without their consent. This offence often takes form in posting photos, videos or deepfakes of someone to harm them. The offender could be anyone who got access (whether directly or through hacking) to the victim's material. However, the vindictive nature of the term stems from the fact that most perpetrators are ex-partners, trying to shame and digitally abuse their victims. As María Rún Bjarnadóttir explains in her article "Does the Internet Limit Human Rights Protection? The Case of Revenge Porn" , this type of phenomenon is unfortunately not new, as there have been instances of non-consensual pornography shared before. Yet, as the author further argues, "although the internet did not alter the concept, it has affected the amount".

While victims of revenge porn could be anyone, it's important to point out that it is a highly gendered crime. In the study "Dismantling 'You Get What You Deserve': Towards a Feminist Sociology of Revenge Porn", Emilee Eikren and Mary Ingram-Waters explain that revenge porn should not be seen "as isolated, individual acts against a woman", but rather as part of "a broader culture of violence against women" and as a reflection of "cultures of hegemonic masculinity on the internet and social media". This type of crime targets women as a way "to prevent them from enjoying full access to the opportunities, increasingly linked to their online reputations, necessary to live productive lives".

By looking at data on the Italian context, it is clear that revenge porn is both widespread and gendered. According to a recent study, 13% of Italians knew a victim of revenge porn directly . Moreover, among the victims of abuse in Italy, 83.19% of the victims of non-consensual pornography were women . The press has also covered in-depth the growth of this phenomenon across the country. In 2020, Wired Italia investigated revenge porn groups chats of 40.000 members on Telegram, sharing imagery and contact information of women and minors. According to a police report released in November 2020, almost two episodes of revenge porn are reported each day .

The Italian legislation against revenge porn: the first step to serve justice and protect victims

While the spread of revenge porn has increased during the past year, the Italian government already adopted a law against it , officially labelling it as an offence. The 2019 regulation against non-consensual pornography pushes for two types of actions. First, it triggers the so-called "code red", which expedites the procedures to protect the victims, remove the harmful content and serve justice. Secondly, it calls for fines and imprisonment of "anyone who sends, delivers, gives, publishes or disseminates images or videos of sexual organs or sexually explicit content, intended to remain private, without the consent of the persons represented." Depending on the circumstances, incarceration can range from one to six years and fines between 5,000 to 15,000 euros.

This regulation is an essential first step in the fight against revenge porn. However, the Italian approval of this law remains a rare case in Europe. As Politico reported , the European Union has not yet passed a law that directly tackles the crime of revenge porn. In other countries like Germany, France and the UK, governments have already implemented measures and legislation to fight against this crime . Yet, the legal fragmentation across Europe can lead to further roadblocks in removing harmful content due to cyberspace's transnational nature.

The challenges of enforcing online content moderation: should we trust online platforms?

The adoption of laws against revenge porn is necessary to tackle the problem and denounce the perpetrators. However, the enforcement of such regulations and the removal of harmful content online is unfortunately not as straightforward as it should be. The limitations in dealing with this issue are inherently linked to the dynamics of the internet. The lack of clear jurisdictional borders, the ambiguity of platform liability, and users' anonymity allow offenders to spread harmful material at a large scale and across multiple communication channels.

As Bjarnadóttir explains , governments, despite being responsible for protecting human rights both online and offline, cannot interfere directly with the moderation of content on online platforms. This lack of room for action is mainly due to the lack of platform liability and users' right to freedom of expression. Yet, in the case of revenge porn, the harm created by the content excludes it from falling under the category of free speech, as "the rights of others (the person depicted) weighs heavily against the disseminator's freedom of expression". Due to this loophole, democratic governments have limited power in moderating online content, leaving most of the responsibility to online platforms, which work as "de-facto" regulators of the internet.

Private companies set and enforce digital rights through their guidelines, allowing users to report and automatically remove non-consensual pornographic content. The website of C.A. Goldberg, a victims' rights law firm, summarized how victims could ask to remove revenge porn content on multiple mainstream websites and platforms , ranging from TikTok to Pornhub. By looking at it, it's possible to notice that social networks generally provide directions to protect oneself. However, these procedures are far from being harmonized across platforms.

Much of content moderation on online platforms depends on their willingness and scale to remove harmful content. For example, while Google deletes image and site results linked to revenge porn, another website might refuse to do so without the right incentives. To some extent, this was the case for Pornhub. Only after a New York Times article revealed the vast presence of non-consensual and child pornography, the video-sharing platform finally decided to remove large quantities of unverified content .

In Italy, the major roadblock in the fight against revenge porn has been Telegram's policy . The terms and conditions of the app only punish illegal pornography posting in public groups. For this reason, many of the chats discovered by the Wired Italia investigation and the police often link to other private groups, where the content can't be moderated. Law enforcement agencies can nonetheless infiltrate such groups to try to identify the perpetrators. This type of operations, however, takes way more time without platform cooperation.

How can we go forward in the fight against revenge porn?

As the director of the Postal Police, Alessandra Belardini, explained in an interview , the best way to tackle revenge porn is before it is shared online.

The recent cooperation between the Italian Privacy supervisor and Facebook goes in this direction. By contacting the Privacy supervisor, users can preemptively block their intimate content on Facebook and Instagram from being shared. Through an "emergency" channel of communication, the Privacy Supervisor shares it with Facebook, which encrypts the imagery with a secure hash code and blocks any publication attempt.

This technological solution allows victims to regain control over their images. However, preventing revenge porn from happening requires more than that. Regulators need to fight against gender inequality and discrimination online and offline. This is also the case for Italy, where women are the primary victims of revenge porn and other domestic crimes. To better protect its citizens, the Italian government should quickly adopt the bill against misogyny, trans-homophobia and ableism , which has been stalling since 2018. By approving this law, revenge porn will finally be recognized not only as a crime but as one against all women.

Sonia Sangiovanni is a young professional working at the intersection between Technology and Public Affairs. She holds a master’s degree in International Security from Sciences Po, and her Master Thesis on the privatisation of the Intelligence Services in the UK covered the Cambridge Analytica scandals. Throughout her career, Sonia has worked as a consultant for Public Administrations and the European Commission.

When Technology Helps Promote Human Rights Awareness: The #MeToo Movement

Sun, 06 Jun 2021 15:20:50 GMT

DIGITAL ACTIVISM

When Technology Helps Promote Human Rights Awareness: The #MeToo Movement

This article is the first in a two-article series regarding the #MeToo Movement. The present text will bring forward both a brief context of the #MeToo Movement – gaining importance and reaching a wider audience through the tools of social media – as well as the relevant Human Rights provisions and context in which it is inserted.

By Julia Cirne Lima Weston

June 6, 2021

Usama Razzaq

The #MeToo Movement in Context

According to its official website, while the #MeToo Movement was actually founded in 2006, it was when the #MeToo hashtag went viral in 2017 that the issue and the movement spread worldwide “seemingly overnight” . This means that the internet and the use of hashtags within social media helped promote awareness of the theme to a much wider audience.

The #MeToo Movement was founded by Tarana Burke, an activist, who used the expression ‘Me Too’ in reference to sexual violence and harassment suffered by women , specifically, by women of colour. The movement was Burke’s way to help women who had experienced the same violence as she did. With the global phenomenon of the #metoo hashtag, the movement was able to contact and connect a worldwide network of survivors within about six months. The movement continues to focus its work helping violence survivors of diverse backgrounds . The movement has even contributed to a change in legislation within the United States.

The #MeToo Movement and International Law

This analysis starts from the standpoint that the movement did not originate in a vacuum and, indeed, interacts with other issues, such as International Law and International Affairs. The #MeToo Movement came into the global spotlight in a favourable international context: it clearly connects with the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) . This United Nations-sponsored initiative seeks to promote 17 goals for development until 2030 , one is of achieving gender equality (Goal Number 5). SDG 5, amongst other targets, includes a target to end discrimination against women and girls, as well as to eliminate all forms of violence against women and girls, both of which seem to be within the scope of the #MeToo Movement.

It is no surprise, equality amongst all human beings and non-discrimination are within the International Human Rights Law framework, which this article now moves on to analyse. The equality amongst human beings in dignity and rights is enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) , and is followed by a provision of non-discrimination, which includes in its reasons, among others, that there shall be no discrimination on the basis of sex.

A similar provision to that of the UDHR is also included within the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) . Within the ICCPR, there is a specific non-discrimination provision, which applies Covenant rights regardless of one’s sex. This is emphasised in the Human Rights Committee’s General Comment No. 28 - on the equality of rights between men and women, which recognises the issue of discrimination of women internationally. The same General Comment recalls the need for States to provide reports on violence against women, in order to assess compliance with prevention of inhuman treatment obligations.

Non-discrimination and the prevention of inhuman or degrading treatment are only some of the obligations imposed on States by international legal instruments, which would address the issue of violence against women. Another important one is that of the need to preserve the right to life. The ICCPR safeguards the right to life of all human beings. In this sense, General Comment No. 36 deepens the meaning of the right to life by saying:

“Femicide, which constitutes an extreme form of gender-based violence that is directed against girls and women, is a particularly grave form of assault on the right to life”.

The choice of this author of a wider focus on the ICCPR is due to its great number of State parties, with a current total of 173 signatories. This makes it a more widespread framework, due to which clearly the majority of States worldwide are obliged to safeguard certain rights, such as the prevention against inhuman treatment and safeguarding of the right to life without discrimination of any kind.

Additionally, there are soft law instruments which are also relevant for our discussion on the #MeToo Movement. The Declaration on the Elimination of Violence Against Women , within the General Assembly’s Resolution 48/104 of 20 December 1993, is a prime example of international recognition of the situation of women worldwide. The Declaration encompasses all kinds of violence against women and emphasises the need for States to condemn all of these forms of violence by, inter alia developing adequate legal sanctions, refraining from conducting such violence, among others. While soft law documents lack the binding force of treaties within International Law, they are important when it comes to the development and evolution of International Law.

As such, the #MeToo Movement, brought forward and expanded through the use of social media, is not an isolated phenomenon within the Human Rights universe. Since the UDHR, Human Rights instruments have emphasised the need for non-discrimination and the prevention of violence and inhuman treatment against individuals. With the advancement of these documents, through General Comments, we have reached a further consensus on the status of the disadvantage of women internationally and the need to preserve them from violence.

As a result, we have a further emphasis on the need to assess violence against women as addendums to the ICCPR, as well as a Declaration in this sense, obtained in the last few years in international fora. The advent of the SDGs further strengthens that the goal to prevent violence against women is yet to be achieved, and that new initiatives must be taken. The spread of movements such as #MeToo, consequently, fit right within these goals, as they are able to transmit experiences and a notion of the violence suffered daily by women and girls worldwide, to a larger audience.

Conclusion

While #MeToo has existed as a movement since 2006, it only managed to obtain the global audience that it currently has due to the spread of the #metoo hashtag. This is an undeniable contribution of technology, most specifically of social media, to the worldwide spread of awareness of the need to address violence against women and girls.

This article sought to address #MeToo not as an isolated phenomenon, but as something that interacts with the International Human Rights framework and can trigger important change, such as more concern from States regarding their own legislation. The subsequent article on this series will address some legal design issues within the #MeToo Movement. It will give some suggestions in order to reformulate it to best achieve its goals. Stay tuned to the Cosmonaut to see the end of this series on the #MeToo Movement!

Julia Cirne Lima Weston holds an LL.M in International Law from University College London and a Bachelors degree from the Pontifical University of Rio Grande do Sul, in Brazil. She currently serves as an editor and columnist at the Brazilian Institute for the Law of the Sea.

Hacking Creativity – Authorship in the Digital Age

Fri, 30 Apr 2021 17:39:45 GMT

INTELLECTUAL CREATION

Hacking Creativity – Authorship in the Digital Age

AI systems can produce literary and artistic works autonomously. This capacity raises major policy questions for the copyright system, which has always been intimately associated with the human creative spirit and with respect and reward for the expression of human creativity. The policy positions adopted in relation to the attribution of copyright to AI-generated works will go to the heart of the social purpose for which the copyright system exists.

By Irina Buzu

April 28, 2021

Shakuro

Keywords: artificial intelligence, creativity, copyright

As Artificial Intelligence (AI) seems to be gaining more ground on the human agenda day by day, it becomes increasingly difficult to ignore the implications of smart, fast and efficient algorithms being integrated in nearly every aspect of the new reality.

The narrative of the human-machine competition has been part of the conversation about technology ever since the first machines were created. The flashy head-line terminology might vary over time, but the main idea that keeps being stressed remains unchanged: humans are losing the race against machines, or that they are becoming irrelevant, redundant and replaced by intelligent machines.

This human versus machine narrative climbed the first step on the proverbial prominence ladder during the 18th and 19th centuries, when the steam engine and the mechanised automation of agriculture and manufacturing was scaled. The narrative became more ominous, when more intelligent and precise machines began to threaten the jobs of humans with more powerful social and political representation, during the robotics revolution of the 1960s-70s. The next technological missile hit the jobs of the service and support industries, as part of the information revolution.

Now we have reached the next, but hardly the last, chapter in the human-machine competition, as intelligent machines have now set their ‘sight’ on after the class of people who write articles about them. This article addresses the question of copyrightability of artworks generated by AI machines, in the light of the shift from a human-machine competition, towards a human-machine collaboration.

Introduction

The first references on automated artists go as far back as the 1970s, when the painter and the University of California professor Harold Cohen has been collaborating with ‘ AARON ’, a program capable of autonomously making pictures . The next grand artistic leap triggered by machine learning and deep learning, materialised in 2013 with ‘The Painting Fool’, the brainchild of Simon Colton, professor of computational creativity at Goldsmiths College, London. Colton redefined the ‘Turing Test’, by suggesting that artificially intelligent artists need to behave in skilful, appreciative and imaginative ways in order to be convincing enough so as to pass as humans. Ever since that tipping point, humanity has faced numerous artistic AI advancements.

In 2015, Google’s Brain AI team unveiled ‘Deep Dream’, a program that has coined a new form of art called ‘Inceptionism’, named after the Inception algorithm. Following a training in identifying objects from visual clues and being fed photographs of skies and random-shaped objects, the program began generating digital images suggesting the combined imaginations of Walt Disney and Peter Bruegel the Elder.

In 2016, a joint initiative by museums and researchers from the Netherlands uncovered a portrait called ‘The New Rembrandt’, a new art piece generated by a machine that had analysed thousands of artworks of the 17th century Dutch painter, Rembrandt van Rijn.

A similar challenge was taken on by a Paris-based artist collective in 2018, called ‘Obvious’, who wondered whether an AI machine could generate the next original Picasso masterpiece and pass it as man-made. When it went under the hammer in the Prints & Multiples sale at Christie’s in October 2018, ‘Portrait of Edmond Belamy’ sold for an incredible $432,500, thus marking the arrival of AI art on the world auction stage.

In 2019, the world saw the announcement of ‘Ai.Da’, the first ultra-realistic drawing robot artist, whose mechanical abilities, combined with AI-based algorithms, allow her to draw, paint and even sculpt. One of Google’s latest art projects, ‘PoemPortraits’, takes a word of your suggestion and generates a unique poem (to which you can also add a selfie) using an algorithm trained via deep learning neural networks trained on 20 million words out of 19th century poetry. The ‘ AIVA ’ music engine generates soundtracks for games, commercials, and movies, that are indistinguishable from those created by the most talented human composers .

In the meantime, AI machines have taken over various other creative endeavours, from writing articles and digests to almost winning a Japanese literary essay competition; from ‘automated journalism’ to legal paperwork and contracts; from architectural blueprints to object and process design optimisation; just to name a few.

To drive this point home, G. Kasparov stressed that: ‘AI products tend to evolve from laughably weak to interesting but feeble, then to artificial but useful, and finally to transcendent and superior to human. There is always a tipping point at which they go from amusing diversions to essential tools’ [Kasparov, G & Greengard, M 2017, Deep Thinking. Where machine intelligence ends and human creativity begins. Public Affairs, New York, p.51].

Simply put, in the past half-century, machines have become increasingly good at emulating humans and laying siege to what has been a strictly human outpost: intellectual creativity.

(Re)defining creativity

The creative Anthropocene

Creativity has always been regarded as one of the main pillars of the anthropocentric doctrine. What else is there, besides language, values, emotions and sensations, to the equation of what makes us human, if not creativity?

Edward O. Wilson’s statement comes to mind, when he addressed creativity as the ‘unique and defining trait of our species’, continuing on to call it ‘the innate quest for originality’ [Wilson, E O 2017, The origins of creativity. Penguin Books, Great Britain, p.3]. In fact, whenever we browse through the myriad of names and faces who have written either pages or books or volumes of our cultural evolution, from Einstein and Tesla, to Bach, van Gogh, Shakespeare, Gaudi, Tornatore, and the goes on, the most common attributes that come to mind are visionary, inventor, pioneer, insightful, creative. But what is creativity, really? Why were certain ideas deemed to be creative and innovative, while others were lost as mediocre and nonconsequential in the whirlpool of time?

Leading researchers in the field, such as M. Stein, M. Csikszentmihalyi, T. Amabile, D. W. MacKinnon, H. Simon, and others have been tackling these issues for decades. They have approached them from psychological perspectives , to experimental , to economic and political . The common ground is that there is no universally accepted definition of creativity, nor is there a clear recipe or list of attributes that a creative individual must possess. In fact, the current consensus is that creativity results from the interaction of a system composed of three elements: (1) a culture that contains symbolic rules; (2) a person who brings novelty into the symbolic domain, and (3) a field of experts who recognize and validate the innovation.

Da Vinci or Elon Musk’s discoveries would be inconceivable without the prior knowledge, without the intellectual and social network that stimulated their thinking, and without the social mechanisms that recognized and spread their innovations.

To elaborate a bit further on the first two elements, one would agree with the words of F. Offner, a scientist and inventor, who stressed that: ‘The important thing is that you must have a good, a very solid grounding in the physical sciences, before you can make any progress in understanding’ [Csikszentmihalyi, M 1997, Creativity. The psychology of discovery and invention . Harper Perennial, New York, p.47]. The same conclusions are voiced in every other discipline. Artists agree that a painter cannot make creative contributions without looking, and looking, and looking at previous art, and without knowing what other artists and critics consider good and bad art. Writers say that you have to read, and read, and read some more, and know what the critics’ criteria for good writing are, before you can write creatively yourself.

On account of the third element, M. Csikszentmihalyi argues that by creativity we mean ‘an idea or action that is new and available’ [Csikszentmihalyi, M 1997, Creativity. The psychology of discovery and invention . Harper Perennial, New York, p.23]. However, if we follow this account, then we cannot simply accept a person’s own perception as the criterion for its existence. There is no way to know whether a thought is new except with reference to some standards, and there is no way to tell whether it is valuable until it passes social evaluation. Therefore, creativity does not happen inside people’s heads, but in interaction between a person’s thoughts and a sociocultural context. It is a systemic rather than an individual phenomenon.

It is also M. Csikszentmihalyi who points out that if there was one word that would distinguish creative people, one word that could express what makes their personalities different from others, it would be complexity [Csikszentmihalyi, M 1997, Creativity. The psychology of discovery and invention . Harper Perennial, New York, p.57]. By this he means that they show tendencies of thought and action that in most people are segregated. They contain contradictory extremes; instead of being an ‘individual’, each of them is a ‘multitude’. Like the colour white that includes all the hues of the spectrum, creative people tend to bring together the entire range of human possibilities within themselves.

Following this line of reasoning, it would be reasonable to assume that, given the complexity and unpredictability of the creative process, algorithms (no matter how complex and intelligent) would not be capable of mimicking human creativity. And yet, the current state of affairs proves otherwise. It would seem like a Moravec’s paradox, if not for two elements that are part of today’s status quo, which lacked in the times of Edison or Shakespeare: big data and enormous amounts of computational power.

Under usual circumstances, in order to gain enough knowledge and insight into any given field or symbolic domain, one has to spend countless hours learning, consuming and processing information. In the case of human creators, this endeavour could take an entire lifetime, and even then, there are a set of barriers that hinder the complete understanding of a domain.

The first and foremost is that human creators are, well, human, and as living beings their brain capacity, energy flow and attention span are limited by certain obstacles typical to humans. M. Csikszentmihalyi digests them down to the following few: ‘Some of us are exhausted by too many demands, and so have trouble getting hold of and activating ourpsychic energy in the first place. Or we get easily distracted and have trouble learning how to protect and channel whatever energy we have.

The next problem is laziness, or lacking discipline for controlling the flow of energy. And finally, the last obstacle is not knowing what to do with the energy one has’ [Csikszentmihalyi, M 1997, Creativity. The psychology of discovery and invention . Harper Perennial, New York, p.344].

In addition to these, nowadays, with the incredibly huge amounts of data flows, fast paced work environments and increasing demands, professionals are indirectly encouraged to become better versions of themselves, on a daily basis, but only in a very narrow specialisation of the symbolic domain. The trouble with this is that most creative achievements depend on making connections among disparate domains. The more obscure and separate knowledge becomes, the fewer the chances that creativity can reveal itself.

Outsourcing creativity

In his book Homo Deus , Yuval Noah Harari offers a very interesting perspective to the anthropocentric attributes, put forward in the beginning of this section, zooming in on them through an algorithmic lens. He argues that algorithms are ‘the single most important concept in our world’, and stresses the importance of understanding how algorithms are connected with emotions and that emotions are nothing but ‘biochemical algorithms’, and as such the humans are controlled by algorithms that ‘can work through sensations, emotions and thoughts’ [Harari, Y N 2015, Homo Deus. A brief history of tomorrow. Harvil Secker, Great Brintain, p.97]. To some extent, following a Darwinian approach, this could translate into the fact that natural selection has programmed every bit of human biology, and with that, every bit that makes us human. And if so, if humans ‘powered’ by biochemical algorithms can be creative, why can’t algorithmic driven machines be creative as well?

Algorithms and intelligent machines don’t have to overcome the obstacles faced by human creators. They are not hindered by human shortcomings and due to enormous computational power, they have no trouble processing vast amounts of data efficiently and fast. Then, being proficient in pattern recognition, and as they filter, predict, collect, evaluate and learn, they can easily build a puzzle made of inter-sectorial blocks of information coming from different symbolic domains, and thus, they manage to derive original solutions to pre-existing domain specific problems, which is a creative endeavour as such. In addition to this, the promise of the information technology revolution and computer literacy have proved, to a large extent, to be counter-productive in terms of human creativity. A vast majority of people rely nowadays on various digital tools and assistants to provide answers, search for information and offer advice, thus involuntarily outsourcing certain peripheral cognitive functions, without realising the long-term implications of their actions. This view echoes a 2007 article in the Wired by C. Thompson, which incited a follow-up reaction from the New York Times columnist D. Brooks, who argued that: ‘I had thought that the magic of the information age was that it allowed us to know more, but then I realized that the magic of the information age is that it allowed us to know less.’ Continuing, ‘You may wonder if in the process of outsourcing my thinking I am losing my individuality. Not so much. It’s merely my autonomy that I’m losing.’

It is worth noting that in fact, each of us carries a device such as a phone or a tablet that can make you an instant expert on anything, thanks to Google and Wikipedia. These devices have nowadays become extensions of our arms and owning them can sometimes be incredibly useful. Doing so doesn’t make us any less intelligent than using encyclopedias, phone books or, once upon a time, the help of librarians. It is only the next stage of how our technology allows us to create and to interact with more information faster and faster – and it won’t be the last stage. The danger isn’t intellectual stagnation or an addiction to instant fact-finding missions. The real risk is substituting superficial knowledge for the type of understanding and insight that is required to create new things.

It all comes down to human-machine collaboration. It can help us be more creative, or less, depending on how we use our digital tools. Unfortunately, computer literacy is more a question of consumer information rather than knowing how to generate or use the information acquired. If necessity is the mother of innovation, secure affluence seems to be its dysfunctional stepparent. A similar perspective is given by the world chess champion G. Kasparov, who notes that while using your phone isn’t cheating in real life, you might however develop a cognitive limp from an overreliance on a digital crutch. He continues to stress that if we only rely on our machines to show us how to be good imitators, we will never take the next step to becoming creative innovators [Kasparov, G & Greengard, M 2017, Deep Thinking. Where machine intelligence ends and human creativity begins. Public Affairs, New York, p.229]. Similarly to our bodies, our brains need exercise and constant training by performing demanding and challenging cognitive tasks, in order to excel and reach that proverbial ‘Aha!’ insightful spark.

Unfortunately, partly relinquishing our cognitive autonomy to intelligent machines proves to be far easier than getting it back, which is why, while humanity hits the brakes and enjoys the cognitive ride, algorithms and AI machines are fast-forwarding at incredible speed towards becoming a new source of creativity, blurring the lines between art and technology. Humanity is therefore arguably at a tipping point when neither renouncing digital tools in particular, nor denying the digitalisation and automation more generally, is possible. Some have a utopian while others a dystopian vision of the fully automated AI future we are heading into at rapidly increasing speed. Under these circumstances, each of us has a choice to make: to embrace these new challenges, or to resist them. Will we help shape the future and set the terms of our relationship with algorithms and intelligent machines, or do we let them to be forced on us?

Regulating Creativity 3.0

We have previously argued that AI has arisen in the realm of creativity and innovation and is expected to become an integrated part of daily life in the near future. New AI technologies present exciting opportunities for developments in the creative arts, entertainment industries, as well as life enhancing inventions.

Intellectual property (IP) has always had a symbiotic relationship with the development of new technology and in turn policy has needed to adapt to keep pace with the technology and cultural changes. AI technology has the potential to shake up the IP system, raising fundamental questions from originality to authorship to ownership and infringement.

There is a current ongoing debate on whether policymakers should create a new sui generis regime extension to the existing copyright framework, which would be applicable to the new 3A era of advanced, automated, autonomous AI systems. The argument of whether to afford copyright protection to AI systems and the creative AI generated output is, in fact, part of a larger, more controversial debate on whether AI should be granted legal personality. This was initially proposed, albeit with limited effects, by the European Parliament in its Resolution of 16 February 2017 with recommendations to the Commission on Civil Law Rules on Robotics through the concept of electronic personality.

So far, national and regional legislations do not acknowledge the AI systems can hold rights or be subject to obligations similarly to a natural person or legal entity, as this rests on profound ethical implications and consideration should be given to the possible impactful ramifications. At the same time, some have also voiced opinions that any attempt to articulate an IP framework around AI is premature at best, if not flawed altogether. There is a pressing need for AI to be understood and defined first, then (if necessary) regulated. In this line of reasoning, it also remains unclear whether copyright is the appropriate, let alone ideal, vehicle for regulating AI, as it is fundamentally centered on human creativity.

We believe that an appropriate analysis of these issues needs to follow a few considerations. Firstly, one needs to distinguish between the two branches of AI, the so-called ‘ strong AI’ and ‘ weak AI’ . Strong AI refers to a computer system that broadly approximates the mental and cognitive capabilities of human beings, whereas weak AI refers to a computer system that provides solutions to well-defined problems arrived at by specific applications.
Ultimately, the purpose of weak AI is to automate tasks that traditionally required time intensive mental activity or effort by a human, such as engaging in classification, identification of similarities, pattern recognition, etc.

It is currently agreed that strong AI is still a yet unrealised technology. Although there is some dispute as to whether it can be achieved at all, there seems to be agreement that at least it will not be realised in the foreseeable future. Therefore, an AI system that truly conceives autonomous creations without any level of human supervision, contribution or intervention requires strong AI technology. The question therefore is whether copyright protection should be assigned for AI generated works, as these may be presently achieved only by currently deployed (still) weak AI technology . To further clarify, we shall refer to some of the examples of AI technology mentioned previously.

In the publishing industry, weak AI technology such as template text generators are used, based on pattern recognition and the use and evaluation of existing text modules. For example, ‘QualiFiction’ is a weak AI that has been testing manuscripts for their potential for success by comparing them with existing bestsellers.

However, the bestseller formula has yet to be found, as it is hugely dependent on human subjective apprehension, as opposed to algorithmic mathematical calculation. Text generators and automated journalism, such as the weak AI technology of the company ‘uNaice’, are used to generate short texts of products on online shop pages, but they hardly pass the threshold of creativity. In China, bots compile text collections from Wikipedia entries, but they cannot decide what is good or bad, true or false; weak AI recognises patterns and assembles text modules on the basis of probability.

Similarly, translation programs learn faster, but their word-for-word translation takes no account of allusions, metaphors, irony, the nuances of synonyms or sentence rhythm, despite employing deep learning algorithms; they still require an editorial and linguistic like narrative intensive revision, usually performed by a human.

Likewise, ‘Sunspring’ claims to be the first ever screenplay written entirely by an AI machine, but of course it required a human to develop the software and to collate and input the hundreds of screenplays used as the dataset. The previously mentioned famous AI portrait of Edmond Belamy signed as authored by an algorithm, sold for $432,500. The work was created by Obvious, a Paris-based collective consisting of Hugo Caselles-Dupré, Pierre Fautrel and Gauthier Vernier by way of what they call ‘GAN: Generative Adversarial Network’. The algorithm consists of two parts; the Generator and the Discriminator. Caselles-Dupré, Fautrel and Vernier input a data set of 15.000 portraits, the Generator makes a new image based on the data set and the Discriminator tries to spot the difference between a human-made image and one created by the Generator.

Nonetheless, in an unprecedented turn of events, in January 2020, a Chinese court assigned copyright to an AI, Tencent’s ‘Dreamwriter’, which has been producing articles for some years. The court found that the article’s articulation and expression had a ‘certain originality’ and met the legal requirements to be classed as a written work — thus it qualified for copyright protection and awarded copyright ownership to Tencent for all stories its AI produces. However, the question of how the AI was created, whether creator copyright was respected in the creation of the AI has not been made clear. Almost at the very same time, the European Patent Office (EPO) refused two patent applications relating to inventions that listed an AI as inventors, founding their judgement on the European Patent Convention, which indicates a clear legislative understanding that the inventor is a natural person.

There are, however, jurisdictions that already assign copyright protection of AI generated works via computer-generated works regime. The ownership of the copyright is granted to the person who set up the arrangements necessary for the creation of the work. For example, section 9(3) of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 states that ‘in the case of a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work which is computer-generated, the author shall be taken to be the person by whom the arrangements necessary for the creation of the work are undertaken.’ Section 173 of the act defines a computer-generated work as a work that ‘is generated by computer in circumstances such that there is no human author of the work.’ This work is granted protection for 50 years after it was made .

A recent European Commission Report on AI and IP stated that we could be moving towards AI autonomy, at least to a level that the human contribution is ‘trivial to the creative or inventive process’ and therefore we could be entering into an era where machines will ‘not only assist humans in the creative process but create or invent all by themselves’.

However, we are not presently at that stage and at present AI technology is not currently truly autonomous. In fact, in a typical machine learning system there is human involvement and human intervention at a number of points, such as choosing how to set the system up – writing and choosing of the algorithm (including which learning models to use), choosing and collating data, often this includes the undertaking of data cleansing or other actions on the data including how it is structured, providing feedback, reviewing output and revising model and so on. In fact, the data itself, such as in the examples mentioned above, are human created sources. AI augments human skills and expertise but does not make human contribution au less relevant.

Moreover, traditionally, the copyright system as being associated with the human creative spirit for the encouragement of the expression of human creativity. In the 2011 CJEU case Painer, the Court held that “an intellectual creation is an author’s own if it reflects the author’s personality. That is the case if the author was able to express his creative abilities in the production of the work by making free and creative choices…by making those various choices, the author of a portrait photograph can stamp the work created with his ‘personal touch.” This emphasises the need for human personality input to the creation of copyright works [ Eva-Maria Painer v Standard VerglasGmbh and Others (2011) C-145/10 – Painter].

Further, it is important to recognise that extending copyright protection to AI-generated works could disrupt the philosophical justifications for copyright and undermine the foundations upon which protection is currently built. There are different schools of thought on justifications for granting copyright to AI-generated works and these need to be explored further. Therefore, it should be asked, in addition, on what theoretical basis should the protection be granted.

Closing remarks

In his brilliant 1976 book, Computer Power and Human Reason: From Judgment to Calculation , Joseph Weizenbaum argues, ‘However intelligent machines may be made to be, there are some acts of thought that ought to be attempted only by humans’. He extolls the importance of judgment, wisdom, compassion – the things we must not outsource to machines, even if we can. In a profound formulation, machines, he writes, can decide , but they do not choose . Why does a machine do what it does? Every mechanized decision can be traced back, step by algorithmic step, 1 by 0 by 1, to an earlier branch in its code. Eventually this reaches the inevitable conclusion of ‘Because you told me so.’ For humans, writes Weizenbaum, this is not the case, and the root explanation is, instead, ‘Because I chose to.’ Within that simple phrase lies human agency, human leadership, human responsibility, and humanity itself.

We have argued that our technology can make us more human by freeing us to be more creative, but there is more to being human than creativity. We have other qualities the machines cannot match. They have instructions while we have purpose. Machines cannot dream, not even in sleep mode. Humans can, and we will need our intelligent machines in order to turn our grandest dreams into reality. And as G. Kasparov puts it, if we stop dreaming big dreams, if we stop looking for a greater purpose, then we may as well be machines ourselves.

Passionate about information technology, innovation, art and artificial intelligence, Irina is part of and offers legal tech expertise for the Code For Moldova community, the first civic tech organization in the Republic of Moldova, and is a SEEDIG YS alumna. She is pursuing her PhD research in International Law, with a focus on AI policies and regulations.

Accessible?

Sat, 24 Apr 2021 18:16:42 GMT

Kittiwake

tech culture society

Accessible?

The word accessibility is defined by a myriad of acceptations that describe each a different nuance of the word. It could mean easy to access, but also someone charismatic therefore accessible. When you look it up in a dictionary you’ll easily realise that the semantic chart of this word is huge.

By Andrés Cortés

April 24, 2021

The Matroska problem of the digital divide

In many ways, the quest for accessibility, understood as the inclusion of all kinds of differently-abled people, hold a crucial aspect for digital inclusion. We must remember that we are conditioned by our upbringing and education to believe certain truths that are not universal. That our representation of reality might be distorted by our environment and what we have been exposed to. So, what exactly does accessibility mean through the lens of digital inclusion?

First of all, access is a very powerful word. Take a moment to think of all the possible contexts you could find this word. You can have access because you belong to a certain group, or be granted access because you’ve proven your belonging to such a group. You can be denied access because of your values, or very simply because you are physically not able to access somewhere. Accessibility , defined as the will to make places and information available to people who have non-traditional bodies and abilities, should be a preoccupation for all of us.

The universe surrounding the meaning of words is fascinating, in fact, Saussure talked about such conundrums of language. For instance, he separates two aspects of a word in the language; the signifier and the signified (signifiant and signifié in French). The signifier is the arrangement of symbols we’ve agreed to make specific sounds, when put together make a word. The signified is the whole universe that word carries with it. For example, we can all recognize a table but it would be hard to define, we can all agree when something is being used as a table even if it isn’t.

We could understand it as the platonic idea and reality; we all know the concept of a table (signifier) but your coffee table is just one among all the possible forms a table can take. This ambiguity contributes to all the wild interpretations we can have of words, their meaning and it stresses the power they have upon us.

Redefining access who do we listen to

A key factor to fight the lack of inclusion in our societies and therefore in the digital world is to listen, to give space for the voices that are often ignored a place to shine. Allow me to show you a few non-traditional ways of communicating that already exist in the digital sphere so you can then discover your own.

Being a polyglot and having lived in several countries has taught me something, accents hold great communicative value. Especially the absence of an accent is considered to demonstrate higher intelligence, when in fact the capacity of speaking two or more languages should be applauded. Well, Jamila Lyiscott rhymes tell us the story of her three ways of speaking English in her TED talk 3 ways to speak English. In this 4:29 minute-long poem, she repurposes the word articulate which has been used to compliment immigrants or in this case African-American people on their use of more academic use of English. She goes through her history and her life experiences to show us how are the 3 ways of speaking English are not only valid but also worthy of recognition. She demonstrates how the syntax and vocabulary of these different dialects represent richness instead of a lack of knowledge. In my opinion,we should be more open to not discard some options or alterations of the language with the label ''not idiomatic'', we should rather welcome their richness and delve into the new world that is created in the in between.

Similarly, Christine Sum Kim, a Berlin-based artist renders the most basic concepts of Sign Language accessible to us, people without ASL (American Sign language) training or culture. In this TED talk , she explains the extent to which sound is part of her life, but not in the way we would imagine it to be- such as sound etiquette. Her work depicts the intrinsic value of ASL that is both visual and makes up deaf culture.

I invite you dear reader to dive into this universe of different capacities, to take a plunge into what perception of the world you have not been aware of until now. This is the question we ask ourselves in the Institute everyday, how can we integrate as many voices as possible into the Digital cosmos. How can we respectfully cohabitate an ethereal world? This is our quest and to begin giving possibilities I leave with Sum Kim explaining closed-captions [cries with a very tiny fashionable hat in a empty bar] .

I'm Colombian, I am 23 years old and I’m a polyglot. I just finished my degree in Performing Arts and I’m doing a masters degree in translation. Among my interests are etymology, linguistics, and everyday ethics. How can philosophical ethic knowledge be applied on an everyday basis? Aside from a researcher for the institute I conduct my own research on feminity in the LGBTQ+ community through artistic expression and ancestral practices.

Algorithms in Social Media Platforms

Sat, 24 Apr 2021 18:16:40 GMT

Kittiwake

tech culture society

Algorithms in Social Media Platforms

How social media algorithms influence the spread of culture and information in the digital society.

By Maria Alessandra Golino

April 24, 2021

What is a social media algorithm?

Algorithms in social media platforms can be defined as technical means of sorting posts based on relevancy instead of publish time, in order to prioritize which content an user sees first according to the likelihood that they will actually engage with such content. For example, the posts which are recommended to you when you scroll through your Instagram feed, or the stories of your friends that appear first on the dashboard, are determined by algorithms.

Algorithms can be written by coders who make use of machine learning. “Machine learning” means that algorithms “learn” how to carry out tasks under various levels of human oversight. Algorithms manage several tasks which would be tedious for humans to carry out, such as managing flows of content through active recommendations as well as negative shadow bans and mediating interaction with information through likes and comments to improve content discoverability. In addition, algorithms rank and filter information in ways that create incentives and conditions of interaction for content creators that are similar to markets.

Why do algorithms exist?

The function of an algorithm is to deliver relevant content to users. The reason why social media platforms use algorithms is to more organically filter through the large amount of content that is available on each platform. Algorithms do the work of delivering content that is potentially more “interesting” for a user to the detriment of posts which are deemed irrelevant or low-quality - either in general, or to a specific user.

Regarding the criteria based on which algorithms deliver content, sometimes social media platforms explicitly specify which content they consider as high-quality and therefore promote on their platform. It must be further kept in mind that social media platforms are actual businesses, which make part of their revenue from marketing. This may include marketing of a brand or content that public pages want to promote by paying a fee to the social media in order to have the algorithms promote them.

How do algorithms work?

Algorithms are designed in a way that takes into account different aspects. Some of these aspects are content-based, meaning that this kind of algorithmic design seeks to match a user’s taste, based on their profile, to specific posts that the system guesses the user will like. Once users show interest in a specific tag or category, they are directed to other items in the same category.

Moreover, algorithms can operate in a collaborative way. Collaborative filtering consists in matching users to other users who seem to share similar interests; this way, a person is directed to posts or videos that they might want to see based on the fact that a user with a similar profile searched for that specific source. Algorithms can be context-aware, in the sense that they can individuate personal data such as a user’s exact geographic location in order to include it in the algorithmic calculations.

Finally, machine learning uses computers to simulate human learning, which allows them to identify and acquire knowledge from the real world, and improve performance of some tasks, such as recommendations through algorithms, based on this new knowledge.

How algorithms influence the spread of culture in society

These different approaches to algorithmic design have consequences when processing cultural content. For example, when engineers set computers through machine learning to create algorithms based on the geographic location of users, they limit - or at least direct - the spread of a particular form of art or of information to that specific area. The effects of algorithmic design can be considered both positive or negative. Often algorithms may be created with the aim of increasing awareness or interest in the digital society on a specific matter, some users may suddenly see in their feed an increase of posts concerning nutrition and diet, or foreign cinema, or politics.

However, the negative implications that algorithmic design may have are often the object of heated discussions on the controversies that surround algorithms. Such controversies often concern privacy issues: algorithms work with the personal data of the social media user, in order to “know” how to display the content on the social media platform (for example, algorithms make use of sensitive data such as the geographical location of the user, the friends and acquaintances they interact the most with, the pages and hashtags that they often search for, et cetera). Similarly, there are also considerations about how algorithms influence the opinion and interests of social media users and, consequently, of the digital society.

Through the use of shadow bans , algorithms may give rise to information gaps, as they hide or neglect certain posts, while prioritizing revenue-inducing content. This aspect of algorithmic design is controversial because it carries the pretense to determine which content users should find important or worth of appreciation. This may lead to a non-objective and polarized decision of who and what gets in the spotlight. As a result, algorithmic design inevitably influences the spread of culture and shapes the digital society in a certain way: it decides which type of content or topic should be given priority in each individual feed, and which artists, content creators or brands deserve to gain more visibility than others .

References & links

Hunt, R. & McKelvey, F. (2019). Algorithmic regulation in media and cultural policy: a framework to evaluate barriers to accountability. Journal of Information Policy 9, 307-335.

https://later.com/blog/instagram-shadowban/

Barnhard, B. (2021). Everything that you need to know about social media algorithms. Sproutsocial. Available at https://sproutsocial.com/insights/social-media-algorithms/

Poepsel, M. (2018). Digital Culture & Social Media in Media, Society, Culture & You. Rebus Community.

Maria Alessandra Golino holds a Bachelor’s diploma in European Law from Maastricht University. Her role at the Institute for internet and just society is that of researcher for the Kittiwake project.

A More Equitable Model of Royalties' Distribution

Sat, 24 Apr 2021 17:53:51 GMT

Kittiwake

tech culture society

A More Equitable Model of Royalties' Distribution

SoundCloud introducing fan-powered royalties.

By Sofia Ghezzi

April 24, 2021

The world of online music platforms

In just a few decades the internet has profoundly changed our society. Individuals are now able to communicate virtually, access information, make international transactions, and enjoy entertainment in a completely different way. In particular, within the entertainment industry, the music business has gone through a metamorphosis by transitioning towards online streaming music platforms.

Music platforms have been a game-changer for the way we now understand music and its fruition ( Quinn, 2018, p.52 ). A plethora of music is now easily available for the public free of charge, or for a small flat fee ( Bender, Gal-Or & Geylani, 2021, p.1083 ). This has brought a change in the perspective of the value of the music product in economic terms, as being available for free on the internet causes an obvious damage to the artist and owner of the copyright work ( Towse, 2020, pp.1461-1462 ). As opposed to the traditional deals in the music industry requiring the individual consumer to buy a single product in the physical shop ( Bender, Gal-Or & Geylani, 2021, p.1083 ), nowadays, marketing music and music consumption are mainly digital ( Lestari & Laksono, 2018, pp.329-330 ).

Music platforms have arisen around the first years of 2000; specifically, SoundCloud was created in 2007, but only launched a year later. SoundCloud is a music streaming platform based in Berlin and provides music streaming services. It functions by uploading the artists’ music by placing a file in a network address and distributing their music tracks. This platform has been around for quite some time now, and it is the very first that is trying to tackle one of the biggest issues in the music streaming world: transparency of royalties’ distribution ( Quinn, 2018, p.5 9-60). In fact, SoundCloud has recently introduced fan-powered royalties as a new model to pay its artists on the platform.

Legal background

Royalties are legally binding payments made to an individual or a company for the ongoing use of their assets, including copyrighted works. In the music world, copyrights can be defined as “the right of an artist who engages with generic musical forms and notes to create a new musical work, to ownership of that work, and the financial benefits flowing therefrom” ( Quinn, 2018, p. 49). The purpose of copyright law is to strike a balance between three different interests: the public right to access and enjoy the copyright work, the artist’s right of remuneration for its work, and the inspiration of new copyrights works ( Quinn, 2018, p.5 0). Normally, on online music platforms, such as Spotify and Apple Music, the royalties to the artists come from revenue based on listeners’ subscriptions and/or advertising revenue.

SoundCloud’s new system

In order to tackle the transparency of royalties’ distribution, SoundCloud has decided to change its model of pay-outs to artists. In fact, SoundCloud has defined this move as a way of providing “ more equitable pay-outs, transparency, and control over their (artists) own career .” The old SoundCloud’s model of distribution of royalties was collecting the total streams of artists on the platform and pouring them in a hypothetical “pool”. Revenue to the artists, in the form of royalties, were distributed on the base of the artist’s total amount of shares of streams. This system is called “ pro rata model ”, and it is used by all major audio streaming services such as Spotify and Apple.

Whereas the new SoundCloud’s model of distribution of royalties is called fan-powered or “ user centric model ”, namely the artist is being paid on the base of its fans’ actual listening habits. A study published by “Digital Media Finland” shows the differences and similarities between the two systems, advantages and disadvantages; in any case, the user centric model gives more power to the users and benefits the independent artists ( Muikku, 2017, pp.11-12 ).

The new system was announced by SoundCloud on the 2nd of March 2021, and it was put in place by the 1st of April 2021. Independent artists who monetize directly with SoundCloud are eligible for this new system of payment; the streams of those artists are distributed directly to the artists that the fan has listed to. The underlying idea is that if a fan is listening to a new emerging artist, part of the revenue of his subscription on the online music platform and the advertisement he/she consumed would go directly to that particular artist.

SoundCloud also claims that the new system should be benefitting more independent artists, as they are more equitable and transparent . In particular, the system pays royalties to artists based on what portion of a fan’s time they listen to each artist. The total amount of money generated by a fan for the artists they listen to is then calculated on the following criteria : (1) how much the fan listens to that artist in proportion to all of their listening time in a given month, (2) how many advertisements the fan has consumed, (3) whether the fan has a paying subscription to SoundCloud Go+.

SoundCloud is now the first and only platform to have introduced this new model for paying their artists. It may be setting an example for other online music streaming platforms, thus we shall see how its implementation will play out within the next few months, and see if any other major platforms will follow.

References & Link

Quinn, A. (2018). Are online music platforms undermining the principles of copyright law? Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practise, 13(1), 52.
Bender, M., Gal-Or, E., & Geylani, T. (2021). Attracting artists to music streaming platforms. European Journal of Operational Research, 290(3), 1083.
Towse, R. (2020). Dealing with digital: the economic organization of streamed music. Media, Culture & Society, 42(7-8), 1461-1462.
Lestari, S. N., & Laksono, A. P. (2018). Journal of Dinamika Hukum, 18(3), 329-330.
SoundCloud website. Fan-powered royalties FAQ. Available at: https://help.soundcloud.com/hc/en-us/articles/1260801306810
SoundCloud website. SoundCloud pays artists fairly. Available at: https://community.soundcloud.com/fanpoweredroyalties
SoundCloud newsroom (2021). SoundCloud introduces fan-powered royalties: a game-changing new pay model for independent artists. Available at: https://press.soundcloud.com/197001-soundcloud-introduces-fan-powered-royalties#:~:text=New%20York%2C%20NY%20%2D%2D%20March,to%20earn%20money%20on%20SoundCloud
Banton, C. (2021). Royalty definition. Investopedia. Available at: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/r/royalty.asp
Muikku, J. (2017). Pro rata and user centric distribution models: a comparative study. Digital Media Finland OY. Available at: http://www.digitalmedia.fi/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/UC_report_final_171213.pdf

The Beginning of a Journey

Sat, 24 Apr 2021 17:42:08 GMT

Kittiwake

tech culture society

Technology & Culture

The beginning of a journey.

By Nathalie Alquati Bonisoli

April 24, 2021

Introduction

Nowadays, access to the Internet on a regular basis is available for billions of people around the globe, which means that access to information has expanded globally to levels that have never before been witnessed in human history. The Big Tech industry is rising and dominating our world. Kids born in the last decades are denominated digital natives as they grew up in close contact with computers, the Internet, mobile phones, and Social Media. In this respect, the common view is that the main drive of the technological progress the world is facing solely concerns prosperity and economic growth.

However, the roots of technological progress are intrinsically linked to humanity’s cultural and social developments. Technology and culture work together, they go hand in hand when shaping our society and adapt to our needs. In these times, we are witnessing the development in digital and internet technology that have allowed for the promotion of digital culture like never before in every sphere of humans’ life from arts to politics, from science to law.

The meaning of words

Technology

The components of the word “Technology” can be traced back to Ancient Greece: techne meant art, craft, while logia was the suffix denoting the study of something or the branch of knowledge of a discipline. The use of this particular word did not emerge until the second half of the 19thcentury. It developed mostly to describe the restructuring of Western societies during the Industrial Revolution ( Murphie & Potts, 2003, p.3 ). During modern times, technology was normally conceived as the application of a body of knowledge or science in specific areas ( Murphie & Potts, 2003, p.4 ). Nowadays, the meaning of technology has acquired a more abstract meaning, as we are surrounded by and totally dependent on it. Indeed, from the perspective of the Western world, technology became an overarching system that we inhabit.

Culture

The word “Culture” derives from the Latin word cultura which meant tending, cultivation. From ancient times, the meaning of this word shifted from an agricultural reference into a metaphor to describe other pursuits as the cultivation of mind or body. ( Murphie & Potts, 2003, p.7 ). The word culture, as we frame it today, is much broader, complex, and difficult to explain. The British anthropologist Edward B. Tylor described culture as “that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom and any other capabilities and habits acquired by a man as a member of society”. Besides including every activity of humans, culture belongs to every human, to every social class, to different races, to different age groups( Murphie & Potts, 2003, p. 8).

The relationship of technology and culture

Multiple theories on the social and cultural significance of technology were formulated. In this respect it is relevant to cite Eric Schatzberg’s work Technology: Critical History of a Concept, which untangles and clarifies the history of technology by rehabilitating the latter as a concept for history and social theory ( Schatzberg,2018, p.235 ). Schatzberg rejects a pure instrumentalist approach in which technology is reduced to an instrumental reason in the process of finding the best means to a specific end. Instead, Schatzberg sustains a cultural approach in which technology is defined as a set of practices humans use to transform the material world by creating and using material tools and as a creative expression of human culture. For societies to thrive and evolve, technological innovations have become necessary.

At the same time the culture of human societies has shaped how those civilizations have created, benefited from, and been implemented by technology. Technological systems are invented by humans and reflect the very essence of a society’s needs and specially cultural practices. Technology adapts also to new cultural demands and different needs. For instance, we could argue that the Big Tech industry’s products, such as computers, social media, streaming platforms are a response to the needs of the globalization process that our society is facing.

Our Reality

The relationship between technology and culture is complex: it emerges through new forms of art and develops as a form of cyberculture and digital media. Technology brought rapid changes in culture; as a matter of fact, it is difficult to conceive any contemporary form of culture as untouched by developments in technology. Nonetheless, technology is intrinsically dependent on our society’s cultural drive. For this reason, in today’s world it is essential to understand the development of technology and its relations to society and culture, as the way technology advances is dependent on the way culture desires.

Conclusion

Kittiwake’s aim is not to tell readers how to interpret technological change, but rather to describe the cultural expression of technology and its social impact. We aim to reflect on how we live with technology, what impact technology has on our lives and on to what extent technology shapes culture and vice-versa.

References

1. Murphie A., Potts J. (2003). Culture and Technology. Palgrave MacMillan.

2. Shatzberg E. (2006). Technik comes to America: changing meanings of technology before 1930. Technology and Culture 47, 486-512.

3. Schatzberg E. (2018). Technology: Critical History of a Concept. The University of Chicago Press.

4. Agar J. (2019). What is Technology?. Annals of Science 77(3), 377-382.

5. Tylor E. B. (1871). Primitive culture: researches into the development of mythology, philosophy, religion, art and custom. J. Murray Publications.

6. Kranzberg M. At the Start. Technology and Culture 1(1), 1-10.

7. Wardyinski D.J. (2019). Technology and Society: How Technology Changed Our Lives. Brainspire. Available at https://www.brainspire.com/blog/technology-and-society-how-technology-changed-our-lives

8. Newman D. (2017). What Comes First? Culture Change or Tech Change. Future of Work. Available at: https://fowmedia.com/comes-first-culture-change-tech-change/ .

Resisting Facial Recognition

Sat, 24 Apr 2021 17:30:46 GMT

Kittiwake

tech culture society

Resisting Facial Recognition

Three campaigns to watch out for (and sign up) !

By Francesca Scapolo

April 24, 2021

The rise of facial recognition technology

In 2019, media outlets worldwide published articles describing what was happening in Hong Kong, where people were protesting in response to the introduction of the Fugitive Offenders amendment bill by the Hong Kong government. One detail sparked a lot of attention: law enforcement authorities used artificial intelligence software that can match faces from video footage to police databases to track down protesters. Coincidentally, facial recognition technology and information on its deployment in urban spaces also popped up in the news in London, where the private owner of the newly redeveloped site located near King's Cross Station was found to be using a biometric surveillance system to track random pedestrians.

Face recognition is used to identify or verify the identity of an individual using their face. These systems use algorithms trained to pick out distinctive details about a person’s face, such as distance between the eyes or shape of the chin, which are then converted into mathematical representations and, finally, compared to data available in a face recognition database.

Scary, eh? Imagine you are walking to go to your favourite place to grab a coffee, and while doing that, your face is captured by a camera placed just next to the building you are passing by. In the precise instant, your face is scanned, and a system is working to match it with your local police database to find out if you are a criminal. You might don't see any problem with this; after all, you didn't do anything wrong, right?

Well, multiple research found that the accuracy percentage is relatively low (95% inaccurate!), and it further decreases when it comes to black people. This is as a result of it being usually trained on Caucasian faces, which then result in systematically misidentifying and mislabelling racialized individuals. The technology reflects and further builds on long-standing social divisions that are deeply intertwined with racism, sexism, homophobia, colonialism and other forms of structural oppression. Also, the full extent of the discrimination created by facial recognition system is still largely unknown (The use of live facial recognition technology by law enforcement in public places, 2019).

Three campaigns to follow (and sign!)

Recently more and more organisations have taken a stand against facial recognition, stressing how this violates people's human rights. Campaigns have been launched to ask governments and local authorities to ban the use of such technology worldwide. We decided to list some we think it is worth watching out for (and that you might want to sign):

Reclaim Your Face: launched by EDRi to ban facial recognition technologies in Europe launched in February 2021, which count more than 30 organisations involved all over Europe already 28,000 signatures! The campaign calls the European Commission to strictly regulate the use of biometric technologies to avoid undue interference with fundamental rights. In particular, they ask the Commission to prohibit, in law and practice, indiscriminate or arbitrarily targeted uses of biometrics which can lead to unlawful mass surveillance. More available at https://reclaimyourface.eu/
Stop Facial Recognition: launched by the London-based NGO Big Brother Watch, this campaign aims to ban the expansion of live facial recognition surveillance in the UK since the first police trials. Backed by over 25 rights groups, academics, lawyers and MPs from across major parties in the UK, they are fighting to urgently stop facial recognition surveillance being used in our public spaces, whether by police or private companies. More available at https://bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/campaigns/stop-facial-recognition/
Ban the Scan : launched by Amnesty International, this campaign calls governments and federal authorities in the US to ban facial recognition technologies in both public and private spaces. You can also find Fight for the Future’s interactive map of facial recognition use and ban efforts across the United States on the website. More available at https://banthescan.amnesty.org/

Last but not least

In addition to these, the European Commission is due to publish a new "European approach for artificial intelligence" with more indications on the use of facial recognition technologies in April 2021. We hope to see their call to ban facial recognition systems everywhere in Europe, following the examples of cities such as San Francisco and Boston that already took a stand against mass surveillance and human rights violations.

Digital Policy Tracker - Asia

Sat, 24 Apr 2021 13:43:22 GMT

Digital Policy Tracker

Asia

Last Major US social network to shut down in China

When 08.10.2021 Where China , Asia Who Microsoft

Microsoft has decided to shut down the localized version of Linkedin for China due to rising censorship demands and significantly challenging operating environment.

LinkedIn in China has been operational since 2014. While Facebook, Twitter and Google have long exited the Chineese tech space - LinkedIn continued to function by introducing customizations adhering to the stricter internet laws of the country. A new China-based platform, InJobs, will be introduced that won't have a social feed but would contribute towards creating economic opportunities. As China continues to rank low on the internet freedom scale, it is time to think how long will it be that all US Tech firms exit the space or conform to the evergoing restrictions to mantain a global market share.

#censorship #digitallaws #bigtech #socialmediaregulation

Hong Kong’s Anti-Doxxing law

When 08.10.2021 Where Hong Kong , Asia Who Hong Kong Privacy Commissioner

The Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance is Hong Kong's longstanding data protection law that has recently gone through certain controversial ammendments . The latest law, put in effect as of 8th October 2021, is an anti-doxxing law that criminalizes the non-consensual disclosure of individuals sensitive personal data. Any breaches would result in 5 years jail time and fines upto HK$1 million. Doxxing is simply defined as exposing previously private personal information to the public without consent, over the internet. Introduction of such a law puts tech giants like Google, Facebook, Twitter etc at a risk as it also hinders some level of free speech. As a result, these companies have threatened to leave Hong Kong. While doxxing is a serious offence, anti-doxxing laws can not be equated to privacy regulation. Anti-doxxing limits the right of public to know, journalism and free speech. This ammendment seems like an attempt by the government to limit hate speech against it. It will only contribute to greater self-censorship but further hinder Hong Kong's freedom of expression.

#privacy #freedomofspeech #personaldata

China’s Personal Information Protection Law

When 30.08.2021 Where China, Asia Who Cyberspace Administration of China

The Personal Information Protection Law (PIPL), a law designed to protect online user data privacy, is set to be implemented from 1st November in China. The law fills a gap, as for the first time a law has defined what sensitive personal information entails and regulates the transfer, storage and usage of such data. It brings forth key implications for firms that rely heavily on personal data as it clearly asks firms to regularly audit their use of data and only collect information that has a clear and reasonable purpose. It is expected that such a regulation will also limit cross-border information transfer. The fact is that PIPL is China's attempt to centralize control of data and prevent tech giants from abusing personal information. It impacts two kinds of businesses the most; those in possession of large amounts of personal information and those with information on critical infrastructure.

Lately, a global trend to protect data sovereignty can be observed. In part, such defined laws play an imperative role in overcoming data exploitation by firms and corporations. As we transition into an environment that breeds data collection, we must also be conscious about how much of the data is made freely available for use.

#datalaws #personalinformation #dataprivacy

FBR Under Attack

When 19.08.2021 Where Pakistan, Asia Who Pakistan's IT Ministry, FBR

Pakistan's largest data centre, Federal Board Revenue(FBR), experienced a major cyber attack this August. As a result of the attack, the FBR website, "IRIS" system, WEBOC and other vital tools remained non-functional for a while. According to official sources, the attack affected the virtual ecosystem by compromising about half of the virtual machines; as a contingency plan, a new virtual space was set up. Sources said a premier intelligence agency had warned FBR of an impending attack, but Pakistan Revenue Automation Limited (PRAL) took it lightly. In a recent update, FBR's Chief Information Officer, Mansoor, stated that there was no data leak as a result of the attack - only systems were disrupted. As technological advancements overtake different aspects of our everyday lives, FBR's automation is a crucial step towards a more reformed and modernized system. However, with such digital advancements come more significant digital vulnerabilities and escalated cybersecurity threats. When a system houses such critical and vast data, it becomes imperative to have robust cybersecurity laws and procedures in place. This is precisely what the current system lacks. Having a system aligning people and technology to combat these threats by state and non-state actors has become an integral part of the country's defence.

#cybersecurity #cybercrime #dataprivacy

Pakistan approves Cybersecurity Policy

When 30.07.2021 Where Pakistan, Asia Who Pakistan's IT Ministry

The Pakistan Telecommunication Authority (PTA) approved a new cybersecurity policy and a new cybersecurity agency. According to Pakistan's IT Minister, the new policy aims to "enhance the governance and institutional framework for creating a secure cyber ecosystem". The policy includes introduction of computer emergency response teams, security operation centres and public awareness campaigns . It is interesting to see that the development comes at a critical time for Pakistan, given that it recently accused India for the use of the Israeli Pegasus spyware to snoop on Pakistan's Prime Minister. Furthermore, Pakistan's poor ranking on the ITU's Global Cybersecurity Index and implementation of the extant Prevention of Electronic Crimes Act, 2016 (PECA) fuel the following question, now more than ever before -- if cybersecurity norms in the country will be supplemented by adeuqate infrastructure, capacity and will actually be followed through!

#cybersecurity #cyberpolicy #cyberattacks

The Pegasus spyware attack in India

When 19.07.2021 Where India, Asia Who NSO, Amnesty International , Indian Government

Pegasus is a hacking software developed, marketed and licensed to 'vetted governments' globally by the NSO Group - an Israeli concern. NSO's categorially claimed that the software it used only to investigate terrorism and crime. However, a leak of 50,000 phone numbers selected for surveillence has shown that the technology has been abused for years . In order to dig deeper into this, "Project Pegasus" was launched that is a collective venture by journalists, media organizations and NGOs across the world. While a global phenomenon, those targeted in India include several journalists, politicians, social activists -- some of who seemed to take contrarian views to the ruling Modi Government. Widely being speculated as mass snooping exercise by the Indian Government, this puts forth a couple of pivotal policy predicaments to ponder over, atleast in the Indian context -- will privacy become a mainstream issue and what good do the recently notifed, "reformed" IT rules do if surveillance is not complemented by transparency and oversight? Most importantly, how and when do governments demand tracebility of first originator on E2EE applications and when can citizens really trust their government to not snoop over them?

#cybersecurity #cyberattacks #masssurveillance

Telenor quits Myanmar over military coup

When 09.07.2021 Where Myanmar , Asia Who Telenor, M1, Myanmar's Military

Myanmar's military coup has led one of its major telecom operators, Telenor, to exit the country and sell its subsidiary to M1 group - a conglomerate that interestingly, has business connections with the military. Telenor stated that the situation had spiralled out of control and upon evaluation of all possible options -- a sale of the company was the best solution. Telenor invested in Myanmar in 2014, with the hope to introduce access to affordable mobile services in the country, but since the coup, the military has imposed internet blackouts, banned access to social media sites like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and practically blocked the free flow of information . Telenor's exit has two-fold implications: one -- violating human rights are bad for the economy, and two -- with M1 seemingly having connections with the military, a hegemony to control information, access and connectivity seems to be on the cards for Myanmar. This has dire consequences on expression, privacy, and gravely threatens the open internet.

#militarycoup #dataprivacy #freedomofspeech

India's new IT minister

When 08.07.2021 Where India, Asia Who Indian Authorities, Silicon Valley,

Last week brought in a major restructuring of Narendra Modi's cabinet as Ravi Prasad, India's IT minister resigned along with other high profile politicians. The cabinet restructuring comes at a time when Prasad was leading a key battle against Silicon Valley giants in regards to data privacy, freedom of speech and implementation of new IT laws. A shwini Vaishnaw , an engineer and former bureaucrat, will now be heading the ministry of IT. In a statement, he emphasized the need to continue to fight the good fight against American technology titans as this would enhance India's control over the internet and improve transparency in policymaking. Ravi had been a in a constant row with Twitter over the past month. His resignation maybe seen as a foreceful eviction due to his inability to handle the implementation of the new IT laws.

#dataprotection #socialmedia #siliconvalley

China's tech regulations & Didi

When 05.07.2021 Where China, Asia Who Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC),Didi,

Didi, China's biggest ride-hailing company, was ordered by Cyberspace Administration of China (CAC) to pull its app from app stores. It alleged that Didi illegally collected users personal data, and did not comply with data protection rules put in place. Didi responded by ensuring that it would remove its app fr om app stores and "conscientiously rectify" personal information security issues .
In the latest development, China's cyberspace regulator stated that any company with data for more than 1 million users must under go a security review before listing its shares overseas. The review is an attempt to impose tighter data collection and storage restrctions as it will look into risks of data being controlled by foreign entities. Two sets of rules are expected to go live this year; Data Security Law and the Personal Information Protection La w. It is believed that these acti ons are a part of the governments attempt of enhancing control over China's overall data and technology sector. To inhibit tech giants from having a monopoly of power in terms of the data they retrieve. This could be China's attempt of centralizing control.

#dataprotection #privacy #law

India's IT minister blocked by Twitter

When 26.06.2021 Where India, Asia Who Twitter, Indian Government

India's IT Minister, Ravi Shankar Prasad, was denied access to his Twitter account for an hour on 25th June 2021. Twitter stated that the suspension was done based on the violation of U.S. Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). However, the IT minister criticised Twitter for the suspension, stating that it was a direct violation to India's new IT Laws. The rules state that the host of user content must be informed about the grounds of suspension and must be given adequate opportunity to dispute action. Ever since India introduced its new IT laws , t here h as been much back and forth between the government and different social media giants.

#freedomofspeech #techlaws #digitalrights

China's Data Security laws and the Government's absoloute control over Tech Giants

When 21.06.2021 Where China , Asia Who Chinese Government

China's new Data Security Laws further strengthen State control o ver the country's tech giants. The law dictates that if any 'core state data' is mishandled, the said business would have to be shut down, have its licenses revoked/suspended and would be liable to pay a fine o f upto $1.6 million. Such a broad defintion of 'core state data' leaves the government with considerable wiggle room to specifically target tech giants like Alibaba, ByteDance, Tencent etc. As Beijing sets itself to become the world's largest player in international data, it determined to not let tech giants like Alibaba to use their data platforms to cultivate an independent power base. The law with its ambiguity on data localisation and cross-border data transfers, seeks to create more hurdles for foreign tech companies. Overall, such strict and confined laws solely contribute to enhancing the governments control on every sort of data produced and eliminates control of data by independent bodies.

#techgiants #datasecuritylaw

Growth of Cloud Computing in Healthcare

When 17.06.2021 Where Asia Who Healthcare Sector

A digital transformation is well-underway in about 93% of the healthcare organizations globally. Investment in healthcare industry's digitization will aid in reducing medical errors and increasing patient satisfaction. The healthcare industry produces a huge repository of data and having this data collected on a cloud platform will help streamline processes. In Southeast Asia, Singapore and Malaysia appear to be at the forefront of utilizing cloud as part of their ongoing healthcare digitalization efforts. Given that such digitization opens a path for integration of machine learning and artificial intelligence tools, it may also pose a threat in terms of data privacy and data breaches.

#cloud #bigdata #datatransformation

Whatsapp sues the Indian Government over new IT Rules

When 26.05.2021 Where India, Asia Who WhatsApp, Indian Government

The Indian government introduced a law asking Whatsapp to trace back private messages to the original sender to carry out a mass surveillance scheme. Seeing this as a direct violation of privacy laws and the fact that it would break end to end encryption, Whatsapp sued the Indian government over the introduction of such a law. The idea was initially pitched in 2018 by the Indian government but only recently implemented as an IT law in New Delhi that requires social media platforms to trace their users and report back the information to Indian authorities. Platforms like Whatsapp, Facebook and Twitter are currently in the timeline defined by the Indian authorities to comply with these new laws. However, it seems unlikely that any of the platforms would indulge in an agreement that threatens user privacy.

#privacy #massurveillance #humanrights

Air India Passengers Data Breached

When 21.05.2021 Where India, Asia Who Air India

A cyberattack on Air India's data processor led to 4.5 million customers data being leaked. The breach involved the personal data of passengers between 2011 and 2021. However, no accounts were hacked, and neither were any passwords leaked. The airline was able to counter the cyberattack and hopes that no such incidents will occur in the future.

#cyberattack #privacy #dataprotection

Facebook bans anti-coup groups in Myanmar

When 15.05.2021 Where Myanmar, Asia Who Facebook

Facebook has banned organizations that have resisted the military coup since 2019. However, ever since then, much has changed as the government was overthrown, and organizations such as the Arakan Army (AA) are no longer classified as terrorist organizations. Facebook has also banned not only the AA but other ethnic armed organizations over the years. This has directly impacted such organizations ability to share their viewpoints on the online platform.

#censorship #socialmedia #onlinecontentmoderation

Amazon comes to Pakistan

When 06.05.2021 Where Pakistan , Asia Who Amazon

Pakistan becomes part of Amazon's seller list. This news comes as great news for Pakistan-based merchants and entrepreneurs as they would be officially able to introduce their products on a global, centralised marketplace. This is an excellent achievement for the trade and eCommerce wing, as Amazon's entry is expected to help boost the eCommerce industry in Pakistan .

#ecommerce #amazon #digitalmarkets

Social Media helps India with its COVID'19 fight

When 03.05.2021 Where India, Asia Who Social Media Platforms

With a drastic rise in COVID-19 cases in India and the state's inability to cater to everyone affected, the general public has come together to create an online community to aid each other through these challenging times. Through different campaigns on online platforms, people can connect those in need to those who can help provide medicines, oxygen, plasma donors etc. From viral tweets to hashtags to direct messaging and apps - the Indian community has come together to aid each other.

#socialmedia #digitalaid #digital services

Chinese regulators issue app privacy protection rules

When 30.04.2021 Where China, Asia Who Chinese Government

China's regulators have drafted regulations dictating how apps are to protect their users' data and privacy. Among these regulations is the need to limit user-data access required by apps and the need for the information being collected, users being notified of sensitive personal data being collected, limitation of app distribution platforms etc. The draft regulations will be open for comment till 26th May 2021.

#dataregulation #privacy

Facebook claims censorship of the #ResignModi hashtag was by "mistake"

When 29.04.2021 Where India, Asia Who Facebook,Indian Government

Like other platforms, Facebook complied with the Indian government's orders to censor content related to Indians criticism of their government's response to COVID'19. However, Facebook claimed that censoring the hashtag #ResignModi was a 'mistake' and not a result of the government asking them to do so .

#censorship #freedomofspeech #covid-19

Chloé Zhao’s Oscar win censored on Chinese social media platforms

When 26.04.2021 Where China, Asia Who Chineese Propoganda Ministry

Chloé Zhao is the first Chinese woman to win the Academy Award for Nomadland. Shortly after, all news and social media outlets in China removed this win from their platforms. It is claimed that the Chinese Propaganda Ministry initiated this removal due to negative sentiments being shared about Zhao and her work previously.

#censorship #freedomofspeech

T witter censors Indian Tweets related to pandemic misinformation

When 24.04.2021 Where India, Asia Who Twitter, Indian Government

Twitter has removed about 50 tweets related to the Indian Governments handling of the pandemic based on their non-compliance with Indian law. These tweets may still be viewed outside India. However, Twitter has the right to take down tweets in a specific jurisdiction if they don't comply with the jurisdictions law. The tweets censored, criticized the government and the prime minister for their inability to control the COVID'19 situation as India goes into a deadly second wave. In a similar article in the New York Times, Indians have criticized big technology companies for censoring such tweets and not contributing to verify data that matters - i.e. availability of tests, ventilators and hospital beds. One may question how much control American tech giants hold on the kind of information disseminated and whether such censorship represents their inability to contribute to fundamental human rights such as freedom of speech.

#censorship #freedomofspeech #covid-19

Digitized Vaccination Process and Exclusivity in India

When 16.04.2021 Where India , Asia Who National Health Authority, Indian Government

In an attempt to digitize the process, the Indian government introduced vaccine registration using Adhaar ID based facial registration via a mobile app. While this might be a seemingly efficient approach, it is highly exclusionary. Adhaar is the worlds largest biometric system however, over 100 million citizens are still excluded from it. Moreover, there are data privacy concerns as under absence of laws, the citizens data maybe used for profiling and survilence. With the second wave effecting millions, it is important to roll out a more accessible, faster vaccination program.

#facialrecognition #privacy #covid-19

Clubhouse Data Leak and Hong Kong Users

When 12.04.2021 Where Hong Kong, Asia Who Clubhouse, Privacy Commissioner

Post concerns of a data leak of 1.3 Million Clubhouse users, the Hong Kong's Office of the Privacy Commissioner for Personal Data inquired whether any Hong Kong users had been impacted by the leak. According to Clubhouse CEO Paul Davison, the so-called data leak was false and no user-content had been uploaded on to hacker websites.

#socialmediaplatforms #privacy #dataprotection

Pakistan lifts ban on TikTok

When 01.04.2021 Where Pakistan, Asia Who TikTok, Pakistan Telecommunication Authority

A court based in Pakistan lifted the ban on TikTok that was introduced on March 11th, due to obscene content. As per Jahanzeb, a lawyer at Pakistan Telecommunication Authority , TikTok has promised to oversee and better moderate third-party content on the app.

#socialmediaplatforms #onlinecontentmoderation #tiktok

Data Protection adequacy adoption for South Korea by the EU

When 30.03.2021 Where South Korea, Asia Who European Union, Republic of Korea

A conclusion to adequacy talks between EU and Republic of Korea, that would allow for free and safe data flows between the two. The talks began in January 2017 and are expected to enhance data protection.

#privacy #dataprotection

China punishes LinkedIn over lack of censorship

When 18.03.2021 Where China, Asia Who China Cyberspace Administration, LinkedIn

Chinese content moderation authoritities criticized LinkedIn for its inability to control offensive political content on the platform. As a result LinkedIn has been asked to produce a self-monitored report covering the monitored content and has been forced to suspend new users for a month. LinkedIn is the only social media platform allowed to operate in China.

#censorship #onlinecontentmoderation #linkedin

Digital Policy Tracker - Oceania

Sat, 24 Apr 2021 13:43:20 GMT

Digital Policy Tracker

Oceania

Online privacy code for the Big Tech

When 25.10.2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who Austrlian Goverment, Big tech

The Australian Goverment has released the exposure draft of the Online Privacy Bill which provides for strict new privacy requirements, including stronger protections for children on social media. Under the code social media platforms will be required to take all reasonable steps to verify their users' age, and give consideration to the interests of the child when handling personal information. The code will also require platforms to obtain parental consent for users under the age of 16. The Attorney-General observed that the legislation was an effort to force tech companies to responsibly handle user data. The government also pointed to evidence that the mental health of young people had deteriorated in recent years and was linked to social media.

The critics of the Big Tech have warned the social media media giants should not be involved in the drafting of the code, saying it had the potential to “dramatically reshape children’s experiences in the digital world for the better.”

#B igtech # intermediaryliability # socia l mediaregulation

Australia is preparing for another showdown with Big Tech — this time over defamatory posts

When 13 . 10 .2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who Austrlian Goverment, Big tech

The Australian government is considering a range of measures that could hold social media firms more accountable for defamatory and abusive content posted onto their platforms. There is a consultation process underway looking at what kind of liabilities should the platforms have concerning those posts. Last week, the Prime Minister described social media as a “coward’s palace” where users can hide behind anonymity and "say the most foul and offensive things to people and do so with impunity.” In such instances, the social media companies should be treated as publishers, he noted. The Australian government has taken active steps in the last few years to establish legal and regulatory frameworks for social media giants. This year Australia passed a law that required Google and Facebook to pay local media outlets and publishers to link their content in news feeds or search results. Similarly, Australia this year passed legislation that allows the country’s eSafety commissioner to order platforms to take down posts or materials deemed “menacing, harassing or offensive.”

#B igtech # intermediaryliability # socia l mediaregulation

Australian regulator aims to rein in Google's advertising power

When 28.09.2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who ACCC, Google

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) is considering regulatory action against Google due to its dominance in the online-advertising sector. In a report, the ACCC has noted that Google has a dominant position in key parts of the advertising technology supply chain. They also observed that lack of competition can lead to higher ad tech fees which would ultimately result in consumers paying more for advertised goods. Finally, the report highlighted that the current competition laws in Australia were insufficient to fully address the issue. Google in response has argued that businesses benefit from using its services in the form of cost savings, time savings and business growth. Google spokesperson also noted that Google enables small businesses to reach customers and grow. Australia has taken an aggressive stance on regulating US tech giants that have taken an aggressive approach while regulating US tech giants. Fo r instan ce earlier this year, the Australian government mandated big tech companies, including Google and Facebook, to pay news publishers for content.

#b igtech # anticompetitionlaw # online advertisment

Reserve Bank of Australia to test central bank digital currencies with other central banks

When 03.09.2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who Bank of Australia

The Reserve Bank of Australia (RBA) has decided to conduct trials with other central banks to test the use of central bank digital currencies (CBDC) for wholesale international settlements. The project aims to develop a prototype shared platform for cross-border transactions using multiple CBDCs. Such a platform will enable financial institutions to transact directly in CBDCs, which could eliminate the need for intermediaries and reduce the time and cost of transactions. This move can be traced to development made back in 2020. That year the Australian Government had announced a review into the regulatory architecture of the country's payments system to ensure it is suitable for continued innovation and to remain internationally competitive. The project can help create a robust payments environment and is essential to Australia's digital economy.

#CBDC # digitaleconomy #cryptoregulations

Australia mulls regulations of digital payment services by tech giants

When 30.08.2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who A ustralian Government, Google, Apple

The Australian Government is currently contemplating the best way to overhaul its current infrastructure for financial regulation to enable stronger oversight of digital wallets and payments from Big Tech companies like Apple, Google, WeChat and others. The regulatory framework for payments has remained largely unchanged since 1996. The current framework does not regulate payment services provided by big tech. The regulations being considered will empower the treasurer to classify Big Tech platforms as designated payment systems. This announcement has come a month after the call by Bank for International Settlements (BIS) earlier this month for financial watchdogs to urgently get to grips with the growing influence of ‘Big Tech.’

If the proposal gets transformed into legislation it would help the government evolve the current framework in face of new technological innovations and new business models.

# big tech # digital payment #digitalwallets

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) chairman has called for a reform in the current mergers legal framework to stamp out “killer acquisitions.”

When 27.08.2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who ACCC

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) chairman has called for a reform in the current mergers legal framework to stamp out “killer acquisitions.” Currently, companies can bypass the ACCC and directly go to the Federal Court to gain merger clearance. When the ACCC opposes mergers as it did with the TPG’s acquisition of Vodafone last year, it must provide hard evidence that it is likely to lessen the competition in the future substantially. Mr Sims, chairman of ACCC, has noted that this places a high burden of proof upon the ACCC. It was the reason for their recent string of court losses, including the TPG/Vodafone merger and AGL’s acquisition of Macquarie Generation. ACCC Chairman recommends that companies only approach the ACCC for clearance which would be in line with “most merger regimes internationally”. However, the Morrison government will unlikely pursue the changes Mr Sims outlined, citing its reluctance to place more regulatory burdens on Australian businesses as the economy recovers from Covid-19.

#a nticompetitionlaw # mergers # big tech

Australian Senate passes a new surveillance law

When 25.08.2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who Australian Government, Australian Senate

The Australian Senate has passed the Surveillance Legislation Amendment (Identify and Disrupt) Bill that expands the power of law enforcement agencies to identify and disrupt suspected online criminal activity. The law provides law enforcement agencies to collect intelligence on criminal networks, take control of online accounts and modify or delete the data of suspected offenders. The law also places an onerous criminal penalty anyone who refuses to comply can face up to 10 years’ imprisonment. The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) previously warned that the new warrant powers could adversely impact the privacy of a large number of individuals – including those with no suspected involvement in criminal activity. Similarly, the Australian Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS) , echoing the concern raised by OAIC, had recommended thirty-three amendments to the law. However, the law has been passed without any major amendment. The law in its current form would allow the state to take actions against dissenters and would chill activity online.

#cybersecurity #cybercrime #surveillance

OAIC launches investigation into the 2019 Optus Data Leak

When 06.08.2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who OAIC

The Office of the Australian Information Commissioner (OAIC) has opened an investigation into the 2019 Optus data breach, which saw the personal details of 50,000 customers published in the White Pages. The details included the names, addresses and mobile phone numbers of the customers. Optus notified the customers of the breach soon after and it blamed it on a systematic error. Two years after the breach the OAIC opened its investigation. The OAIC statement highlighted two purposes of the investigation to determine if there were any systematic issues in the security systems and the extent of harm caused by the data leak.The investigation could take years, based on their other similar probes, and it is unclear how serious any determination may be. The OAIC in the past in many data breach determinations has only required taking measures to improve information systems and governance. Even in the case of Uber's massive data breach for which other nation's regulators had imposed hefty fines, the OAIC has only asked Uber for punitive measures.

#privacy #databreach #cybersecurity

Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security recommends over 30 changes to a surveillance bill

When 06.08.2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who Australian Government, PJCIS

The Australian Parliamentary Joint Committee on Intelligence and Security (PJCIS) recently released its report on the Surveillance Legislation Amendment (Identify and Disrupt) Bill, 2020. The Committee's report echoes the Australian Information Commissioner's concerns that the bill gives wide-ranging and coercive powers to security agencies. Contextualised through thirty-three proposed amendments, the report categorises the same into three subsets : those promoting oversight and accountability, promoting transparency and, laying down safeguards. The suggested amendments would constrain the sweeping powers of the agencies under the existing bill.

# cybersecurity # cybercrime #surveillance

Australian Government establishes a multi-agency task force to combat ransomware attacks

When 16.07.2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who Australian Government, Law Enforcement

The Australian Government has created a new multi-agency taskforce, called Operation Orcus in response to the surge of ransomware attacks, which have increased by over 60% from last year. This taskforce is the first concrete response by the Government in this regard, who until recently, only resorted to issuing warnings in the event of such attacks.The government has described the taskforce as a tough measure that would crack down on organized crime. However, the effectiveness of the taskforce is questionable because the law enforcement agencies do not have the power under law to compel cooperation from businesses, and reports highlight how a larger number of businesses are unwilling to cooperate with law enforcement. The Australian Strategic Policy similarly, explained how this was one of the biggest hurdles in the law enforcement fight against ransomware attacks.

# ransomware #cyberattack #cybersecurity

Australian Privacy Watchdog found that Uber breached the privacy of an estimated 1.2 million Australians

When 13.07.2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who OAIC, Uber

T he Australian Information Commissioner and Privacy Commission (OAIC) determined that Uber and Uber B.V. interfered with the privacy of an estimated 1.2 million Australians while responding to the cyberattacks in October and November 2016. OAIC found Uber companies user's privacy by not taking reasonable steps to prevent unauthorised access of personal information and they did not lay down security procedures and systems following prescribed best practices. Moreover, Uber companies did not disclose the breach immediately, rather they paid the attack to get the attacks to delete the data. This case raised the important and complex issue of whether Australia's Privacy Act applied to overseas-based companies that outsource Australia's personal data. The OAIC answers this question affirmatively. This ruling will help clarify the responsibility of global corporations under Australian privacy law.

#databreach #cyberattack #cybersecurity

Australian Tech Companies express opposition to proposed cybersecurity legislation

When 09.07.2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who Australian Government, Bi g Tech

The Australian Government introduced the Security Legislation Amendment (Critical Infrastructure) Bill in December last year, in response to an increasing threat of cyberattacks. During a parliamentary inquiry about the same, tech companies raised issues about how measures outlined in the Bill would provide extensive power to the government to gather information, issue directions to companies, or to autonomously intervene in situations without providing meaningful safeguards and oversight as a counterweight. Overall, the companies called for a regulatory framework that was more balanced and respectful of their own systems.In the past few years, Australia has introduced cybersecurity laws that have provided the government with extraordinary powers, and often this has been met with pushback from the tech industry.

#techregulation #cyberattack #techgovernance

Australia's Competition Commission authorizes a regional newspapers industry group to negotiate with Big Tech

When 01.07.2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who ACCC, Google, Facebook, Country Press

The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has issued draft proposals to allow a regional newspapers industry group to negotiate with Google and Facebook to hammer out the details of a payments deal for the news content used by tech companies on their platform. This development is a direct result of Australia passing a landmark law (The News Media Bargaining Code) which requires tech firms to provide fair compensation to media companies for the content on their platforms. The law will only have a lasting legacy if it facilitates fair deals between tech firms and domestic media firms especially the smaller ones.Early reports suggest that the law has allowed a handful of big media players to strike deals with tech corporations; however, for small and independent publishers the process for securing deals has been more arduous.

# bigtech #journalism #internetregulation

Calls to stop the state police from using the national facial recognition system without statutory backing

When 30.06.2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who Australian Government, States Law Enforcement

It was reported that the New South Wales Police was testing out the national facial recognition system for criminal investigation. Calls were raised against this move citing lack of safeguards and oversight. The national facial recognition database is n ot backed by law and efforts to introduce it failed in 2019 when the proposed bill was rejected for providing extensive surveillance powers. The Australian Human Rights Commission had already noted that law enforcement unless there are proper safeguards in place. However, even without safeguards and a legal sanction states including NSW have been uploading personal data to the database. This development is part of a wider trend in Australia that started with the “war on terror” of providing the government with exceptional law enforcement and surveillance powers; this has led to an endless barrage of national security legislation and surveillance cameras and facial recognition system technology being deployed widely across the country.

# statesurvillance #facialrecognitiontechnology #privacy

New Zealand Government decides to scrap the content filtering provisions from a draft bill

When 22.06.2021 Where New Zealand, Oceania Who Government of New Zealand

This Bill was introduced as part of t he regulatory responses that were brought in after the Christchurch Shootings. These included a review of the existing legal content regulatory arrangements, an online awareness campaign, and the Christchurch Call Summit that brought governments and tech companies together with the aim to eliminate violent extremist content online.The bill allowed government agencies to issue takedown notices and punish non-compliant websites. Moreover, it provided power to the government to create internet filters for preventing access to objectionable content. Finally, the bill empowered the Chief Censor, to take actions against objectionable content. It was the internet filter provisions that received overwhelming opposition from almost all parties. The concerns about the provision were that it provided drastic powers without significant oversight and transparency.

# censorship #contentmoderation #digitalgovernance

Australia's eSafety Commissioner launches the next phase of their SafetyByDesign initiative

When 22.06.2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who Australian eSafety Commissioner

The Australian eSafety Commissioner in 2018 launched their SafetybyDesign campaign which places safety and privacy at the centre of product development. It aims to ensure that safety is a primary consideration instead of the product being retrospectively fitted with safeguards. The latest development to this project is the online safety assessment tools for start-ups and enterprise companies. The assessment considers five factors: [i] transparency and accountability, [ii] structure and leadership, [iii] user empowerment, [iv] moderation, escalation, and enforcement, and [v] internal policies and procedures. These tools have been designed in consultation with industry - and in conjunction with the recent Online Safety Bill, is trying to integrate newer governance methods into the dynamic space of content regulation.

# techregulation #safetybydesign

Australian Senate passes the Online Safety Bill 2021

When 22.06.2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who Australian Government

Australia’s Senate passed the Online Safety Bill to provide greater protection and redress to the victims of cyber abuse. This bill is the result of a reform process that began in 2018 with the Government reviewing its existing online safety laws. A prominent provision under the bill requires intermediaries to take down 'harmful’ material within 24 hours of notification and imposes for penalties for both, individuals who generate/share abusive content and intermediaries to whom the takedown notices are served. The bill also provides more power to the eSafety Commissioner to investigate and unmask anonymous accounts. It also grants the commissioner stronger powers to block domains and URLs. The bill, if passed by the Parliament's lower house, would place more stringent intermediary regulations in the country.

#intermediaryliability #cyber bullying #privacy

Chairperson of Australia's Competition Commission targets telcos for anti-competitive activity

When 22.06.2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who A ustra lian Competition Commission, Vodafone

Rod Sims, the Chairman of the Australia Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) has released a statement targeting TPG and Vodafone’s merger for the increase in telephone prices in the country over the last year. Rod Sims reiterated that this was the reason the ACCC had opposed the merger as it would lead to the competition being muted and customers having to pay more. This statement is part of Sims' campaign for tougher merger laws and the increase of ACCC's powers. Sims shall release their proposal for stronger merger powers in two months. Thus, it would be important to monitor statements and developments from the ACCC to understand the potential changes to Australia's anti-competition law.

#competitionlaw #telecomregulation #mergers

Australian opposition introduces bill to tackle ransomware payments disclosure

When 21.06.2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who Australian federal opposition

The Australian federal opposition has introduced a bill which, if passed, would require businesses and government agencies to report to the Australian Cyber Security Centre before paying ransom for a ransomware attack. The purpose of the bill is to compel the cooperation from the entities and to gain information intelligence. This move comes after a recent spate of high-profile cyber-attacks involving ransomware in the last 18 months i Australia. The opposition has been pushing for this since last February but the Australian Government till now has resisted the calls and has only issued advisories.

#cybersecurity #cyberattacks #ransomware

Australian institutions face vulnerability to ransomware

When 18.05.2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who Australian institutions

Owing to the recent ransomware attacks in the US, cybercrime experts warn Australia about similar attacks and the need for more robust cybersecurity. With the pandemic, the health care system is more prone to such an attack. Other institutions like public organizations and educational institutions may also face similar cyberattacks. Recent events and such a threat show how cybercrime is no longer just impacting the digital world but public life.

#cybercrimes #criticalinfrastructures #cybersecuri ty

Australia and India team up on critical technology

When 22.04.2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who Australian a nd Indian universities

Australia and India have teamed up to work on development of critical and emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence, 5G networks, the internet of things and quantum computing through a research grant programme. They aim to contribute to the global tech ecosystem by inculcating the shared vision of an open, free, rules-based Indo-Pacific region. A core area of the project is to integrate ethical frameworks,enhanced technical standards and knowledge on critical technologies.

#techgovernance #criticaltechnologies

Australian Consumer Data Privacy breach by Google

When 16 .0 4 .2021 Where Australia, Oceania Who Google, Competition & Consumer Commission

As per the federal court, android users were misled by Google about their personal location data collection. According to Google, if the new users turned off their locaton history, the new app would not be able to track their location. However, a default setting 'web & app actvity' allowed Google to collection personal location data. Such privacy breach is against Australian law, the ACCC viewed this as a personal victory in the field of protecting consumer data.

#dataprotection #privacy

Protections enhancement in Data Availability Bill

When 23 .03.2021 Where Australia , Oceania Who OAIC,Australian Parliament

Data Availability and Transparency (DAT) Bill was introduced in December 2020 to help protect public data. The OAIC has asked for additional privacy measures that would provide clarity for data scheme entities about their privacy obligations and individuals greater protection.

#dataprotection #privacy

Digital Policy Tracker - Latin America

Sat, 24 Apr 2021 13:43:17 GMT

Digital Policy Tracker

Latin America

Chile set to become the first country to pass ‘neuro rights’ law

When 02.10.2021 Where Chile , Latin America Who Government of Chile

Chile set to become the first country in the world to recognize and protect neuro rights. The law protects rights to personal identity, free will and mental privacy. Mental identity is defined as a non-manipulable right to protect against technological advancements in neurosciences and artificial intelligence. With the rapid progress in neurotechnology, many fear that this may end up being misused in the future for recording and modifying mental data. Chile’s law is a step to protect the neuro rights from future intrusion, and it would be interesting to see the development and impact of such law.

#neurotechnology #privacy #neurorights

Cuba introduces legislation that criminalises dissent

When 19.08.2021 Where Cuba, Latin America Who Government of Cuba

The ongoing protest in Cuba against the ruling regime has met new resistance from the government which has enacted a law to criminalise any critique on the internet. In yet another move to stifle dissent, the Cuban government has passed a regulation which holds any inciting acts "that alter public order" as crimes. The government is treating dissenters as cyberterrorists and as per Communications' Resolution 105, such dissent is social indiscipline. The new framework is marred with political goals that gives unlimited power to the government to restrict internet access and circulation of information via social media. Futher, it criminalises posts that are against government.

#contentmoderation #righttoprotest #freedomofspeech

Costa Rica signs legal framework to govern "digital nomads"

When 18.08.2021 Where Costa Rica , Latin America Who President Carlos Alvarado

' Digital Nomad' is a concept which involves tourism with work and in the wake of the pandemic, digital nomads are growing in numbers. A person interested in working from a remote location can opt for Costa Rica as it gives several incentives to remote workers from different jurisdictions. In order to attract tourists, Costa Rica has introduced a legal framework which accords recognition and protection to Digital Nomads as remote workers. The regulation gives residence permit for a year extendable for another, and the usage of one's driver's license from their home country in Costa Rica. Further, the regulation establishes the non-resident immigration category for beneficiaries as well as total exemption from income tax. People opting for remote work can now choose Costa Rica as their headquarters. The move is seen to attract more tourists and incorporate a new way of working.

#digitalnomads #work #tourism

Uruguay brings bill to regulate digital assets

When 05.08.2021 Where Uruguay, Latin America Who Government of Uruguay

In a move to attract more investment, Uruguay has introduced a bill to legalise digital assets. A copy of the b ill is (here) . The move is to accept cryptocurrencies for payments and introduce them in the financial framework. The government has created a body as the National Secretariat for the Fight against Money Laundering and Terrorism Financing (SENACLAFT) with the purpose of maintaining a registry of virtual assets providers. Interestingly, the country is pushing cryptocurrency as digital assets but the BIll has not recognised it as legal tender. Other provisions of the Bill are related to setting guidance to regulate the production and exchange of cryptocurrencies and fiscal security in commerce derived from usage of such currencies. El Salvador is the first country to allow cryptocurrency within in jurisdiction and now its Uruguay (unlike El Salvador, it is not recognised as legal tender in Uruguay) that follows the league.

#digital assets #cryptocurrency #cryptoregulations

Brazil data protection law's sanctions for non compliance comes into force

When 04.08.2021 Where Brazil, Latin America Who Government of Brazil

In furtherance of the data protection law passed in September 2020, Brazil gave a window period till August 2021 for organisations to comply with it. The law also created a Suprevisory body that will look into compliance by organisations. Companies and organisations are finding it difficult to comply with the new regulation in light of the pandemic and a shorter window period to align with the law. However, the government did not extent the dedadline and now the law in force imposes fine that runs upto 50 miliion reais (US $ 9.6 million) per day for violation or non compliance with the law.

#dataprotection #privacy #law

El Salvador modifies its Electronic Signature Act , 2016

When 20.07.2021 Where El Salvador, Latin America Who Government of El Salvador

The Electronic Signature Act, 2016, which came into force on April 23, 2016, was modified by the Salvodoran congress on July 20, 2021. The Act governs electronic seals, time stamps, and website au thentication. A total of 41 articles have been modified to create legal certainity for providers of certification services and to the users that avail such services. The amdendments also cover modalities of electronic document storage, dematerialisation services of physical documents. El Salvador has been in news for marching forward with cryptocurrency and in order to create a better certification services and boost investment climate, the Act was reformed. The modified framework addresses the evidentiary vallue of such certified electronic signatures and digital messages. This will bring more regulatory clarity with respect to digital law.

#digital #signature #law

Cuba restricts internet access in wake of anti-government protests

When 19.07.2021 Where Cuba, Latin America Who Government of Cuba

Cuba is witnessing one of the largest anti-government protests against food shortages and high prices amidst the COVID-19 pademic. The country has been facing an economic crisis for years which has deepened due to sanctions imposed by the US under the regime of former President Trump. The government has restricted internet access and control on social media sites to disrupt communication amongst protesters. This curtailment is indeed looked upon as violation of human rights and US in no way can surpass international law and territorial soverignity of Cuba to help the Cubans. Social media helps in the mobility of movement and coordination amongst protesters, with restricting the acess, the government potentially disrupts the coordination.

#internet #socialmedia #government #protest

Colombia allows two Crypto Exchanges to operate in the Country

When 09.07.2021 Where Colombia, Latin America Who Government of Colombia

Superfinanciera, Colombia’s financial regulator, announced that the Movvi and Bitpoint have been authorized to operate in the country. This means that Columbian users can now perform cash-in and cash-out operations on both platforms after an evaluation by the entity’s Evaluation and Tracking Committee evaluated the pilots. This pilot program, aimed at making transactions safer and easier for the average person, will run for 12 months and once the pilot period is over, users will be required to withdraw their Colombian Pesos (COP) or cryptocurrency as the platform deals with local regulations. With Colombia being one of the economies with the highest crypto transaction volumes in the world, the launch of this pilot program, comes at a time when Colombian investors demand more security in transactions, easier access to information, and a knowledge of risks in dealing with cryptocurrency.

#fintech #cryptocurrency #financialregulations

Mexican Institute of Telecommunications issues guidelines on net neutrality

When 07.07.2021 Where Mexico , Latin America Who Mexican Insitute of Telecommunications

On June 28, the Mexican Institute of Telecommunications approved the guidelines applicable to authorized parties for data traffic management and network administration to provide Internet access services. These guidelines will implement the “Net Neutrality” chapter included in the Federal Law of Telecommunications and Broadcasting (Ley Federal de Telecomunicaciones y Radiodifusión), encouraging principles of non-discrimination, privacy, digital inclusion, and transparency. The IFT's issuance of these new guidelines is a positive step for user privacy, wider internet access, and transparency in the second-largest economy in Latin America.

#netneutrality #digitalinclusion

Bitcoin law to come into effect from September 7, 2021

When 23.06.2021 Where El Salvador, Latin America Who President Nayib Bukele

President Nayib Bukele has recently allowed Bitcoin as legal tender in El Salvador. In furtherance of this process, he has announced that a Bitcoin law will come into effect from September 7, 2021. Pertinently, Bitcoin shall join, rather than replace, the US dollar which is the official currency of El Salvador. President Bukele has also explained that a key rationale underlying the adoption of Bitcoin as a legal currency is that of helping people send remittances back to El Salvador, given that the process is typically replete with high transaction and commission costs. Post the law coming into effect, El Salvador will become the first country in the world to adopt Bitcoin as a legal currency. So far the characterisation of Bitcoin in many countries has been limited to that of assets and not currency. The use of Bitcoin shall be permitted with ATMs, digital wallets, and free money.

#bitcoin #currency #cryptoregulations

World Bank rejected El Salvador's Bitcoin implementation

When 17.06.2021 Where El Salvador, Latin America Who World Bank, Government of El Salvador

Citing environmental and transaparency concerns governing Bitcoin, the World Bank rejected El Salvador's plan for implementation of Bitcoin. The debt that El Salvador owes to US Treasuries dipped to 705 basis points and El Salvador is looking to redeem the situation by creating lucrative investment through Bitcoin legalisation. It has sought legal and technical assistance from IMF which is yet to respond on the issue. However, World Bank did not extend its support for Bitcoin.

#bitcoin #currency #cryptoregulations

El Salvador is now the first country in world to adopt Bitcoin as legal tender

When 11.06.2021 Where El Salvador, Latin America Who President Nayib Bukele

El Salvador has allowed Bitcoin as legal tender thereby meaning that in the country Bitcoin will be parallel to dollar which became its official currency 20 years back.

#bitcoin #currency #cryptoregulations

Blockchain renewables registry launched in Chile

When 01.06.2021 Where Chile , Latin America Who Government of Chile

RENOVO is a platform designed to provide national registry of all the renewable energies generated and consumed by Chile. This is to ensure transparency and robustness through compliance.

#renewable #blockchain #electricity

Ecuador enacted its New Personal Data Law

When 01.06.2021 Where Ecuador, Latin America Who Government of Ecuador

Ecuador has come up with its first Personal Data Protection Law. The law is based on EU General Data Protection Regulations except for monetary penalties.

#dataprotection #privacy #law

Brazilian Central Bank issues guidelines for its cryptocurrency

When 31.05.2021 Where Brazil, Latin America Who Brazilian Central Bank

The Central Bank Of Brazil has released a note listing the general guidelines for the design of a hypothetical central bank digital currency (CBDC) for the country. The document states that CBDC should be used as a money substitute, comply with anti-terrorism regulations, and be issued by the central bank. Moreover, due to its digital nature, CBDC should be in "adherence to all privacy and security principles" and put "emphasis on the development of innovative business models based on technological advances, such as smart contracts, internet of things (IoT), and programmable money".

# cryptocurrencies #cryptoregulations #CBDC

Jamaica Central Bank to introduce digital currency next year

When 28.05.2021 Where Jamaica, Latin America Who Jamaica's Central Bank

The Bank of Jamaica announced the introduction of a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) scheduled for next year. The new digital currency will help the government reduce welfare payments by making them instantaneous. The new CBDC will also aim to boost financial inclusion and reduce costs for financial institutions.

# cryptocurrencies #cryptoregulations #CBDC

Criminal suspected of running an international skimming operation copying credit card data arrested

When 28.05.2021 Where Mexico, Latin America Who Mexican government

Mexico announced the arrest of a critical underworld figure, Florian Tudor, aka The Shark, suspected of running a syndicate that stole millions of dollars from tourists by cloning their credit card.

#data #crime #creditcard

Criminal suspected of running an international skimming operation copying credit card data arrested

When 28.05.2021 Where Mexico, Latin America Who Mexican government

Mexico announced the arrest of a critical underworld figure, Florian Tudor, aka The Shark, suspected of running a syndicate that stole millions of dollars from tourists by cloning their credit card.

#data #crime #creditcard

Colombia orders WhatsApp to comply with data protection rules

When 27.05.2021 Where Colombia , Latin America Who WhatsApp, Colombian Privacy Authority

The Colombian government pressured WhatsApp over its privacy policy, as it does not comply with data protection laws. The authorities asked WhatsApp to continue providing the service without restrictions to users refusing to accept the new policy, including maintaining user accounts and their message and file records.

# privacy # dataprotection #socialmedia

Cuban Central Bank warns about the Rise of Crypto-Related Ponzi Cases

When 19.05.2021 Where Cuba, Latin America Who Cuba's Central Bank

Cuba's central bank recently issued a warning about the rising number of cryptocurrency-related scam cases across the island. ScammersIn particular, citizens should be aware of the Ponzi schemes hiding under legit-looking digital asset investments. The schemes have been scamming several people across the nation, whose has been hurt by a long-lasting economic crisis. While there has been an increase in acceptance towards cryptocurrencies, the Cuban government isn't currently endorsing any virtual currency-related projects in the country and, in fact, "advises the public not to get involved in operations of this nature." Yet, like many other governments in the region, the Cuban Central Bank is evaluating the introduction of a central bank digital currency (CBDC).

#cybercrimes #cryptocurrencies #cryptoregulations

WhatsApp delays enforcement of new privacy rules in Brazil

When 17.05.2021 Where Brazil, Latin America Who WhatsApp, Brazilian Privacy Authority

Following the pressure to postpone its privacy policy update, WhatsApp has agreed to delay its enforcement of 90 days while Brazilian authorities investigate the data privacy implications to users of the app's new rules. If Brazil's authorities conclude WhatsApp is not complying with the local legislation, actions ranging from warnings to fines may be applicable as the sanctions under the Brazilian data protection rules will be enforced from August 2021.

#privacy # dataprotection #socialmedia

Mexico senate voted for Bills to reform Electronic Financial Transactions

When 14.05.2021 Where Mexico, Latin America Who Mexican government

Mexico senate approved bills of the General of Negotiable Instruments and Credit Transactions (Ley General de Títulos y Operaciones de Crédito or LGTOC), the Federal Code of Civil Procedure (Código Federal de Pr ocedimientos Civiles or CFPC), the Law of Credit Institutions (Ley de Instituciones de Crédito or LIC) and the Commerce Code (Código de Comercio or CC) to reform electronic financial transactions.

#financial #transactions #digitalpayments

Mexico’s regulatory scheme imposed a Value-added Tax (VAT) on Digital services

When 12.05.2021 Where Mexico, Latin America Who Mexican government

Mexico enacted chapter III-Bis on Title I of the Value-Added Tax Law that imposes a value-added tax (VAT) on Digital services like streaming services, digital intermediaries etc. The purpose for imposition of the tax is to address the tax revenue shortfall .

#data #taxation #digitalservices

Brazilian authorities call for postponement of WhatsApp privacy changes

When 10.05.2021 Where Brazil, Latin America Who WhatsApp, Brazilian Privacy Authority

Back in June 2020, WhatsApp launched a new service for Brazilian users. The app rolled out digital payments in-app, yet only a few days after the service release, Brazil's Central Bank suspended it, citing concerns about competition in the payment system market. Almost a year after overseeing the app's compliance with competition laws, the Central Bank recently removed its service suspension. WhatsApp users in the region will now be able to connect debit, prepaid or combo cards from several banks working with its payment processor.

#privacy # dataprotection #socialmedia

Brazilian Central Bank lift ban on WhatsApp in-app payments

When 04.05.2021 Where Brazil, Latin America Who WhatsApp, Brazilian Central Bank

#digitalpayments #competitionlaw #WhatsApp

El Salvador announces the creation of a National Digital Authority

When 23.04.2021 Where El Salvador , Latin America Who National Digital Authority

El Salvador announced the creation of the National Digital Authority. The regulatory body will be in charge of creating new legislation to better regulate the use of information and communication technologies and coordinate the digitalization of the public administration. Its competence will equally cover the enforcement of rules regarding universal access to internet, personal data protection, e-commerce and cybersecurity. The adoption of a regulatory body for digital laws and services has been a common trend across multiple countries in the world.

#digitalauthority #dataprotection # cybersecurity

Apple Inc was held liable to pay $3.4 million to Chilean consumers in a lawsuit

When 08.04.2021 Where Chile, Latin America Who Consumer lawyers, Apple

Around 150,000 users sued Apple claiming underperformance of software updates. Apple admitted that iOS software was tweaked to slow the perform ance of its devices and was forced to pay to pay $3.4 million to Chilean consumers. Similar consumer issues had been noticed in March in Brazil.

#consumersrights #softwareupdates #apple

A total 1,464,002 accounts have been affected by the Facebook data breach

When 05.04.2021 Where Costa Rica , Latin America Who Facebook

A record of 533 million users data has been exposed for free on dark web in the recent Facebook data breach. The list also includes 1.464.002 accounts from Costa Rica.

#databreach #darkweb #facebook

Panama’s new Personal Data Protection Law came into force

When 29 .03.2021 Where Panama , Latin America Who Panama

Panama’s new personal data protection law (Ley No.81) extends to databases of national and foreigners. The law mandates consent of data subject for collecting personal data. A time period of 7 years has been allowed to store, treat data under prescribed circumstances.

#dataprotection #privacy

Facebook froze Venezuela President Nicolás Maduro's page over COVID-19 misinformation

When 27.03.2021 Where Venezu e la , Latin America Who Facebook, President Maduro

Venezuela’s president Maduro shared Carvativir, an oral solution from thyme, as a "miracle" medication for coronavirus with no side effects, a claim that lacked scientific evidence. Facebook claimed it violated its policy and thus froze his page.

#onlinecontentmoderation #misinformation #facebook

Prospera: a private tech city opens business in Honduras

When 27.03.2021 Where Honduras , Europe Who Prospera Honduras

A charter city with first colonists as e-residents is to be opened by Prospera with its own rules and constitution. It has its own constitution of sorts and a 3,500-page legal code with frameworks for political representation and the resolution of legal disputes, as well as minimum wage .

#e-residency #smartcity #digitalconstitution

EBANX: fintech unicorn seeks to expand operations in Latin America

When 26 .03.2021 Where Latin America Who EBANX

EBANX is a fintech unicorn currently operating in 15 countries in Latin America, offering payment solutions. Countries are moving to digital commerce in wake of pandemic and are adopting digital solutions giving a market size of 52 million people.

#fintech #digitalpayments #ecommerce

Apple fined in Brazil for removing chargers in iphone12 box

When 23.03.2021 Where Brazil, Latin America Who Consumer Protection Regulator, Apple

The Brazilian consumer protection regulator (Procon-SP) fined $2 million Apple for misleading advertisements, after the company removed iphone chargers in the box. The regulator also highlighted other problems with Apple like iOS update issues that some users reported about functions in their iPhones after updating the software. It said Apple did not help the resolve the issue.

#consumersrights #apple

The Electronic Commerce Law (LCE) came into force in El Salvador

When 10.02.2021 Where El Salvador, Latin America Who Government of El Salvador

El Salvador passed a new law to regulate e-commerce. The purpose is to establish the legal framework for all commercial relationships undertaken and contracts executed through digital or electronic means. The law defines providers’ obligations, internet providers etc.

#digitalservices #e-commerce #digitalregulations

Digital Policy Tracker - North America

Sat, 24 Apr 2021 13:43:16 GMT

Digital Policy Tracker

North America

As FCC acting chair's term winds down, experts fear impact on digital access and connectivity

When 16.09.2021 Where USA, North America Who Federal Communications Commission

The White House is nearing the deadline to announce the Federal Communications Commission's chairperson that has been deadlocked in a 2-2 partisan split since January. Since the U.S. House of Representatives is about to vote on the $1 trillion bipartisan infrastructure bill , policy experts predict the President's pick for the FCC chairperson will be announced soon. The commission's acting chairwoman, Jessica Rosenworcel, has led the agency with a steady focus on long-term broadband subsidy to promote digital access all over America and to combat “digital redlining”. The new chairperson will have this issue of broadband access for all, along with a mounting list of policy items like restoration of net neutrality, encouraging competition in the broadband market, enacting pending broadband license renewals and spectrum actions, among others. President Biden's nominee will, thus, not only be shaped by what his administration expects from the telecom industry but will also shape this crucial industry for the next five-year term.

#FCCchair #digitalaccess #broadband

Internal Facebook report states the company forced troll farm content on over 40% of all Americans each month before 2020 election

When 16.09.2021 Where USA, North America Who Facebook, MIT Technology Review

A former Facebook employee released an internal report written in October 2019 that detailed Facebook's failure in changing its algorithm post the 201 election. Their strategy of dealing with harmful content after it was posted and only li miting "worst of the worst" con tent at the source did very little to control the 'troll farms' - professional groups that work to post provocative content and propaganda on social networking sites. The report estimates that over 140 million Americans were encountering the content produced by these 'troll farms' monthly, most of which was targeted towards Christians, African Americans, Native Americans, and women. Since the platform does not penalize unoriginal content but instead pushes engaging content higher up on the users' feed, the content created by 'troll farms', which is often engaging and created to be reposted, ranks higher on the user's feed. Such engagement and reach, in the hands of bad actors, can expose the users to become targets of politically divisive content and misinformation. The report has highlighted the platform's systemic issues that stem from its flawed algorithm and lack of policies that target harmful content at the source.

#algorithm #trollfarms #USelections

Senate infrastructure bill cracks down on crypto tax reporting, White House voices support

When 03.08.2021 Where USA, North America Who US Senate, White House

Senators introduced a $1 trillion bipartisan federal infrastructure bill that may require cryptocurrency brokers to report traders’ information about the purchase and sales prices to the IRS, leading to higher tax bills for investors. This bill's guidelines affect investors and companies that qualify as "brokers". To clear up the confusion about who classifies as a "broker", some senators have introduced an amendment to the infrastructure bill based on its language. Industry groups and the Chamber of Digital Commerce called the bill's existing version “too broad and vague", saying the bill may affect companies and investors negatively. The White House issued a statement in support of the bill calling it "an important step forward in promoting tax compliance". If the original version of the bill passes, it could hurt the crypto market owing to the heightened enforcement. If favourably amended, it would be a win for the crypto industry - a sunrise sector that is struggling to find regulatory legitimacy and sound legal feet across the world. The original language might also force some companies to shut down or move offshore if they can’t comply, impacting the American digital asset ecosystem.

#cryptoregulations #cryptocurrency #digitaltax

Lawmakers introduce bill to hold Facebook, Twitter accountable for Covid-19 misinformation

When 23.07.2021 Where USA, North America Who American Government, Facebook, Twitter

Senators Amy Klobuchar and Ben Ray Luján introduced the Health Misinformation Act in the Senate that would remove safe harbour given to platfroms under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, for misinformation spread about public health emergencies. The bill aims to hold social media companies like Facebook and Twitter accountable for amplifying misinformation during the pandemic about vaccines, false Covid cures, and other misinformation about the virus. This bill follows President Biden's recent comment , where he accused Facebook for spreading misinformation that "is killing people". This new bill would strip social media companies of the immunity provided by Section 230 in events of public health emergencies. For the bill to become effective, lawmakers and agencies enacting the exception would be required to define "health misinformation" to hold companies accountable for the spread of misinformation. This move hints at lawmakers and the White House turning their attention to holding social media companies for facilitating the spread of false information.

# misinformation #covid19 #section230

Facebook, Amazon ask for FTC Chair Lina Khan's recusal

When 14.07.2021 Where USA, North America Who Facebook, Amazon, FTC

On July 14, Facebook sent a petition to the Federal Trade Commission asking for Chair Lina Khan's recusal from the FTC's antitrust case against the company. Given the Chairwoman's very vocal stance on antitrust and her frequent criticism of big tech companies, Facebook has asked for the same, in the interest of "fairness". Khan's recusal will leave the vote between two Republicans and two Democrats - hinting at a tie that would stop the matter from going any further.

Facebook's move follow s Amazon's petition for Khan's r ecusal from anti-trust matters regarding the company, hinting at big tech's dissatisfaction with her leadership of the FTC. Even if these recusal requests are dismissed by the FTC, they might imperil Khan's leadership of the FTC and her involvement in antitrust cases in the future.

#antitrust #digitalregulations #bigtech

Google hit with antitrust lawsuit by 36 states alleging app store monopoly

When 08 .0 7 .2021 Where USA, North America Who Americ a n Gove r n me nt , Google

On July 7, state attorneys representing thirty-six states filed a complaint in a federal court in San Francisco alleging that Google is imposing barriers that completely prevent or at least strong discourage third-party developers from distributing their apps outside Google's Play Store. The case is being led by New York with Utah, North Carolina, and Tennessee, and states that the company uses unfair tactics to limit competition and collects "extravagant" commissions from developers upon app purchases. The lawsuit follows the American government's crackdown on tech giants wi t h anti- trust bi l ls that aim to encourage fair competition, highlighting the administration's growing concerns towards the anti-competitive stance of big tech companies.

# playstore #competition #antitrust

Trump sues Facebook, YouTube and Twitter over ‘censorship’

When 08.07.2021 Where USA, North America Who Donald Trump, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube

Former US President Donald Trump has filed a class-action lawsuit targeting Google, Twitter, and Facebook and their CEOs, claiming that he is the victim of censorship. The lawsuit is in response to the indefinitie suspension of the former president's social accounts from these platforms over safety concerns amid the January 6 Capitol riots led by his supporters. Other than asking for the restoration of Mr Trump's account, the lawsuit also demands that the tech firms be prevented from "censoring" the his accounts in the future. The lawsuit, which Mr Trump calls "a very beautiful development for our freedom of speech" was filed at a federal court in Florida and has been deemed a "mockable" attempt to gain attention by legal experts .

#contentmoderation #censorship #capitolriots

Ruling against Facebook in sex trafficking case threatens key legal shield for Social Media Platforms

When 25.06.2021 Where USA, North America Who American government, Facebook

O n June 25, the Texas Supreme Court stated that Facebook is not a "lawless no-man's land" and can be held liable for letting sex traffickers use the platform for recruiting. This ruling followed cases filed by victims of sex trafficking , who were contacted by pimps on Facebook. The suit alleges that Facebook not only failed to prevent sex traffickers from using the platform but also benefitted from the exploitation of victims. Facebook's lawyers argued that under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act it is not responsible for what users say on the platform. The Court ruled that as per the exceptions to Section 230 passed in 2018, platforms can be held accountable for violations of state and federal human trafficking laws through civil lawsuits. As pe r legal exper ts , Facebook can appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court, however, that would open the ruling to more scrutiny and could give rise to more exceptions to Section 230, causing the erosion of a key legal shield for tech companies in the U.S.

#sextrafficking #section230 #s ocialmedia

U.S. Governement reins in on Big Tech with new bills and appointments

When 25.06.2021 Where USA, North America Who American Government, Tech Companies

On June 8, the US Senate passed a bill co-sponsored by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), the top antitrust senator and Chuck Grassley (R-IA), the top Republican on the Senate Judiciary Committee that would increase the fees that companies planning the biggest mergers have to pay to government antitrust agencies. On June 23 and 24, the U.S. House of Representatives Judiciary Committee voted on major bills directly aimed at restricting companies from promoting their own products online, regulating large-scale acquisitions, and generating higher revenue for antitrust agencies that oversee the activities of tech companies. The bills have been met with opposition from lawmakers who are apprehensive about "Big Government", the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, as well as companies such Amazon, Apple, Facebook, Google. Along with these bills, th e appointments of Big Tech critics and Columbia University Law School professors, Lina Khan as the FTC chair and Tim Wu as special assistant to the president for technology and competition policy, signal at the American government's intentions to increase regulatory scrutiny of the size and influence of digital companies.

#antitrust #digitalregulations #bigtech

Trudeau’s party passes bill to regulate social media, streaming in Canada

When 23.06.2021 Where Canada, North America Who Canadian Government, Streaming Services

Canadian House of Commons passed a bill that aims to regulate streaming services and social media platforms, starting in 2022. Bill C-10 will subject digital companies like Netflix, TikTok, YouTube to similar requirements as traditional broadcasters, where tech giants will be expected to disclose revenue sources, fund Canadian content with a portion of their profits and increase its visibility. The bill aims to promote domestic content, get digital companies to contribute to the country's economy, and regulate harmful content. The Senate has stated that Bill C-10 will require more study before it can be approved as a law. The bill's aim to regulate the algorithm that tech companies use to recommend and promote content has garnered criticism from net-neutrality advocates, digital-law experts, and opposition parties. Bill C-10, akin to many other lesgislation on intermediary regulation worldwide, has highlighted the challenge of regulating content without compromising individual freedom of expression.

#digitalregulations #streaming #socialmedia

TikTok changed its U.S. privacy policy, allowing the company to collect faceprints and voiceprints of users

When 14.06.2021 Where USA, North America Who TikTok

On June 2, TikTok updated its privacy policy for American users. Under its new "Image and Audio Information" section, the app will automatically collect as "faceprints" and "voiceprints") from its users. The policy clarifies that the biometric data collected is as defined under the US law and additional permissions will be taken from users where the law requires. However, the policy fails to mention whether the additional permissions will be specified under state law, federal law, or both. The ambiguity of this update has received negative reviews from digital-law experts. Given TikTok's popularity among younger users, it is important for the privacy policy to be clear and accessible, so the users can remain aware of what they are consenting to.

#tiktok #privacy #biometrics

Facebook to pay 14 Canadian publishers for some news content posted to platform

When 2 6.05.2021 Where Canada, North America Who Facebook, Government of Canada, News

Facebook has announced that it will pay 14 prominent Canadian publishers undisclosed amounts to link to their articles on its COVID-19 and climate science pages or other unspecified use cases. Industry watchers say the deal brings cash to media companies hurting for advertising but believe the arrangement should be viewed as Facebook's way of getting ahead of potential regulation in Canada without tackling much of its criticism over issues such as privacy concerns and the prevalence of misinformation on its platform. This comes on the heels of the recent tiff between Facebook and the Australian Government over the latter's News Media Bargaining Code, a global policy precedent -- that sought to make tech platforms pay news organisations for hosting their content .

#revenuesharing #bigtech #onlinenews

Facebook's Nick Clegg calls for a bipartisan approach to break the deadlock on internet regulation

When 24.05.2021 Where USA, North America Who Facebook, FTC, US Congress

In the backdrop of changing policy predicaments on content, privacy and platform governance across the world and particularly in the US, Nick Clegg -- Facebook's VP of Global Affairs, has advocated for a more agile and consensus-driven model on digital policy. Calling out for reforms in 4 key areas -- intermediary liability (Section 230), influence operations by bad actors, privacy and data portability, he also calls for the US to set up an independent regulator on all matters concering digital policy. This shows Facebook and by extension, Big Tech's heightened focus on these regulatory areas and is an indication on increased lobbying/advocacy efforts on the same.

#intermediaryliability #privacy #dataportability

Oversight Board rules against Facebook on a post about the Armenian genocide

When 06.05.2021 Where USA, North America Who Facebook Oversight Board, Donald Trump

Facebook's Oversight Board ruled forced Facebook to reinstate an online post criticising Turkey's portrayal of the Armenian genocide. The meme, posted by an user in the United States, had initially been removed by Facebook because its content moderators believed the language fell afoul of the company's hate speech rules, as well as its cruel and insensitive community standards.The board said that the post should be allowed to remain because of people's legitimate right to share hateful content if it is done to raise public awareness, which the board understood to be the post's intent. The board also said the post should have been left up because it fell under Facebook's satire exception for potentially harmful content.

#onlinecontentmoderation #freedomofspeech #hatespeech

Biden Administration revokes Trump's executive order on limiting platforms' protections

When 17.05.2021 Where USA, North America Who B iden Administration, Donald Trump

The Biden Administration has overturned Trump's Executive Order (post his tussle with Twitter tagging his tweets about unsubstantiated claims of mail-in voting fraud) that sought to limit the liability shield given to social media platfroms for hosting user-generated content. This significant development is indicative of the United States' pivot to a more moderate stance towards platform governance -- a change from the erstwhile "Trumpian" approach of punitive measures on intermediaries, enabling chilling effects on speech and an environment of self-censorship.

# intermediaryliability #s ection230 # platformgovernance

Facebook Oversight Board maintains ban on Donald Trump's account

When 06.05.2021 Where USA, North America Who Facebook Oversight Board, Donald Trump

Facebook's Oversight Board has upheld the ban on former President Donald Trump's account. The panel ruled that Donald Trump's posts “created an environment where a serious risk of violence was possible.” The panel said that ongoing risk “justified” the move to ban him. Yet, the board argued that an indefinite suspension was “not appropriate” because it was not a penalty defined in Facebook’s policies. The board gave Facebook six months to make a final decision on Mr. Trump’s account status. This case reignites and throws oxygen to the ongoing debate regarding censorship and availability of fora for public expression of opinion.

#onlinecontentmoderation #freedomofspeech #fac ebook

U.S. House Passes Bill To Create First Crypto Task Force On Digital Assets

When 22.04.2021 Where USA, North America Who House of Representatives

The House of Representatives passed a bi-partisan bill called the ‘‘Eliminate Barriers to Innovation Act of 2021’’, which aims at creating a digital asset working group between the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). The scope of this cooperation would be to start critical conversations on digital assets and cryptocurrencies, and how to go forward. The bill still needs to be passed by the Senate before turning officially into a law. Similar exploratory and regulatory bodies have recently been established in multiple countries across the globe.

#cryptocurrency #cryptoregulations

Treasury Secretary calls for the adoption of a global minimum corporate tax rate

When 08.04.2021 Where USA, North America Who US Treasury Secretary, OECD

US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen calls for the adoption of minimum corporate tax rate, a crucial proposition of the OECD BEPS 2.0 package that has been under discussion since 2018. After Trump's admin opposition to the proposal, this shift from the Biden government represents a significant development on the matter.

#digitaltaxation #corporatetax #OECD

Biden a nnounces a 100 billion $ plan to invest in broadband

When 03.04.2021 Where USA, North America Who US government

The Biden administration, as part of its proposed $2.3 trillion infrastructure package, has promised to devote $100 billion in broadband infrastructure investments. It marks a significant shift away from an US model that is very much private-sector oriented, and intends to not only make connectivity in rural areas cheaper and more accessible, but to also make the broadband “future-proof”. The plan will be deployed in the span of an eight-year infrastructure plan.

#connectivity #digitalinfrastructure #broadband

An Alabama Amazon plant threatens to form a union

When 29.03.2021 Where USA, North America Who French Competititon Authority, Apple

In the Alabama town of Bessemer, Amazon workers are holding a vote (whose final results are expected to be rounded up around the 6/7 April) to create the first union of Amazon workers. The vote, which has gathered national and international attention, could be the first of many more Amazon plants to see a union be born. Amazon is also being criticised throughout the political spectrum for its 'union-busting' practices, aiming to dissuade workers from creating a union.

#laborlaws #unions #amazon

Federal Trade Commission files reveal Justice Departement considered Google internet search practice to be a monopoly

When 16.03.2021 Where USA, North America Who Google, FTC, DoJ

Thes e leaked files suggest that the department of justice was already aware of Google's efforts to dominate the mobile internet search market (namely by being the default engine, via agreements with smartphone producers). FTC lawyers considered the efforts to be illegal and foresaw the creation of the monopoly which Google today enjoys. Yet, politically appointed decisionmakers at the head of FTC declined to act on these reports. These files provide perspective on the ongoing lawsuits pending for Google, suggesting that action could have been taken before total ownership of the market was acquired by Google, and especially when competitors were still in the race to compete.

#monopoly #antitrust #google

Digital Policy Tracker - Africa

Sat, 24 Apr 2021 13:37:40 GMT

Digital Policy Tracker

Africa

President Buhari discusses Twitter ban during Independence's Day speech

When 01.10.2021 Where Nigeria, Africa Who President Buhari, Twitter

On Nigeria Independence’s day, President Muhammadu Buhari talked about the pros and cons of social media platforms, commenting on the Twitter ban since June 5th. According to the president’s speech, the ban was imposed as “some users have misused the platform to organise, coordinate, and execute criminal activities, propagate fake news, and promote ethnic and religious sentiments.” However, the ban initially followed Twitter’s moderation of the president’s account due to the publication of harmful language. President Buhari’s speech further explained that he constituted the Presidential Committee to engage Twitter to solve critical issues, ranging from national security to fair taxation and content moderation. The president’s speech on online content moderation on Nigeria’s Independence Day symbolises the importance and complexity of online regulations, as Twitter is treated almost like a State actor with diplomatic rights in the country.

#twitterban #contentmoderation #socialmediaplatforms

The Bank of Ghana announces the launch of CBDC called E-cedi

When 30.09.2021 Where Ghana, Africa Who Bank of Ghana

The Bank of Ghana announced that it was launching a new digital currency called the E-cedi. The digital coin will operate in a sandbox interim and hinged on advancing financial inclusion and facilitating trade towards a cash-lite economy. A CBDC in Ghana would aim to introduce a less volatile currency and make the transaction faster and safer. The introduction of E-cedi will nonetheless require a firm commitment from the government to include the unbanked population in the digital economy.

#c ryptocurrencies # digital payments # CBDC

Ethiopia builds a national social media platform

When 24.08.2021 Where Ethiopia, Africa Who Ethiopian Government

Ethiopia has begun developing its own social media platform to rival Facebook, Twitter and WhatsApp. While it does not plan to block these platforms, it announced its goal to build an Ethiopian equivalent of WeChat; the social messaging app is often criticised as a tool by Chinese authorities for monitoring its population. As social media platforms have been used on each side through the armed conflict pitting the Ethiopian federal government against the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (TPLF), there have been multiple unexplained social media shutdowns. For this reason, human rights groups are concerned by the government’s initiative to create a local social media, as they fear it might be used as a tool of surveillance and to shape a patriotic narrative.

#socialmedia #surveillance #censorship

ESwatini restricts access to social media platforms

When 08.07.2021 Where eSwatini , Africa Who Governement of eSwatini

Following weeks of pro-democracy protests and civil unrest, the mobile telecommunication company MTN suspended access to social media platforms. The service interruption came after the eSwatini Communication Commission issued the directive to MTN and other operators. The government allegedly shut down internet services to stop citizens from communicating with the outside world after a pro-democracy protest turned violent and the army reportedly tried to repress the demonstrations. Currently, the service has been restored, yet the King’s control over internet access is perceived as a threat to freedom of speech and accountability for violating human rights.

#internetaccess #freedomofspeech #digitalrights

Senegal discusses new law to regulate social media content

When 14.06.2021 Where Senegal, Africa Who Governement of Senegal

President Macky Sall has called for new legislation to give power to the Senegalese government to regulate social media content. While the president is concerned by the spread of fake news and hate speech online, other government members warn against the risk of censorship and lack of freedom of speech. On this matter, the Minister of Digital Economy and Telecommunication stated that the new legislation would require all the key stakeholders involved in the dynamics of the digital economy. The Senegalese government aims to establish more balanced powers over online content moderation and avoid potential escalations between the President and Social Media companies, similar to the Nigerian case.

#onlinecontentmoderation #hatespeech #socialmedia

Nigeria bans Twitter, following the removal of President Buhari’s post

When 09.06.2021 Where Nigeria , Africa Who Twitter, Nigerian government, President Buhari

Following the removal of one of President Buhari’s tweets, Nigeria banned Twitter, cutting off 40 million users from the platform. The banned tweet’s veiled threat aimed at separatists in the South. Because of this, Twitter classified it as hate speech and proceeded to remove it. While multiple politicians across the globe have been censored and banned by the company over the past years, it is the first time that content moderation has led to immediate consequences. The ban is considered as endangering the freedom of speech in the country.

#onlinecontentmoderation #freedomofspeech #censorship

Uganda Financial Intelligence Authority calls for digital currency regulation

When 28.05.2021 Where Uganda, Africa Who Uganda Financial Intelligence Authority

Uganda’s anti-money laundering agency asked the government to implement and enforce regulations in the digital currency industry. The Financial Intelligence Authority (FIA) worked on a campaign to get digital currency firms to register, without much success so far. The call for registration and regulation will aim to reduce cryptocurrency risks linked to scams, money laundering and terrorism financing. Similar regulations are also being discussed and implemented in other countries in the region and other continents.

#cybercrimes #cryptocurrencies #cryptoregulations

South African Competition Commission drafts new bill to regulate mergers in the digital market

When 19.05.2021 Where South Africa, Africa Who South African Competition Commission

The South African Competition Commission drafted a new bill for the Competition Act, No. 89 of 1998, which does not concern small mergers with pre-merger notifications. Yet, with the new bill, "the Commission may, for a period of up to 6 months following the implementation of a small merger, call for the merger to be notified if it believes that the merger may substantially prevent or lessen competition or that it cannot be justified on public interest grounds". The drafting of this bill follows concerns over the regulation of digital markets, where online platforms can sometimes act as markets gatekeepers by acquiring small-yet-innovative startups.

#antitrust #competitionlaw #digitalmarkets

A new report shows the government of Botswana is investigating journalists through hacking

When 07.05.2021 Where Botswana, Africa Who Committee to Protect Journalists

A new report by the Committee to Protect Journalists shows that the government of Botswana hired Israeli and US forensic companies to investigate journalists. The type of techniques used include phone cracking technologies and they have been deployed against journalists, who consequently got harrassed and tortured by the government.

# freedomofexpression, #c ensorship # surveillance

Mauritius proposes new Social Media regulation

When 06.05.2021 Where Mauritius , Africa Who Mauritius' ICT authority

The ICT Authority of Mauritius proposed amendments to the country's Information and Communications Technology (ICT) law to regulate social media platforms. Despite being one of the most democratic countries in the continent, the proposed amendments may lead to an "Authoritarian Approach to Internet Architecture". According to the proposed regulation, "through a technical toolset (a proxy server), proposed under section 11, the regulator will be able to identify social media traffic which will then be automatically decrypted, archived, and analysed." Implementing this new measure would be at odds with the existing data privacy laws and constitute an act of mass surveillance, threatening human rights to privacy and freedom of expression.

#socialmedia #o nlinecontentmoderation # freedomofexpression

Rwanda adopts draft law to protect privacy digital tax

When 06.05.2021 Where Rwanda, Africa Who Rwandan Chamber of Deputies

The Chamber of Deputies of Rwanda adopted a draft law relating to personal data protection and privacy. The introduction of this law aims to protect personal data from being used without consent and setting up systems of accountability and clear obligations for those who control or undertake the processing of such data.

#digitalrights #privacy #dataprotection

PwC points out ambiguities in Kenyan digital tax

When 28.04.2021 Where Kenya , Africa Who PwC, Kenya Revenue Authority

The tax and audits firm PwC Kenya pointed out some ambiguities in the 2021 digital service tax (DST). According to the company, the enforcement of this regulation can result in unnecessary queries from Kenya Revenue Authority and higher prices for digital services. he The scope of digital service tax includes all services provided through a digital platform without regard as to whether the digital platform qualifies as a digital marketplace in line with the definition provided in the primary legislation. Because of this, the regulation could lead to potential adverse business impacts.

#digitalservices #digitaltax

Twitter announces the establishment of a regional headquarter in Ghana

When 25.04.2021 Where Ghana, Africa Who Twitter

T witter announced by surprise the decision to establish its headquarters in Ghana, as the country supports "free speech, online freedom, and the open internet". The choice has been shocking for many, as other countries in the continent has been traditionally considered as digital hubs or bigger markets. Yet, Ghana has invested quite a lot in its digitalization over the past years. This will be an opportunity to support digital businesses not only internally, but also across Africa.

#socialmedia #digitalhub #twitter

Human rights activists urge the new president to form a special commission to examine media laws

When 10.04.2021 Where Tanzania , Africa Who THRDC , Tanzanian President Samia Suluhu Hassan

The Tanzania Human Rights Defenders Coalition (THRDC) urged President Samia Suluhu Hassan to form a special commission to examine media laws, which include the Media Services Act of 2016, Cybercrimes Act of 2015, Electronic and Postal Communications Act of 2010, and Online Contents Regulations of 2000. Under the former President, these laws were enforced to heavily regulate and ban various media outlets. The review of these regulations would allow to better protect freedom of expression in Tanzania.

#digitalregulations #digitalrights #freedomofexpression

Regulators in South Africa and the US collaborate on telecommunication

When 09.04.2021 Where South Africa, Africa Who South African government, US, Huawei

Regulators in South Africa and the US have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) that will see them collaborate and share ideas. The MoU will initially focus on telecommunications regulation and policy in line with what was described as the "mutual benefit of the two regulators".
It is widely expected the MoU could eventually lead to Huawei being locked out of a key African market. The collaboration will also include "an information exchange and technical cooperation", not only in telecoms but also the wider ICT industry.

# telecommunications # ICT # huawei

Guinea launches a new digital platform for public services

When 07.04.2021 Where Guinea, Africa Who Government of Guinea, Global Voice Group

The Telecommunication and Posts Regulatory Authority (ARPT) of the Republic of Guinea and the company Global Voice Group (GVG), will be launching in partnership to build a digital ecosystem regulation platform. The goal of this project is to promote and sustain trust and inclusiveness in the mobile and digital ecosystem for the benefit of all Guineans. The implementation of the platform will start on June 1st and it is considered as one of the biggest efforts in digitalising the country.

#digitalservices #publicsector #platformofservices

Tanzania reopens Media houses closed under former President Magufuli

When 06.04.2021 Where Tanzania, Africa Who Tanzanian President Samia Suluhu Hassan

After the death of president Magufuli, the new Tanzanian President Samia Suluhu Hassan reopened previously closed media outlets, which included online television stations. The new presidential order gives hope for a possible review of the 2015’s Cybercrimes act and the Electronic and Postal Communications (Online Content) Regulations (EPOCA), which have often been used to repress digital rights and freedom of expression in Tanzania. So far, the regulations have only been used to stop the spread of rumours on the late president.

#digitalrights #freedomofexpression #fakenews

Burkina Faso receives new tools to combat cyber crimes

When 02.04.2021 Where Burkina Faso, Africa Who Bureau against cybercrimes, ECOWAS, EU

Burkina Faso’s Bureau against cybercrimes has receives from the ECOWAS and the EU, new tools to fight the rise of cybercrimes in the region. In Burkina Faso the Internet penetration rate is around 30% according to the latest data from the Electronic Communications and Postal Regulatory and the financial damage caused by cybercrime costs more than one billion FCFA in 2020.

#cybersecurity #cybercrimes

Facebook Announces VAT for personal Ads of Kenyan Users

When 25.03.2021 Where Kenya, Africa Who Facebook, Kenya Revenue Authority

Facebook will apply a value added tax to advertisers in Kenya who do not confirm whether they are advertising for business purposes. The VAT will be later transfered by Facebook to the Kenya Revenue Authority. This new tax will be enforeced in April, as a consequence of the digital services taxes introduced by the Kenyan governement in February.

#digitalservices #digitaltax #facebookads

Nigerian government pushes for deepening broadband connectivity

When 22.03.2021 Where Nigeria, Africa Who Nigerian Government

The Nigerian government is aiming to train 600 young people, in order to install critical infrastructure across the country and deepen broadband connectivity. This initiative will help the digital development underserved and rural communities.

#criticalinfrastructure #connectivity #digitaltraining

Ghana’s central bank launches new regulatory sandbox to prioritize blockchain projects

When 04 .03.2021 Where Ghana , Africa Wh o Central Bank of Ghana

Ghana’s C entral B ank has launched a regulatory sandbox to prioritize and support the development of blockchain projects in the country. This project will aim at reducing time-to-market for Ghanaian digital financial services firms, as well as allowing regulators to learn quicker about innovators.

One of the focuses of this project is to develop a Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) and strengthen the fast-rising mobile payments services. Yet, the decision of Ghana’s central bank is at odds with the strict “anti-Bitcoin stance” of neighbouring Nigeria. Debates on the regulation of cryptocurrencies are currently happening across the continent, in order to prevent scams and retain more cryptocurrencies companies.

#fintech #blockchain #cryptocurrencies

Kenya’s MPs approve new law to regulate mobile and digital loan rates under the supervision of the Central Bank

When 01.03.2021 Where Kenya , Africa Who Central Bank of Kenya, Kenyan Parliament

The Kenyan parliament is reviewing a bill that aims at regulating mobile loans and the treatment of defaulted credit to protect borrowers from predatory lending. If passed, the bill would bring digital and mobile lenders under the supervision of the Central Bank of Kenya. The push to control the activities of digital lenders comes more than a year after Kenya removed the legal cap on commercial lending rates. The decision to regulate digital and mobile lenders is following a more general trend in regulating and governing digital transactions, in order to reduce fraud.

#fintech #digitaltransactions #mobilepayments

Digital Policy Tracker - Middle East

Sat, 24 Apr 2021 13:37:37 GMT

Digital Policy Tracker

Middle East

UAE jumps to 10th rank in global digital competitiveness

When 30.09.2021 Where UAE, Middle East Who UAE

I The index issued by the IMD World Competitiveness Center (WCC) of the International Institute for Management Development (IMD) shows that the UAE leads the Middle East and North African and outperforms some major economies, such as Finland, Canada, the UK, Australia, China, Germany, France, Japan and Belgium. The UAE’s rapid advancement in digital competitiveness follows a regional trend in the Gulf, where countries have been pushing for a strong wave of digital services.

#d igitalization #d igitalcompetitveness #d igitalservices

Taliban use social media as a tool for propaganda

When 21.08.2021 Where Afghanistan, Middle East Who Taliban

The Taliban, who banned the internet when they first took control of Afghanistan, have turned social media into a powerful tool for taming opposition and disseminating their message. They use thousands of Twitter accounts — some official, others anonymous — to pacify Afghanistan's terrified but increasingly tech-savvy urban base. Yet, the portrayal of Afghanistan through their posts is a poor indicator of public opinion and the current situation. Many critics of the Taliban and supporters of the US-backed government have gone underground for security reasons. Yet, the Taliban have already demonstrated that they can effectively sell their message, as evidenced by a recent social media campaign that may have influenced Afghan security forces to lay down their weapons.

#socialmedia #censorship #propaganda

Iran's Parliament suspends the review of internet restricting bill

When 26.07.2021 Where Iran, Middle East Who Iranian Parliament

Iran’s parliament has suspended its review of the “Protecting Users in Cyberspace and Organising Social Media” bill, which, according to civil society, businesses and some ministries could lead to excessive restrictions of the Internet. The bill was proposed three years ago and it includes a controversial article on foreign service providers, which could be forced to follow Iran’s rules in order to provide their services in the country. According to the Iranian Minister of Information and Communications Technology, “the bill will limit users’ free access to information, weaken the government’s role in cyberspace decision-making, and make the ministry practically obsolete.” The legislation also intends to criminalise the use of banned services, such as VPNs. The implementation of this measure could severely endanger freedom of speech, by filtering too much the flow of information in Iran.

#contentmoderation #censorship # freedomofspeech

Palestinian Monetary Authority evaluates a Digital Currency Launch

When 24.06.2021 Where Palestine, Middle East Who Palestinian Monetary Authority

The Palestinian Monetary Authority is evaluating the possible issuance of a central bank digital currency (CBDC) through two separate studies on cryptocurrencies. The introduction of a national digital currency would aim to replace the current use of the Israeli shekel, the Jordanian dinar, and the U.S. dollar in the country. The goal would be to establish a more stable currency and obtain financial independence from the neighbouring countries. Yet, the adoption of a Palestinian CBDC is still uncertain due to the current economic situation, worsened by the political instability in the region and the Covid-19 pandemic. Studies on the adoption of CBDC are being undertaken across geographies. In cases such as El Salvador, they are also being evaluated to gain monetary independence from foreign currencies.

#cryptocurrencies #cryptoregulations #CBDC

Saudi Arabia introduces new cybersecurity framework

When 30.05.2021 Where Saudi Arabia, Middle East Who ICT Commission

Saudi Arabia's Communications and Information Technology Commission announced the implementation of a new cybersecurity regulatory framework for service providers in the communications, IT, and postal sector. The regulation contains a comprehensive set of cybersecurity requirements and controls that will establish a high level of confidence in the integrity of service providers' infrastructure and the application of best practices to develop appropriate cybersecurity measures. This framework has been put in place as part of Saudi Arabia's Vision 2030 and the National Transformation Program, aiming to accelerate primary and digital infrastructure projects to raise living standards in the kingdom.

# cybersecurity #criticalinfrastructure

Instagram tweaks algorithm after accusations of Palestinian censorship

When 30.05.2021 Where Palestine, Middle East Who Instagram

Instagram is changing its app to show more viral and current affairs posts amid complaints from its staff that pro-Palestinian content was not seen by users during the recent conflict in Gaza. Up until now, Instagram has prioritized original content over the one reshared or reposted by other people. Yet, as a spokesperson for the company said, this “caused people to believe we were suppressing stories about particular topics or points of view”. Following the recent internal concerns and appeals, the company announced that it will move to give equal weighting to reshared posts as it does with originally produced stories. Instagram said the move was not wholly in response to the problems over pro-Palestinian content but had been considered for some time.

#onlinecontentmoderation #algorythms #socialmedia

Israeli Defense Minister urges Facebook and TikTok to crack down on violent posts

When 14.05.2021 Where Israel, Middle East Who Social Media Platforms

The Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz met with Tiktok and Facebook representatives to urge them to be more proactive in removing violent content against Israel. The meeting happened at a time of escalation between Israel and Palestine.

#onlinecontentmoderation #socialmedia #harmfulcontent

Iranian Majlis works on legal framework to regulate cryptocurrencies

When 10.05.2021 Where Iran, Middle East Who Majlis

Due to the rise in the use of cryptocurrencies in the country, experts and private sector representatives have pushed the parliament to better regulate cryptocurrencies transactions by reducing the bureaucracy tied to obtaining government licenses. The Majlis is already developing a legal framework to allow crypto trade, and it will soon publish an official roadmap to implement new regulations. This call for laws happens when cryptocurrencies are becoming increasingly popular among Iranians, disappointed by the sluggish bourse and the pattern of decline in other financial markets.

#cryptocurrencies #digitalpayments #crypto regulations

The Central Bank of Iraq signed an agreement with Mastercard to promote digital payments

When 19.04.2021 Where Iraq , Middle East Who Central Bank of Iraq, Mastercard

The new agreement between the Central Bank of Iraq and Mastercard will aim to reduce the use of cash in the country and promote digital payments. By digitalizing its payment ecosystem, Iraq will boost financial inclusion, encourage social-economic development and mitigate the risks of a shadow economy. The implementation of this new partnership will initially focus on building secure payment ecosystem within the education sector. Yet, the project will develop into a full digital ecosystem.

#fintech #digitalpayments

Oman blocked Clubhouse due to lack of permit to operate

When 14.03.2021 Where Oman , Middle East Who Telcom Regulatory Authority, Clubhouse

The Omani Telecommunications Regulatory Authority has blocked the Clubhouse voice chat app, as it did not obtain a permit to operate in the country. Human Rights associations warn that the block might be linked to issues over freedom of speech.

#censorship #freedomofexpression #encryption

Saudi Arabia establishes the Digital Government Authority to lead digital transformation

When 11.03.2021 Where Saudi Arabia, Middle East Who KSA Digital Governemnt Authority

The Saudi Arabian’s cabinet approved the establishment of a Digital Governemnt Authority, to lead the digital transformation of the country. This decision is in line with the Kingdom’s goal of becoming the “leading digital economy of the Middle East”. The Digital Governement Authority will be in charge of the creation and development of digital platforms to provide better digital interactions between “citizens to government, government to citizens, and government to businesses”. The GDA will also play an essential role for the “Saudi Vision 2030” campaign, which aims at establishing the Kingdom as one of the top countries in e-governance.

#e-governance #digitaltransformation #onlineplatforms

Digital Policy Tracker - Europe

Sat, 24 Apr 2021 13:35:09 GMT

Digital Policy Tracker

Europe

EU announces draft law and measures strengthening cybersecurity requirements

When 15.09.2021 Where EU, Europe Who Ursula Von Der Leyen, European Union

In the perspective of IoT and of the growing intensity of cyber attacks on European soil (Irish Health System, Anhalt-Bitterfeld and Thessaloniki municipality, Lazio region being only some examples) Ursula Von der Leyen dedicated a key part of the yearly State of the Union address to laying out the reasoning behind the new proposal of a Cyber Resilience Act. The Act adds all connected objects to the scope of the existing proposal for a Directive on Security of Network and Information Systems, commonly known as the NIS2 Directive, dedicated to raising the cyber security requirements for digital services employed in critical sectors of the economy and society.

#ICT #cyberresilienceact #cybersecurity

UK prioritises innovation over anything else in its proposed reform of its privacy regulator

When 10.09.2021 Where UK, Europe Who Boris Johnson, Information Commissioner's Office

Eyeing its Europe-leading digital innovation hub as an important lever for growth post-Brexit, the Conservative government is now launching works to overhaul and reform the regulatory landscape in the IT sector. By seeking to include economic growth in the mission of the Information Commissioner's Office, by restructuring the institution so as to to include an independent board and chief executive, by loosening its data protection law to become more business friendly. These proposals, now under a 10-week consultation, imply a clear choice: economy over privacy. Yet, a key factor still needs to be ensured: the EU still has to judge the UK's regulation and framework as satisfactory. An open confrontation on these matters might lead to a revision on the digital services and trade Brexit deal.

#privacy #innovation #brexit

Estonia proposes minimal EU threshold of expenditure on cybersecurity

When 08.09.2021 Where Estonia, Europe Who Estonian Government, EU

While the EU has been stepping up progressively to regulate and harmonise cybersecurity standards (from the CyberSecurity Act to the NIS 2 directive to ENISA's efforts more generally), investment is still lacklustre. So much so that a minimum threshold of spending should be put forth. This is the argument made by the Estonian IT Minister, Andres Sutt, in front of fellow European ministers during Tallin's Digital Summit. Estonia, a digital leader both in cybersecurity and disruptive innovation, is the strongest advocate of digitisation as a vector of growth and geopolitical strength in the continent. Host of the NATO Cooperative Cyber Defence Centre of Excellence, of the EU's Agency for the Operational Management of Large-Scale IT Systems and third-ranked in the Global Cybersecurity Index. Yet, not every country is as big a believer in cybersecurity: the upcoming French EU Council Presidency will be key in seeing how much the debate can be forwarded when a fellow-minded country is in the position to do so.

#cyberdefence #ENISA #cybersecurity

Civil society backlash mounts over Apple's proposed child abuse scanner

When 19.08.2021 Where Europe Who Civil society, Apple

An international coalition of around 90 digital rights groups has drafted and signed an open letter asking the CEO of Apple, Tim Cook, to reconsider his intention to create scanning features to detect child sexual abuse material. On the 5th of August, Apple announced its intention to introduce child safety features to inspect children’s IMessages and to identify child sexual abuse content among images uploaded on iCloud. Still raging in Europe and beyond, the tradeoff between privacy and combating of pedo-pornography is still waging. The creation of a voluntary backdoor is seen as a dangerous precedent by policy groups, who fear governments (especially authoritarian ones) might start asking for a progressive broadening of the perimeter of scanning. Pressure on the company, or potentially legal requirements, would thereby pile up. On the other hand, the rampant accessibility of child abuse content online, some would argue, would justify usage of such extraordinary measures. Reminiscent of the recent European Parliament ePrivacy derogation allowing for voluntary tracking of child sex abuse content online, this faultline of modern day privacy regulation is becoming front right and centre in the today's policymaking agenda.

#privacy #childabuse #cybersecurity

Serbian media get labelled by Twitter as pro-government and Serbian President plays the victim

When 17.08.2021 Where Serbia, Europe Who Twitter, Serbian Government

After a variety of local media outlets (Kurir tabloid, First TV, RTS, Tanjug agency, “Serbian Telegraph, “Politika” newspaper, Happy TV, Pink TV, the tabloid “Informer” newspaper and B-92 radio) got labelled as 'cooperating with the Serbian government' by Twitter, the Serbian President Vučić erupted in disapproval by stating "can’t wait Twitter to switch off my account to become another Trump". The President also criticized Twitter for not labelling State financed media (such as the BBC, Voice of America, or NPR) similarly, alluding to anti-Serbian bias. Twitter responded by highlighting the editorial indipendence of these media platforms. A further example of Twitter's efforts to act as more and more like a gatekeeper, this scenario shows yet again how open the hostility can get between these now indispensible platforms and local institutions.

#Twitter #contentmoderation #platformgovernance

Ireland given ultimatum to enforce GDPR rules on Whatsapp

When 29.07.2021 Where Ireland, Europe Who Irish Data Protection Commission, Facebook

After dragging down the speed of its investigations into Whatsapp's potential privacy violations, the Irish Data Protection Commission has been given one month to finish the investigation by the European Data Protection Board. Among the matters of investigation, there is most importantly the failture to provide clear information on what data Whatsapp was sharing with Facebook. Not the first time the Irish regulator has been blamed for being too forgiving with Big Tech (MEPs have accused Ireland in the past of de facto not enforcing the GDPR), the decision signals one further blow for the board. Speculation is rampant on the results of the eventual investigation.

#privacy #dataprotection #GDPR

TikTok creates first cybersecurity centre in Dublin

When 28.07.2021 Where Ireland, Europe Who Tik Tok

TikTok has announced that it will be launching a new cybersecurity centre in Ireland, the first of a number of planned ‘Fusion Centres’ designed to respond in real-time to cyberthreats. This new centre aims to expand on TikTok's global security practice established in Washington DC, in an effort to keep up with the soaring investments by Big Tech in cybersecurity offerings, via both acquisitions and internal expansions. In this period of increasing frequency of cyberattacks (Colonial pipeline, Lazio Region, Ireland health system, etc.), policymakers' general electorate's attention is focusing itself more and more on the matter, pushing the bigger companies to keep up with the times. Between the ever increasing reputational cost of failed data protection and the risk of further hardening of regulation by policymakers (e-privacy directive, review of NIS 2, etc.), the GAFAM are rushing to get ready.

#dataprotection #cybersecurity #tiktok

NHS shown to be sharing data with around 40 companies

When 27.07.2021 Where United Kingdom, Europe Who NHS

According to an analysis published by the Financial TImes, more than 40 companies have been granted to access to an estimated 100 different NHS data sets from English hospitals. The data concerns topics as diverse as databases listing patients admitted, their diagnosis and treatment all the way to more niche data sets on mental health, mortality, maternity services. Part of a wider strategy to leverage data to achieve stronger public health outcomes, the news has sparked some worry on those most suspicious of conflict of interest and lack of transparency in the usage of that data. Among the institutions that have received the data we can notice medical analytics companies (IQVIA, Carnall Farrar, Methods Analytics), charities, vaccine manufacturers, subcontractors and even management consultancies. As rigourous as the application procedure to be granted access to the data is (pseudonymisation of the data, vetting of candidate companies wanting to access the information, guarantee that it will be used exclusively to improve treatment of patients), concerns about the commercial applications of this data that can be extracted by for-profit entities that have access to this exclusive information is legitimate.

#healthcare #data governance #privacy

French Government holds Defence Cabinet after Pegasus spying allegations

When 19.07.2021 Where France, Europe Who French Government, NSO group

A fter the report of President Emmanuel Macron having been targeted via the Pegasus spyware by a Moroccan intelligence service, the French government has called a defence cabinet to assess potential responses to the news. The President has, as of now, changed both phone and phone number, by precaution. In case this Moroccan hypothesis was to be confirmed, Paris states to be ready to 'publicly contest' Rabat's actions. Macron's phone would in this case be the most high-profile phone number to be hacked by the Pegasus spyware, which has shown the limited safety of Whatsapp's encryption services.

#cyberespionage #spyware #pegasus

The EU joins in, albeit more moderately, in its criticism of China's cyberattacks

When 19.07.2021 Where European Union, Europe Who European Union

After the Chinese cyberattacks on Microsoft's servers, the EU has joined in on the White House's calls for condemnation. If Biden has obtained total collaboration from allies such as the UK, Japan, and Australia, the EU has stopped short of directly blaming the Chinese government for the attacks, as it was wished by Washington. This divergence further indicates a softer stance on China by European partners as opposed to a more incisive United States, which seeks to replicate the success of the recent cybersecurity conversation with Putin.

#cybersecurity #China# cyberattacks

The European Parliament's Industry Committee adopts its report on the Data Governance Act draft

When 16.07.2021 Where European Union, Europe Who European Parliament, Google, Facebook

The Data Governance Act was adopted in the Industry committee with a landslide majority. The legislative proposal, submitted last year, intends to define the governance of the European data spaces. The governance structure will be centred around data intermediaries, which will have to fulfil specific neutrality obligations that avoid the concentration of data in the hands of few major players. The intent is to create a trusted environment for European SMEs to reap the benefits of the data economy. DGA-compliant intermediaries will be able to receive a ‘soft’ certification from the competent national authorities. An advisory body gathering key stakeholders will also be introduced to facilitate agreement on harmonised standards and interoperability requirements. The final vote in the plenary is expected in September, as the initiative is as of now still blocked at the Council level.

# data #governance#privacy

UK should tighten rules for digital ads in its electoral campaigns, says the official watchdog

When 07.07.2021 Where United Kingdom, Europe Who UK Government

In a fresh report on election finance ( which can be found here) , the Committee on Standards in Public Life called for "more proportionate and transparent rules" to better track overseas influence and allow Britain's "highly complex" laws to keep pace with digital campaigning.Among the main points of concern, the fact that United Kingdom's current electoral rules do not explicitly prohibit foreign actors from spending on election campaigns, and the intelligence and security committee, which oversees the country's intelligence agencies, warned last year that the country is still "vulnerable to covert digital influence campaigns" by countries such as Russia. Especially considering that no support to politicians below 20 thousand £ in England is to be declared public. In a context of hybrid warfare and repeated interference in elections, the committee is wary of the risk such an exposure would bring to the integrity of the electoral process.

#digitaladvertising #elections

UK Government will review the Chinese purchase of a semiconductor firm

When 07.07.2021 Where United Kingdom, Europe Who UK Government

Boris Johnson has announced that the government will review the purchase of the UK’s largest producer of semiconductors, Newport Wafer Fab, by a Chinese-owned manufacturer called Nexperia, after it was criticised for apparently acquiescing to the takeover. In a context of shortage of semiconductor supply (carmakers in 2021 are for instance already experiencing production delays), this move is to be seen as an attempt to tame the efforts from China to insert itself in the strategic supply chains of Western states. The government is also scrutinising the takeover of Cambridge-headquartered chip designer Arm by the US chip company Nvidia on national security grounds. Boris Johnson himself has defined semidonductors as "of huge importance to this country".

#trade #semiconductors # criticalinfrastructure

EU adopts derogation allowing for screening and reporting of child abuse content

When 06.07.2021 Where European Union , Europe Who European Parliament

The European Parliament adopted the final version of the ePrivacy (a 2002 directive regulating the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector) derogation, a temporary measure enabling providers of electronic communication services to scan and report private online messages containing material depicting child sex abuse. The provisions also allow companies to apply approved technologies to detect grooming techniques. The measure is an iterim provision until 2025, or until the adoption of the long-awaited (negotiations for it sarted in 2017) revision of the directive altogether. A priority of the upcoming Slovenian presidency, such a revision would update a now obsolete regulation, where profound asymmetry is applicable between the heavily regulated personal data (where GDPR applies) and the far less regulated non-personal data (where ePrivacy applies).

#contentmoderation #childabuse #privacy

European Commission criticises a draft French law on online platforms' obligation

When 05.07.2021 Where France , Europe Who European Commission , French Government

On a second reading of the bill on fighting separatism (mainly dedicated to fighting internal terrorism), the French National Assembly adopted a text under which platforms will be required to “make public the resources they devote to combating illicit activities” and to “implement procedures and proportionate human and technological resources” to this end.The French law obliges operators to designate a single point of contact for cooperation with judicial and administrative authorities, and the conservation of reported and removed content. An “easily accessible and user-friendly reporting system” for users and the establishment of a “trusted third party” status are also required. According to the Commission, the bill poses a “risk to the single market in digital services and to Europe’s prosperity”, and represents one further example of the strenuous tension between Common Market principles appear to be threatened by the digital economy and the inherent divergences in policy positions between Member States.

#digitalplatforms #contentmoderation #singlemarket

The European Commission seals a data flows deal with the United Kingdom

When 28.06.2021 Where United Kingdom & EU, Europe Who EU Commission, UK Government

The EU Commission has approved a deal that will will allow personal data to be transferred from the EU to the U.K., avoiding a no-deal scenario that could have cost the British economy as much as £1.6 billion. The approval by the EU's executive comes only days before an interim solution to keep data flowing across the Channel after Brexit runs out, as the European Commission ran out of time to approve the deal before the Brexit transition period ended in January 2021, and therefore had to work a temporary, six-month solution into the trade deal to keep continue transferring data. This indirectly implies approval of British data protection standards, which is not to be given lightly according to the association of practitioners in the field. This decision is interpreted by some as an example of "softness" towards the UK, whose relatively healthy startup economy and digital sector would have massively suffered from a rejection of the deal, as three-quarters of the country's international data flows are with the 27-country bloc.The contract does however include a clause to review its conditions in 4 years' time.

#trade #data #brexit

UK's Competition and Markets Authority investigates Google and Amazon over fake reviews

When 25.06.2021 Where United Kingdom, Europe Who Google, Amazon, CMA

The UK's CMA is investigating whether Amazon and Google have broken consumer law by not taking sufficient action to protect shoppers from fake reviews. The CMA, which began probing into the issue of fake reviews on these major platforms two years ago, has stated that the work it has undertaken so far has raised ‘specific concerns’. In particular, these concerns include the inadequacy of action on the part of these platforms to detect fake reviews, identify suspicious behavioural patterns, investigate the reviews, and to impose sanctions on reviewers and businesses who are in contravention of the rules. If the investigation does indeed reveal that Amazon and Google have broken consumer laws, the CMA can take enforcement action, such as securing formal commitments from the platforms of addressing the problem with rigour, engaging in litigation etc.

#Google #Amazon #contentmoderation

French lawsuit on Apple's developer contracts gathers steam

When 25.06.2021 Where France, Europe Who Apple, French Government

A lawsuit led by the startup interest group France Digitale and the French government, targeting Apple, is being pursued by French attorneys. Hearings will start towards September. The lawsuit, initiated 4 years ago by the French government, concerns contracts with app developers, which France Digitale deems as anti-competitive and abusive of Apple's position of advantage.

# AppleStore #Antitrust #Competition

EU establishes a JOint Cyber Unit to fight cybercrime

When 23.06.2021 Where European Union, Europe Who EU Commission

The European Commission laid out on the 23 June its vision for a Joint Cyber Unit to tackle evolving cyberthreats and to increase European resilience. The Joint Cyber Unit will serve as a platform for cooperation for cybersecurity communities across the EU, enabling them to draw on each other’s support and to create a cybersecurity shield to detect cyberthreats before they can cause damage.

#c ybersecurity #ransomware # cybercrime

CJEU ruling limits platforms' responsibility for illegal content

When 23.06.2021 Where European Union, Europe Who Youtube, CJEU

A ruling by the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on Tuesday 22 June has shed some light on the conditions under which content-sharing platforms are exempted from responsibility for copyright infringements, with potentially far-reaching implications for the EU’s Copyright Directive and the Digital Services Act. The CJEU ruled that online platforms are not to be considered responsible for content illegally posted by users unless they actively contribute to making such content available. In this legal framework, online platforms are not required to monitor users’ online content to see if it respects copyrights .

#DSA #CJEU #contentmoderation

Digital Sovereignty observatory launched in France

When 21.05.2021 Where France, Europe Who Capgemini, EDF, French Government

Telecom Paris and Netexplo officially launched the Technologies & Digital Sovereignty observatory on Thursday (20 May), which aims to bring together companies and startups and political players. The new observatory, which has been joined by Capgemini Invent, EDF, Renault, Orange Business Services, Thales and Village by CA, has set itself the objective of deciphering initiatives in the field of digital sovereignty: 5G, cloud, artificial intelligence, connected objects.It will report on its observations at an annual event on “New technological horizons of digital sovereignty”.

#d igital s overeignty #g ovtech

Germany adopts a new data protection regulation

When 21.05.2021 Where Germany, Europe Who German Parliament

German parliament adopted a law regulating data protection and privacy in telecommunications and telemedia, transposing EU requirements on cookies from the bloc’s e-privacy directive. German data protection was until recently regulated by a series of laws, leading to legal uncertainty due to partially contradictory provisions. The Telemedia Act (TMG) and the recently amended Telecommunications Act (TKG) have prompted uncertainty in some quarters. The Data Protection Act passed on 20 May intends to unify the country’s rules and align with the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).

#telecommunications #dataprotection #privacy

Ransomware attack on Ireland's health service's system

When 14.05.2021 Where Ireland , Europe Who Ireland Health Services

Irish hospitals were forced to shut down IT systems and cancel appointments following a ransomware attack on the Irish Health System's IT infrastructure. The organisation switched to paper files immediately so as to avoid acquisition of patient data .

#ransomware #cyberattack #criticalinfrastructure

DSA regulation will be used to fight disinformation

When 13.05.2021 Where European Union, Europe Who European Commission

The Commission has presented a paper explaining how it expects the DSA to address disinformation. Firstly, through a co-regulatory approach including stakeholders in the definition of minimum criteria. Secondly, tackling illegal content and systemic risks. By requiring all online platforms to issue Codes of Conduct that illustrate how the platform will tackle these risks. Thirdly, user empowerment is related to advertisements as they have been identified as key amplifiers for spreading disinformation. Finally, the Commission contends that the DSA enforces a diligent approach, providing binding risk management obligations on online platforms.

#platformregulation #onlineharm #misinformation

EU Court of Justice rules in favour of Amazon in tax row

When 12.05.2021 Where Luxembourg, Europe Who EU Court of Justice, EU Commission, Amazon

The EU General Court Wednesday overruled the European Commission's finding that Luxembourg granted €250 million in illegal tax benefits to Amazon. The Commission's finding that Amazon was granted a tax advantage "is based on an analysis which is incorrect in several respects," the court held.

#digitaltaxation #taxavoidance #amazon

Deal reached at EU level on online child sex abuse

When 30.04.2021 Where European Union, Europe Who European Council

A provisional deal has been reached at the European Council level on the removal of online child sex abuse. The interim regulation will apply, for a duration of three years, to providers of electronic communications services such as web-based email and messaging services, forcing them to detect, remove and report child sexual abuse online. The issue had been one of the main sticking points still to be solved of the upcoming e-Privacy directive, which has been under negotiation since 2017..

#onlinecontentmoderation #onlineharm #privacy

European Commission issues antitrust charges against Apple

When 30 .04.2021 Where European Union , Europe Who European Commission, Apple, Spotify

The European Commission is issuing antitrust charges against Apple, following an initial complaint from Spotify in 2019. The Commission's concerns are related to the App Store policies, including charging a 30% cut of every in-app purchase. By having a dominant role in the music streaming app market and a gatekeeping role for the App Store, Apple is in breach of EU competition law.

#antitrust #competitionlaws #appstore

Tiktok establishes the European Transparency & Accountability Centre

When 27.04.2021 Where Ireland, Europe Who TikTok

T iktok announced the opening of a European Transparency and Accountability Centre. The centre will focus on online content moderation and users' privacy and security on the platform. The company has already opened a similar centre in the US, yet the choice to open a new one in Europe seems a strategic one, as the EU and UK are updating their digital policies. Tiktok has more than 100 million users in Europe, and the new centre will help people and regulators better understand the platform's processes and procedures.

#contentmoderation #privacy #tiktok

The European Union proposes new AI regulations

When 21.04.2021 Where European Union, Europe Who European Union

The European Union proposed new laws to regulate the use and implementation of AI in the Member states. The proposed regulations will restrict and ban some AI uses, common in China and the US. The EU has included facial recognition, autonomous driving and algorithms for driven advertisement, automated hiring and credit scoring. Despite being at an early stage, the proposition can be considered a step forward for safer AI. The impact of a similar regulation could also shape AI policies across the world.

#airegulations #ai #eu

Bank of England and the Treasury are launching digital currency taskfor c e

When 19.04.2021 Where United Kingdom , Europe Who Bank of England, Treasury

The Bank of England and the Treasury are launching a digital currency task force to monitor and explore the idea of adopting a digital currency in England. The task force will coordinate exploratory work to understand how the Bank of England would get the new currency into the economy, how households and businesses would use it and the implications for financial stability. Crypto regulations are being drafted and implemented across multiple countries at the moment. The urge to regulate them follow the growing interest in digital currencies and a wave of payments digitalization due to the covid-19 restrictions. In the UK, the exploration of potentially adopting a digital currency is also a way to maintain the City as one of the world's financial capitals.

#cryptocurrency #cryptopolicies

EU adopts its 'Digital Compass' 2030 Strategy

When 08.04.2021 Where European Union, Europe Who European Union

The EU has presented its vision for Europe's digital transformation, with a horizon of 2030. The strategy will focus on four levers of action: skills, government, infrastructure and business. Among the various goals set by this roadmap, we can note: 100% online provision of key public services, 75% of European business making use of cloud computing services, gigabit connectivity for the entirety of EU households.

#digitalinfrastructure #digitization #eu

Google commits 25 million EUR to combat fake news and misinformation

When 05.04.2021 Where European Union, Europe Who Google, European University Institute

Google has provided a founding donation of 25 million EUR to the newborn European Media and Information Fund, managed by the European University Institute and by the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation. The fund will provide grants to researchers, fact-checkers, not-for-profits and other public interest-oriented organisations working on disinformation research and strengthening media literacy and fact-checking.

#fakenews #onlinecontentmoderation #google

UK competition regulator to investigate Facebook takeover of Giphy

When 01 .0 4 .2021 Where United Kingdom , Europe Who UK CMA, Facebook, Giphy

The UK CMA has started an investigation on Facebook's 400 million $ acquisition of GIPHY, for fear that the takeover may “result in a substantial lessening of competition” for gif creation. The regulator believes the acquisition could lead to a squeeze on the supply of gifs to other social networks such as Snapchat, TikTok and Twitter, by 'lessening the incentive to expand its digital advertising, leading to a loss of potential competition in this market'.

#antitrust #socialmediaplatforms #facebook

Dutch data protection authority fines Booking.com for data breaches

When 31.03.2021 Where Netherlands , Europe Who Booking , Dutch Data Protection Authority

The Dutch Data Protection Authority has fined Booking.com for having been too late to report a data breach of the personal information of 4000 customers. The company did in fact miss the obligation to report the breach within 72 hours, only signalling the issue one month after the emergence of the problem.

#dataprotection #privacy #cybersecurity

France's competition authority approves Apple’s new privacy protocols

When 17.03.2021 Where France, Europe Who French Competititon Authority, Apple

France’s competition authority has given the go-ahead for Apple’s new privacy protocols to be implemented, stating that the move does not “constitute an abuse of a dominant position,”. The main point of contention came from developers, which harboured fears of unfair competition following the announcement by Apple this June of a new policy to strengthen the protection of its customers’ privacy, introducing a feature dubbed ATT (App Tracking Transparency) in September 2021. The new mechanism would mean that an iPhone owner, when viewing an application downloaded from the App Store, would see a pop-up window asking for explicit consent to share personal data with third parties for advertising purposes. In case of consent by the viewer, third parties would be able to access the Identifier for Advertisers (“IDFA”), which identifies each Apple device and allows for the tracking of the owner’s advertising, including on third-party sites. The complainant associations criticized Apple for requiring application developers to use ATT solicitation to access the IDFA identifier. The collection of consent via ATT solicitation would condition the tracking of the user’s advertising on third-party sites, which would then allow targeted advertising to be sent to the user. This approval paves the way for the deployment of the new privacy policy, which is expected for autumn 2021.

#competition #privacy #apple

Social Media and the Battle Against the Second Wave of Covid-19 in India

Fri, 23 Apr 2021 21:00:45 GMT

SOLIDARITY ONLINE

Social Media and the Battle Against the Second Wave of Covid-19 in India

There has been a massive change from social-media movements just being a form of ‘armchair activism’ to changing the lives of many at the grass-roots level, and is directly responsible for saving the lives of many individuals in this situation. The ability of strangers to rally against the inefficiencies of the Government and come together in times of need provides for a glimmer of hope.

By Raushan Tara Jaswal

April 23, 2021

Abdul Latif

This article tries to highlight the importance and use of social media platforms, specifically Instagram , Twitter , and WhatsApp in India while battling a deathly second wave of Covid-19 infections, which are currently peaking at 300,000+ cases daily . In the era of failing public and private health infrastructure, failing federal governance both at the Centre and at the State levels, conflicting and rampant misinformation, and overall a dystopic situation that is presently prevailing in India, crowdsourcing of resources are proving to be a beacon of hope. While discussing the failing governance and crippling health infrastructure in the current scenario, this article seeks to provide an insight into the power of social media and the immediate benefits that have been realized by Indians presently.

Glimmer of Hope

As of today morning, the author Tweeted the need for an Oxygen Cylinder for a close friend’s father – and within the hour, through the help of the ‘Twitterverse’ , her friend was able to secure the same . At the time of writing the article, the Tweet had 200+ Retweets , and dozens of replies, all with up-to-date and promising leads for an Oxygen Cylinder. It is just one of the examples that highlight and showcase the power of social media. While India is battling with the worst of the Covid-19 Pandemic presently , it is the ‘common man’ that is rising to the occasion and is attempting to save lives.

Situation in India

Currently, India is facing a second wave of Covid-19 cases , much more devastating than the first wave, reaching more than 300,000 cases daily , and more than 2,000 deaths. The actual number is considered to be much higher considering the ground realities in different cities – especially the number of deaths . India also is facing an acute shortage of hospital beds, ventilator beds, oxygen and oxygen cylinders, essential life-saving pharmaceuticals, across the country , and both in private and public healthcare systems, which are adding to the misery of the common man.

Often privilege and monetary resources tend to skew the scales to your benefit, but with the present situation, even the most privileged are suffering from the disease. This includes the leader of the political opposition, and people with utmost privilege including judges, politicians, ministers, celebrities, and businessmen are also suffering from Covid-19 and in some cases, are even losing their lives. With no nationwide lockdown imposed as of writing this article, some states, including the National Capital Territory (NCT) of Delhi, have imposed State-wide or even city-wide lockdowns (within States) to curb the transmission of the disease.

The last ‘wave’ was much lower in numbers, it had already stressed the existing health infrastructure and pushed it to the very brink . With the present wave, with no noticeable improvements in the infrastructure over the past year, the current infrastructure is unable to deal with the influx of cases requiring medical intervention. Even if patients have been able to seek and avail the medical intervention required, they have been faced with an additional burden of lack of resources – including oxygen, steroids, plasma, other essential pharmaceuticals, even within the best of the hospitals.

Super-Spreader Events

Another additional nail in the coffin in the present situation is some of the events that preceded the sharp increase in cases – State elections in 4 States and 1 Union Territory which were preceded by election rallies amassing massive crowds, which have also led to a sharp increase in Covid-19 cases in these States . This coupled with the Hindu festivals and religious gatherings, especially that of the ‘Kumbh Mela’ , have contributed to the sharp increase in numbers, doubling in less than 10 days . This situation was also sought to be rectified by a Former Union Law Minister in a letter to the Supreme Court (with the assistance of the author of this Article) to take suo-moto cognizance of such events and issue relevant directions. Since the submission of the aforementioned letter, many of such events have subsequently been scaled down, with many political parties electing not to hold any rallies at all.

Reaction of the Judiciary

Various High Courts across the country have taken stock of the situation – in cases of oxygen shortage to both public and private hospitals as well as the lack of essential pharmaceuticals like Remdesvir , which is still being prescribed in India to treat Covid-19. In extreme situations, these courts have directed the public institutions – at the Centre and the State levels to even ‘beg, borrow, and steal’ , if need be to provide oxygen to both private and public hospitals. This situation has also worsened because some States, which are responsible for the production of medical oxygen have been retaining the same for their States . It is a clear example of the failures of the Indian federal structure – where the tussle between the states is leading to mismanagement of resources and the situation , and thereby, a loss of lives. This situation has also been taken stock of by the Supreme Court, on 21st April 2021 , in a suo-moto cognizance of the Covid-19 situation – demanding urgent action and plans to be presented for oxygen demand and supply, vaccine distribution, etc.

Social Media to the Rescue

While the situation does seem extremely bleak for the next few weeks, especially in the absence of any cogent response from the top-most official of the country , there is still hope. The hope is peddled on various social media platforms through community support, community building, and crowdsourcing of information and resources of immediate need. The example that is quoted by the author is merely one of the instances where it has resulted in an on-ground change in people’s lives.

Oxygen, hospital beds, ICU beds, ventilator beds, pharmaceuticals, food services, emotional support have been sourced through the powerful medium of social media platforms. The most important of these platforms has turned out to be Twitter , but even the ‘Community Help’ function on Facebook, WhatsApp groups, (especially Facebook Group and their subsequent WhatsApp Groups - ‘Network Capital’) Instagram Stories has been at the forefront of providing resources directly to the affected persons. Personally, the author knows of multiple people getting the required help (disclosure is retained due to privacy of the patients), and often not through the ‘official channels’.

People, not necessarily doctors or government officials are working round the clock – and are developing search engines , to quickly search and access the resources available across the country. Google Spreadsheets and Google Docs are also other mediums through which information on such resources are available and is updated every single minute after verifying the requisite information. It often is demarcated by the resources and is updated daily (often hourly) after verifying which resources/persons have been exhausted and often runs into multiple pages. Existing and new WhatsApp groups have been turned into another resource for collating information on an urgent basis.

While there have been some cases of misinformation and misuse of the situation by extorting exorbitant money or extorting money on false leads, however, overall, the benefits have far outweighed the disadvantages. These disadvantages seem minuscule, especially with the lack of any information from the Centre or the State Governments. These platforms (because of their user base as well) have helped transform and provide a glimmer of hope in light of failing democratic institutions within the country. It is only when the public institutions fail the common man, that one turns to strangers – and in this case, it is the kindness of strangers that has truly come through and restored the author’s faith in humanity.

Conclusion

The situation, while dire, is also a beacon of change and hope through the power of social media platforms. These platforms have had a real-life impact on the lives of many – especially during a pandemic and at a time where there is a severe resource crunch, and a lack of response from public officials and institutions. There has been a massive change from social-media movements just being a form of ‘armchair activism’ to changing the lives of many at the grass-roots level, and is directly responsible for saving the lives of many individuals in this situation. Yes, the reality is that even these movements have not been able to save all lives, they do depict the perseverance of the human spirit and the ability of strangers to rally against the inefficiencies of the Government and come together in times of need to provide a glimmer of hope.

This is a developing story in India. Some of the information might be outdated at the time of publication due to the rapid changes in the situation. It stands updated as on 21st April 2021, at 5 PM IST.

Raushan pursued her LLM at the University of Cambridge as a Commonwealth Shared Cambridge Trust Scholar with a specialisation in International Law. She is currently an Advocate at the Supreme Court of India and a Lecturer at Jindal Global Law School. At our institute, she leads the Digital Human Rights cycle. She has a host of publications in the area of human rights and technology – often how technology impacts civil and political rights and how it can be leveraged to attain human rights.

To Trust or Antitrust? Digital Competition

Thu, 22 Apr 2021 15:10:57 GMT

ABOUT

What is the current shape of Competition Law and Policy in the Digital Era? Changes in the digital environment and in technology business models increasingly unleash conundrums for both theory of competition law, policymaking and enforcement. There doesn’t seem to be one answer that fits all.This conversation aims to cover some important topics in this context. First, the current efforts by regulators when assessing Big Tech companies in their relevant markets. The fear of presumed competition harm as a result of novelties in digital markets has, as a default reaction, the request for new regulatory interventions. The question, however, is whether or not this reaction is justified and necessary. On the other hand, we will focus on data-intensive markets in a discussion of whether authorities have shown a good understanding of their nature and the consistent rules while analyzing companies competing in such environment. We will also jump back to some classic examples of tech-based antitrust case law to reconsider if the authorities have to review lessons from the past in shaping how they oversee contemporary challenges in digital antitrust.

SPEAKERS

Prof. Dr. Dirk Auer is a Senior Fellow at the International Center for Law & Economics. His work focuses on the law and economics of antitrust, with an emphasis on innovation policy, digital markets and European competition law. Dirk is also an Adjunct Professor UCLouvain and ULiège, in Belgium, where he teaches courses on American law and on the economics of competition law.

IGF+ Next Generation Internet Governance

Thu, 22 Apr 2021 15:03:40 GMT

ABOUT

Enhancing Internet governance requires multiple actions and reforms to make it more responsive and relevant to current digital issues, in particular, to ensure that technology is harnessed for good, seek the opportunity to manage its impact and ensure that it presents a level playing field for all. The role of the IGF+ becomes key on digital issues, but also it will face some important challenges. For instance, it will need to address how to ensure the cooperation and participation of different stakeholders (business, academia, civil society and technical organisations) that will help to respond to digital issues and evaluate trade-offs as they emerge. Another challenge is to overcome the silos between technical knowledge, civil society and policymakers, which can be critical for adopting and implementing policies. In particular, it will be essential to address how to strengthen institutional links between the IGF+ and the UN for an effective action. Not less important will be the discussion around the ways to ensure participation, and concrete policy recommendations and the tools that must be implemented to achieve the goals sought. Join us on a discussion about the IGF+ reforms towards an agile and inclusive internet governance.

SPEAKERS

Jorge Cancio is Deputy Head of the International Relations Team at the Federal Office of Communications (OFCOM), Switzerland. As such he has managerial and coordination duties and represents Switzerland in a number of international fora and processes related to Internet Governance and Digital Cooperation (notably UN, UN Commission on Science and Technology for Development (CSTD), UN IGF, EuroDIG, Council of Europe Expert Groups, European Union High Level Group on Internet Governance, the UN High Level Panel on Digital Cooperation and follow-up work, the Geneva Internet Platform, or the Swiss IGF). Amongst his duties, he acts as Swiss Representative within the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC) to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN), where he currently is one of the Vice-Chairs. Prior joining OFCOM in 2015, Mr. Cancio held different positions within the Spanish Administration, in the fields of Copyright, Internet Law and Policy, including Internet intermediary liability, Open Data, Internet Governance, and Telecommunications. He holds a law degree from the Universidad Autónoma de Madrid as well as an LL.M. from the Benjamin N. Cardozo Law School, New York. Mr. Cancio is fluent in Spanish, English and German, and has a working knowledge of French.

Prof. em. Dr. Wolfgang Kleinwächter is P rofessor Emeritus of Internet Policy and Regulation at Aarhus University. He is a member of the Global Commission on Stability in Cyberspace (GCSC) as well as a former member of the ICANN Board of Directors and Special Ambassador of the NetMundial Initiative (NMI). He is a long-time participant in international negotiations on Internet Governance (ICANN, WSIS, UN, ITU, G7, EU and IGF). He served as a member of the UN Working Group on Internet Governance (2003 - 2005), as personal advisor to the chair of the UN Internet Governance Forum, Nitin Desai (2005 - 2010), as chair of the "Cross Border Internet Expert Group" of the Council of Europe (2009 - 2011). He is the founder and chair of the Summer School on Internet Governance (SSIG). He also founded and acted as first Chair of the IGF Dynamic Coalition on Internet of Things (DC.IOT@IGF). He was a member of the government delegations of Denmark at the UN World Summit on the Information Society/WSIS (Tunis 2005) and Germany at the ITU World Conference on International Telecommunication/WCIT (Dubai 2012). He is the author of numerous publications and has been invited as an expert at hearings in the European Parliament and the German Bundestag. He has been awarded the eco Internet Award in 2012.

Sorina Teleanu is an independent consultant with expertise in Internet governance and digital policy. Sorina previously worked with DiploFoundation as Digital Policy Senior Researcher, and with the Romanian Parliament, as advisor dealing with ICT-related legislation and policies. Between 2011 and 2016, she served as the alternate representative of the Romanian Government to ICANN’s Governmental Advisory Committee. Sorina also served as the Chair of the Executive Committee of the South Eastern European Dialogue on Internet Governance (SEEDIG), and was a member of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group (MAG) which provides advice to the UN Secretary-General on the programme and schedule of the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) meetings. She has been a long-time volunteer to the IGF Secretariat and EuroDIG, and also worked as a fellow and consultant at the IGF Secretariat. Sorina is an alumna of DiploFoundation’s Internet Governance Capacity Building Programme, ICANN’s Fellowship Programme, the Internet Society’s Next Generation Leadership programme, and the European Summer School on Internet Governance. Her educational background is in international relations and European studies, having received a bachelor and a master's degree from the Lucian Blaga University in Sibiu, Romania.

One Way Ticket to Luxembourg - Facebook v. Bundeskartellamt at the ECJ

Wed, 14 Apr 2021 20:27:43 GMT

BIG DATA & ANTITRUST

One Way Ticket to Luxembourg - Facebook v. Bundeskartellamt at the ECJ

A landmark competition-privacy case has been sent to the European Court of Justice. The Higher Regional Court in Düsseldorf has decided that the GDPR-related concerns on the much-expected Bundeskartellamt v. Facebook dominance dispute shall be interpreted by the ECJ before a final ruling is set in German Courts.

By Mario Tavares Moyrón & Petar Pešić

April 14, 2021

“We have very good reason to do away with anachronistic laws and norms, as they can lead to unfairness and to the delay of progress. That is why Zuckerberg hinting that privacy had become obsolete was so significant. Since then, wanting to reassure users and keep up with competitors who are more serious about privacy, Zuckerberg has changed his tune and in 2019 claimed that ‘the future is private’. Just one month later, however, Facebook’s lawyer argued in court that users had ‘no privacy interest’, because by the sheer act of using the platform they had ‘negated any reasonable expectation of privacy’.

-Carissa Véliz, Privacy is Power

The middle of the year 2020 was coming to an end when the Federal Court of Justice (Bundesgerichtshof) of Germany confirmed the Federal Cartel Office’s (Bundeskartellamt) decision on Facebook dominance. The company quickly appealed the ruling, to be referred to the Higher Regional Court (Oberlandesgericht) of Düsseldorf. After analyzing the substantial arguments of the case, the Competition Chamber of the Oberlandesgericht has recently decided to send the dockets to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) for a formal interpretation of the European Regulations at stake.

In light of the above, it is worth a step back to remember the context of this dispute and have a short recap to see why it is now a matter of resolution for the ECJ.

Summary of the case

In February 2019 the German competition authority determined that Facebook was holding a dominant position in the social network’s market. As a consequence, the referred Office imposed a series of guidelines to prevent the company from abusing its powers in the relevant market, such as restrictions to the data processing activities, which, according to the Bundeskartellamt, compelled users to allow broad access to their data for further exploitation, without the user’s previous, informed and explicit consent.

The Bundeskartellamt was not aiming to financially punish Facebook but rather intended to establish ex-ante measures against possible abuses of dominance that also impacted the scope of the data protection legislation. In specific, those from the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). These measures required an action plan for Facebook to amend its data processing practices in order to enhance its users' privacy rights.

Facebook quickly challenged the decision from the Bundeskartellamt and asked for interim relief from execution of the decision before the Düsseldorf’s Oberlandesgericht, where its judges granted an injunction to the effect that the company could omit the action plan ordered by the competition authority. In consequence, the Bundeskartellamt appealed the ruling, which forwarded it to the chambers of the Federal Court of Justice in Karlsruhe. And as anticipated in the introduction, on June 23rd of 2020, the federal judges confirmed the decision of the Bundeskartellamt.

Now, again, it was the turn of the Higher Regional Court in Düsseldorf.

Initial legal assessment by the German Competition Authority

The German competition watchdog was of the idea that Facebook systematically abused its market power, reducing the options of products offered to its users as a result of systematically displaying undemanded targeted advertisements . According to the results of the Bundeskartellamt’s 3-year investigation, Facebook created profiles of its users built from the analysis of personal data and online behavior, without having properly fulfilled the regulatory requirements to collect such data.

The Bundeskartellamt considered that the data handled by Facebook allowed not only to generate highly targeted advertisement but also to strengthen the entry barriers to the social media market through network and lock-in effects.

Under its own interpretation of the GDPR, the Bundeskartellamt noted that users could not provide their consent freely, in an informed way, and with clear and specific purposes to authorize the combination of data. Facebook was conditioning the use of the social network to the acceptance of the terms of use.

Although Facebook disclosed the purposes of processing personal data on its privacy policy, together with the legal basis for such purpose, it did not provide an alternative ( opt-out ) for the user to refuse the combination of data.

Furthermore, the combination of data was not disclosed, neither only sourced from the Facebook page or app, but also by other interfaces connected to Facebook and third-party websites integrated through plugins, such as the Like button or the Share option. Additionally, the latter is a possible trigger for leaking users’ personal data.

The Competition Authority resorted to substantiate this case following a civil law doctrine from the Federal Court of Justice on “abusive commercial terms”. According to the referred doctrine, an abusive commercial term would be there when one of the parties to a contract had unbalanced power during the negotiation and leveraged it to prevent the other party from any bargaining capacity. As a consequence of the lack of contractual autonomy, constitutional rights (such as informational self-determination, in the case of relevance) of the disadvantaged party of the negotiation could be undermined, hence requiring the involvement of the Court.

In light of the above, the Competition Authority considered that when investigating companies like Facebook, competition watchdogs should assess their data processing activities to test their level of compliance with privacy laws, as their ultimate purpose is to safeguard a right constitutionally acknowledged.

Why was the dispute referred to the ECJ Chambers?

The ECJ acts as the final interpreter of the EU Law and as such is the right addressee in cases where courts of Member States need to decide on a matter related to the Union Law. In those situations, national courts may refer such queries -as is the case with the GDPR- to the ECJ for further clarification.

When it comes to this dispute, the final list of questions is yet to be published. However, Düsseldorf’s Oberlandesgericht was emphatic on the fact that the core of the case was by no means settled yet after the Bundesgerichtshof decision. The central question being: are competition authorities allowed to use antitrust law as a tool to enforce data protection regulation or do they exceed their competence in doing so? Another query that could be expected to be rendered to the Chambers relates to the bundling of the social network users’ data from the various resources harvested by Facebook without consent.

Other elements to be set are related to the procedural aspect of the case and include whether the right entities of Facebook were targeted during the proceedings and whether Facebook was granted a fair hearing.

Data protection regulation has been a sort of a no-go for competition law. Many experts argue that there is a frontier between antitrust and data protection that should not be crossed, even if these areas of law get to interact within many technology-related cases.

Wrap-up before a Court’s ruling

The case has already proven to be groundbreaking. The German Parliament (Bundestag) recently introduced an amendment to the Act against Restraints of Competition, which now establishes the Bundesgerichtshof as the first and last instance of appeal to Bundeskartellamt’s decisions . This will likely speed up the process of deciding on similar disputes.

As it concerns Facebook, the company has been systematically bundling all of the data gathered from its users, using its platforms and third-party sources to strengthen profiles, which matches the company’s business model driven towards advertising. In essence, they use this practice to increase their revenue by offering advertisers better personalization and performance of their campaigns. On the other side of the pond, questions arise as to whether acquisitions of Whatsapp and Instagram by Facebook were mistakenly cleared from antitrust concerns.

If we are looked at as consumers and we take that the goal of the EU competition law is to strive for consumer welfare and to promote a “highly competitive social market economy” as stated in the Treaty on the Functioning of the EU, then we must wonder if this practice is harming consumers or not. Privacy threats included. What we are getting as consumers is an ever-increasing amount of ads for our “ free ” use of Facebook’s platforms.

Facebook increases its revenue using our data, that we must opt to surrender if we wish to use their services, and every possible competitor has driven away from this industry because of network effects. It is hardly plausible that a new entrant to the market can offer similar advertising services as Facebook does, because they simply cannot gather that much data.

What is interesting is that we still perceive Facebook as a social media company, although their business model revolves around advertising. If they would be seen as advertisers, would their business model and their approach to collection and use of data be seen as exploitative practice? In any case, consumers expect to see the European Court of Justice focusing on the substance of the case and providing clear answers. This dispute has already taken years to decide and a tortoise approach to such highly important cases, is hampering the effectiveness of an eventual decision. By the time this case finally gets resolved, we might realize that the practice that was in the focus of this case has become obsolete.

What is still true is that this can become the next landmark case to be used as reference for matters related to the intersection of the data protection and competition law. Whether this will be the case, only time will tell.

Mario is a legal counsel based in Paris. He underwent his graduate studies in Regulation of New Technologies, Data Privacy, and Fintech. His work experience has been focused on TMT, Contract Law, Compliance for Financial Institutions, Privacy, and Competition Law. He Co-leads the Institute’s Big Data & Antitrust cycle.

Petar is a qualified lawyer from Serbia working in the IT industry. He has completed his LLM degree at the University of Cambridge, specializing in the area of Competition/Antitrust Law. During undergraduate studies at the University of Nis, Serbia, he was participating in numerous Moot Court Competition, of which most notable results were 1st place at the Trans-European Moot Court Competition before the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France, and Price E. Monroe Media Law Moot Court. He previously completed a traineeship in a reputable Serbian law firm and worked in the Legal Team in the iGaming industry. His areas of interest include AI, IT Law, and Human Rights.

Data-Driven Mergers

Wed, 14 Apr 2021 18:59:32 GMT

COSMONAUT

S E R I E S

Data-Driven Mergers

Chris Gannon

Privacy & Antitrust

The current approach to data-driven mergers largely ignores the potentially detrimental effects of concentration of personal data on consumers. However, there must be a route that enables the integration of privacy concerns into competition law analysis to ensure that privacy, considered as a fundamental aspect of consumer welfare, is not degraded by the merger.

Ben Chamberlain

Data accumulation as barrier to entry?

A dynamic digital environment requires antitrust authorities to meticulously and creatively assess a broad range of determinants in deciding on the competitive effect of some merger. Data accumulation in that regard can be taken as a red flag, but not as solid proof of detrimental anti-competitive effect.

Jignesh Gajjar

Acquisition on condition

By the end of 2020, the European Commission approves Google's acquisition of Fitbit on conditions. Google had to commit to not using location, health, and well-being data from Fitbit users for 10 years to target ads. The company also assured that the deal will not affect Fitbit's competitors using Android and has indicated that it will not interfere with the operation of Fitbit devices on other operating systems. The European regulator also demanded that users have the option to disable data sharing with other Google services.

Johnkutty KM

Our Series

WhatsApp’s Privacy Policy in the Light of the Bundeskartellamt’s Facebook Decision and the Turkish experience

Wed, 14 Apr 2021 18:24:38 GMT

BIG DATA & ANTITRUST

WhatsApp’s Privacy Policy in the Light of the Bundeskartellamt’s Facebook Decision and the Turkish experience

WhatsApp was acquired by Facebook in February 2014. It was unforeseen the massive relevance that both companies' combined data would eventually have for Facebook’s business model. We currently see a clearer perspective of the above in light of WhatsApp’s new privacy policy.

By Gözde Diktas

April 14, 2021

In early January of this year, all WhatsApp users received a notification with respect to its new terms and conditions and privacy policy. According to such notification, by granting your consent, your data would be fully integrated with Facebook. A refusal to accept the referred terms would be equal to the inability to use WhatsApp anymore. As network effects are important, WhatsApp could expect that most of the users would unquestionably accept these updates, but many persons preferred to migrate to different messaging applications promising to offer more privacy-friendly practices.

While in the European Economic Area, WhatsApp is somewhat restricted to limitlessly sharing its data thanks to the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), this is not necessarily the case for other jurisdictions. This article will flag some key items to consider for Turkey, after a quick revision of a piece of case-law that sits data protection regulation together with antitrust law.

The Bundeskartellamt v. Facebook Case

In the case Bundeskartellamt v. Facebook , the German Competition Authority started an investigation on Facebook for collecting user and device-related data from third-parties partnered with Facebook (including WhatsApp) and combining such data with information from the platform’s user account.

Facebook asserted that its conduct was performed legitimately by receiving users’ consents. But the Bundeskartellamt argued that for the collection of consent as a legal basis for data processing to be valid, it should not be granted under coercion. In other words, users were conditioned to accept the terms and conditions if they wanted to use the app. Consequently, the terms of use and privacy of Facebook were in breach of the principles enshrined in the GDPR.

In addition to the above, the conduct of Facebook constituted an abuse of dominance in the form of exploitative contractual terms. According to German case-law, where one contractual party is so powerful and it is practically able to dictate the terms of the contract, it can be considered as an abuse of dominance, in order to protect constitutional rights of the ‘weak’ parties to the agreement. In this context, Bundeskartellamt stressed that a violation of GDPR should be considered too a violation of constitutional rights since the GDPR protects the fundamental rights to privacy and the protection of personal data.

The Bundeskartellamt pointed out Facebook’s market share and strong direct network effects preventing its users from switching to another social network. It additionally mentioned that other advertising platforms found it difficult to thrive in a market captured by Facebook. It was also with this case that a myth was challenged: that of free of charge services allowing the platform to dispose of the users’ data as it pleased them, where data becomes the token for exchange.

This whole context comes to relevance when we look at WhatsApp’s situation: (i) a messaging application with massive outreach and, (ii) an inexistent wiggle room for the terms and conditions. Bundeskartellamt’s decision should be a route map when leading with what might be indeed abusive contractual terms that would prevent a user from connecting to the app.

Turkey

Jumping to another jurisdiction, it is worth clarifying an enforceability point of the Turkish Competition Act ( ‘Law No. 4054’ ), where in the absence of the Facebook Turkey office, the Turkish Competition Authority (“TCA”) is based on effect doctrine rather than the principle of territoriality.

Accordingly, all agreements, conducts and decisions restricting competition in any of the markets in Turkey could be subject to the Law. 4054. Therefore, even in the absence of physical presence in Turkey, any undertaking causing anti-competitive effects in Turkish markets could be investigated by the Turkish Competition Authority.

According to the 2020 Report by Gemius, Instagram has 40,080,825 users in Turkey and Facebook has 31,236,479 users. These figures are relevant as it is Facebook who owns WhatsApp. For messaging applications , WhatsApp has 50,038,812 users, Facebook Messenger has 29,602,803 users and BIP (local messaging application in Turkey operated by Turkcell) has 9,528,919 users.

With these figures in mind, the TCA filed a lawsuit and launched an investigation with the ex efficio decision numbered 21-02/25-10 dated 11/01/2021 on interim measures against Facebook for its recent implementation concerning data sharing preferences to detect whether there is an infringement under the Article 6 of Law No. 4054 on abuse of dominant position.

At this point, TCA has the authority to launch an investigation either with a preliminary examination on whether an in-depth investigation is required or without any preliminary examination based on Art. 40 of the Law No. 4054. However, in practice, TCA has mostly initiated investigations with a preliminary examination before launching a full-fledged investigation in an effort to collect information about the factual background of the allegations.

Nevertheless, TCA this time initiated an in-depth investigation directly rather than following that two-step approach. Competition experts justify this decision by the position of the TCA to provide sufficient information on legitimate competition law concerns which need to be assessed in an in-depth investigation.

TCA also decided to implement preventive measures by obliging Facebook to withdraw WhatsApp's policy updates, meant to enter into force by February 8th, 2021 and notify its withdrawal from the latest update to its users who have already accepted the updated terms or received the notification.

According to Art. 9 /4 of Law No. 4054, where there is an objective possibility that the investigated conduct could cause significant and irreparable damage, the TCA may take measures, not going beyond the scope of the Board's final decision, to protect the situation prior to the investigated conduct. Once this authority is exercised, the TCA must provide adequate reasoning for its decision and persuasive indicators demonstrating the possible damages in the absence of the interim measure.

With respect to abuse of dominance, the competition authorities generally use comparative tools or value tests to determine whether a dominant undertaking has an exploitative strategy, and prove its possible harm. Abuse of dominance is regulated and prohibited by Art. 6 Law No. 4054 with several behaviors as examples of abuse of dominance.

In reference to exploitative abuses, restrictions in production, marketing or technical development for consumers' disadvantage is one of the counted examples, and unlike German legislation, there is no other Article than this regulating the criteria to rely on in determining abusive behaviors. Thus, the TCA published in 2014 the Guidelines on the Assessment of Exclusionary Abusive Conduct by Dominant Undertakings (“Guideline”). Exploitative conducts, however, were not in scope.

On the other hand, it should be also noted that the examples in Art. 6 are not counted as numerus clausus , and there are other examples just brought with the case-law, such as excessive pricing as an exploitative abuse. Turkish competition law does not foresee such detailed rules on deciding market power and abuse of dominance as German competition law, and the Guideline does not cover exploitative abuse, unlawful access (with respect to the privacy concerns) to data affecting competition by an undertaking. However, Turkish courts may determine exploitative abuse on the basis of existing case-law.

Generally, TCA’s investigation is quite similar to Bundeskartellamt’s Facebook Decision. It was decided that subsidiaries of Facebook such as Instagram or WhatsApp can continue collecting data of users only separately if there is no real consent of users for their data to be processed by another subsidiary or Facebook. Even if it is currently hard to get a clear conclusion in a non-EU country without examining allegations in detail, it would not be wrong from the announcements and allegations to say that WhatsApp indeed attempted to abuse on the basis of its dominant position.

Final note

As the loss of control over personal data is also regarded as a topic of interest for data protection authorities, the Turkish Data Protection Authority initiated an investigation against Facebook and WhatsApp on following bases;

The consent mentioned in the policy update is demanded only for processing of the data, not for the transfer of data to third parties abroad.
Transfer of data to an undertaking in another country might be against the required elements in Art. 9 of the Turkish Law on the Protection of Personal Data.
Coerced consent may not be considered as “explicitly given” which is a minimum requirement of the Law before any processing is performed.

It is very likely that as in the Turkish case, many other competition authorities start looking at the intertwined connection between antitrust law and data protection when, as in the case referred above, data becomes essential for the undertaker's strategy and potentially threatens fundamental rights for the sake of their own profit.

Gözde Diktas is a fresh lawyer admitted to the Istanbul Bar Association in Turkey. She experienced an international traineeship on Information Technology Law, Competition Law and Data Privacy (based on GDPR) in Ukraine, and is expecting to perform two more in Malta and Portugal. She studied the US. Common Law during bachelor program, and she has publications in the field of competition law and an international report on internet censorship. She is a researcher in Big Data & Antitrust Research Cycle in the Institute for Internet & the Just Society. She is fluent in English and Turkish, and can communicate in French.

(Sensitive) Data Mergers and Consumer Welfare

Wed, 14 Apr 2021 18:07:58 GMT

BIG DATA & ANTITRUST

(Sensitive) Data Mergers and Consumer Welfare

The acquisition of Fitbit by Google is an emblematic case, as it represents an attempt by Google to expand its participation in the wearables and the health market. This text aims to provide a short overview of the main antitrust and privacy discussions surrounding the case, including the particularities involving sensitive data and the impacts of the merger when it comes to consumer welfare.

By Juliana Novaes

April 14, 2021

One of the most remarkable antitrust cases in 2020 was the acquisition of Fitbit by Google, which started in 2019 when the $2.1 billion deal was announced. Fitbit is a company focused on fitness and electronic products, such as smartwatches and wearable technology in general. This is an emblematic case, as it represents an attempt from Google to expand its participation in the wearables and the health market.

Antitrust concerns in the Google/Fitbit case

Fitbit is part of the fitness and health industry and has as part of its business model the development of electronic devices that are able to gather and analyze personal metrics from its consumer relating to their health and physical activity habits.

As a consequence, a significant part of the data processed by the company is of sensitive nature, involving information such as heart rate, quality of sleep, steps climbed, and information that generally provides insights on health habits maintained by users.

The merger would hence mean that Google would have access to the databases belonging to Fitbit. Some concerns involving the case are based on the premise that Google could use this data for improving even more its profiling and personalization mechanisms, which would increase entry barriers and damage competition in general. This is based on the discussion around the potential of data as a competitive asset that can create barriers and exclude competitors who do not have access to the same amounts of information and therefore have reduced possibilities of developing personalized products and services with the same precision. This would hence open loopholes for large companies to abuse their power of dominance generated by vast amounts of data.

Data collected by Fitbit could strengthen Google's power in digital economy markets, such as online advertising and search engines, having the potential to leverage its position in additional markets, like those linked to health.

Consequently, following the announcement by Google, the European Commission began investigating the case, due to the high amounts of data that would be obtained from the acquired company and the potential effects this would have on competition.

Consumer welfare concerns

Following the announcement involving the deal, several civil society organizations wrote a joint declaration stating their concerns regarding the merger. The declaration is part of an international initiative that presses competition authorities from around the world to analyze carefully the impacts of the Google-Fitbit operation from a consumer welfare perspective.

This discussion inserts itself in a context in which consumer privacy has become a critical public policy topic. The merger raised concerns among civil society organizations on what are the possible impacts of such a merger when it comes to the privacy of customers.

The very nature of the personal data processed by Fitbit is of high concern, as it provides insights into consumers’ health conditions. This not only affects the right to privacy but could lead to other consequences in the long-term associated with discrimination of individuals and misuse. Health-related data is considered of sensitive nature by the General Data Protection Regulation and it is subject to particularly strict rules due to the long-term consequences for individuals if not correctly protected.

In this sense, one of the arguments presented by civil society organizations is that, as the merger could have potential impacts of lowering competition in the sector, there would be not enough incentives for Google to offer services with high quality in terms of privacy and data protection after acquiring Fitbit. This could therefore potentially decrease the level of informational autonomy and protection that would be designated to the customers who share their data with the devices offered by the company.

Civil society organizations also raise awareness of the possibility of Google imposing entry barriers to other competitors through interoperability mechanisms involving the Android operating system. This would also damage consumers, as they would have fewer options when choosing a similar service.

Moreover, the organizations are concerned with the autonomy of customers when choosing which data to share with the company. They reinforce the need for Google to allow for the possibility of current Fitbit consumers not wanting to have their data integrated after the acquisition.

The Outcomes

By the end of 2020, the European Commission decided to approve the acquisition . Nonetheless, there were commitments involved in the decision. Google had to commit to not using location, health, and well-being data from Fitbit users for 10 years to target ads. The company also assured that the deal will not affect Fitbit's competitors using Android and has indicated that it will not interfere with the operation of Fitbit devices on other operating systems. The European regulator also demanded that users have the option to disable data sharing with other Google services.

Privacy as an Element of Product Quality in the Assessment of Data-Driven Mergers

Wed, 14 Apr 2021 17:00:12 GMT

BIG DATA & ANTITRUST

Privacy as an Element of Product Quality in Assessment of Data-Driven Mergers

By Nathalie Alquati Bonisoli

April 14, 2021

In the debate on the intersection between big data, privacy, and antitrust, one of the main issues is that the current approach to data-driven mergers largely ignores the potentially detrimental effects of concentration of personal data on consumers.

Competition authorities constantly assess the role of data as a source of market power, and how the aggregation of data by the merging parties could potentially constitute a barrier to market entry for competitors. When it comes to privacy-related issues, the present assumption is that it does not constitute an antitrust concern, and it should be addressed only by consumer protection laws or privacy legislation.

This view equates privacy and personal data protection as other non-economic interests and therefore falls outside the scope of competition law analysis. Several attempts have already been made to address the detrimental effects of the accumulation of data by advancing theories consumers’ harm as a method to include privacy concerns in the competition law analysis. One of these arguments was pursued by analyzing the harm to consumers due to the diminution of product quality.

Consumer Protection in the European Competition Legal framework

Consumer protection is an inherent feature of competition law. In the European legal framework, the prohibition of abuse of dominance entails an extension of the consumer-protection function, with a further focus on consumer choice and implications for innovation.

Accordingly, also the European Merger Regulation refers to consumer welfare: when conducting a merger review, the Commission should take into account the interests of consumers, and that the technical and economic progress brought about by a merger is to the advantage of consumers.The areas of abuse of dominance and mergers are intertwined, as the legal test applicable to mergers is based on the creation or strengthening of a dominant position following the merger.

Privacy as an element of product quality

The root to comprehend privacy and data in the scope of competition law is to consider privacy as an element of product quality, which constitutes a significant non-price parameter of competition in online markets.In this respect, the EU already highlighted the importance of non-price parameters of competition, such as product quality within the scope of merger analysis. The ECJ confirmed this approach in Microsoft/Skype where it assessed the merger’s potentially detrimental impact on non-price competition in the form of degradation of innovation and service quality.

However, competition authorities are still reluctant to block a merger on the sole ground of its negative effect on product quality or other parameters of non-price competition.The Commission approach in Facebook/WhatsApp case clearly reflects this line of thought . After the merger, Facebook changed WhatsApp’s privacy policy to enable it to combine WhatsApp user data with Facebook user data. Consequently, WhatsApp users received a notice that WhatsApp would transfer their data to Facebook in a take-it-or-leave-it choice.

Whereas the Commission acknowledged that privacy is increasingly valued by consumers, it still refrained from actually assessing whether the merger would lead to a decrease in the future quality of the privacy offered by both undertakings.In this respect, the EU Commission stated that any privacy-related concerns deriving from the data aggregation within the control of Facebook do not fall within the EU competition legal framework.In this case, the Commission pointed out that the merged entity will continue to be bound by EU data protection regulation after the merger. This case is emblematic in showing that instead of looking in potential privacy-related damage on consumer welfare in the merger, the Commission stated that privacy concerns should not fall under the competition law framework.

The Facebook/WhatsApp case illustrates how the present antitrust authorities lack the adequate tools and methodologies to account for privacy as a non-price dimension of product quality. It could be argued that, by following this theory of harm to consumers, competition authorities face the problem that product quality is difficult to measure and might give rise to imprecise and complex comparisons. On one hand, it could lead to harm to consumers who value privacy as product quality. On the other hand, the benefits that consumers will derive from a merger must be evaluated, as access to more user data may also enable an online platform to improve the overall product quality.

For this reason, what can be understood is that under the current legal framework, degradation of the quality of privacy is primarily perceived as relating solely to consumer laws and data protection regulations. However, the focus of consumer law is on advertising and on quality, hence it would not be a proper tool in this context, as it is not equipped to deal either with monopolistic powers or with mergers.Accordingly, privacy-related consumer harm should not be conceived as irrelevant in the competition assessment, as a merger which entails a decrease in privacy protection will not necessarily violate EU data protection laws.

Concluding Remarks

Since the volume and variety of data aggregated by technology companies entail broad societal implications it is necessary to broaden the scope of competition assessment in data-driven mergers. What is now desirable is to find a route that will enable the integration of privacy concerns into competition law analysis to ensure that privacy, considered as a fundamental aspect of consumer welfare, is not degraded by the merger. This article presented one of the theories on the appropriate role of data and privacy in the competition law assessment which will empower competition authorities to integrate potential consumer harm arising from a decrease in privacy protection into their merger assessment.

Nathalie Alquati Bonisoli is currently completing Master of Laws degree in European Competition Law and Regulation at the University of Amsterdam. As an undergraduate, she studied European Law at Maastricht University where she graduated with the Business Law specialization. During her bachelor's she participated in the Erasmus program in London where she studied English law at Westminster University. She is fluent in Italian and English and can communicate in Dutch, French and Chinese.

Propensity of Data Accumulation to Raise ‘Barriers to Entry’

Sun, 11 Apr 2021 22:23:24 GMT

BIG DATA & ANTITRUST

Propensity of Data Accumulation to Raise ‘Barriers to Entry’

By Miljana Todorovic

April 11, 2021

Entry barriers can be defined as factors that could make a new entry on the market less likely or less rapid by affecting the expected sunk costs of entry and/or the expected profits for new entrants once they are in the market, or by establishing physical, geographic or legal obstacles to entry. Those difficulties may prevent the competitor from expanding his production or discourage potential competitors in providing effective competition to the dominant undertaking. That is why barriers to entry are important to be examined when assessing if an undertaking abuses its dominant position, which is prohibited by Article 102 TFEU.

In the case of digital markets, the collection and use of large volumes of data have attracted substantial attention , also in regard to barriers to entry. There are several strategies for companies to get better access to data. For example, acquiring another company owning large datasets or merging with it, mergers of two companies that already hold strong market positions in separate upstream or downstream markets, or acquisitions by dominant platforms of small start-ups with a quickly growing user base.

Is Big Data a Big Problem for competition?

Apart from the undoubtedly procompetitive effects of these mergers, its frequency over the last decade gave rise to concerns about whether the mergers with specific data resources can significantly impede competition. They could result in a concentration in control over valuable and non-replicable data resources, and consequently in better data access for the merging parties than for their competitors. The question that needs to be examined is whether the collection and exploitation of data may raise barriers to entry and be a source of market power.

We talk about entry barriers resulting from data collection when new entrants are unable either to collect the data or to buy access to the same kind of data, in terms of volume and/or variety, as established companies. The French-German study on competition law and data identifies five types of conduct that can lead to exclusion of competition: refusal to provide access to data, discriminatory access, exclusive contracts, tied sales and cross-usage of datasets, and data as a vehicle for discriminatory pricing.

However, even though there is a big hype around data, there are challenging opinions that the anticompetitive danger of data accumulation cannot be taken as a general statement. Examples have shown that data-driven markets are characterized by low entry barriers and new entrants can fastly establish themselves despite existing network effects (some examples are Slack, Tinder, and Snapchat). Data accumulation, by itself, does not create a barrier to entry and does not automatically endow a firm with either the incentive or the ability to foreclose rivals, expand its monopoly, or harm competition in other ways.

Important pieces in the assessment puzzle

The importance of data varies from market to market and its propensity to raise or lower barriers to entry depends on the nature and use of the data and the availability of alternative data sources. Big Data is well-known to be defined by three V’s, Volume, Velocity, and Variety, however, there is much more to know about the characteristics of particular data to make a right assessment of its importance for a specific market and its influence on competition.

One should make a distinction between first-party and third-party data, and further between those collected on its own assets, and those on the company’s customers. Next to it, other features of data have to be explored, such as their uniqueness, replaceability, portability, and interoperability. It is also pointed out that a combination of different data troves could raise competition concerns if the combination of data makes it impossible for competitors to replicate the information extracted from it. This shows the necessity to evaluate data on a case-by-case basis.

It is, however, important to notice that a thorough assessment of data is not sufficient to conclude on possible entry barriers. Another major part of this equation is market concentration because only when the level of market concentration is relatively high, data collection can provoke the rise of entry barriers and reduced competition.

With everything noted above, the story on the assessment of barriers to entry is still not complete. It is emphasized that antitrust authorities will need to look more closely not only at the substitutability of different types of data for different purposes but also at the role of related but distinct factors such as the availability of algorithms or other software to process such data.

Final notes

Data accumulation does not necessarily pose a significant antitrust risk. Competitive concerns of raising barriers to entry are limited to a specific set of circumstances. They include certain features of particular data, the level of market concentration, and other factors related to data processing. A dynamic digital environment requires antitrust authorities to meticulously and creatively assess a broad range of determinants in deciding on the competitive effect of some merger. Data accumulation in that regard can be taken as a red flag, but not as solid proof of detrimental anti-competitive effect.

Miljana Todorovic is a doctor in law from the University of Belgrade. She has publications in the field of Constitutional Law, Criminal law and Property Law, and participated in numerous scientific conferences. At the Université libre de Bruxelles she completed an LL.M. in International Business Law. Miljana is a scientific collaborator at the University of Ghent and a mother of two. In the Institute for Internet & the Just Society she is co-leader of the Big Data & Antitrust Research Cycle.

Digital Tracing and COVID-19 - The Israeli Case

Sun, 11 Apr 2021 21:35:36 GMT

PRIVACY

Digital Tracing and COVID-19 -

The Israeli Case

Israel has been the only western democracy which used secret service tools to fight the Coronavirus. The challenges presented by the pandemic put in balance human rights as privacy, freedom and health. Many countries find digital tracing a method to contain the propagation of the virus. However, this approach has confronted human rights.

By Alice Bryk Silveira

April 11, 2021

Introduction

During the current COVID-19 pandemic the governments have been using tools to protect public health and contain the spread of the coronavirus. However, certain human rights have been restricted by those public health measures which brings the discussion of the legality of such human rights restrictions. For instance, some countries have been using Digital Tracing as a tool to contain the growth and proliferation of the virus. The Digital Tracing mainly consists of tapping into cell phone location data to track infection spread and then notify people who may have been exposed . This method puts in balance the right to privacy and freedom.

Explaining Digital Tracing

First, it is important to note that there are two types of technologies used to track data. The first one is called centralized in which the information can be stored by the government and the processing can be done by civilian government agencies, for instance healthcare authorities or by security agencies that enjoy direct access to the cellular infrastructure. The second type is the digital tracing established on made-to-order apps which can be voluntary or mandatory. This second approach sends the information straight to the other users of the app, in which case the data is decoded and processed on each user’s cellular device. This decentralized method has been used in countries such as Italy, Germany, Switzerland, and few states of the USA .

The Israeli Case

In March 2020 , the Israeli government approved a non-voluntary emergent mass surveillance program allowing the location tracking of citizens as part of a national effort to slow the spread of COVID19. The digital contact tracing has been headed by the Israeli Security Agency (ISA), known by Shin Bet, which is responsible to fight against terrorism and espionage. The mobile-phone location data helped to identify people who had crossed paths with patients who had been positive for COVID19- and then they were put into mandatory quarantine.

In response to the implementation of this mass-surveillance program for contact tracing, human rights organizations submitted a petition to the Israeli High Court of Justice arguing a violation of basic human rights, as human dignity and privacy. In April, the High Court of Justice ruled that Shin Bet security service’s cell phone tracking of confirmed coronavirus carriers could not continue to operate due to the lack of legislation .

However, as a result of the increase of COVID-19 infections, in July 2020, the Israeli Parliament (Knesset) passed a temporary law authorizing the use of the Shin Bet to track civilians for six months . Once again, in response human rights organizations submitted a petition that the temporary order was unconstitutional, once authorized the Shin Bet to use extreme mass surveillance tools which have been used for national security for civilian matters.

Recently, the High Court of Justice restricted the activity of Shin Bet which after March 14th can only be used for the people who don’t cooperate with epidemiological investigations, thus the tracing system will be used as a “complementary tool” for individual cases. It is crucial to highlight that the method used by Shin Bet has been proved not to be very efficient and it has been reported several cases of people who have been sent wrongfully to quarantine .

Closing remarks

As we can see, the Israeli case brings to discussion the limits of public health tools and human rights in a democracy. In the case presented above, it is possible to affirm that the means used by the Israeli government are disproportionate. Countries have been using an “emergency state law” to justify abuses to democracy. It is undeniable that the current pandemic brought many challenges to the countries and governments all around the world. However, we can never forget to ensure that the human rights as privacy and freedom will be respected along with the right to health.

Therefore, it is crucial to take into account the principles for maintaining privacy and civil liberties with the cellphone tracking , as the principle that the data access should be permitted to as few people as possible; the limitation of time of the program; the supervision based on transparency; the knowledge of the public about what data are collected and how those data will be used, stored and shared; the principle that civilian operators (telecommunication and software industries) should preferably operate the mass contact-tracing systems; the encouragement of voluntary participation and most importantly the principle of proportionality to determine if the limitations on the human rights are truly necessary. Thus, it is an accomplishment that even after a long process Israel recognized the value of the population's human rights and limited the use of controversial measures as contact tracing.

Alice Bryk Silveira is a Brazilian lawyer, member of the Brazilian Bar Association and she recently completed her LLM in International Law & Human Rights at Tel Aviv University. She holds a Bachelor's Degree in Law from Pontifícia Católica do Rio Grande do Sul (PUCRS). During Law School, she has been an intern at the Federal Public Defender’s Office of Brazil and the State Public Defender’s Office. Also, she has been a volunteer at ACRI - The Association for Civil Rights in Israel doing legal research, where she has done research about the privacy impacts of Facial Recognition Technology. Her research interests are the intersection between human rights and technology. She is fluent in Portuguese and English and can communicate in in French and Spanish.

I didn’t do it, my brain made me do it

Sun, 11 Apr 2021 21:35:32 GMT

NEUROSCIENCE

I didn’t do it, my brain made me do it

In the past two decades, as significant advances in neuroscience have ameliorated our understanding of brain structure and function, along with increasing advancements of brain imaging techniques and state-of-the-art analytic tools, neurocriminology, the study of biological factors contributing to crime, has resurfaced.

By Tereza Bountioukou

April 11, 2021

From phrenology to neurocriminology

Nowadays dismissed as pseudoscience, phrenology - from the ancient Greek φρήν (mind) and λόγος (knowledge) - established by Franz Joseph Gall, constituted man’s first attempt to trace specific behaviour or personality traits to brain morphology. Even though substantially problematic and often used to justify superiority against “lesser races'', the study of phrenology was surprisingly the first to advocate the idea of rehabilitation of criminals in favour of punishment. Influenced by Gall’s research, Cesare Lombardo, the nineteenth-century Italian criminologist and advocate of biological determinism – the idea that all human characteristics are determined by hereditary factors - , supported that criminal behavior was in fact inherited and “born” criminals could be identified by primitive, ape-looking physical features, e.g. asymmetry of the face, prognathism, etc.

As expected, in the following years, the development of human thought and the emergence of the sociological theory of crime and epigenetics, shifted attention away from the biological roots of criminal behaviour. In the past two decades, as significant advances in neuroscience have ameliorated our understanding of brain structure and function, along with increasing advancements of brain imaging techniques and state-of-the-art analytic tools, neurocriminology, the study of biological factors contributing to crime, has resurfaced. Although most neurocriminologists agree on underlying biological factors as the primary causes of aberrant behaviour, they nonetheless don’t undermine the significance of social and environmental factors.

The ever-changing concept of criminal responsibility

The identification of a neural basis behind criminal behavior has raised a reconsideration of the crucial issue of criminal responsibility. As Richard Dawkins states, “A truly scientific, mechanistic view of the nervous system make[s] nonsense of the very idea of responsibility”. On the contrary, others believe that such scientific evidence can help establish criminal responsibility and aid the prosecution of crime. In hope of a reformation of the criminal justice system, Sapolsky emphasizes the need of treatment, not punishment, and envisions that neurocriminology will bring a “world of criminal justice in which there is no blame and only prior causes”.

Recent advancements in neuroscience have changed our perception on various societal issues; for example, drug addiction is considered from being a personal responsibility before to a multi-faceted disease now. The novel interdisciplinary field of neurolaw attempts to address this change of public perception of crime and how it may affect practices in the legal system, either to predict or convict crime. Despite the growing interest in this field, it is important to comprehend the limits of the neuroscientific tools available and draw the line between scientific facts and what is termed as normative in legal and social practices.

The mind of a psychopath deciphered

The first case to suggest the brain’s role in determining personality occurred due to Phineas’ Gage extraordinary case study. In 1848, Gage, an American railroad worker was accidentally involved in an accident, resulting in an iron rod penetrating his left prefrontal cortex. According to descriptions of the time, he turned overnight from a kind, reliable man, to a disinhibited, unreliable individual. Since then, further research into the prefrontal cortex links damage to it with antisocial behaviour and impaired impulse control.

It is important to consider that as a society we do not punish violent acts altogether but we punish them in the wrong context and the prefrontal cortex (PFC) has been proven to be involved in learning and imposing context. Research has shown that the main role of the PFC is to bias the individual into doing the harder rather than the easiest thing; essentially the backbone of our civilized society. Rats possessing a lesioned PFC , compared to normal rats, are unable to postpone their gratification to get a bigger food reward after some delay and instead opt for the most impulsive choice of instant gratification but lesser reward.

Research conducted by Adrian Raine, one of the first neuroscientists to investigate psychopathy using neuroimaging, highlights the starring role of the prefrontal cortex and its association with the impaired emotional processing in psychopaths and individuals exhibiting antisocial behavior. Although Raine is enthusiastic about the promising possibilities of neurocriminology in the future, he acknowledges that our exaggerated reliance on neuroscientific evidence could introduce dangerous implications to our free will agency. As an alternative, he proposes that neuroimaging can be best employed to support partial responsibility of guilt and possibly implement mitigating factors in the courtroom.

Neuroscience in the courtroom

One of the most memorable instances of bringing up criminal responsibility was the McNaughton insanity defence rule that first appeared in the 19th century. This test of insanity requires that the perpetrator, because of some mental disease, was unable to understand the nature or quality of the act that he or she performed, or did not know that the act was wrong. This rule was heavily criticized, mainly about its dismissal of impaired volition in certain mental health cases. Now that our understanding of the PFC and its role in regulating behavior is developed, we can understand how an individual that is frontally damaged may be able to differentiate between what’s right or wrong, but unable to act upon that knowledge.

A more recent case of neuroscientific evidence used to influence court decision was the Roper vs. Simmons case that was considered by many as signifying a new era of neuroscience applied in the courtroom. In 1994, Christopher Simmons, 17 at the time, brutally murdered a young woman and was not sentenced to death because of an appeal of the defence to neuroscientific evidence regarding the immaturity of the adolescent brains, citing the lack of complete myelination of cortical neurons in adolescents. While advocates for juveniles saw this as a triumph, other neuroscientists and psychologists believed that neurolaw was turning in the wrong direction.

Stephen Morse in what he highlights as the “brain overclaim syndrome” , meaning the increasing attempts of neuroscientists to find causation of behaviour using imaging techniques, when in fact they don’t know causation. For him, neurolaw should not bring disputes regarding criminal responsibility or function in an exculpatory way; ‘to treat persons otherwise is to treat them as less than human’.

Tereza Bountioukou is currently pursuing her Bachelor’s Degree in Neuroscience at the Universe of Bristol. She has volunteered in Ithaca Laundry and has organized a fundraising event to raise funds for Steps in an attempt to alleviate poverty and improve the lives of people living in street conditions. She is a member of the British Neuroscience Association (BNA) and Data Science Society of the University of People. She has been awarded the Bristol PLUS Award for her extracurricular activities. She is fluent in English and Greek and advanced in French and Spanish.

Neuralink – Black Mirror’s Next Unreleased Episode

Sun, 11 Apr 2021 21:35:29 GMT

NEUROETHICS

Neuralink – Black Mirror’s Next Unreleased Episode

Elon Musk, after his success with SpaceX and Tesla Motors, has focused his gaze onto something far closer, our own brains. In 2016, he created “Neuralink”, an overambitious – as some people would say -company, that is primarily working on the production of the “Link”.

By Adriana Papasavva Ortiz

April 11, 2021

The Link is a neural implant, or more simplistically a chip with a number of micro-electrodes, which are inserted into the brain and connect to several neurons. It has the size of a coin and once it is placed in the skull, no one would know that you are carrying it (at least if you have substantially long hair). Additionally, Neuralink’s team is working on the development of a robotic system that a neurosurgeon will use to successfully insert the electrodes.

But what is the problem?

Neuralink’s main goal according to its official website, is to let you control a computer or mobile device anywhere you go , something possible through the processing, stimulation and transmission of electrical signals to specific neurons, to imitate the communication of normal neural signalling. However, Elon Musk himself, stated in a product presentation that took place in August 2020, that Neuralink’s goal is to solve “important spine and brain problems” with an affordable and user-friendly device. These problems include blindness, paralysis, insomnia, addiction and generally all sorts of diseases that have to do with the nervous system. Not only that, but he also stated that the Link could be used to share data to our friends, save memories and even entertain us by playing music.

Apart from the informational contradiction and inaccuracy that exists around the company’s ultimate intentions, we also have to consider the limits of neuroscience. Currently, brain reading technology is being developed, but it’s still in a primitive stage. Scientists have achieved to create computational models that encode and decode brain activity from specific areas of the brain – like high level visual area s – however, they still don’t produce highly accurate results about semantic relationships. So, it seems almost delusional that a chip would be able to send specific messages, such as colours, to decode largely complex processes, as emotions, activate specific neurons in synchrony to play music, and on top of that cure diseases such as Alzheimer’s and epilepsy.

The Internet and our Brains

As these goals seem rose-coloured, we owe to process the potential negative impacts of such an advancement. The digitalisation of our society has undeniably ameliorated numerous aspects of our lives, but it has also taken a toll on our privacy. The mere use of several platforms on the internet helps the – notorious – algorithm understand better what we like, so as to present us more attractive and personalised posts and advertisements, something we comply with in exchange of using a particular app for free.

Do the phrases “Terms and Conditions” and “Privacy Statement” sound familiar? Probably, but we all know that nobody actually reads them, however, they include a tricky section that you should be aware of. Usually, the company expresses that if our personal data end up in the hands of “third party companies”, they will not bear any responsibility for the use they will make. These mysterious companies create individual profiles composed of our interactions on the internet and then sell them to companies that want to increase their sales, by getting a better understanding of their customers. So, in all probability, an extensive list of things you like and repel you, constituting your profile, is floating in a huge computer, waiting to be sold.

Our sense of privacy has been also threatened through the development of facial recognition. Here the theory of obscurity plays an important role, as it states that “information is safe – at least to some degree - when it is hard to obtain or understand”. In contrast, “Yandex” a Russian browsing tool, allows you by uploading an image of a person to find available photos on the internet of them. So, when platforms allow you to find personal photos of random people you may encounter with in the streets, this poses a menace to the sense of anonymity. At the same time, our online behaviour is pretty paradoxical; we live increasingly lonely lives yet we share plenty of personal details. This complex behaviour is known as the privacy paradox . So, our transparent behaviour on social media contributes to the creation of a vicious cycle.

The Link and our brains

So, coming back to our main subject, if at some point in the future, a chip that allows us to have direct access into people’s minds is developed, how are we going to ensure that it is going to be used ethically? Taking into consideration how naively we have used the internet until now, what are going to be the consequences when we’ll interact with A.I. without filtering our actions through our thumbs? How is that information going to be used? Will the chip be able to affect our subconscious levels of information processing?

The only sure thing is that this whole story can propel our imagination into a dystopian science fiction story. If in the end a chip like that is developed, it would be interesting if only for once we don’t let history repeat itself, and actually take action and encounter the variety of ethical issues that could arise, before it is too late.

Adriana Papasavva is completing her bachelor’s degree in Neuroscience at the University of Bristol. She holds the Bristol Plus Award for her extracurricular activities. She is a member of the British Neuroscience Association and the Data Science Society of the University of Bristol. She has received the iKEEP project training for business intrapreneurship, organised by the University of Exeter. She has published literary articles in magazines such as ‘El Pensador’. She is fluent in Greek, Spanish, English, and French.

John Snow, Cholera and Democracy

Sun, 11 Apr 2021 21:35:26 GMT

OPEN DATA

John Snow, Cholera & Democracy

Democratizing data and its access represents an important means of keeping the government in check and ensuring it takes proportionate decisions, adapted to the situation. This is even more important in situations such as the pandemic, during which many governments have tended to bypass parliamentary power when implementing restrictions.

By Nathan Lefievre

April 11, 2021

On January 22, 2020, more than a month before the World Health Organisation (WHO) declared the Covid-19 a pandemic, John Hopkins University unveiled its global coronavirus tracker . Today a wide variety of trackers can be found online, but John Hopkins’s remains a reference in coronavirus data visualisation and a great step for data democratization. While the WHO was publishing daily reports of the virus spread, shown in tables and numbers, the University’s tracker proved a clear and simple way of obtaining information on the pandemic, via charts, curves and maps. The University’s initiative is an excellent example of the importance and benefits of open data for democracy in times of crisis.

The Covid-19 pandemic has undeniably affected and weakened democracy and human rights protection across the globe: 70% of countries covered by The Economist ’s Democracy Index have recorded a decline in their overall score . But on a more positive note, the pandemic has proved a significant catalyst for the development of open data and open science. There are of course serious concerns that, considered as an end in itself, open science can reinforce the strength of surveillance capitalism – by legitimizing the collection of health data by Big Tech companies for example . However, in the context of the pandemic, open data – if provided in an effort of data democratization – can have major positive consequences for the spread and control of the virus.

All over the globe, scientists have kept repeating for the past year that to tame the spread of the virus, governments need to step out of the fog. In order to take timely decisions, adapted to the situation, the most public data available is needed. But the need for public data to deal with epidemics did not appear with the Covid-19. It takes its roots in the 1854 cholera epidemic in London. At the time, the disease was thought to be transmitted by miasmas. However, a doctor named John Snow – not that one – does not believe in this theory and attempts to study the spread of the disease in the Soho neighbourhood. By marking the houses affected by the disease and cross checking the data with a map, the doctor found a link with a public water pump in Broad Street, proving that the disease is transmitted by water and not by air . As early as 1854, John Snow had proven the need for public, open data for governments and citizens alike.

In 2016, the French Parliament passed the Law for a Digital Republic, stating that any data must become public except if it presents too sensitive information. On the dedicated website, data.gouv.fr , one can today find thousands of public datasets from bacteriological analysis of public drinking water to the list of all objects owned by the French state . Since its launch, the website and data made available have mostly been used by scientists and researchers, rather than the public. But the Covid-19 pandemic has put the website in the foreground in France, being reused by citizens to display in a clear and easy to understand manner the numbers of the pandemic: daily cases, incidence rate, share of variants, etc.

Through their work, made possible by the opening of data, any citizen can follow in a precise manner the evolution of the pandemic and thus, understand the stakes and adapt their behaviour . By increasing transparency and justifying the decisions, open data can reduce the prevalence of conspiracy theories and improve the relationship between citizens and their governments. Additionally, providing citizens with such data can increase the likeliness that they will accept and adhere to the necessary restrictions to be implemented.

Indeed, in times of crisis, having access to clear, precise and up-to-date data is the key to manage and reduce risks. Open data is key to such risk management, as it gives to every individual the power to understand the risks and challenges. As such, individuals can become actors of the crisis by acting as informed agents who can take timely and relevant decisions to reduce the impact of such disasters. International initiatives such as Our World in Data, the Worldometer, have demonstrated the importance of open data by offering to the world easily accessible global and country-specific information on the spread of the virus. Such initiatives have truly shown the power and relevance of civil society initiatives in times of crisis when governments and international bodies could not or did not wish to provide such amount of information in a clear fashion.

Knowledge is a key component of any democratic regime. In order to fully enjoy their democratic rights citizens must be aware of them and of their limits. Moreover, knowledge allows any individual to take part and sustain the public debate. Democratizing data and its access represents an important means of keeping the government in check and ensuring it takes proportionate decisions, adapted to the situation. This is even more important in situations such as the Covid-19 pandemic, during which many governments have tended to bypass parliamentary power when implementing restrictions.

Open data should be a key component of any modern democratic regime. By providing every citizen with crucial knowledge on a wide variety of topics, governments can stem the rise of populist threats that often rely on fake information to gain influence. Finally, open data is absolutely necessary for democracies in times of crisis, by harnessing the power and expertise of each and every citizen, making them an actor of the country’s resilience.

Nathan is in the first year of a dual Master in European Affairs and Public Policy between Sciences Po Paris and the National University of Singapore. He has previously worked for the International Action Network on Small Arms on Gender-Based Armed Violence and with the Institute for Sustainable Energy Policies.

Surveillance - A Real Threat to Information Security and Journalism

Sun, 11 Apr 2021 21:35:22 GMT

PRIVACY

Surveillance - A Real Threat to Information Security and Journalism

Why the German basic right to the internet is at stake.

By Pia Staudenmaier

April 11, 2021

Whenever there is a new surveillance law that affects digital systems, people interested in internet politics are up in arms against it, plainest to see on Twitter . However, the outrage is usually not something that has a great effect on the legislation. A few representatives may also feel related to those interested in data protection and the freedom and security online, but after all, the surveillance laws usually pass. By protests on the streets, especially with so-called 'freedom not fear' demonstrations, privacy activists also tried to gain attention for topics such as data retention policies and government spying malware.

However, all of this only had a very limited effect and was mostly ignored by lawmakers. So civil rights activists filed constitutional complaints, which lead to two interesting decisions by the Federal Constitutional Court in Germany in 2008 and 2016, restricting the use of trojans used for government surveillance and, by the opinion of some computer experts, practically making lawful use of them technologically impossible.

Why should anyone care for their country's criminal procedure law?

Criminal procedure law regulates the manner in which executive power conducts criminal law cases. Most people believe it does not concern them, but this might be just a little short-sighted. The new legislation changed inter alia §§ 100a and 100b of the Code of Criminal Procedure which gives investigation authorities the right to access the information technology system e.g. your computer or smartphone. There are many ways to get access to private systems without the person being aware of it. It is most likely either through a phishing email or by exploiting existing security gaps. It would then be possible to read every conversation on the phone, see all pictures and data and access the camera. This leads to the following problems.

Firstly, federal authorities have an interest in systems having security gaps. Which means security gaps that are yet unknown to the companies are of use and can be exploited. Ultimately, the security gaps will not be reported but rather kept secret. This means the government would actively support it. This will help cybercriminals, and it will lower information security. This is not just a fictional scenario but actually what happened when NSA's "EternalBlue" exploit was leaked and used for the WannaCry ransomware, which caused billions of euros in damage.

Secondly, as authoritarian governments can exploit the security gaps, investigative journalism will be a great deal harder and riskier. Two journalists in exile in Germany joined an appeal to the constitutional court initiated by the society for civil rights ( Gesellschaft für Freiheitsrechte - GFF ). Both did research on their government's wrongdoing and are therefore constantly under pressure whilst receiving threatening messages. They claim that security gaps in their phones and computers are most likely to be life-endangering for them. Since anyone could use them to hack into their phones and computers to find sensitive information or even the current location. This is yet another obstacle for people who are fighting for the truth and for the people who are willing to help journalists since the informants will risk their lives likewise.

Another raw point of the use of surveillance software is the validity of evidence extracted with it or such evidence that is later found on an infected device since the software could be used to tamper with evidence as well.

The Fundamental Right to the Guarantee of the Confidentiality and Integrity of Information Technology Systems

In 2008 Germany's constitutional court ruled that the general right of personality encompasses the fundamental right to the guarantee of the confidentiality and integrity of information technology systems. Since a majority of people have computers today and they are used for different purposes, such as for comprehensive administration and archiving of an individual's personal and business matters, as a digital library or for entertainment. Computers are therefore a significant part of personal development.

This increases when the systems are connected through the internet, where many types of communication services help the individual maintain active social contacts. The society for civil right s says in the constitutional complaint, "modern information technology systems resemble an outsourced part of the brain". This being said, one wonders why the federal authorities should have more access. So far, it has already been possible to listen and read all ongoing conversations.

The court ruled in 2008 that the secret infiltration shall only be legitimate "if factual indications exist of a concrete danger to a predominantly important legal interest." Which are the life, limb, and freedom of the individual or such interests of the public a threat to which affects the basis or continued existence of the state or the basis of human existence. This restriction applies to broad surveillance. The new legislation thus could avoid it because it is suppose d to permit reading ongoing conversations solely. In a commentary to the Committee on Legal Affairs and Consumer Protection, Dr. iur. Ulf Buermeyer said it is not possible to distinguish the two procedures from a technological perspective and argued there is no way to control what the authorities will do.

Hence the risk that all the sensitive data will be read, be it on purpose or even negligently, without the strict limitation is hig h. The extended use of this technology, therefore, violates not only fundamental IT rights but also the fundamental rights of others. Experts in the technological field also argue this way; for example, the Chaos Computer Club issued a statement where they demanded that the so-called "Quellen-TKÜ" should be treated equally as an online search of the devices stored data, for which the German Federal Constitutional Court set the mentioned high bar requirements. (The "Quellen-TÜK" is the lawful interception of the communication data on the device before it gets encrypted).

This expertise was mostly ignored by the federal government as well as by several governments of German states, who introduced the "Quellen-TKÜ" their new police legislation without meeting the requirements for an online search of the device. It looks like security authorities and domestic politics did not accept yet that classical wire tapping times are over. This leads to an inflated number of cases where government malware is supposed to be used. As the icing on the cake, just a few months ago, even intelligence services were given the competence to use this kind of method to gain access to telecommunication data, despite severe warnings from the federal data protection officer and several civil rights organisations.

Closing remarks

Coming back to the protest on Twitter. Unfortunately, the protest did not have the desired reach. However, the next outrage against the so-called "Staatstrojaner" is probably only a matter of time. The game the government seems to play also keeps to be the same, even if the laws do not fulfill the court's requirements, there are always a few years until the next decision is made in Karlsruhe, and up until then, the surveillance is in effect.

Pia Staudenmaier holds a bachelor of law from Freie Universität Berlin. She specialized in international law at Stockholm University with the main focus on human rights and data privacy law in the US and Europe. She worked for a technology-based Law Firm and in a legal tech startup. She was speaking at the Legal Tech Summer School 2019. In the Law and Technology Circle, she is part of the Digital Human Rights Team, focusing on data privacy.

Equal Access to Education in the Digital Age

Sun, 11 Apr 2021 21:35:19 GMT

DIGITAL INCLUSION

Equal Access to Education in the Digital Age

The Covid 19 pandemic has accelerated the transition to digital education which shows great potential. It simultaneously threatens to increase the inequality gap as less fortunate communities do not have access to the technologies that make digital learning possible.

By Signe Wolf Børm

April 11, 2021

Julio Cesar Gonzales Becerra

The issue of education during a pandemic

Society today finds itself in an era of digital revolution with technologies promising a more efficient and effective society. During the Covid-19 pandemic, we depended on the digital world to maintain societal interests, such as education. In order to hinder the virus from spreading too rapidly and thereby getting out of control, national authorities have shifted to the online sphere. Irrespective of national governments actions to move education online, it should be questioned whether ethical standards are upheld and in this context examine whether human rights are honored, specifically the right to education.

Definition and legal context

Digital human rights encompass the idea that human rights must be respected in a digital environment, i.e. it can be considered an extension of the ´´traditional definition of human rights´´, to the digital environment . Considering the right to access in light of the Covid-19 pandemic such rights now also include the right to education, as this today largely takes place digitally to stop the spread of the coronavirus. In this connection, the following question arises; does the fact that education is now conducted online affect students and their human rights specifically the right to education? This question is essential since education has been moved ; online it is possible that we exclude a part of the population, resulting in societal inequality being reinforced through the failure to grant universal access to the digital world. Digital rights should therefore be considered a fundamental right as it lays the base of the right to exercise a number of other human rights.

It should firstly be noted, that the right to education is ensured in a number of international and Regional Treaties, amongst those being the Convention on the Rights of the Child (general Comment No.13), the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (Article 26), the European Charter of Human Rights (Article 2 Protocol 1), and the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (Article 11). This means that ratifying states should ensure access to education is granted in all parts of society and as the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has stated, education in all forms and on all levels shall be: available, accessible, acceptable, and adaptable. This clearly illustrates that where this is not the case, measures must be taken to ensure such.

Solutions to ensure education for all

One may assume that a stable internet connection is a given in our modern world however this is far from the truth. Access to education has become increasingly difficult during the pandemic but it is particularly the most vulnerable that suffer , which leads to an increased risk of school dropouts. Overall, we are facing an increasing gap between positive learning outcomes, as well as a generation of students with serious deficits in their education. It is clear that states have struggled to respond to Covid at a pace matching the speed with which the pandemic developed. A number of initiatives have already been taken to combat the issue however, greater measures on an international scale are required. One solution to the issue could be the creation of a treaty on the right of everyone in the digital age. Such a solution would encompass the need to include technological changes of this era and the societal changes this brings about into the fundamental rights framework.

Conclusion

Overall, it has become clear that the digitalization of education might be the future of learning as it may afford some individuals with greater opportunity and easier access to education. It has simultaneously made it more difficult for particularly vulnerable individuals to access education. Resources not being accessible to students and difficulties for educators to carry out their work will most likely lead to an educational gap in the future. A gap which must be limited by ensuring equal access to education. This necessitates consideration as to how the right to education can be ensured. One option worth considering is a Treaty on Digital Human Rights.

Considering this, in the context of the ongoing pandemic, it is necessary to work towards ensuring all students have access to the resources necessary to obtain their education, including laptops, the internet and in some cases even electricity.

Signe Wolf Børm is completing her Master's degrees in International Technology law at the Vrije Universitet Amsterdam and in European Competition Law and Regulation at the University of Amsterdam. As an undergraduate, she studied European Law at Maastricht University. Through her studies and internships she has specialized within the field of technology and law. She has moreover applied her legal background in the development of the Digital Human Rights Lawyer at the Public and International Law and Policy Group.

Free Speech vs Misinformation - The Imperative Role of State Legislation

Sun, 11 Apr 2021 21:35:17 GMT

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION

Free Speech vs Misinformation -

The Imperative Role of State Legislation

Freedom of expression is a component of the human act of communication and interaction within society; the Human Rights Commission states that freedoms of opinion and expression constitute the ‘foundation stone[s] for every free and democratic society’.

By Kar Lok Pang

April 11, 2021

Dmitry S

Potential for denigration of human rights

Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights enshrines freedom of expression as a fundamental human right, and this has been accorded recognition in the constitutions of many jurisdictions across the world. The constitutional right to freedom of expression is protected by Article 10 of the Human Rights Act in the United KIngdom, and the concomitant right to free speech is protected by the First Amendment in the United States.

However, freedom of expression is not an absolute right. Governments have restricted freedom of expression in the form of public assemblies where there is a perceived or actual threat to wider societal interests. For instance, while Article 14(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of Singapore guarantees citizens the right to freedom of speech and expression, Human Rights Watch reports that ‘the Singapore government’s use of overly broad criminal laws, oppressive regulations, and civil lawsuits severely curtails freedom of speech and assembly’.

Freedom of expression may not be absolute, yet it is an indisputably important right that cannot be abolished altogether. As such, constitutional protection serves as a public guarantee against complete erosion. That said, recent developments have sometimes been used as justification for limiting freedom of expression, which has arguably become more important in the digital age where speech need not be verbal in nature.

Social media

The 2011 Arab Spring saw social media being harnessed as a tool to spread democracy, but social media is only a tool. Social media users are especially susceptible to believe misinformation. A tool can be used for both good and evil, and there are signs of the tool being used in the opposite direction of late. The increasing reach of governments into the corporate sphere, as well as the insidious collection of user data without explicit channels for informed consent, point towards the potential of digital technologies to do more harm than good.

In particular, the advent of social media has shifted the public construction of human rights as dispensable — in some instances the wider public interest of societal stability is understandably justified, yet the potential for abuse of power by the state is not curtailed, given the lack of government transparency in the absence of constitutional checks and balances.

Misinformation and the rise of fake news

Popularised by Donald Trump in his presidential campaign, the term ‘ fake news ’ is in fact no stranger to public vocabulary. It is reported that ‘false news reached more people than the truth; the top 1% of false news cascades diffused to between 1000 and 100,000 people, whereas the truth rarely diffused to more than 1000 people’. Fake news threaten accessibility to accurate, unbiased, and objective information sources, leading to widened cracks in the delicate fabric of social cohesion in an increasingly multicultural and pluralistic world. It is up to governments to straddle the difficult question of balancing the right to freedom of expression with curbing the threat of fake news. Worryingly, false information seems to peak during election periods.

Given the availability of fact-checking tools and resources, and greater awareness of the phenomenon in the political psyche of the public, it is submitted that state interference needs to (i) be limited to particular circumstances, (ii) transparently communicated, and (iii) err on the side of caution more often than not. To do otherwise would open the proverbial floodgates to abuse of power that has no place in a modern society built on the ideals of human autonomy.

The imperative role of the state

What states should not do

Social media has transformed the landscape in which human rights operate, but the role of the state in protecting human rights remains the same. It is important to adopt a considered approach towards perceiving fake news and developing an appropriate response to tackle any problems that may arise. To this end, states should not:

Manipulate transmission of information via social media for the purposes of election manipulation (‘cyber troop’ activity in India ); or
Cut off access to social media to mask oppressive regimes (2021 Myanmar junta coup).

What states should do

States play many roles in social coordination, from normative aspects related to upholding human rights, to regulating the promotion of different perspectives while serving public interests. Since legislation passed by the state has a pervasive reach within individual jurisdictions, it is imperative that states remain accountable for their actions.

States should:

Develop educational campaigns to increase general public savviness (2020 summer of digital activism );
Work alongside industry stakeholders to strengthen existing digital infrastructure and promote press freedom;
Only wield legislation sparingly and in clear, unambiguous language, considering its utility as a social tool with communicative purposes.

In summary, governments have much to do (and not do) in regulating free speech. Ultimately, transparency must be demanded for, by setting precedents and following detailed qualifications when potentially infringing human rights.

Kar Lok Pang is a law undergraduate at the University of Oxford. He is a researcher in the Digital Human Rights team under Law & Technology. Kar Lok is interested in promoting state accountability, harnessing law as a force for good, and the impact of technology on regulatory and human rights issues.

Earth Observation & Climate Change

Thu, 25 Mar 2021 20:26:21 GMT

ABOUT

You can’t fix what you can’t see. Discussing the role of Earth Observation in monitoring environmental change and how this can contribute to reaching global climate targets. Climate change is having serious impacts in the planet’s atmosphere and ecosystems. Accurate environmental data is key for scientists to understand, assess and predict the impact of the climate crisis and for policy-makers to advance effective strategies to mitigate and adapt to climate change. However, monitoring environmental changes is not an easy task. Satellites offer bird’s eye views that can reveal patterns and track changes that are hard to detect from the ground. The science of Earth Observation (EO) is living a golden age, following recent breakthroughs in satellite design and launch operations, coupled with recent advancements in spatial resolution and Artificial Intelligence (AI). What is the space sector space of art? What is the role of satellites and AI in the fight against climate change? How can EO data improve environmental monitoring?

SPEAKERS

Grace Mitchell is a Data Scientist at the environmental tech nonprofit, WattTime. WattTime’s mission is to give everyone the power to choose clean energy. The organization’s core products are marginal emissions data, AER solutions, and consulting. In 2019, Grace led a project proposal that was awarded a $1.7M grant from Google.org. The project is now a part of Climate TRACE, a coalition of over 10 organizations in collaboration with former US VP, Al Gore. At WattTime, Grace works on data pipelines and modeling power plant generation and emissions. This data will eventually enable more effective and transparent climate policy and strategy. Grace is also the co-lead of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion for Women+ in Geospatial, as well as a mentor for Omdena.

Dr. Rochelle Schneider is a Research Fellow in Artificial Intelligence for Earth Observation (AI4EO) at the European Space Agency (ESA). Rochelle is an advocate of extracting knowledge from satellite technologies to health applications (Space4health), unlocking the generation of global impact.

Launching Project Aristotle

Fri, 12 Mar 2021 17:27:59 GMT

PROGRAMS

Launching 'Project Aristotle'

Sanskriti Sanghi & Siddhant Chatterjee

March 12, 2021

Can a structure of governance for the digital realm be achieved? Which values would it prioritize? Who would be its stakeholders? If these questions intrigue you, keep reading to learn about our flagship project and how you can participate in it! We invite legal aid clinics, research centres, pro bono committees, student organizations interested in conducting impactful research, as well as independent researchers, experts and students to participate in Project Aristotle!

Project Aristotle will be conducted as a clinic on comparative constitutional law and policy in which our endeavour is to prepare a research guide on what a structure of governance for the digital realm can look like when it is informed by interdisciplinary country-specific legal and policy research and analysis. The project shall aim at understanding how, politically, philosophically, legally, and socially, constitutional models which are proven ( in a certain sense ) structures of governance in the physical world can be translated into the virtual world, whether they even should, and to what extent.

By participating in, you will be involved in cutting edge research and be part of a global network of thinkers aspiring to influence the architecture of the digital ecosystem.If you would like to collaborate with us, please fill out the following form .

Privacy & Covid-19

Tue, 09 Mar 2021 21:40:02 GMT

ABOUT

Governments are taking unprecedented steps to track, trace, contain and mitigate the spread of Covid-19 by resorting to digital technologies and advanced analytics to collect, analyse and share data for front-line responses. Data is essential for efficiently tackling the pandemic and forecasting the spread of the virus, to assess the resources of health care systems and to evaluate the efficacy of policies restricting the movement of individuals. While contact-tracing technologies can be useful to limit the spread of the virus, if left unchecked, they can also be misused for extensive collection and sharing of personal data, mass surveillance, limiting individual freedoms and challenging democratic governance. Transparency and effective communication are not solely dictated by data protection objectives. They are crucial for establishing public trust in the emergency measures taken and a broad compliance hereto as a requisite for effective democratic governance. Join us for a discussion with young experts sharing their insights from their respective jurisdictions about the effects of regulatory measures on the right to privacy.

SPEAKERS

Dr. jur. Ma. Angela Leonor Aguinaldo, J.D., LL.M. is an Attorney at Law; specializes also in EU and ASEAN affairs, Criminology, International (Criminal) Law, international cooperation in criminal matters, and online evidence. She was a member of the Max Planck Institute for the Study of Crime, Security and Law and the International Max Planck School for Comparative Criminal Law when she finished her Ph.D. degree from the Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg with magna cum laude honors.

Daniel Becker is partner at Lima ≡ Feigelson Advogados and Director of New Technologies at the Brazilian Center for Mediation and Arbitration (CBMA). Dispute resolution attorney focusing on contractual disputes from regulated sectors. Invited professor at several institutions, frequent speaker and author of several articles published in national and international books and magazines on the topics of arbitration, civil procedure, regulation and technology. Organizer of the books “Tomorrow Lawyer”, “Regulation 4.0, vol. I and II”, "Litigation 4.0" and “Comments on the Brazilian Data Protection Law”, all of them published in Portuguese by Thomson Reuters.

Merel van Gils works as a human rights lawyer for 'Climate Justice through the Courts'. She has participated at International Humanitarian Law Clinic of the Kalshoven-Gieskes Forum on International Humanitarian Law. She holds a B.A. in law from Leiden University and a M.A. in criminal law and public international law from the University of Amsterdam and Leiden University, respectively.

Alina Škiljić, CIPP/E, is a Croatian lawyer primarily focused on data protection and privacy law, corporate law and technology transactions. She graduated from the University of Zagreb and is currently working as a third-year associate in the Zagreb office of the global law firm. She is an active member of the International Association of Privacy Professionals and is currently serving a one-year Young Privacy Professional - volunteer mandate in Croatia. She has been published several times in international law journals and has previously interned in the European Parliament and participated in projects of the European Court of Human Rights.

Vinitika Vij is a lecturer at Jindal Global Law School secured her B.A. LL.B. (Hons.) from Jindal Global Law School in 2018. She acquired her LL.M. in International Law from the University of Cambridge in 2019. Her area of interest is public international law, mainly international trade law, IP law, investment law, international environmental law and international criminal law. Her research areas focus on the various linkages between these fields. Her previous publications have explored contemporary issues in public international law, especially international trade law. She has also been associated with the Geneva-Georgetown Trade Lab.

Collective Intelligence - A New Path for Journalism

Sun, 07 Mar 2021 21:11:12 GMT

LIQUID INTELLIGENCE

Collective Intelligence - A New Path For Journalism

What the modern challenges for mainstream investigative journalism are and how an interdisciplinary collaboration can overcome them.

By Sonia Sangiovanni

March 7, 2021

Five months after being poisoned with a nerve agent called Novichok, the Russian opposition leader and activist Alexei Navalny returned to Moscow. As his flight landed in the Russian capital, border police detained him on the basis of violated terms of probation. His unjust incarceration, however, was not the only cause for public protests across Russia. A two-hours long documentary on Putin’s secret palace was released by Navalny’s team on the same day.

Through an in-depth investigation that involved aerial and satellite imagery, open source data, leaked documents and 3D modelling, the video uncovered not only the lavish luxury of the Russian President, but also his corruption schemes and abuses of power.

Beyond its striking revelations, the documentary showcased new roads for investigative journalism. The same technology used by intelligence services can, in fact, be at the service of the fourth estate. To do so, however, it’s necessary to follow unbeaten paths. Driving away from the traditional tools of journalism, reporters can now fight against the threats of digital surveillance by joining a new interdisciplinary movement based on collective intelligence.

In this article, I want to explain what the modern challenges for mainstream investigative journalism are and how an interdisciplinary collaboration can overcome them. As this collective approach to journalistic investigations is still at its early stages, I will also introduce some of the leading initiatives in this field, hoping to inspire the readers of this article in rethinking the traditional power structures of surveillance and intelligence.

Liquid intelligence against traditional investigative journalism

As I explained in the previous article , my theory on liquid intelligence is a grim one. Secret services and private intelligence companies are described as more powerful than ever: thanks to globalisation and our digitalized society, they can now oversee vast populations and single out individuals, by accessing their private information almost instantaneously. As the focus of intelligence agencies depends on both the regime and national agenda of each country, investigative journalists can be targeted for various reasons. Beyond the tragic cases in which they are considered political enemies, they might also be spied on, in order to access a particular network and information.

As multiple researchers have argued after the Snowden’s revelations in 2013, being aware of governmental mass surveillance, like a panopticon, can create a “chilling effect” . By introducing potential private intelligence companies to the mix, the threat of being hacked and spied on becomes even more real for journalists and activists. On this matter, Dan McCrum, John Scott-Railton, Lorenzo Franceschi-Bicchierai and Runa Sandvik shared a great testimony at the panel discussion I’ve been hacked! for the Logan Symposium, organized by the Centre for Investigative Journalism . The four speakers shared their stories and struggles, while reporting on cyber spying and hacking companies. From having their sources leaked, to living with excessive paranoia, they all had to look for alternative routes to protect themselves and their work.

The outcome of being silently spied on can have tragic consequences for journalists. Even the late Jamal Kashoggi might have been one of the victims of cyber spying. As it was reported by the Citizen Lab , Omar Abdulaziz, a Saudi opposition activist and collaborator of Kashoggi was being spied by the NSO group, at the time of the murder. While it’s unclear whether or not the tapping might have been linked to the death of the journalist in the Saudi Consulate in Istanbul, we shouldn’t exclude the possibility that the information gathered through Abdullaziz’s device might have been used to target Kashoggi. As Ron Deibert, head of the Citizen Lab, commented in an interview for The Guardian , “even though software typically can’t kill people directly in the way that bullets can, the end result is often the same.”

Collective intelligence: a common fight for more democracy and transparency

Yet, globalization and a connected society can also be at the service of investigative journalism. While it might require breaking away from the traditional techniques of investigation, reporters can enhance their work through forms of “collective intelligence.” By collaborating with technologists, hackers, civil society and whistle-blowers, it is possible to both collect and analyse evidence of injustice and human rights abuses, despite the challenges of liquid intelligence.

However, how can we ensure that investigative journalists and civil society are not using, in their turn, intrusive technology against citizens? Like for Intelligence agencies, this is obviously not an easy question to answer, nor one to underestimate. Here are a few things to keep in mind.

First, while both journalists and intelligence agencies (along their contractors) might use similar tools, their approaches and goals are often different. As governmental intelligence focuses on national defence, its approach is often rooted in the so-called “security dilemma”: to take an advantage over my enemy and protect my citizens, I need to increase my defence tools; my enemy feels threatened by them and therefore increases its own resources. The need for opacity, in this case, becomes necessary in order to avoid con flicts ( As I did not want to derail the whole article into a debate over goals and scopes of national defence, please, forgive my reckless oversimplification).

O n the other hand, journalists need transparency to make their investigations reliable a nd verifiable. Their role, in fact, is to show an injustice as it’s made, rather than to predict one. For this reason, it’s important that the gathered data shows the facts in full transparency and that leaked information might be used only in case of necessity and after a thorough verification.

The second aspect to keep in mind is also the scale and scope of the investigation. In the case of secret services, the allocated resources for such operations are way higher than the journalistic ones. As a consequence, journalists need to rely on open source not only for transparency reasons, but also budgetary ones. The scalability of their operations is also limited by the scope of their work. While journalists might be interested in mapping a terrorist network just as much as an intelligence agency, it’s unlikely that they would do so in a similar capacity, as they won’t need that much data.

Nonetheless, while transparency is at the core of journalistic investigations, it’s still important to be sensible in how to use it. Sources need to be protected even when they share their content online and on social media, as they might be affected after the release of the investigation. Especially when using open source imagery, it’s up to the journalists to make sure that people are not just used as evidence of injustice, but they are also being protected from it.

These are obviously just some of the aspects to keep into consideration when using intelligence tools for journalism. Many more decisions will need to be made depending on the topic and related risks for the reporters, their sources and civil society at large. While these choices are not easy ones, the core of collective intelligence is also to find and share ethical advice with one another. As I will present in the next paragraphs, in this new ecosystem there are already a few organizations and initiatives that aim at helping reporters, researchers and whistle-blowers in how to protect themselves and others.

New investigative paths for a better and more democratic future

The most well-known platform for this type of investigative journalism is probably WikiLeaks. Over the years, the platform has helped to uncover multiple human rights abuses, such as those in the Afghan and Iraq wars. The added value of the platform for journalists is to quickly access leaked documents in a centralized way and to look for evidence independently. When using content from it, it is generally recommended to still treat the leaked material as such. This will obviously include verifying if it might be directly harmful to someone, how and why it has been leaked and whether or not it is supported by other evidence.

Open Source databases are also one of the most common collective solutions for investigative journalism. While they aren’t inherently new, they are often hard to analyse without any knowledge in data science. For this reason, collaboration with data-scientists and technologists can help journalists in accessing and analysing unprecedented amounts of information. Among some easy to access database initiatives for journalists, the following have also been recommended at the Logan Symposium on Collective Intelligence :

Opencorporates , one of the biggest open source databases on corporations across the globe. It is extremely easy to use and it proved to be particularly useful in case of fraud and corruption investigations.
OCCRP Aleph , it collects data from a variety of sources to “track assets and corporate ownership, government expenditure, and information on individuals and groups of journalistic interest”. It’s important to notice that the access to data is limited and reporters need to submit an official request. As explained on the website, this procedure has been put in place for “concerns about data protection and civil rights.”
Tech Inquiry, launched by a former Google employee and whistle-blower, it hosts a “Procurement and Lobby explorer” that allows to search for “entities and awards associated with US federal contracts, listed in the U.S.”

Two other initiatives that deserve to be mentioned are Bellingcat and Forensic Architecture .

The first one is an independent collective of researchers and digital investigators that analyse open source data (mostly imagery) in order to uncover human rights abuses. Their most important cases covered the use of chemical weapons in Syria, the disappearance of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17 over Ukraine and the Skripals poisoning. Thanks to their transparency and toolkits on how to conduct digital investigations, Bellingcat defines itself as “ An Intelligence Agency for the People .”

A similar title could equally be awarded to Forensic Architecture, an interdisciplinary collective that uses architecture and digital tools to report on human rights and violence abuses. Linked to the Goldsmith University of London, this research centre has produced compelling visualisations that have served both journalistic investigations and court cases. Among these, it’s worth mentioning the trial of the Greek Neo-Nazi group, Golden Dawn, for the murder of Pavlos Fyssas.

Another domain of collective intelligence is focused on the protection of journalists and their sources. As I explained before, the consequences of cyber spying can often have negative consequences in the offline world. For this reason, it is crucial that reporters can protect their devices and sources. To do so, there are already accessible encryption communications tools like the Signal App and Telegram. Another toolbox is the Security Planner by Consumer reports: created with the collaboration of the Citizen Lab, it provides free guides for staying safe online.

In case of sensitive information, leaked documents and contacts with whistle-blowers, journalists can also reach out to initiatives such as the Signals Network for Whistleblowers and Reporters without Borders . Both NGOs would be able to provide help and tools for protecting both journalists and their sources, from external harms. The latter can also assist them with physical security concerns, as well as legal advice.

These collective intelligence solutions are emerging out of a necessity: to empower journalists in their investigations. This type of collaboration allows them to investigate injustices and abuses of power, without facing the direct risks of being hacked, incarcerated or even killed. As stories like the ones of Kashoggi and Navalny continue to unfold, it is our duty to create safe spaces and platforms to continue to tell them. Even if that requires new collaborations and intelligence tools.

Sensitive Souls Connected

Sun, 07 Mar 2021 20:42:58 GMT

ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY

Sensitive Souls Connected

Why are some individuals more sensitive to their environment? And what is the neurobiology behind it? This blog article sheds light into the neurobiological trait sensory processing sensitivity, the historical development of the concept and the interplay between genes and environments.

By Nico Amiri

March 7, 2021

Numbers

Roughly three out of ten individuals are highly sensitive. That means that more than a quarter of society has a special trait and, that is, sensory processing sensitivity (SPS) - or high sensitivity. What does it mean exactly to be a highly sensitive person (HSP)? The trait refers to the intensity of processing internal and external stimuli, which is relatively higher in comparison to the non-highly sensitive portion of the general population, and higher empathy as well as increased emotional reactivity (Greven et al., 2019) .

Neurobiology

Both terminologies and the biopsychological concept were coined and developed by psychologist Elaine Aron and her husband Arthur Aron in 1996 and the years thereafter. In the early years of research, the trait was qualitatively measured by the Highly Sensitive Person Scale (HSPS) questionnaire (Booth et al., 2015) . Over the course of the last 20 years, the primary psychology-oriented research has been extended and enriched by gene and genome studies as well as brain imaging studies. The concept has been given a biomedical fundament.

There is a variety of genes, thought to play a crucial role in the neurobiological development of SPS. Among them there is the serotonin transporter, encoding for the corresponding gene 5’-HTTLPR gene. This gene is present in two variants: a short (S) and a long (L) variant. Each individual carries one gene (variant) from the mother and on from the father, thus there can either be S/S or S/L or L/L combinations in the offspring. Carriers of the two short variants are more likely to develop SPS and subsequently to be highly sensitive (Caspers et al., 2009) .

Genes and gene variants are one side of the coin, the other is the environment. There is epigenetics, for instance, referring to the package of DNA, for instance; it regulates if certain genes are actually translated into proteins and subsequent traits. Through so-called gene-environment interactions, the environment influences how the genetic ‘toolbox’ is used. In the case of SPS, the circumstances an individual lives in are crucial to determine how they are affected by their trait. This is called the differential-susceptibility hypothesis (Ellis et al., 2011) .

Figure 1. Illustration of the different models describing individual differences in Environmental Sensitivity: Diathesis-Stress (1.1) describes variability in response to adverse exposures, and Vantage Sensitivity (1.2) variability in response to supportive exposures, whereas the remaining three models Differential Susceptibility (1.3), Biological Sensitivity to Context (1.4), and Sensory Processing Sensitivity (1.5) describe individual differences in response to both negative and positive experiences. Consequently, Models 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5 reflect the combination of Models 1.1 and 1.2. Adapted from Figure 1 in “Individual Differences in Environmental Sensitivity” (Pluess, 2015) , Author: Mpluess, CC BY-SA 4.0 ,

As shown in Figure 1, the type of environmental exposure is crucial for the level of individual functioning. Negative exposures as, for instance, an adverse childhood, are reported to affect the highly sensitive person negatively (Aron et al., 2005) . A positive environment, however, can mean benefits for the HSP, as “developmental enhancements” (Ellis et al., 2011) .

To grasp the essence of this biopsychological model, we can, for the sake of simplicity assume that there is a dichotomy, meaning there are only two categories: highly-sensitive individuals and individuals without SPS. However, it has to be mentioned that there might be actually more than two categories. It could be the case that SPS is a ‘spectral’ trait: humans might be neither highly sensitive and empathetic or cold-hearted and non-empaths; it could rather be the case that the intricate play between (epi)genetics and the environment determines where on the spectrum an individual is located at a given time point in life.

Nico Amiri, 24, holds a bachelor’s degree of Biomedical Sciences from Maastricht University with a semester at the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, following a minor in neurosciences. As of September 2020, he is following a Research Master in Biomedical Sciences, specialising in Genetics & Genomics. His research interests are neurogenomics, sensory processing sensitivity, and Alzheimer’s Disease. He is a member of the Neuroethics cycle at the Institute for Internet & the Just Society.

Digital Enablers of Sharing Economy

Sun, 07 Mar 2021 20:21:55 GMT

SUSTAINABILITY

Digital Enablers of Sharing Economy

Most of the things each of us own stay unused most of the time. In the United States and the United Kingdom around 80% of all items owned are used less than once per month leaving a large amount of goods unused, when they could be useful elsewhere. The way of life of modern societies is characterized by growing consumption of resources, increasingly at the expense of the environment. A digital sharing economy offers a way for citizens to share, rent and replace under-utilized assets by the help of digital solutions and alleviate the pressure of the planet’s resources.

By Josephine Andersen

March 7, 2021

W hat is the sharing economy ?

Adding to the list of hyped solutions, the sharing economy might seem like yet another “green” approach that offers little but buzzwords. However, sharing is a basic premise of society. The sharing economy is a wide concept that covers different activities and services with the aim of increasing the circulation of assets by capitalizing on the underutilization of goods and products. It can be described as “consumers granting each other temporary access to under-utilized physical assets” . It is about consumer-to-consumer sharing through platforms where they provide each other with temporary access to a good, thus the transfer of ownership through second-hand shopping, or leasing of cars as an example, does not fall under the concept of the sharing economy. By making existing goods available for those who need it, the sharing economy seeks to develop efficient use of physical assets among citizens and typical goods that circulate in a sharing economy are cars, tools, clothes - even homes.

Environmental benefits of sharing

There is a strong consensus that new consumption patterns are needed to tackle the current overexploitation of natural resources and generation of greenhouse gases (GHGs) related to production. By enabling access over ownership, the sharing economy holds the potential to promote more sustainable consumption practices based on sharing can address contemporary urban challenges such as waste generation and local pollution, but also social aspects like unemployment and social segregation. As such, dematerialization of the economy through sharing, might offer a sustainable solution to the growing environmental and urban challenges. Sharing as a concept is by no means new, but by connecting citizens and their communities through digital platforms, the need for new products can be reduced by capitalizing on the idling capacity of underused assets.

Digital technologies as enabler of the sharing economy

The sharing economy is to a large extent ICT-enabled as it relies on technology to facilitate the sharing by providing access to information and mediating the exchange through apps or platforms. Such platforms can provide a faster access to goods, with no or low intermediary costs and innovative ways of offering services. Bike pools are well known and widely used across cities. U-bike is a Swedish municipal initiative for renting electric cargo bikes through the service platform Triply. Another example is Nabohjelp , an app for neighborhoods that allow the residents to borrow tools, sports equipment or other everyday objects for free by either searching for objects available for borrowing or making a request for a specific object.

By establishing the connection within communities digital technologies can help us to connect with strangers to rent and borrow. We have already observed several such solutions, with some of the most well-known such as the likes of AirBnb and Uber. However, these companies have provoked loud criticism for their impact on society and working practices and have added a dent to the idea of a digital sharing economy. An alternative to such models is a sharing economy in the form of more local solutions, steered by local municipalities. This can be referred to as the sharing city where municipalities or community organisations facilitate solutions that ensure delivery of public benefits and at the same time restricting those that might bring about negative impacts on society.

The city of Amsterdam was in 2015 named the first European Sharing City . Building on its experimental approach to digital transformation, the shareNL has fostered solutions such as Peerby , where citizens can rent or lend a wide range of tools, Barqo and GoBoat which connects boats that are unused 92% of the time which tourists and locals. The motivation for the city to encourage this development, aside from the facilitation of better access and more sustainable consumption, is the idea that the sharing economy cultivates interest in participation and contribution to the city by harnessing the connectivity provided by digital technologies.

Closing remarks

The environmental benefits of the sharing economy may seem obvious as it increases the utilization of already existing resources which should reduce the need for extraction of new resources. However, a significant research gap still exists concerning the benefits of the sharing economy and its possible rebound effects related to the circulation of goods and increased digitalization. If done right, the sharing economy can reduce the current negative impact from consumption and production and create greater access to resources by harnessing the possibilities of digital tools.

Josephine Andersen is a graduate student at Sciences Po Paris where she is completing her masters in International Public Management. She has a Bachelor degree in Political Science from the University of Oslo. She is currently an intern with the Centre for European Policy Studies in Brussels where she does research on European environmental and energy policies and she is involved in several research projects on circular economy. Josephine is fluent in English, Norwegian and Danish, and with basic knowledge in French.

Why Facebook´s Market Power Will Grow

Sun, 07 Mar 2021 20:21:40 GMT

BIG TECH

Why Facebook´s Market Power Will Grow

While Facebook seems to lose users in North America and Europe, its “Free Basics” initiative is about to tap a massive reservoir of potential users in developing countries.

By Marco Schmidt

March 7, 2021

Abdul Latif

Loss of importance?

Facebook is undoubtedly the biggest social media platform in the world with around 2.7 billion active users per month as of the third quarter of 2020. Nonetheless, its rapid growth has not only come to a halt, in fact, the number of users in North America has decreased from the second to the third quarter of 2020 by one million . This is the first time ever that Facebook's user base in North America shrunk and one probable reason is the increasing popularity of platforms like Tik-Tok or Instagram (which, in all fairness, belongs to the Facebook group), especially among people aged 15-25. But does that mean that Facebook´s importance will diminish in the near future as North Americans and Europeans alike turn towards other social media platforms? Not at all, here is why:

Internet.org and Free Basics

Through its internet.org initiative, Facebook has committed to connecting the remaining half of humankind to the internet that, until today, still does not have access to it. A part of this initiative that was launched in 2013 is the “Free Basics” service. The idea is rather simple, as approximately 85% of the world population lives in areas with mobile coverage, many of those are still not able to pay for mobile data and are therefore excluded from using online services. Through cooperation with mobile operators, “Free Basics” offers access to certain apps and platforms free of charge. As Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Facebook, proclaimed in the United Nations General Assembly internet access as a basic human right, this seems to be another step of Facebook in order to fulfill that goal.

This program has not been enrolled in most of the developed world due to the fact that the percentage of people that are already connected is a lot higher than in countries of the global south. Until now, the program focuses on countries like Guinea, Iraq, the Philippines, Honduras or Peru. The logic behind the project is clear; in places where people are not yet connected to the internet, the potential to acquire new users is enormous. Facebook does also have an inherent interest in getting people connected to the internet. Without the internet their very own platform cannot be used. Facebook claims to provide “Free Basics” users with news, health information, local jobs, education and communication tools. The latter obviously being Facebook.

The Success and its consequences on markets

The success of that approach is evident. Facebook, being the first player to penetrate the social media market in many places, enables people to access the internet, and not just that, Facebook is also the only choice among comparative offers as only selected platforms are accessible via “Free Basics”. It also stands out that the number of internet users in some Free Basics countries almost matches the number of Facebook subscribers, which is the case e.g., in Algeria, Guinea or Madagascar. The same goes for some Asian countries like the Philippines or Laos. On a global scale, while the number of Facebook users in developed countries might stagnate, the number of people that are enabled to get in touch with the internet through “Free Basics” are potential future Facebook users. There are already 2.7 billion Facebook users and approximately half of the world population, meaning another 4 billion people, are not even connected to the internet yet. Therefore, Facebook definitely has the chance to double its number of users in the future and remain the dominant force in the global social media market.

As the example of India has shown though, Facebook certainly cannot continue growing as smoothly as they might envision. In 2016 already, “Free Basics” was declared illegal by the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India for violating the rules of net neutrality. The concept of net neutrality establishes the prohibition of discriminatory behavior of an internet service provider to other apps, websites or platforms. As “Free Basics”, through a pre-selection done by Facebook, just allows the consumer to access certain content without paying for mobile data, many competing companies are denied access to the market. That, of course, is great for Facebook that is meanwhile establishing its dominant position in that very market.

The effects that “Free Basics” has on the functionality of the internet market in countries that are just starting to get their population connected are to be examined closely. A relatively high percentage of the population in India already has access to the internet ( 54,4% ), so Facebook´s “Free Basics” will be a lot more influential in countries where this percentage is lower, mainly on the African continent . Facebook will continue to grow in these areas and almost naturally become the dominant social media platform. However, the consequences on the functionality of the growing and developing internet markets should be monitored and critically looked upon.

Marco Schmidt is about to finish his law degree at the University of Trier, Germany. He is particularly interested in matters of antitrust law and plans to pursue a LL.M. in Law and Economics at the University of Utrecht, the Netherlands. Being a German native, he is also fluent in English and Spanish.

The Massive Brazilian Data Leakage and International Human Rights Law

Sun, 28 Feb 2021 19:59:58 GMT

PRIVACY

The Massive Brazilian Data Leakage and International Human Rights Law

By the end of January 2021, Brazilian news outlets were announcing a major data leakage of the CPF (Código de Pessoa Física, in Portuguese, the Brazilian equivalent to a Social Security Number and Tax Identification Number).

By Julia Cirne Lima Weston

February 28 , 2021

The Leakage

Two leakages have been registered , one of them containing 223 million CPF numbers, as well as full name, gender, date of birth, and vehicle registry, circulating on the internet freely; and the other including information on social benefits, which is being sold to criminals. As the number of CPFs transcends the total number of the Brazilian population , now estimated to be around 212 million people, it is likely that information belonging to the deceased has also been made public. This event has, of course, major repercussions on the Human Rights of the Brazilian population. It is important to understand which of those are seen as having been affected, in order to make the affair notable internationally and to call upon best practices for safeguarding said data.

This problematic situation of data leakage comes not so long after the creation of the Brazilian General Law on Data Protection (LGPD), which was homologated in 2018. The law, among other issues, regulates the usage, transfer and storage of data by public and private actors alike. In terms of content, it does not deviate much from the basics of its international predecessor, the notable European Union General Data Protection Regulation.

A noteworthy aspect to keep in mind for this brief article can be found on the foundations of the Brazilian LGPD, one of which is that of Human Rights, including “free development of the personality, dignity and the exercise of citizenship by natural persons”. As such, Brazil has a national regulation which protects personal data, both in private and public settings, in a legislation guided by Human Rights. With such a leak, we have a breach of Brazilian Law. But how about the international law aspects, if any, of such a leakage?

The Applicable International Human Rights

As we speak of data, we speak of personal information and, consequently, of privacy. As such, this article, with basis on General Comments from the Human Rights Committee and a General Report of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, argues that there is a breach of the International Covenant for Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). The ICCPR’s article 17 foresees that there shall be no unlawful or arbitrary interference with one’s privacy, something which shall be protected by law against interference and attacks. Brazil, among other Latin American States, is also a party to the American Convention on Human Rights . A similarly worded provision to the ICCPR is also contained in this document, on its article 11 .

The Report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights on the right to privacy in the digital age specifically applies said ICCPR article to the issue of technology and data transfer, among other situations brought forward by digital platforms. General Comment number 16 of the Human Rights Committee applies this to attacks and interference emanating both from State authorities or other natural or legal persons, and requires States to adopt legislation and other measures to increase protection and give effect to the prohibition in question. A relevant excerpt from General Comment 16 to this issue reads as follows:

"Effective measures have to be taken by States to ensure that information concerning a person’s private life does not reach the hands of persons who are not authorized by law to receive, process and use it, and is never used for purposes incompatible with the Covenant. "

As such, according to the understanding of International Human Rights Law, effective measures should have been taken by Brazilian authorities to prevent said exposure of its citizens’ private information. As this is a rather recent event, there are no conclusive investigations on the matter and on the measures to be taken by authorities. However, it is important that Brazil considers these dispositions when investigating and remediating said occurrence. It is also important that this is taken into consideration when formulating better policies for data protection in the future within the Brazilian legislative, as another occurrence of the sort can harm Brazil’s reputation globally in terms of data protection.

Julia Cirne Lima Weston is an LL.M graduate in International Law from University College London and is a qualified lawyer at the Brazilian Bar Association.

AI Courts Where You Vacation

Fri, 26 Feb 2021 23:10:53 GMT

LEGAL TECH

AI Courts Where You Vacation

Costa Rica amazes day in and day out with its crystal-clear waters, year-round warm temperatures and pristine rainforest. This Central American country has only 0.03% of the world’s surface, but astonishingly houses 6% of the world’s biodiversity . Due to its natural resources, this nation has become a global pioneer in sustainable travel and ecotourism . But in addition to its natural reputation, it seems that Costa Rica is willing to show the world that they can also lead by example in the application of technology. Recently, the Costa Rican judiciary announced their first AI project to be used in its courts .

By Gabriel Obando-Chacon

February 27, 2021

Luis Quintanilla

How can AI be used in courts?

The first thing that comes into mind when someone talks about AI in courts is possibly a robot judge. Nevertheless, while this is not entirely impossible, the state of the art is just not quite there yet. The current AI systems are more likely to assist judges and court officials, as opposed to replacing their roles. The present-day technology is still incapable of rendering complex legal decisions on its own (or at least to the standard desired for judicial decision-making) and will likely continue to be designed to assist judicial courts in the near future.

Some countries have already experienced different assistive applications of AI in their judicial systems. For example, it’s likely that you have already heard of the heavily criticized COMPAS , an algorithmic system that is currently in use in several US courts. This AI system is supposed to measure the chances of a prosecuted felon of committing another crime (“recidivism”). This AI system is considered to be assistive as the judge weighs in how heavily she wants to rely on the algorithmic output for her final decision. The algorithm becomes another piece of the decision-making puzzle.

But other countries seem to be convinced that AI could potentially replace judges. In 2018, Estonia announced that they would launch a small claims court whose decisions would be entirely produced by an algorithm , without the assistance of a human judge. However, two years after the project was announced, it has not really taken off. It seems that the task is far too expensive or complex, even for Estonia, a forerunner in the application of technology in tasks related to public administration.

So, what is the Costa Rican judiciary going to do?

T he Costa Rican judiciary is keeping things simple. Instead of being overly ambitious, the Costa Rican judiciary have trained an algorithm that is able to categorize the type of requests that a party to a collection proceeding makes before the court. In short, a party files a letter, for example, requesting the court to change their email address to receive court notices, then, the system labels this brief as a “change in notices”, allowing the judge to preemptively know what the brief is about.

While this might not sound revolutionary (and it’s not!) the positive impact that a minor change like this in terms of time consumption could be huge. In a country of only 5 million people, there are over 733.169 active collection cases, assigned to a taskforce of 86 judges nationwide . In other words, that is over 8.500 collection cases per judge. With the AI system implemented, the judges will be able to prioritize their attention to certain briefs as they consult a file. In general terms, involving AI could make a difference in case management. Of course, it will not be the ultimate solution for all issues related with judicial administration, but it’s a start.

What are some challenges in the near future?

Innovating in the public sector is not easy. The Costa Rican judiciary faces many challenges ahead with its first AI project. For instance, the training period for the algorithm will have to be heavily supervised. There is little margin for error in judicial environments and one mistake could have negative effects in thousands of files and people’s lives. Adequately, the Costa Rican judiciary is taking precautions by implementing a pilot project in Perez Zeledon (a town South of the capital) to evaluate the success of the AI system, before it is used anywhere else.

Furthermore, projects like this should catalyze the discussion for further privacy regulations in Costa Rica. As the application of technology becomes the norm in public administration and, in judicial decision-making particularly, clear and enforceable rules will be required to make sure that the citizenry’s data is processed in accordance with the rule of law. As of now, Costa Rica has a privacy act, but this is far from the standards promoted by the EU’s GDPR, which appears to be the metric for this type of regulation in the world. Modernizing the legal framework is not easy, but it is certainly of essence.

Despite these challenges, this small Central American nation appears to be willing to take risks through a technological leap in its courts. Positive experiences with AI in courts have already been reported in Mexico, Colombia and Argentina , so Costa Rica should not be an exception.While the application of technology should always be welcomed, as a society, we should remain vigilant to guarantee that the rule of law and our data are always well protected.

Gabriel holds an LLM from McGill University. His research focused on privacy concerns related to the collection of data by governmental agencies to implement judicial AI. Before that, he obtained an LL.L from the University of Costa Rica with a concentration in Human Rights Law. He has worked in 'Big Law' and boutique firms in Costa Rica. Most recently, he joined Nelson Champagne Avocats in Montreal where he's part of the class actions team. He's also the co-founder of algoritLaw, a blog that explores the intersection of AI and Law. He's fluent in English and Spanish, and proficient in French.

The Space Revolution the Earth Needs

Fri, 26 Feb 2021 22:42:18 GMT

ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING

The Space Revolution the Earth Needs

Earth observation is living a golden age. What is the role of satellite technology in the fight against the climate crisis?

By Javier Canales Luna

February 26, 2021

Luis Quintanilla

On 4 October 1957, a small aluminium sphere 58 centimeters in diameter with four radio antennas broke in the Earth’s orbit. It was Sputnik I, the world's first artificial satellite. Launched by the Soviet Union, Sputnik inaugurated the so-called “space race” with the United States, a competition between the two rivals during the Cold War to achieve space exploration milestones.

In those days, the space was seen as a theater, a far and well-suited place for the two great powers of the moment to show technological power and, by extension, ideological superiority. Things have changed quite a lot since the end of the conflict, and the space ecosystem is no exception. Today’s society would be hardly possible without satellite technology. Cuts in launching cost and developments in satellite miniaturisation are revolutionising aerospace, opening the gate for new players in a market traditionally monopolised by large national space organizations from a restricted group of countries.

According to the Union of Concerned Scientist , more than 2.700 operational satellites, both public and commercial, are currently circling the planet (and the number is expected to rise dramatically in 2020s, in line with space activity growth predictions ), providing a wide range of applications, including Internet connectivity, GPS and Earth Observation (EO).

EO data is proving increasingly helpful in environment matters. Data collected from satellite remote sensing provide valuable information to monitor and assess the status of natural and man-made systems. Satellite availability, coupled with recent advancements in spatial resolution and Artificial Intelligence (AI) algorithms, have resulted in new series of breakthroughs, leading climate researchers to speak of a golden age of EO.

If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it

Climate change is having serious impacts in the planet’s atmosphere and ecosystems. Accurate environmental data is key for scientists to understand, assess and predict the impact of the climate crisis and for policy-makers to advance effective strategies to mitigate and adapt to climate change. However, monitoring environmental changes is not an easy task. As stressed by María Fernanda Espinosa Garcés, former President of the United Nations General Assembly, “If you can’t measure it, you can’t manage it” . Great hurdles remain in traditional monitoring systems using sensors on the land, including the limited coverage (about 30% of the planet’s surface is covered, mostly land areas), the lack of measurement uniformity, and the risk of technical failure or human tampering.

Here is where EO comes to the rescue. Satellites offer bird’s eye views that can reveal patterns and track changes that are hard to detect from the ground. Over 450 satellites are currently in orbit for EO purposes. A tiny portion are heavy multisensor infrastructures operated by official space organizations like NASA or the European Space Agency (ESA), aiming to monitor specific aspects of Earth’s natural system. The rest belongs to large constellations of smaller, low-cost satellites, launched by private companies such as SpaceX and Planet Labs, which are contributing to the increasing imagery availability, coverage and granularity.

Once the image data is available, the next question is what to do with it. The problem is that EO satellites output a huge amount of image data (only the ESA/EU Copernicus satellites produce tens of terabytes per day). Fortunately, AI is helping automate a task otherwise impossible for humans to process alone. In short, machine learning algorithms can be used to classify imagery from large datasets, thereby facilitating the process of information discovery.

As a result of these advances, the environmental applications of EO data has not ceased to increase in the last decade. Satellites provide wider and continuous observation capability, as the same sensor can be used at different places in the world, including remote and inhospitable zones. This will make it easier to detect illegal environmental practices or track progress in areas such as agriculture , fisheries and forest policies . The space revolution will also provide new ammunition to tackle climate change. Having a reliable and disaggregated account for global carbon emissions is key to assess progress in countries commitments under the Paris Agreement. Provided that satellites can provide unequivocal and uniform evidence across countries, EO methodologies could be adopted to validate emissions reported by companies and governments, enhancing transparency and accountability. This is the idea behind TRACE (“Tracking Real-time Atmospheric Carbon Emissions”), an international initiative working to track real-time global carbon emissions from major polluters using a mix of satellite image processing and machine learning.

Towards a new paradigm in environmental monitoring?

Yet the important advances in recent years, there are still several challenges ahead for satellite remote sensing before it can be accepted as a reliable and well-understood measurement technique (Ruf et al, 2018 ). At the technical level, space-based environmental monitoring methodologies remain in an early stage, an further progress is need to calibrate the raw measuring devices, correctly interpret the the measurements(a task that is becoming very complex when using certain AI algorithms) and smoothly combine these measurements with terrestrial sources (eg, meteorology stations or emission estimates from open datasets).

Plus, there is the question on how to make the space revolution beneficial from end-users and the public sector. Despite the hype provoked by Elon Musk’s plans to colonise Mars or Joe Bezos's Blue Origin announcement of incoming tourist trips into orbit , the space is still very far from regular people. There is the need to accelerate the development of the space downstream market. Improving user engagement is central in this process, as only by working with local problems users can judge whether a given space-based solution is fit for purpose, thus providing valuable feedback to improve the service. However, there are still significant barriers such as restricted data access (though there is a growing trend towards the democratisation of the use of satellite data) and users’ lack of EO relevant digital skills.

Limited awareness and understanding of what is going on above the sky not only compromise the rapid expansion of the space market, it also slows down the integration of EO applications within the public sector. Evidence from satellite data could be used by decision-makers and legislative authorities to improve or reform current environmental policies and regulatory frameworks. EO-based applications would then become crucial to ensure compliance and standardise monitoring and verification processes.

Javier Canales holds a Dual Bachelor in Law and Political Science from Carlos III University and a LL.M. in European Law from Maastricht University. After completing his legal studies, he specialised in the field of data science. He currently works as a Data Analyst at Trecone Solutions and part-time instructor at Datahack, where he teaches course of Big Data and Python Programming.

Platform Governance

Sat, 20 Feb 2021 00:11:10 GMT

COSMONAUT

S E R I E S

Platform Governance

Ittai Rosas

Facebook's Oversight Board

Facebook's novel experiment in global governance is posited to conduct independent and external assessment of controversial cases the determination of which are likely to have far-reaching implications for human rights. Whether this endeavor presents true promise, or whether it is a smokescreen to gain greater legitimacy with minimal changes to its corporate structure remains to be seen.

Darya

Social Media Councils

Article 19 proposes a decentralized network of content moderators as a set of open, participatory and accountable bodies made up of various actors working at the national level to safeguard freedom of expression online. This model aspires to unbundle content moderation currently monopolized by social media companies.

Lordicon

Governors' Dilemma

Both public and private actors are increasingly under pressure to play a more active role in online content moderation inevitably raising other concerns. Social media companies like Facebook, Youtube and Twitter are criticized for their lack of transparency and democratic legitimacy in taking such decisions. On the other hand, governments tend to outsource human rights decisions constitutionally reserved for courts to private actors.

Daniel

Our Series

Privacy & Covid 19 - Country Reports

Fri, 19 Feb 2021 23:20:10 GMT

PUBLICATION

Privacy & Covid-19

The objective of the country reports is to offer an overview of the main, or most problematic, measures, and to highlight “alarm bells” and “best practices” in assessing the state of privacy and data protection amidst the current pandemic. We hope to contribute to the global policy and research discourse for an efficient and human rights compliant handling of the Covid-19 pandemic.

By Andreu Wilson; Daniel Becker; Natália Brigagão; Victor Silveira; Vinícius Alvarez; Alina Škiljić; Mikko Rudanko; Cian Henry; Matthew Nuding; Merel van Gils; Dr. jur. Ma. Angela Leonor Aguinaldo, J.D., LL.M

February 19, 2021

“Balcony Concerts”, Catherine Cordasco

We shouldn't have to make a choice between health and privacy. For this, we publish a collection of country reports on the legislative and regulatory measures taken in the respective jurisdictions in response to Covid-19 from a human rights and rule of law perspective, with particular focus on privacy rights. The objective of the country reports is to offer an overview of the main, or most problematic, measures, and to highlight “alarm bells” and “best practices” in assessing the state of privacy and data protection amidst the current pandemic.

Download Report

Data is crucial in the fight against the pandemic but not unchecked

While contact-tracing technologies can be useful to limit the spread of the virus, if left unchecked, they can also be misused for extensive collection and sharing of personal data, mass surveillance, limiting individual freedoms and challenging democratic governance.

Core principles of data protection should apply

According to the European Data Protection Board, data subjects should receive transparent information on the processing activities that are being carried out and their main features, including the retention period for collected data and the purposes of the processing. Measures implemented to manage the current emergency and the underlying decision-making process should be appropriately documented. Transparency and effective communication are not solely dictated by data protection objectives. They are crucial for establishing public trust in the emergency measures taken and a broad compliance hereto as a requisite for effective democratic governance.

Governments, in multistakeholder consultations, must therefore reconcile the risks with the benefits of the data processing while guaranteeing that any extraordinary measures are proportionate to the risks and are implemented with full transparency, accountability and a commitment to immediately cease or reverse exceptional uses of data when the crisis is over.

With the following publication, we hope to contribute to the global policy and research discourse for an efficient and human rights compliant handling of the Covid-19 pandemic.

I would personally like to wholeheartedly thank our authors for shedding light in the measures of their respective jurisdictions. Special thanks to Ruby Rosselle Tugade and Raphael Lorenzo A. Pangalangan for their outstanding work in managing and coordinating an international team of editors, without whom this result would not have been possible.

Of course, we all at our institute could not be prouder since we are presenting you our very first publication.

Foreword by Konstantinos Tsakiliotis

Legal Issues of Deepfakes

Mon, 08 Feb 2021 20:30:03 GMT

DISINFORMATION

Legal Issues of Deepfakes

Deepfake contents initially were only about celebrities, however even ordinary people can create their own deepfake content today. With the widespread use of deepfake content, problems such as manipulation of the public, attacks on personal rights, violations of rights of intellectual property and personal data protection are becoming more common. Legislators and Big Tech are looking for an effective solution against increasing problems of deepfakes.

By Betül Çolak

January 19, 2021

Definition & History

Deepfake is a new phenomenon heard by many internet users today. It is a combination of “Deep Learning” and “Fake” . As it is understood from combination, deepfakes are created by using artificial intelligence technology, in specific machine learning technique. Algorithms work on massive data sets — fairly convincing deepfake can be done with as few as 300 images — belongs to the source person to create deepfakes. Then, algorithms swap one face —the source— to another —the target— with the face swap technic. However, there are three essential technics to create Deepfake contents that face swap, expression swap, Generative Adversarial Networks (“GAN”) . Regardless of which technic is used, the process has generally same steps that are extraction, training and creation. Also, there is no need to massive data sets anymore. Today, even one single photo of a source is enough to create deepfake contents.

In 2017, a software developer nicknamed "deepfakes" on Reddit online platform posted his creations that he swapped the Hollywood celebrities’ faces onto the faces of porn artists. After the creations spread rapidly, deepfake became a new trend. Numerous applications have emerged to create deepfake contents for the last 4 years. Because the applications are easily accessible and free, many people create deepfake contents of themselves or celebrities such as politicians, actors/actresses, artists and singers. Some famous examples of deepfakes are about Obama, Trump, Zuckerberg and Dalí. Moreover, they are quite convincing. In other words, it is difficult to distinguish which one is real. Therefore, it is exciting to hear your favorite artist calling out to you in a video or to watch your favorite actors in another movie that they didn't perform.

Deepfakes have a wide usage from the entertainment industry to the health sector. For example, it has been used in the health sector to detect tumors . However, deepfakes have some drawbacks such as for post truth politics and harassment of women in the form of revenge porn, manipulation of the public, intervention to the elections, violations of personal data protection rights and intellectual property rights. Although there are numerous issues about deepfakes, this article will focus on intellectual property rights and personal data protection rights regarding deepfake contents.

Legal Issues of Deepfakes

The World Intellectual Property Organization (“WIPO”) published the “ Draft Issues Paper On Intellectual Property Policy And Artificial Intelligence ” on December 2019. The draft holds problems of deepfake contents in terms of intellectual property rights. There are two questions addressed specifically to deepfake issue on the Draft:

“(i) Since deep fakes are created on the basis of data that may be the subject of copyright, to whom should the copyright in a deep fake belong ?

(ii) Should there be a system of equitable remuneration for persons whose likenesses and “performances” are used in a deep fake? ”

WIPO states that deepfakes may cause more severe problems such as violation of the human rights, right of privacy, personal data protection right, etc. than the copyright infringements. Therefore according to WIPO, the main concern here is whether copyright should even be accorded to deep fake imagery, rather than to whom copyright in a deep fake should belong. As a response, WIPO states that if the deepfake contents are completely contradictory with the victom’s life, the deepfake contents should not be rewarded with copyright protection. For the previous questions, WIPO also mentions that if deepfakes are subject to copyright, it should belong to the inventor of deepfakes . As for the reason that there is no intervention of the source person whose image, sound or other feature is used during the creation of deepfakes but just his/her consent.

Accordingly, copyright is not a good weapon to be put against deepfake, as the victim of deepfakes does not own a copyright interest in their own image. On the other side, the victim of deepfake can take to the right of personal data protection. According to Article 5 (1) of EU General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”), “ personal data shall be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date; every reasonable step must be taken to ensure that personal data that are inaccurate, having regard to the purposes for which they are processed, are erased or rectified without delay(‘accuracy’)”.

I n the light of the Article 5, if a deepfake content is irrelevant, inaccurate or falsity, they should be erased or rectified without delay. Moreover, even the deepfake content is true or accurate, a data subject —a victim of a deepfake— may exercise the right to be forgotten, granted to European residents in Article 17 of GDPR as the “right to erasure”. In accordance with Article 17, the data subject shall have the right to obtain from the controller the erasure of personal data concerning him or her without undue delay and the data controller shall have the obligation to erase personal data without undue.

Conclusion

Today both states and BigTechs take action against the problems of deepfakes. As an example, BigTechs develop the tools to detect challenges of deepfake contents. Virginia, Texas and California is first states in the US that have regulations against legal issues of deepfakes. The law in Virginia imposes criminal penalties on the distribution of nonconsensual deepfake pornography, whereas the law in Texas prohibits the creation and distribution of deepfake videos intended to harm candidates for public office or influence elections. When current problems are taken into consideration, more legislation and technological tools against deepfakes will probably occur soon.

Betül Çolak is a lawyer specializing in IP and Technology law from Turkey, and is a Researcher in the AI and Fairness research cycle of the Institute. She completed her undergraduate degree in law where she developed a passion for AI and exploring regulation of emerging technologies. She has researched on issues such as fair algorithms and antitrust cases of BigTechs, personal data protection and IP regulation.

India's Struggle Against Fake News

Sun, 07 Feb 2021 21:11:53 GMT

COMMUNALISM

India's Struggle Against Fake News

How disinformation and the failed attempts against it have aggravated ethic and religious tensions in India.

By Srishti Nair

February 7, 2021

India’s diversity- boon Or bane?

As rightfully said by Rabindranath Tagore, If God had so wished, he would have made all Indians speak with one language ... the unity of India has been and shall always be a unity in diversity." India’s diversity is reflected in the variety of rituals, customs, religions, customs and social structures spread across a population of 1.3 billion individuals. It is reinforced by the multicultural and secular approach adopted by the country which has propelled its growth and global significance. However, these persisting differences have also increased the likelihood of social conflicts within the society which are often voiced in a rather morally reprehensible and violent manner. From the 1984 Sikh riots (" 1984 Anti-Sikh riots - history and aftermath ,"2018) and the 2002 Godhra riots in Gujarat (" Timeline of the riots in Modi’s Gujarat (Published 2014) ," 2018) to the recent riots in North- East Delhi, India’s tryst with communal related violence has been rather fateful.

Communalism is the product of a particular situation of a particular society, economic and polity. It can be described as an effort of the community to fight for a possible solution of their personal and social crisis without correctly getting hold of what the social state of affairs are. More often than not, such clashes are more ideological than physical thereby, emphasising upon the increasing need to drive home the falsity of communal assumption, of communal logic, of communal answer etc.

The widening gap between truth and lies

With the advent of technology, fighting such ideologies has become all the more difficult given the consumer driven media platforms which believe in giving people what they want rather than what they need, making it difficult to distinguish between right and wrong for each side has its own sea of digital supporters. Digital platforms including social media have gone on to become carriers of fake news which is often targeted at not destroying the truth, rather; to manipulate and weaponize information to achieve political or societal goals ( Gioe,2017 ).

Fake news misleads people, spreads false propaganda, malign people and communities. Thus, playing an instrumental role in creating communal hatred and instigating violence ( Panigrahi & Sigh, 2017, p. 2 ). India too has faced many incidents wherein violence has been triggered by fake news and rumours circulated through social media and internet messaging platforms. The recent Delhi riots was one such incident which opened our eyes to the harsh reality of the hatred and mayhem caused due to spread of fake news on digital platforms.

Role played by fake news in aggravating communal violence during the 2020 Delhi riots

The infamous Delhi riots of 2020 initially started off as a protest against the Citizenship Amendment Act which was seen as discriminatory against the Muslim minority and a threat to the constitutional principles of secularism and equality. Peaceful protests and demonstrations were being carried out all over the country with the exception of a few incidents of stone-pelting and burning of vehicles. On the 23 Feb, 2020 following the Northeast Delhi, BJP leader Kapil Mishra’s speech calling out people to come out in support of the Act and against the protesters, clashes broke out between anti- and pro-CAA demonstrators all over Delhi-NCR.

These clashes were manifested in forms of arson, vandalism of property, stone pelting and burning of places of worship. In parts of the city, shops and houses owned by Hindus were torched by a Muslim mob, subsequently, mosques were vandalised, a tyre market largely owned by Muslims was set on fire by crowd that screamed "Jai Shri Ram” and mutilated bodies were found at different sites. Over 10,000 emergency calls were made to the police control room during the whole ordeal ( Standard, B. (2020)).

Muslim migration into Uttarakhand and Uttar Pradesh, how to spot 12 signs of Jihad, and calls for economic boycott of Muslims were some of the misleading WhatsApp messages being forwarded all over the country during the anti-CAA protest phase ( J, 2020 ). Several videos, live streams and pictures of older mob attacks that happened in different cities way before 2020 were edited and circulated to falsely suggest that the Muslims being attacked in the videos were in Delhi, clippings of young Syrian women and children were also circulated to manipulate sentiments of the masses (" Delhi endures tense night amid false rumours of violence " 2020). Even credible news channels went ahead to publish misinformation around the identity of a gun-wielding man pictured during the Delhi riots. Furthermore, certified social media accounts with large public following also thoughtlessly promoted these viral videos without checking the authenticity. More than 1000 pictures and videos were found to be circulated on all the digital platforms from accounts on Twitter, Facebook, Instagram as well as WhatsApp groups.

Law and fake news

In today’s technologically advanced world, social media has proved itself to be an essential tool of communication and self-expression. Globally, there are more than 3 billion individuals who are a part of this massive and ever evolving web-based community. Given the significant role played by such digital spaces in facilitating the exercise of the freedom of speech and expression, it often becomes difficult to regulate data available on these platforms.

In nations which are less speech friendly, spreading fake news is seldom not talked about as a piece of free discourse. In Ireland, for instance, a new law proposed would criminalize spreading fake news on social media ( Jaegar ,2017). In Germany, a social media law came into force in October of 2017 that requires social media sites to remove fake news within 24 hours of being cautioned of the same (" Germany starts enforcing hate speech law ," 2018). However, in countries like India and USA regulation of such freedom is a tightrope walk.

Presently, there are no laws in India which directly govern the regulation of fake news nevertheless, there are some provisions in the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the Information Technology Act (IT Act), and the Disaster Management Act which attempt to control the effect of fake news. These provisions are as follows:

Section 66D of Information Technology Act- “Whoever, by means for any communication device or computer resources cheats by personating shall be punished with the imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years and shall also be liable to fine which may extend to one lakh rupees”.
Section 54 of the Disaster Management Act- “Whoever makes or circulates a false alarm or warning as to disaster or its severity or magnitude, leading to panic shall be punished with the imprisonment which may extend to one year or with fine”.
Section 124A. Sedition: “Whoever by words, either spoken or written, or by signs, or by visible representation, or otherwise, brings or attempts to bring into hatred or contempt, or excites or attempts to excite disaffection towards, the Government established by law in India, shall be punished with [various combinations of terms of imprisonment and/or fines].”
Section 505(1) of Indian Penal Code, 1860- “Whoever by making, publishing or circulating any statement, rumour or report which may cause fear for an alarm to the public, or to any section of the public shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to three years, or with fine or with both”.
Section 153 of Indian Penal Code- “Whoever malignantly, or wantonly, by doing anything illegal, gives provocation to any person intending or knowing it to be likely that such provocation will cause the offense of rioting to be committed, shall, if the offense of rioting be committed in consequence of such provocation be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both; and if the offense of rioting be not committed, with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to six months, or with fine, or with both”.
Section 499 and 500 of Indian Penal Code- “Whoever, by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person is said, except in the case hereinafter expected, to defame that person” and “Whoever defames another shall be punished with simple imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine or with both”.

There are also pending rules and regulations specifically aimed at controlling the increasing menace of fake news, these include the Draft Information Technology (Intermediaries Guidelines) Rules, 2018 which is intended at strengthening the regulatory framework to make social media platforms more accountable under the law ( Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology, Government of India ,2018). Also, following the riots in Delhi, a Peace and Harmony committee was also formed by the Delhi Legislative Assembly with the objective of investigating the application of hate speech rules and policies by social media giants like Facebook ( Dubey , 2020).However, the committee jurisdiction and its power to issue summons continue to debated in the Courts in India (" Peace & harmony committee of Delhi assembly lacks jurisdiction: Centre ," 2020).

Similar struggles can also be witnessed in the US for there exists a large possibility that outlawing fake news would create a chilling effect on real news. Nevertheless, defamation litigation is the key legal recourse against fake news. If fake news is at issue in a defamation claim, it is limited to intentional or knowingly false statement. However, following the republication rue anyone who republishes the defamatory statement is said to have adopted it as his own and is held liable for the same ( Liberty Lobby, Inc. v. Dow Jones & Co. , 1988). Intentional infliction of emotional distress (lIED), known as the end-run approach is similar to defamation as a "regularly" raised tort against fake news publishers under state law ( Klein & Wueller , 2017, p. 06). It is raised when one's publication of fake news results in " intentionally or recklessly causing another person severe emotional distress " through one's extreme or outrageous acts. Fake news publishers can also be subjected to administrative rules and regulations, including the standards of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for unfair and deceptive trade practice which misleads representation, omission, or practice or is likely to mislead a consumer.

Conclusion

Undoubtedly, it is difficult to define as to what constitutes fake news? What motivates it? Whether it is real or imagined? However, it will not be wrong to say that the ease with which one can fabricate a rumour or fake news, spread it faster and wider and call for a collective action has become a matter of grave concern as well as a challenge for lawmakers, practitioners, free speech advocates, media professionals etc globally. Laws pertaining to modern technology, especially the Internet are not effective in India and unfortunately are extremely lax with respect to fake news. Bearing in mind the reach of digital technologies especially social media platforms it is extremely vital that countries across the globe review the existing laws or devise new laws that will enable effective regulation of the technological caveats while keeping the right to freedom of speech and expression alive.

Srishti Nair is a fourth-year law student from Symbiosis International (Deemed) University, India. She is interested in exploring the intersectionality between law and technology especially protection of privacy and digital rights of the community.

Digital Taxes: A Fake Solution For A Real Problem?

Tue, 26 Jan 2021 21:36:02 GMT

DIGITAL ECONOMY

Digital Taxes: A Fake Solution For A Real Problem

By Nicola Bressan

January 26, 2021

“We’ve got to be talking about taxes. That’s it: taxes, taxes, taxes. All the rest is bullshit in my opinion.”

It is with these words that the Dutch historian Rutger Bregman, at the worldwide reunion of private jet users and caviar aficionados that is Davos’ World Economic Summit, addressed one of the most pressing challenges today’s policymakers have to face: tax avoidance. Eroding the depth of public resources, damaging the public’s faith in democracy and the system and causing tension between countries, the phenomenon has recently grown into one of crucial political and policy importance. But what does tax avoidance exactly mean?

Using the OECD’s definition:

‘A term that is difficult to define but which is generally used to describe the arrangement of a taxpayer's affairs that is intended to reduce his tax liability and that although the arrangement could be strictly legal it is usually in contradiction with the intent of the law it purports to follow.’.

As this phrasing points to from the get-go, tax avoidance is indeed a concept whose boundaries are quite blurry, both for experts and - even more so - for the general public. Oft-mistaken with the more immediately comprehendible tax evasion, the confusion surrounding what tax avoidance practically consists of is omnipresent in public debate. Like most things relating to policy, nuance is key: in the spectrum between a perfectly acceptable tax optimisation practice (such as, for example, the use of tax credits for research and development or green energy) and tax evasion (deliberate misreporting of revenue), tax avoidance measures place themselves in the grey middle area.

An ever-growing problem

For all practical intents and purposes, the term tax avoidance refers to the multitude of mechanisms put in place by multinational groups so as to move their profits from high-tax jurisdictions to jurisdictions with a lower imposition rate. From sophisticated accounting schemes with creative names – the infamous “Double Irish with a Dutch Sandwich” and the “Single Malt” definitely stand out – to simpler loopholes allowing for artificially inflated transactions between subsidiaries of the same group, the various tools employed are complex and detailing them would go far beyond the scope of this article. What is interesting to note is how these practices have evolved over the years both in terms of scope and public attention, from an exotic matter familiar only to the most daring of tax planners, to an issue that is front, right and centre in the policy agenda.

Taking a relatively cohesive bloc of countries such as the EU, it is easy to see how corporate tax rates can differ wildly, making the incentive for tax avoidance more than tangible. Source: European Commission.

While by no means new – the first OECD report on the matter goes as far back as 1978 – worldwide corporate tax avoidance has grown into a 500 to 600 billion USD yearly hole in public budgets (Crivelli, de Mooij, and Keen 2015; Cobham and Janský 2018), 1% to 1.3% of global GDP. Taking country-specific estimates, the evolution is staggering: the loss in revenue for the French government, for example, went from less than 1 billion EUR in year 2000, to 13 billion in 2008, and past the cap of 30 billion starting from 2013 (Vicard, 2019). This exponential growth can be easily explained by taking into account two phenomena of our generation: the acceleration of economic interdependence and the digitalisation of our economies.

Structural legal challenges

If the former is self-explanatory, the latter isn’t. Among the multi-faceted challenges digitisation brings to our production models, democracies and daily lives, there is that of taxation. The definition of what fair taxation is, as well as its enforcement, are matters that our connected and internet-reliant world makes all the harder to answer. Traditional frameworks to determine taxable entities and their imposable amounts – which stem all the way back to the early 20th century – are in fact hardly applicable to the modern production of added value and profits.

One of the most basic of concepts in our tax jurisdictions, the idea of a ‘permanent establishment’, is for instance largely inapplicable to the digital economy: if generally, taxing rights are computed from the profit collected from a fixed presence within a given territory, the business model of most tech and digitally-oriented conglomerates can generate great amounts of revenue with little to no actual physical presence in a country. Defining a ‘nexus’, a taxable presence within a country, therefore becomes far more complicated.

Secondly, the intangible nature of the goods and services sold makes it so that defining value creation, and even more importantly linking value creation to tax regimes, is challenging. As Olbert and Spengel (2017) put it, taking the usage of user data as a marketable good as an example, if ‘ the concept of data as a contributor to value creation is established, the question of how to attribute value to the generation, storage and use of data is still unanswered ’. In a more down-to-earth way: if a Brazilian user, by willingly sharing his data, creates value for an American platform, shouldn’t that be taken into account in the calculation of owed tax? In this sense therefore, the usual principle of arms-length transactions and the current transfer-pricing models used to allocate taxable profits within value chains fall short of effectively capturing and appropriately taxing the new, digitalised ways to produce added value.

As these examples show, the phenomenon of tax avoidance is vastly exacerbated by the digital economy. While crucial, they are by no means the only causes contributing to making digitisation a factor of aggravation: abuses of VAT exemptions, the hardship in ‘characterisation of income’ (many e-commerce transactions may, for instance, be classified as royalties), the heavy reliance on R&D cost subsidies and the advantageous criteria for depreciation specific to digital business models also figure on the list. This discrepancy is one companies in the sector do not fail to capitalise on: if on average, SMEs in Europe are taxed at an implicit corporate tax rate of 23%, the largest companies of the digital sector only pay an effective corporate tax rate of 9% (PwC and ZEW, 2018). Beyond the ethical concerns and the missing governmental revenue tax avoidance brings forth, the disloyal competition is an aspect that should not be overlooked.

The relative failure of international policy initiatives

The growing awareness of this injustice has, slowly but surely, translated itself into a growing policy interest to the matter. Firstly, from an international point of view. The most relevant international initiative tackling the issue is, undoubtedly, the OECD’s ‘Addressing Base Erosion and Profit Shifting’ (BEPS) 2013 document and its ensuing Action Plan, finalised in 2015. With the cooperation of 135 countries on the project (albeit to a varying degree of involvement), and around 85 countries -representing more than 90% of world GDP - having signed the Multilateral Instrument on BEPS, the project is widely seen as a successful soft law endeavour, instrumental in setting a concrete worldwide benchmark, and bringing the topic to the forefront of international cooperation. Its biggest achievement is, arguably, having established universally recognised definitions of Controlled Foreign Company rules, Permanent Establishment status and alignment of transfer pricing criteria to value creation.

Yet, the process being largely consensus based and having the explicit aim of being flexible and practical enough to be implemented rapidly in vastly different jurisdictions and tax regimes, one cannot imagine it to be a holistic, all-solving framework. In fact, this first truly global initiative on the matter is to be seen as the groundwork upon which to build further so as to tackle and bring down tax avoidance, rather than ‘the final destination of international tax law reform’ (Reuner and Xu, 2019).

More directly relevant and impactful to the topic of digital taxation are the recent initiatives contained in what has generally been dubbed ‘BEPS 2.0’. Consisting of two pillars, they aim to solve at the root the specific challenges of the digitalization of the economy that we have addressed earlier: on the one hand, the solving of the territorial and nexus-related issues that plague digital services taxation rights, and on the other the establishment of a minimum global corporate tax rate as well as of a tax on base-eroding payments.

Both of these areas of development have the potential to significantly disrupt long-standing paradigms in taxation processes, as well as de facto impacting on the level of sovereignty jurisdictions have in setting their effective corporate tax rates. Depending on where the minimum tax is set, for instance, some low-tax jurisdictions such as Hungary or Ireland might see companies legally resident within their territory being taxed above the threshold set by their own legislators. This would be due to the parent company being directly taxed in its territory of residence in case its foreign subsidiaries’ profits were deemed to have been taxed below the OECD-set minimum rate.

Similarly, the technical difficulty and high sensitivity of the stakes linked to choosing the proper means of allocating taxable profits on the basis of where digital services are consumed rather than where permanent establishments are located characterise the setting of new, digital economy-tailored, profit allocation rules. It is for these reasons that the negotiations on the guidelines to be adopted globally have been fraught with political contrasts and vested interests, which have slowed down the negotiations to a screeching halt: initially meant to be completed ‘before the end of 2020’ (G20, 2019), the initiative is still far from having reached a final stage, with the US Treasury secretary Steven Mnuchin having announced on June 17, 2020 that the talks had ‘reached an impasse’ . While most officials maintain officially that the global option through the OECD is the preferred one, more and more jurisdictions – as we will see – are turning towards unilateral solutions.

The proliferation of digital services taxes

These interim solutions have been mostly centred around one typology: digital services taxes (DSTs). Computed on revenues instead of profits, these measures circumvent one of the most crucial of issues plaguing tax avoidance: as revenues are generally harder to underreport without falling into the scope of blatant tax evasion, levies based on pre-VAT gross turnover would manage to capture a higher share of the actual value created in a given jurisdiction. This is, though, only partly applicable to the digital economy. Beyond this issue, the complexities and shortcomings of such solutions are significant.

16 countries have either already implemented or announced to be planning to adopt such revenue-based taxes.

The policy convergence in the field, while not absolute, has been noticeable: it is in fact France’s 2019 ‘Taxe GAFA’ (GAFA being an acronym for Google, Amazon, Facebook and Apple, which should already provide us with a hint of the aimed targets of the initiative) that has spearheaded the worldwide wave of adoption of digital services taxes. While not being the first country to have enacted a specific taxation measure addressing the imbalances in imposition of large digital groups - for example, Italy had adopted (but never implemented) a digital transaction tax in 2017, and India has been imposing an equalization levy on non-resident service providers ever since 2016 – France and its tax have had an incontestable role in establishing a model and a benchmark for what today would be called a fully-fledged DSTs. Firstly, in pushing jurisdictions into accepting DSTs as the tool of choice to tackle these disparities, and secondly in imposing many of its mechanisms as the common pre-OECD consensus policy reference on the matter.

While not entirely convergent, we can see that the majority of jurisdictions having implemented or having declared to be planning to implement a DST have opted for a rate hovering around 3%. The similarities do not stop there: they also concern the applicable thresholds and, to a lesser extent, the absence of sunset clauses and the definition of imposable services.

An analysis of the divisive measure, which ever since its adoption by the French Parliament has become the spark of a transatlantic trade dispute, is necessary so as to understand its concrete implications, especially as it is fully possible to take the French example as a relevant case study for the rationale and justifying reasoning behind Digital Services Taxes. Firstly, when it comes to the types of services it is aimed to: digital ‘interfaces’ allowing users to enter in contact with each other with the goal of selling goods and services and targeted advertisement services mobilizing user data.

This delimitation of the taxable services falling under the imposable base of the tax is more than relevant, as it excludes first-hand some digital companies (or big multinational companies who source a significant yet not majoritarian part of their income digitally) whose business models do not revolve around these two services: among these, for example, cloud computing, direct provision of intangible content, non-targeted advertisements.

Companies like Spotify or Netflix, for example, whose business models do not have an intermediation element, and rely mainly on subscriptions for revenue, are not liable to pay the tax. Furthermore, it cuts out some parts of the business ventures of the very companies targeted by the tax itself: in fact Apple and Amazon have a large subset of their revenues which do not fall under the criteria above, either because they are offline sources of income (Apple’s hardware sales being an example) or because they are neither based on targeted publicity nor on intermediation (Amazon’s cloud computing services, for instance).

Secondly, so as to establish which companies fall within the scope of the DST, the criteria are twofold and both based on the yearly revenue of the services mentioned above: the company has to exceed 750 million EUR of worldwide targeted services’ revenue, and 25 million EUR of targeted services’ revenue in France. The obvious goal being here to limit the tax to multinationals of significant size, partly because they are those responsible for the highest share of tax avoidance eroding French taxes, partly so as to compensate for the network effects and returns to scale they enjoy over their smaller competitors in a market that is characteristically oligopolistic.

Potentially distortionary, it may be argued that this limitation to companies above an arbitrary threshold leads to differentiated treatment, directly contrary to the principle of tax neutrality. A similar criticism encountered is the one decrying the arbitrary nature of the threshold chosen, which many have interpreted as being deliberately set so high – rather than according to a legal or economic rationale - so as to carve out European and French companies from the imposable criteria, but being formally compliant with non-discrimination principles in WTO, OECD and EU rules. According to governmental and third-party estimates, the number of imposable companies would range from 30 to 40, out of which the only wholly French-owned company would be Criteo. What appears clear is that the face burden of this tax levied would be borne mostly by US-based companies, who in the latter of these estimates comprise as much as 17 companies of the 26 listed.

The ineffectiveness of digital services taxes: the Google Case study

Finally, the means of calculation of the tax itself: even when deliberately disregarding the widely documented distortionary effects of revenue-based taxation, the limited effectiveness of these measures are evident. The chosen rate of 3% on the revenues -while higher than most other gross receipt taxes (in the USA for instance, 7 states have gross receipts taxes on the totality of transactions, with statutory rates going from 0.02% in Tennessee to a maximum 1.95% in Delaware) to make up for a smaller tax base - mentioned by the services above is by no means enough to compensate for the discrepancy tax avoidance brings to the table. Even only a superficial look at the revenue created by the tax – in the fiscal year 2019, the French government has only collected 350 million EUR from the tax– would make such a statement clear. Yet, providing a concrete example here would help in better visualising the minimal effect of the tax on the profitability of the firms.

As we can see from the estimate above, basing oneself off of market shares, realistic growth factors and the worldwide revenues reported by Alphabet Inc. for the fiscal year of 2019, it is possible to estimate Google France’s 2019 revenue to be around when 3708.5 million EUR, 7 times higher than the amount that we can reliably presume Google to have actually reported to the French authorities. Its breakdown would be the following, with only around 68.7% of its activities (Youtube and Google’s ad revenue) falling under the scope of the digital services tax.

Note: the calculations for ‘Hedging gains’, ‘Other bets’ and ‘Non-ad revenue from Google & Youtube (excl. Cloud) are estimated by holding constant the global proportion of revenues. Source : calculations from 2019 yearly report, 2018 declared revenues in France, web analytics, industry reports and benchmarks.

More importantly still, the actual impact of the DST would really only marginally help in making Google’s actual imposition rate fairer and closer to France’s 31% corporate tax rate. Computing the amount of corporate tax actually paid to the theoretical imposable profits, the result is of an estimated effective imposition rate of 2.26%. As the total amount of ad revenues Alphabet receives is of 2472.1 million EUR, the potentially due DST amount is of 74.16 million EUR, by no means enough to compensate the gap with the corporate tax that, basing ourselves off of our prior estimate, ought to be paid in France in the first place : the effective imposition rate, considering that the DST is deductible from corporate income tax, would in fact be of 8.16%. Ironically, Google France would be artificially in deficit for the year, the amount of due DST tax being higher that the net revenues declared so far.

Furthermore, this extreme scenario would apply only in the case where the totality of revenues stemming from French users were to be declared by Google as having originated in France. A case that, considering that the due tax will be calculated based on the yearly VAT reports submitted to French authorities, is highly unlikely. Without more structural reforms of taxation regimes in fact, applicable tools characterization of income and linkage of digital revenue sources to one jurisdiction would remain largely insufficient to legally pin down owed tax. And needless to say, Google is unlikely to voluntarily start declaring the totality of its income in a 31% CIT jurisdiction.

More realistically in fact, the actual impact of the tax would resemble more closely that of the second column, with a constant amount of reported French revenues. The ineffectiveness of the tax here is even clearer: far from a deus ex machina solution, the net fiscal impact of the DST is of 7.3 million EUR for a subsidiary we can realistically estimate to be earning 3708.6 million EUR a year in revenues.

Digital services taxes: an insufficient solution across the board

While this rapid overview is by no means exhaustive, it is sufficient to get a glimpse of why unilateral initiatives to solve tax avoidance fall short of the mark. The issues start from the point of applicability: from the distortionary effects of gross revenue-based taxation, to the incompatibility with long-established international taxation principles, all the way to the seemingly unfair targeting of foreign companies and the plausible contrasts with privacy regulation. They end with concerns of effectiveness and efficiency. Among the further concerns marring the viability of such taxes, we can note the minor amount of revenue netted, the extensive unintended economic costs, from pass-on costs of the tax to compliance costs and distorted incentives, and finally the significant implementation efforts burdening public administrations.

At best, these initiatives are a catalyst for international talks, a means to flex policy muscles and a bargaining chip at the international negotiating table. Judging by the speed of current OECD negotiations, this view could be dubbed as optimistic. At worst, the French and other DSTs are bound to mainly be a political tool for distraction and short-term gain, rather than the solution they are often portrayed to be.

Real solutions to the tax avoidance and advantageous taxation digital supergroups enjoy can only be international and structural, updating practices of international taxation that have now become obsolete. They cannot be a mere quick fix. Voters demand it, the sustainability of our economic models requires it. Recalcitrant countries, as well as the very groups targeted by these insufficient measures need to understand it: they have got to be talking about taxes. Refusing to sit at the table and stifling progress towards consensus will start not to be enough anymore, as policymakers and citizens start escalating pressure for change. The cost of the proliferation of sub-optimal measures such as the Taxe GAFA risks being massive for all stakeholders involved.

The world deserves better. Structural reform is as urgent as ever. Our faith in the system depends on it. As Bregman himself would put it: “All the rest is bullshit”.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Alphabet Inc. ; 2020 ; ‘Alphabet Inc. Fourth Quarter and Fiscal Year 2019 results’ ; Alphabet Inc.

Alstadsæter et al. ; 2015 ; ‘ Patent Boxes Design, Patents Location and Local R&D’ ; European Commission

Article L64 of the Livre des Procédures Fiscales (2008)

Attac France ; 2019 ; ‘La “taxe GAFA”, une fausse solution à l’évasion fiscale’ ; Attac France ; https://france.attac.org/nos-publications/notes-et-rapports/article/la-taxe-gafa-une-fausse-solution-a-l-evasion-fiscale

Avi-Yonah, R. S. & Xu, H. ; 2019 ; ‘Evaluating BEPS’ ; Erasmus Law Review

Bacache-Beauvallet, M. ; 2018 ; ‘Tax competition, tax coordination, and e-commerce’ ; Journal of Public Economic Theory

Becker, J. & Englisch, J. ; 2018 ; ‘EU Digital Services Tax: A Populist and Flawed Proposal’ ; Kluwer International Tax Blog , http://kluwertaxblog.com/2018/03/16/eu-digital-services-tax-populistflawed-proposal/

Beer, S. et al. ; 2018 ; ‘International Corporate Tax Avoidance: A Review of the Channels, Effect Sizes, and Blind Spots’ ; International Monetary Fund

Bird & Bird ; 2020 ; ‘ Digital Services Tax , Overview of the progress of implementation by EU Member States ‘ ; Bird & Bird

Blanluet, G. ; 2015 ; ‘L’entreprise et la jurisprudence fiscale du Conseil constitutionnel’ ; French Constitutional Council

Bloch, F. and Demange, G. ; 2018 ; ‘Taxation and privacy protection on Internet platforms’ ; Journal of Public Economic Theory

Bourreau, M. et al. ; 2018 ; ‘Taxation of a digital monopoly platform’ ; Journal of Public Economic Theory

Bradshaw, T. ; 2020 ; ‘UK aims to raise £500m a year through digital services tax’ ; Financial Times ; viewed on 16 August 2020 ; https://www.ft.com/content/a2ccbba8-5f0e-11ea-b0ab-339c2307bcd4

Brauner, Y. ; 2014 ; ‘BEPS: An Interim Evaluation’; World Tax Journal

Brauner, Y. and Baez, C. ; 2015; ‘Withholding Taxes in the Service of BEPS Action 1: Address the Tax Challenges of the Digital Economy’; IBFD

Brossas ; V. ; 2020 ; ‘Les parts de marché 2020 des moteurs de recherche en France et dans le Monde !’ ; Le PTI Digital ; https://www.leptidigital.fr/webmarketing/seo/parts-marche-moteurs-recherche-france-monde-11049/#Parts-de-marche-des-moteurs-de-recherche-en-France-en-2019

Brynjolfsson, E. and Kahin, L.M. ; 2000 ; ‘Understanding the Digital Economy – Data, Tools, and Research’ ; MIT Press

Canalys ; 2019 ; ‘Canalys: Global cloud market up 37%, with channels creating new growth engine’ ; https://www.canalys.com/newsroom/global-cloud-marketQ32019#:~:text=The%20worldwide%20cloud%20infrastructure%20services,the%20next%20three%20players%20combined

Chamberlain, A. and Fleenor, P. ; 2006 ; ‘Tax Pyramiding: The Economic Consequences Of Gross Receipts Taxes’ ; Tax Foundation

Cobham, A. and Jansky, P. ; 2017 ; ‘Global distribution of revenue loss from tax avoidance’ ; United Nations University World Institute for Development Economics Research

Cobham, A. and Jansky, P. ; 2018 ; ‘Global distribution of revenue loss from corporate tax avoidance: re‐estimation and country results’ ; Journal of International Development

Cockfield, A. ; 2002 ; ‘The Law and Economics of Digital Taxation: Challenges to Traditional Tax Laws and Principles’ ; International Bureau of Fiscal Documentation

Collier, R. et al ; 2018 ; ‘Dissecting the EU’s Recent Anti-Tax Avoidance Measures: Merits and Problems’ ; European Network for Economic and Fiscal Policy Research

Commercial Court of Paris ; 2020 ; ‘Google France’ ; InfoGreffe ; https://www.infogreffe.com/entreprise-societe/443061841-google-france-750103B094270000.html

Crivelli, E. et al. ; 2015 ; ‘Base Erosion, Profit Shifting and Developing Countries’ ; International Monetary Fund

De Crouy-Chanel, E. ; 2011 ; ‘Le Conseil constitutionnel mobilise-t-il d'autres principes constitutionnels que l'égalité en matière fiscale’; French Constitutional Council ; https://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/nouveaux-cahiers-du-conseil-constitutionnel/le-conseil-constitutionnel-mobilise-t-il-d-autres-principes-constitutionnels-que-l-egalite-en

Deloitte ; 2017 ; ‘BEPS Actions’ ; Deloitte ; viewed on 16 August 2020 ; https://www2.deloitte.com/global/en/pages/tax/articles/beps-actions.html

Deloitte ; 2020 ; ‘2020 global survey results on the OECD’s Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) initiative and the next wave of Global Tax Reset’ ; Deloitte

Dischinger, M. and Riedel, N. ; 2011 ; ‘Corporate taxes and the location of intangible assets within multinational firms’; Journal of Public Economics

Dulin, A. ; 2016 ; ‘Les mécanismes d’évitement fiscal, leurs impacts sur le consentement à l’impôt et la cohésion sociale’ ; French Economic, Social and Environmental Council

European Commission ; 2019 ; ‘Data on taxation: statutory tax rates’ ; EU Open Data Port al ; viewed on 16 August 2020 ; https://data.europa.eu/euodp/en/data/dataset/data-on-taxation-statutory-tax-rates/resource/da6b0812-51ac-4d8d-9520-4bbb197d847e

European Commission ; 2019 ; ‘Taxation Trends in the European Union ‘ ; European Commission

European Commission ; 2018 ; ‘Proposal for a Council Directive on the common system of a digital services tax on revenues resulting from the provision of certain digital services. COM/2018/0148 final - 2018/073’ ; EUR Lex

European Commission ; 2020 ; ‘Total general government revenue’ ; Eurostat ; viewed on 16 August 2020 ; https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/databrowser/view/tec00021/default/table?lang=en

European Parliament ; 2016 ; ‘Tax Challenges in the Digital Economy ; European Parliament

European Parliament Research Service ; 2015 ; ‘Bringing transparency, coordination and convergence to corporate tax policies in the European Union’ ; European Parliament

European Parliamentary Research Service ; 2020 ; ‘Digital taxation State of play and way forward’ ; European Parliament

EY ; 2018 ; ‘Global Tax Policy and Controversy Briefing ‘ ; EY

Faulhaber, L. V. ; 2019 ; ‘Taxing Tech: The Future of Digital Taxation’; Virginia Tax Review

Fleming, S. et al. ; 2020 ; ‘US upends global digital tax plans after pulling out of talks with Europe’ ; Financial Times ; https://www.ft.com/content/1ac26225-c5dc-48fa-84bd-b61e1f4a3d94

Fondation iFRAP ; 2019 ; ‘ Les effets contre-productifs de la «taxe GAFA» ‘ ; Fondation iFRAP ; https://www.ifrap.org/budget-et-fiscalite/les-effets-contre-productifs-de-la-taxe-gafa

Fondazione Nazionale dei Commercialisti ; 2019 ; ‘La tassazione dell’economia digitale. Nota d’aggiornamento.’ ; Fondazione Nazionale dei Commercialisti

French Government ; 2018 ; ‘Livre IS : Impôt sur les sociétés ‘ ; French Government : viewed on 16 August 2020 ; https://www.impots.gouv.fr/portail/www2/precis/precis.html?ancre=cpt-8.5.1.5

French Government ; 2019 ; ‘Lutte contre l’évasion et la fraude fiscales’ ; French Government

French Government ; 2020 ; ‘Impôt sur les societés’ ; French Government ; viewed on 16 August 2020 ; https://www.impots.gouv.fr/portail/international-professionnel/impot-sur-les-societes

French Government ; 1968 ; ‘ Convention entre la France et l’Iralnde tendant à éviter les doubles impositions et à prévenir l’évasion fiscale en matière d’impôts sur le revenu’ ; French Government

French National Assembly ; 2019 ; ‘Avis fait au nom de la commission des affaires économiques sur le projet de loi, après engagement de la procédure accélérée, portant création d’une taxe sur les services numériques et modification de la trajectoire de baisse de l’impôt sur les sociétés (n° 1737)‘ ; French National Assembly

French National Assembly ; 2019 ; ‘ Étude d’impact : Projet de loi portant création d’une taxe sur les services numériques et modification de la trajectoire de baisse de l’impôt sur les sociétés’ ; French National Assembly

French National Assembly ; 2019 ; ‘Projet de loi nº 1737 portant création d’une taxe sur les services numériques et modification de la trajectoire de baisse de l’impôt sur les sociétés’ ; French National Assembly

French National Assembly ; 2018 ; ‘Rapport d’information par la commission des finances en conclusion des travaux d’une mission d’information relative à l’évasion fiscale internationale des entreprises’ ; French National Assembly

French National Assembly; 2019 ; ‘Rapport fait au nom de la commission mixte paritaire chargée de proposer un texte sur les dispositions restant en discussion du projet de loi portant création d’une taxe sur les services numériques et modification de la trajectoire de baisse de l’impôt sur les sociétés’ ; French National Assembly

French Senate ; 2018 ; ‘ ‘Rapport fait au nom de la commission des finances sur le projet de loi de finances, adopté par l’assemblée nationale pour 2019’ ; French Senate

French Senate ; 2019 ; ‘Rapport fait au nom de la commission des finances sur le projet de loi, adopté par l’Assemblée Nationale après engagement de la procédure accélérée, portant création d'une taxe sur les services numériques et modification de la trajectoire de baisse de l'impôt sur les sociétés’ ; French Senate

Fuest, C. and Riegel, N. ; 2009 ; ‘Tax evasion, tax avoidance and tax expenditures in developing countries:A review of the literature’ ; Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation

Fuest, C. et al. ; 2013 ; ‘Profit Shifting and ‘Aggressive’ Tax Planning by Multinational Firms: Issues and Options for Reform’ ; ZEW

Fueuerstein , I. ; 2020; ‘La première cuvée de la taxe GAFA a rapporté 350 millions d'euros’ ; Les Écho s ; https://www.lesechos.fr/economie-france/budget-fiscalite/350-millions-deuros-de-recettes-pour-la-taxe-gafa-1205423

Fung, S. ; 2017 ; ‘The Questionable Legitimacy of the OECD/G20 BEPS Project’ ; Erasmus Law Review

Geringer , S. ; 2019 ; ‘National digital taxes – Lessons from Europe’ ; South African Journal of Accounting Research

Giles, C. ; 2019 ; ‘OECD proposes global minimum corporate tax rate’ ; Financial Times ; https://www.ft.com/content/f17a406e-021a-11ea-b7bc-f3fa4e77dd47

Gilley E. et al. ; 2020 ; ‘Digital Taxation—Implications For EU Technology Companies ‘ ; Ropes & Gray LLP ; https://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/tax-authorities/881350/podcast-digital-taxationimplications-for-eu-technology-companies

Goolsbee, A. ; ‘Implications of Electronic Commerce for Fiscal Policy’, in Lehr, W. H and Pupillo, L. M. ; ‘Internet Policy and Economics Challenges and Perspectives’, Dordrecht

Gravelle, J. ; 2013 ; ‘Tax Havens: International Tax Avoidance and Evasion’ ; Congressional Research Service

Hufbauer G. C. and Lu Z. ; 2018 ; ‘The European Union's Proposed Digital Services Tax: A De Facto Tariff’ ; Peterson Institute for International Economics (PIIE)

Iacob, N. and Simonelli, F. ; 2019 ; ‘Taxing the Digital Economy: Time for Pragmatism’ ; ISPI ; viewed on 16 August 2020 ; https://www.ispionline.it/en/pubblicazione/taxing-digital-economy-time-pragmatism-24196#n1

International Monetary Fund ; 2019 ; ‘World Economic Outlook Database’ ; International Monetary Fund ; viewed on 16 August 2020 ; https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/weo/2019/02/weodata/index.aspx

Iqbal, M. ; 2020 ; ‘App Revenue Statistics (2019)’ ; Business of Apps ; viewed on 16 August 2020 ; https://www.businessofapps.com/data/app-revenues/#1

Italian Chamber of Deputies ; 2019 ; ‘ Web Tax ed economia digitale’ ; Italian Chamber of Deputies ; viewed on 16 August 2020 ; https://temi.camera.it/leg18/post/web-tax-ed-economia-digitale.html

Juranek S. et al. ; 2018 ; ‘Transfer Pricing Regulation and Taxation of Royalty Payments’, Journal of Public Economic Theory

Katz, R. ; 2015 ; ‘The Impact of Taxation on the Digital Economy’; International Telecommunication Union

Kimani, E. ; 2018 ; ‘Tax Avoidance: Meaning, History & Rational’ ; SSRN

KPMG ; 2020 ; ‘Corporate tax rates table’ ; KPMG ; https://home.kpmg/xx/en/home/services/tax/tax-tools-and-resources/tax-rates-online/corporate-tax-rates-table.html

KPMG; 2020 ; ‘Taxation of the digitalized economy’ ; KPMG

Laye, S. ; 2019; ‘Amazon répercute la «taxe GAFA» sur ses tarifs: pourquoi la taxation française n’est pas efficace’ ; Le Figaro ; viewed on 16 August 2020 ; https://www.lefigaro.fr/vox/economie/amazon-repercute-la-taxe-gafa-sur-ses-tarifs-pourquoi-la-taxation-francaise-n-est-pas-efficace-20190805

Lehr, W. H. and Pupillo, L. M. ; 2009 ; ‘ Internet Policy: A Mix of Old and New Challenges’, in Lehr, W. H and Pupillo, L. M. ; ‘Internet Policy and Economics Challenges and Perspectives’, Dordrecht

Loretz et al. ; 2017 ; ‘Aggressive tax planning indicators’ ; European Commission

Mahjoubi, M. ; 2019 ; ‘Les Hackers de la Fiscalité’ ; Mahjoubi, M.

Maitrot de la Motte, A. ; 2019 ; ‘Chronique Droit fiscal de l’UE - La Commission européenne a présenté deux propositions de directives relatives à l’imposition des entreprises du secteur numérique’ ; Revue trimestrielle de droit européen

Marques, N. ; 2019 ; ‘La taxation française des services numériques, un constat erroné, des effets pervers’ ; Institut Molinari

Meldgaard, H. et al. ; 2015 ; ‘Study on Structures of Aggressive Tax Planning and Indicators’ ; European Commission

Mikesell, J. L. ; 2007 ; ‘Gross Receipts Taxes in State Government Finance: A Review of Their History and Performance ‘; Tax Foundation Background Paper

Mostafavi, S. and Korenbeusser, S. ; 2019 ; ‘A new French tax on digital services’ ; International Tax Repor t ; https://www.internationaltaxreport.com/corporate-taxes/article137438.ece

OECD ; 2013 ; ‘Action Plan on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting’ ; OECD

OECD ; 2013 ;‘Addressing Base Erosion and Profit Shifting’ ; OECD

OECD ; 2014 ; ‘Addressing the Tax Challenges of the Digital Economy’ ; OECD

OECD ; 2018 ; Tax Challenges Arising from Digitalisation – Interim Report 2018’ ; OECD

OECD ; 2019 ; ‘Programme of Work to Develop a Consensus Solution to the Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the Economy’ ; OECD

OECD ; 2019 ; ‘Secretariat Proposal for a “Unified Approach” under Pillar One' ; OECD

OECD ; 2020 ; ‘Corporate Tax Statistics Database’ ; OECD ; viewed on 16 August 2020 ; https://www.oecd.org/tax/beps/corporate-tax-statistics-database.htm

OECD ; 2020 ; ‘Glossary of tax terms’ ; OECD ; viewed 16 August 2020 ; https://www.oecd.org/ctp/glossaryoftaxterms.htm

OECD ; 2020 ; ‘Statement by the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS on the Two-Pillar Approach to Address the Tax Challenges Arising from the Digitalisation of the Economy’ ; OECD

OECD, 2015 ; ‘Addressing the Tax Challenges of the Digital Economy – Action 1: 2015 Final Report’ ; OECD

Olbert, M. and Spengel, C. ; 2017 ; ‘International Taxation in the Digital Economy: Challenge Accepted?’ ; World Tax Journal

OpinionWay ; 2019 ; ‘2017-2019 : la transformation politique du vote Macron’ ; Le Figaro

Overesch, M. ; 2016 ; ‘Steuervermeidung multinationaler Unternehmen: Die Befunde der empirischen Forschung’ ; Perspektiven der Wirtschaftspolitik

Park, W.G. ; 2008, ‘International patent protection: 1960–2005’, Research Policy

Pellefigue, J. ; 2019 ; ‘The French Digital Service Tax An Economic Impact Assessment’ ; Taj

Pierre Moscovici ; 2015 ; ‘Action Plan for Fair and Efficient Corporate Taxation – Speaking points of Commissioner Pierre Moscovici’ ; European Commission

PwC ; 2018 ; ‘Economic and Policy Aspects of Digital Services Turnover Taxes: A Literature Review ‘ ; PwC

PwC ; 2018 ; ‘Understanding the ZEW-PwC Report, “Digital Tax Index, 2017”’ ; PwC ; viewed on 16 August 2020; https://www.pwc.com/us/en/press-releases/2018/understanding-the-zew-pwcreport.html#:~:text=In%20summary%2C%20the%20ZEW%2DPwC,by%20the%20%E2%80%9Cdigital%20sector%E2%80%9D

PwC and ZEW ; 2017; ‘Digital Tax Index 2017’ ; PwC

Rees, M. ; 2019 ; ‘Taxe GAFA : la CNIL juge impossible la rétroactivité au 1er janvier 2019’ ; NextInpact ; https://www.nextinpact.com/news/107697-taxe-gafa-cnil-juge-impossible-retroactivite-au-1er-janvier-2019.htm

SensorTower ; 2019 ; ‘Global App Revenue Grew 23% Year-Over-Year Last Quarter to $21.9 Billion’ ; SensorTower ; https://sensortower.com/blog/app-revenue-and-downloads-q3-2019

Shaxson, N. ; 2019 ; ‘Tackling Global Tax Havens ‘ ; International Monetary Fund

SimilarWeb ; 2020 ; ‘Top Websites Ranking. Top sites ranking for all categories in France (July 2020)’ ; SimilarWeb ; https://www.similarweb.com/top-websites/france/

Solsman, J. E. ; 2019 ; ‘YouTube crosses 2 billion viewers a month’ ; CNET ; https://www.cnet.com/news/youtube-crosses-2-billion-viewers-a-month/

Tang, P. and Bussink , H. ; 2017 ; ‘EU Tax Revenue Loss from Google and Facebook’ ; Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists & Democrats in the European Parliament

Testa W. A. and Mattoon R. H. ; 2007 ; ‘Is There a Role for Gross Receipts Taxation?‘ ; National Tax Journal

UK Government ; 2016 ; ‘Tax avoidance: an introduction’ ; UK Government ; https://www.gov.uk/guidance/tax-avoidance-an-introduction

UK Government ; 2020 ; ‘Digital Services Tax’ ; UK Government ; https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/introduction-of-the-digital-services-tax/digital-services-tax

UNCTAD ; 2017 ; ‘The top 100 digital MNEs, World Investment Report 2017 – Chapter IV’ ; UNCTAD

United States Trade Representative ; 2019 ; ‘Report on France’s Digital Services Tax ‘ ; United States Trade Representative

Vicard V. ; 2019 ; ‘L’évitement fiscal des multinationales en France : combien et où ?’ ; CEPII

ZEW; 2016 ; ‘The Impact of Tax Planning on Forward-Looking Effective Tax Rates’ ; European Commission

Nicola Bressan is a public affairs consultant from Italy. Passionate about the thousand ways tech influences society and citizens, his objective is to understand how to leverage digitisation for the greater policy good.

Solving the Puzzle of Platform Governance

Fri, 22 Jan 2021 19:36:06 GMT

ABOUT

From the Rohingya genocide in Myanmar to the recent U.S. Capitol riot, society has witnessed social media being used as amplifiers of hate speech and disinformation unraveling the fabric of democracy worldwide. As a result, both public and private actors are increasingly under pressure to play a more active role in online content moderation inevitably raising other concerns. Social media companies like Facebook, Youtube and Twitter are criticized for their lack of transparency and democratic legitimacy in taking such decisions. On the other hand, governments tend to outsource human rights decisions constitutionally reserved for courts to private actors. Some are tempted to interfere by censoring political dissent. From Facebook’s Oversight Board to Article 19’s Social Media Councils and the EU Commission’s Digital Services Act, we discuss new emerging concepts that seek to address the challenges of online content moderation in an endeavor to put the pieces of platform governance together.

SPEAKERS

Pierre François Docquir is a researcher and expert in the fields of Human Rights Law, Internet and Media Law and Regulation working for ARTICLE 19 as the head of the Media Freedom Programme. He holds a Ph.D. in law from Université Libre de Bruxelles.

Jenny Domino is an associate legal advisor at the International Commission of Jurists steering the organization’s policy engagement with social media companies and shaping organizational response to the human rights impact of technology companies. She holds an LL.M. from Harvard Law School a J.D. from the University of the Philippines and B.A. cum laude from Ateneo de Manila University.

Bence Kertész is a policy officer at DG CONNECT of the European Commission, working in the unit Digital Services and Platforms responsible for the recently adopted Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act proposals. Previously, he has worked as advisor for information rights at the BBC. He holds university degrees in law and film production/management from the Eötvös Loránd University and the University of Drama, Film and Television in Budapest, respectively.

Abhilash Nair is senior lecturer at Aston Law School. His principal area of research is within the area of internet law, specifically the regulation of illegal content and internet pornography. Abhilash is secretary of the British and Irish Law, Education and Technology Association and a member of the Evidence Working Group of the UK Council for Internet Safety (UKCIS) as well as of the UN-IGF Dynamic Coalition on Child Online Safety.

Arbiters of Truth Online?

Mon, 18 Jan 2021 01:05:22 GMT

ABOUT

In the aftermath of the US Capitol riot, technology companies from Facebook and Youtube to Shopify, Snapchat, Twitch and TikTok deplatformed the outgoing US president along with myriad of other accounts responsible for spreading disinformation about the US elections and inciting a deadly insurrection at the heart of American democracy. Parler, a right-wing social media company, faced the same fate from its service providers. Despite little sympathy for facilitators of anti-democratic sentiment, this unprecedented move highlights the unchecked power of technology companies. With an eye on legislative efforts in the EU and US, we navigate around questions of accountability and liability for social media companies. While different constitutional traditions shape the global debate, policymakers still face the same dilemmas. How can constitutional safeguards be juxtaposed against corporate responsibility? Where to draw the line between censorship and freedom of speech? And most importantly, who determines what stays online.

SPEAKER

Prof. Florence G’sell is the co-director of the Chair Digital, Governance, and Sovereignty at Sciences Po Paris. As a full professor of private law at the University of Lorraine and associate researcher at IHEJ, her main research focus is the issues of private law from a comparative perspective and the issues raised by the digital transition.

Twitter Permanently Bans Donald Trump. What Does That Mean For Us?

Sun, 10 Jan 2021 18:16:18 GMT

DIGITAL DEMOCRACY

Twitter Permanently Bans Donald Trump. What Does That Mean For Us?

The social media platform decision to suspend the President’s @realDonaldTrump account “due to the risk of further incitement of violence” sparked questions on platforms’ role when it comes to free speech misinformation and content moderation.

By Francesca Scapolo

January 10, 2021

Ina blog post released on the 8th January 2021 by the Twitter Safety account, the social media giant said it had “permanently suspended” Donald Trump’s account, citing concerns over “the risk of the US president using the platform to incite further violence”. Twitch, Vimeo, Reddit and Shopify, Facebook and YouTube joined Twitter by suspending or limiting Trump’s access to their platforms.

These actions come after years of criticism that social media companies have not done enough to clamp down on Trump for spreading misinformation and inciting violence. A few hours from its account suspension, Trump tried to bypass it by tweeting from the official presidential account, @POTUS . He immediately shared a series of tweets accusing the social media company of “banning free speech” and attacking (again) Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1995. According to Trump, that allows social media platforms like Twitter to get away with labelling or even suppressing his posts which spread lies about the 2020 US Election (Twitter quickly removed the tweets).

In an attempt to crack down on QAnon conspiracy theory, Twitter also banned some prominent Trump supporters like Michael Flynn, Sidney Powell and Ron Watkins as part of its broader efforts to tackle misinformation. Despite often resisting the calls to moderate its platform, Twitter has taken a stronger stance against conspiracy theories that have been tied to the violence of the past months. In addition to removing 7,000 accounts and limiting many others for dabbling in QAnon, the platform also restricted their content from appearing in its search functions and “Trending Topics” feature.

Some tweets from US President’s official @POTUS account

Deplatformisation vs free speech?

Banning Trump from posting on most social platforms will undoubtedly have an immediate and noticeable impact in decreasing his ability to reach and communicate directly with his followers. As previous examples have shown (yes, Trump is not the first one *), deplatformisation can lead to an audience reduction and a limitation in terms of reach, but it won’t dismantle the ecosystem of online extremism. Most importantly, it won’t prevent Trump from using alternative service providers to engage with his supporters (i.e. his app, which has a news section ).

Twitter’s decision has been strongly criticised by Republicans, who saw it as a violation of Trump’s free speech and a decision against the US First Amendment. That has opened a debate on social media platforms’ power in influencing and limiting free speech: what does it mean when a corporation can censor a government official? Who should have the right to decide what we can and can’t say? Will Twitter now ban other government officials who keep inciting violence?

But according to an in-depth analysis by The New York Times , it seems that the decision is entirely lawful as the First Amendment prohibits government censorship and does not apply to decisions made by private businesses (in this case, Twitter).

Those are primarily governed by section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which again leaves Twitter free. As Bietti wrote in a recent piece, insisting on the bad cop vs good cop dualism when talking about Trump and Twitter is misleading as “speech regulation cannot be left exclusively to either of these two characters, because neither of them is — or can be — truly and fully aligned with the public interest, let alone trustworthy.” (Bietti, 2020)

It is also essential to bear in mind that those platforms are neither neutral nor apolitical, and there is no general requirement for them to become so.

What is the role of misinformation in all of this?

In addition to that, the recent shocking images from Washington and the suspension of Trump accounts from various social media platforms also spawned several insightful comments on the role misinformation plays. Early this year, a Harvard study found that mainstream news outlets are the largest amplifier of White House disinformation as most journalists are now on Twitter and tend to share their initial comments there.

General claims that the election has been stolen aren’t new; they were already widespread in the last US elections . One of the main differences seems to be the strong endorsement of these claims by figures of authority, such as the President of the United States, which might have somehow made them more credible (Mercier, 2020). As pointed out in Horowitz’s book The Deadly Ethnic Riot, pre-riot rumours serve to channel and justify functions, and that is especially true in the case of social media where rumours of election theft committed by the opposite side have been effectively used to coordinate harmful and violent actions just a few days ago.

Misinformation is a serious matter, but that needs to be seen as a tool used to mobilise collective actions. In a piece published last October, Shannon McGregor, Assistant Professor in the Hussman School of Journalism and Media at the University of North Carolina, and Daniel Kreiss, Associate Professor in the Hussman School of Journalism and Media at the University of North Carolina, wrote something extremely relevant in this context:

“Journalists and voters should pay more attention to the motivations, content, and drivers of mis- and disinformation. Research on those examines how people might share information, regardless of its factual basis, to forge a collective identity with others, how actors strategically utilize racial divisions to further disinformation, and how far-right groups manipulate the media to spread radicalizing conspiracy theories, in turn driving misguided searches for “the truth.” (McGregor, 2020)

As stressed above, polarisation is rooted in social identity, which results in group identifications, a process that changes how we think and feels about ourselves and our (political) opponents. The campaign and election of Donald Trump in 2016 laid bare this fact of the American electorate, its successful rhetoric of “us versus them” tapping into a powerful current of anger and resentment (Mason, 2018).

Tweet from Emily Thorson, Associate Professor of Political Science at Syracuse University

A move towards the harmonisation of content moderation across social media platforms?

The past months showed how social media platforms aren’t often transparent about their decisions regarding content moderation. That usually leaves them open to claims of censorship which hide the real costs of misinformation.

If we think about social media as a territory, or a civic public space, where political actors contend for power the same way they do in elections, the notion of content moderation becomes even more problematic. Content moderation isn’t just about content; it also involves behavioural aspects. An example is the #ProudBoys hashtag on Twitter, which has been flooded with images of LGBTQI+ pride, displacing posts made by neo-Nazis and white supremacists using the tag. A harmful hashtag that violated the platform’s terms and conditions turned into a positive campaign overnight. How should a platform deal with it?

Despite the frequent abdication of responsibility by social media companies, (including the missing endorsement of The Santa Clara Principles on Transparency and Accountability in Content Moderation that offers minimum standards for companies of these scales by almost all companies apart from Reddit), the actions taken by the different platforms in the past days, might suggest we are going towards harmonising content moderation policies. Such harmonisation across platforms on speech standards is essential as it’s bound for free expression.

We need to accept that perfect enforcement in terms of content moderation won’t probably ever be possible, at least at these platforms’ scale. However, we cannot allow the inevitability of errors to come and excuse all mistakes. Platforms should ensure that their decisions about speech are transparent and in line with global human rights standards.

* Facebook also banned Hezbollah because of its status as a US-designated foreign terror organisation, despite the party holding seats in Lebanon’s Parliament.

Francesca is currently completing a MA in Big Data in Culture and Society at King's College London, and working as Engagement Manager at Commonplace, a cause-led tech startup that operates a map-based website and mobile application that allows residents to comment on their local environment. She hold a MSc in Violence, Conflict and Development from SOAS and a BA in International Relations from the University of Trento. She loves hiking, playing table tennis and collecting books. At our institute, she leads our science communication efforts.

ClimaTech

Sun, 10 Jan 2021 17:41:55 GMT

COSMONAUT

S E R I E S

ClimaTech

Danielius Ratkevičius

Challenges & Opportunities

Climate change is the single most defining challenge of our generation. Digital technologies offer unique opportunities to enable and accelerate the green transition by enabling a smarter use of resources, decarbonize sectors and help both industries and societies to adapt to the effects of climate change.

Digital Impact

Digitalization and new technologies have become major drivers of societal change and come with the promise of being the necessary tools to solve global challenges. But digitalization in itself does not achieve sustainable societies. Instead, digital has the potential to accelerate current environmental efforts through increased connectivity and by the gathering, sharing and analysis of data.

Wizzora

Climate Activism

Due to the current pandemic, the COP26 that was supposed to take place in Glasgow in the last part of November 2020 has been postponed until 2021. A group of young students from the UK decided to create the MOCK COP26 to fill the void of the cancelled event. Read the conversation with the inspiring people behind the MOCK COP26 about the role of young climate activists in accelerating global climate efforts.

Nishara Chathuranga

Our Series

Big Data & Antitrust: 2020 in Review

Sat, 09 Jan 2021 23:41:15 GMT

INNOVATION

Big Data & Antitrust: 2020 in Review

A non-exhaustive review of some of the most relevant competition law cases held in 2020, featuring analysis of tech-mergers and the use of personal data as a key advantage for monopolies. The foregoing, with the aim of setting up the discussion for what we believe will be the new competition law and regulation, one that incorporates a digital acumen nurtured by other legal disciplines such as privacy law.

By Juliana Novaes, Mario Tavares Moyron, Miljana Todorovic, Nathalie Alquati Bonisoli, Petar Pešić and Sahil Tharia

January 10, 2021

The competition law landscape and its judicial and administrative review were no exceptions for the global challenges faced during 2020. On the one hand, technological development demonstrated that antitrust policy needs to be enhanced and that aspects previously unnoticed, such as massive accumulation of data, should be part of the analysis of cases by the competent authorities, as this information could be essential for the business model of large technology companies. On the other hand, supervisors landed and started investigations against Big Tech in light of a crescent necessity to protect consumer and privacy rights of their citizenship.

Bundeskartellamt v. Facebook

In June 2020, the German Federal Court of Justice provisionally agreed with the Bundeskartellamt and confirmed the allegation of Facebook abusing its dominant position.

In the assessment of the unilateral behavior of Facebook, the geographical market was found to be Germany, and the relevant product market consisted of private social network services. Since Facebook holds 95% of the market shares it was defined as a dominant undertaking. As the market-dominating network operator, Facebook bears a special responsibility for maintaining still-existing competition in the social networking market.

Consequently, the German competition authority argued that using and implementing Facebook’s data policy, which allows Facebook to collect user and device-related data from sources outside of Facebook and to merge it with data collected on Facebook, constitutes an abuse of a dominant position on the social network market in the form of exploitative terms and conditions. In light of this assessment, the German authorities prohibited the data processing policy Facebook imposes on its users and its corresponding implementation under sections 19(1) and 32 GWB and ordered the termination of this conduct.

It is interesting to note in this case the relationship between data protection and competition law since, from the facts of the docket, it would seem that it is a dispute related only to data protection issues. In this respect, the authorities sustained that a competition law assessment was necessary because the data protection boundaries outlined in the GDPR were overstepped as a consequence of Facebook’s dominant position. To that end, it was indispensable to examine the conduct of dominant companies under competition law also in terms of their data processing activities, as especially the conduct of online businesses is highly relevant from a competition law perspective.

United States’ Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee Investigation

This year we witnessed a much-anticipated hearing in a major congressional antitrust investigation in Washington. On July 27th, the CEOs of Facebook, Amazon, Apple, and Google's parent company Alphabet, faced intense questioning, as a part of over a year-long investigation of the dominance of digital platforms and the adequacy of existing antitrust laws and their enforcement. Although the hearing had an underlying political tone, it was, nevertheless, a much-needed opportunity to request answers to important questions, which were supposed to help determine if those Big Tech had used their dominant position to repress their competition.

The House Judiciary Committee’s Antitrust Subcommittee released in October a Report of over 400 pages, closing an excessive investigation that included, besides the famous CEOs hearing, the production of nearly 1.3 million internal documents and conducting hundreds of hours of interviews.

The Report states that the four businesses enjoy monopoly power, it portrays the challenges due to their domination, and proposes possible remedies to restore competition in the digital economy, strengthen the antitrust laws, and reinvigorate antitrust enforcement.

In the months that follow we shall see if this comprehensive report is going to be a roadmap to a more accountable future of digital platforms.

DOJ v. Google

2020 was undoubtedly marked by the beginning of a case which is already referred to as “a one time in a generation”, a “monumental case”. The USA, acting under the direction of the Attorney General of the US, along with the Attorney Generals of eleven States, lodged the action against Google LLC on 20 October. This civil antitrust lawsuit is brought under Section 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2, to restrain Google from unlawfully maintaining monopolies in the markets of general search services, search advertising, and general search text advertising in the United States, through anticompetitive and exclusionary practices.

As stated in the complaint, Google has used anti competitive tactics to maintain and extend its monopolies in three cornerstones of its empire. Some of these tactics are: entering into tying and other arrangements that require that Google is set as the default general search engine and entering into exclusivity agreements that forbid preinstallation of any competing search service.

The complaint alleges that Google’s anticompetitive practices have had harmful effects on competition and consumers. Google has foreclosed general search engine competitors from gaining vital distribution, scale, and product recognition, which leaves them without any chance to challenge Google.

By restricting competition in general search services, Google’s conduct has supposedly harmed consumers by reducing the quality of general search services and their options as it regards to their own privacy and data protection, lessening choice in general search services, and impeding innovation.

This complaint is the first step in a legal battle that is expected to last for years. It is Google’s quest to present its case and prove that it is not unfairly dominating the online search engine space and that its practices are not anti competitive under long-established antitrust law. At the very finish of the year, in a 42 pages document, Google rebutted accusations that its deals violated antitrust laws.

T-Mobile/Sprint Merger

The year 2020 marked the conclusion of one of the longest awaited mergers. Two telecommunications giants in the US began talks about merging in 2013, when Sprint was evaluating an idea to acquire T-Mobile but dropped it as they were not sure whether they could gain regulatory approval. In 2017 though, the situation changed and this time it was T-Mobile that wanted to acquire Sprint. After initial talks fell off, only a year later talks were resumed and they reached a merger agreement.

That opened up a long wait for the regulatory approval in the US. The deal brought a heavy discussion on whether it should be approved, with a variety of reasons being mentioned in favour of one or the other. FCC approved the merger in 2019 by a 3-2 vote on condition of deploying a 5G network to 97% of US citizens within three years and 90% having speed of at least 100mb/s. The Department of Justice approved the merger on the condition that certain divestitures are made.

That didn’t prevent 13 different Attorney Generals from suing back trying to block the merger. In February 2020, the merger was approved. Sprint ceased its operation in August this year and T-Mobile became a third big player in the US market next to AT&T and Verizon. A so-called 4-2-3 merger was argued on the merits as beneficial for the US consumers and one which would create a new and more powerful competitor to the big players. Use of the network, better quality of services and lower prices alongside improvement in 5G network are some of the reasons that prompted the judge to approve the merger. It remains to be seen whether a condition T-Mobile agreed on before FCC will be achieved in the timeline proposed.

EC vs Apple: a tax-based case

This past year was crucial for Apple. They have brought out a plethora of new products but also won their challenge of the European Commission’s ruling that Apple needs to pay Ireland back 13 billion euros in back taxes. This case, originated in 2016, focused on the alleged state aid that Apple received from Ireland for choosing them as their center of operations for the EMEA region. The Commission in its decision stated that Apple paid tax as low as 0,0005% in 2014 on corporate income. A very elaborate arrangement made by Apple in Ireland used all the deficiencies in the international tax system and the state of Irish economy. Apple and Ireland itself appealed, although Ireland was due to receive a seventh of its annual expenditure.

The General Court decided that the Commission has erred in its findings. In essence, the Commission did not assess the profits and income Apple’s companies in Ireland received, the mutual payments and whether they were in accordance with the “arm’s length” principle. According to the Court, the Commission did not prove that Ireland granted a selective advantage to Apple and that defects in the tax rulings do not prove that there is a selective advantage contrary to the EU State aid rules.

The Commission already announced that they would appeal the judgement which would lead to the European Court of Justice who will have a final say on this matter.

Google’s acquisition of Fitbit

The past 17th of December the European Commission informed its decision to approve the acquisition of Fitbit by Google, under the condition of full compliance with the commitments package offered by Google. In June, the Australian regulator raised concerns that the deal would allow Google to further cement its position and raise barriers to entry for potential rivals. While the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) is undergoing its investigation of the deal, the European approval needs to be examined in light of the previous facts of the case.

In late 2019, Google announced to acquire Fitbit in a $2.1 billion deal. In June 2020, the European Commission opened an in-depth investigation on Google for this deal. The Commission noticed that the proposed acquisition would further entrench Google's market position in the online advertising markets by increasing the already vast amount of data that Google could use for profiling and personalisation of the ads it provides and displays. The Commission's investigation focused on the data collected via Fitbit's wearable devices and the interoperability of wearable devices with Google's Android operating system for smartphones.

Far before the above, In March 2014, Google announced its Android wear platform. Companies such as Motorola, Samsung, LG, HTC and Asus were announced as partners. LG watch and Samsung gear were the first ones launched under the new android gear platform.

Google partnered with all major hardware manufacturers and in October 2014, Google launched its health tracking application Google Fit, supporting almost every blend of Android devices and applications, but for Apple’s.

The facts stated above anticipated the intention of Google to dominate this market by means of such exclusive deals with all major hardware manufacturers in the wearable segment and in software synchronisation. This situation allowed a data monopoly across all devices and applications to Google.

After Fitbit's acquisition and exclusive deals (such as with Fossil), Google has a dominant position in the wearables market. Google Fit and this acquisition could harm present competition for new rivals, provided that Google processes crucial health data for profiling and advertising as a result of Fitbit’s acquisition. As noted before, this deal has a multi-dimensional antitrust probe by considering factors such as “data advantage” over personalisation of ads and dominance in the market by providing Google Fit and WearOS with between 90 to 95 percent of the devices and apps.

Amazon vs. EU

The business model developed by Amazon is based on its dual role as a marketplace where independent sellers can sell products directly to consumers and as a retailer on the same marketplace. The European Commission has been investigating Amazon's dual role since 2019.

The European Union (EU) vs. Amazon formally started in November 2020 as a result of these investigations. A case was filed against the company based on allegations that Amazon violated competition laws by unfairly using non-public data from sellers that use its platform to gain unfair advantage.

As a marketplace, Amazon processes large amounts of business data from sellers who are dependent on its platform, which provides insights on market trends that could be beneficial for Amazon’s strategy as a competing retailer. The conduct could be considered contrary to Article 102 of the TFEU, which prohibits the abuse of a dominant position.

CNIL’s Data Protection Law Enforcement in 2020

Most of the main technology companies, together with other champions from different markets, were subject to the inspection of Data Protection Authorities and even brought to the courts by breach of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). Some other alleged monopolists were scrutinized by the Antitrust authorities whose investigations considered if specific behaviors from such companies, as data controllers, were performed in accordance with the GDPR.

Even though the national supervisory authorities in Europe varied in their approach to apply the GDPR, it is worth looking at a local example of enforcement to witness where privacy-oriented justice might be heading to.

The French Supervisory Authority, the Commission nationale de l'informatique et des libertés (CNIL) awarded a 60 million euro fine to Google LLC and a 40 million euro fine to Google Ireland Ltd , for setting up advertising cookies on computers from google.fr’s users without obtaining prior consent and without adequate information on the scope of the data processing activities –based on non-essential cookies. In addition, Google failed to guarantee the right of opposition by keeping a cookie stored in the browser even if the user had already opted-out from its collection.

The CNIL also served a 35 million euro fine to Amazon for invasive collection of metadata from user’s devices. The origin of the claim was due to the intervention of third-parties’ webpages featuring Amazon advertisement, whereby clicking on an ad would result in automatic harvesting of the device’s data, different from what would happen to the user if the access had occurred directly into Amazon’s main webpage.

The Carrefour group together with its Bank were fined by the French Regulator as well. Such penalty was determined by assessing that the companies failed to comply with their information obligation (displayed by a complex privacy notice), through excessive cookie gathering by default when accessing Carrefour Bank, in addition to a failure to comply with the obligation to limit their customer’s data retention periods. The overall fines reached only an amount of 3 million euro due to the existing efforts by the group to solve the referred compliance issues.

These events may not seem to impact the field of competition law. But as the antitrust trend confirms, one key input on dominance for alleged monopolists has been the availability of massive amounts of data. Particularly, user’s data associated with people’s activities. This data could be perceived as an essential facility, to a lesser extent, as a forecast of buying preferences, but to a higher extent it could also impact sensitive data, as that regarding users’ health or their financial situation. By allowing massive collection of data, the companies under investigation may have undermined customer’s privacy rights at the same time that they consolidate their business model and increase their profits. It is in such regard that Data Protection Authorities will play a vital role together with Competition Authorities, so that data-oriented businesses behave not only in accordance to competition law, but also in compliance with the data protection regulations.

European Court of Justice’s Schrems II decision

In July of 2020 the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) ruled in favor of Max Schrems in the context of an action brought before the Irish High Court and originally deriving from an administrative procedure conducted by the Irish Data Protection Authority. Schrems’ initial complaint targeted Facebook for unlawful data processing and reached the US government, who was systematically running surveillance programs reaching data from the EU. As a consequence of that previous ruling, the first transfer mechanism known as the Safe Harbor was overruled as it did not fulfil the minimum standards of protection for individual’s data.

Concerning Schrems II , the Court invalidated the European Commission’s decision on the EU US Privacy Shield, an international instrument successor of the Safe Harbor, aimed to safeguard data transfers between the United States and the European Union –thereby making any transfer of data on the basis of the Privacy Shield illegal.

The foregoing, as such Privacy Shield, had allowed law enforcement and intelligence agencies in the US to access personal data from EU citizens. Finally, the Court confirmed the 2010’s decision from the European Commission on the Standard Contractual Clauses as a suitable mechanism for data transfers. However, the Court addressed that such mechanism would not guarantee per se the protection of the personal data at stake, but that the data importer and data exporter should assess the conditions of the transfer and provide adequate security measures which shall reach, at least, a level of protection for the data subjects as that required by the Charter of Fundamental Rights and the GDPR.

Schrems II falls into a similar situation as the data privacy cases mentioned above, as it does not directly address a competition law issue, but it certainly describes one dimension of the elements to consider in antitrust investigations and jurisdictional cases: potential undermining of privacy rights as a consequence of the abuse of dominance by Big Tech companies.

Closing remarks

The above mentioned are not the only cases where antitrust and data protection converge. For instance, just in December, Facebook was served with two different lawsuits, one from the DOJ of the US and another from the Federal Trade Commission. In China, Ant Group is under threat of divestiture and its sister company, Alibaba, may be soon subject to an inspection by the Chinese Antitrust Authority. A more robust analysis of such dockets will be required, but it certainly readdresses common practices that appear to be a trend amongst the Big Tech. As we start 2021 we already know that these areas of the law will derive into many debates and more than a couple of headlines. And we are looking forward to seeing where this puzzle leads to.

In the cycle of Big Data & Antitrust, we explore the conundrums of competition law in the digital sphere. Our commitment is to rethink antitrust policy and competition laws' interaction with other types of regulations while keeping pace with the latest technological developments. We endeavor to provide insight into normative and enforcement issues of data technology and competition law.

The Fight Against Voter Suppression

Sat, 09 Jan 2021 23:21:08 GMT

DIGITAL DEMOCRACY

The Fight Against Voter Suppression

How the battle for US democracy continues even after the presidential elections.

By Yamunna Rao & Johanna Rick

January 10, 2021

No matter what Trump, his followers and friends in the Republican Party claim: the 2020 US presidential election is over. This year saw a record in voter turnout, which is even more impressive considering it occurred in the middle of a pandemic. After four years under Trump, people called this “the most important election ever”. Despite or exactly because of this various strategies were employed by primarily red states to deter citizens from voting. Limiting poll stations which resulted in huge queues, limiting the possibility of mail-in ballots, aggressive voter-purging or tougher ID laws - the mentors used are plenty. Such attacks on the American democracy are dangerous because they are often systemic and US citizens either fail to realise that this is not the “normal way” or think nothing can be done. That’s why this blogpost takes a closer look at two grassroot organisations and how they are using offline and online approaches to combat voter suppression.

What is “Fair Fight”?

“Stacey Abrams” is a name that at least after the recent, chaotic, seemingly endless US election everyone should know. Abrams and her grassroot movement “Fair Fight” is widely credited with turning Georgia blue, thereby delivering 16 electoral votes for Joe Biden. And the fight is not over yet, Georgia is also the state in which the race for the Senate will be decided in January 2021 . Another win for the Democrats here would tip the political power truly in their favor and allow Biden to pursue his agenda in the next four years. With full control over the federal government, the Democrats could push through much needed policy reforms on climate change or health care. Most importantly, they aim to remove current obstacles to voting and government work in order to improve America’s democracy. So, it’s time to take a closer look into Abrams’ work, especially her work with Fair Fight to battle voter suppression - a fight that remains important also after the election.

Abrams and Fair Fight run a voter education and encouragement campaign, where they inform citizens about the efforts to discourage and disenfranchise voters and instead help them find their voice. A year before the 2020 presidential election did Abrams publish her strategy to flip Georgia blue in a playbook that advised to go “big and early on digital investments to target all segments of our 1.9 million pool with diverse and compelling content” . Fair Fight currently has 140k Instagram followers, 174k Twitter followers and 47k Facebook followers. They use social media channels primarily to advocate against voter suppression: sharing infographics on voting rights on instagram and tweeting about electoral malpractices. Spearheaded by Abrams, who is part of the Democratic Party, Fair Fight’s is more of a bipartisan initiative and their social media feed often includes democratic celebrities. Selena Gomez, for example, participated in their “Civics for culture campaign” and both Justin Timberlake and John Legend were part of their fundraising, voter-mobilising “Rock the Runoff” concert in December 2020.

As a grassroot organisation with the need for volunteers, Fair Fight’s website offers similar information material to their social media channels but also includes a call to ‘Join the Fight’ on their homepage and allows the public to donate. Fair Fight’s online activities are aimed to target new or disenfranchised voters - a plan that worked out. From 2019-2020 Abrams and her organisation registered more than 800,000 new voters. Keep in mind: according to the last recount Biden won Georgia with a 12,000 vote margin!

In debt and with a prison record

This combination sees many people being turned away from their right to vote because they are unable to pay off monies owed to the legal system. Florida Rights Restoration Coalition (FRRC) raises awareness, funds and extends helplines to individuals seeking to have their voting rights restored. Returning citizens, as they are referred to, are given a second chance at making their voice count and develop a sense of belonging into the society they wish to reintegrate into. FRRC provides a host of resources online to enable returning citizens access resources to restore their names on the electoral list. They are run by other returning citizens, seek to alleviate the sense of disenfranchisement and discrimination against people with convictions. They believe that access and acceptance into the society reduces the chance to reoffend as well as increases the possibility for these individuals to become more involved in their community.

FRRC uses a blend of online and offline activities for its outreach. Information is streamlined and hosted on its portal, including step-by-step visual guides and screenshots to help people to register to vote. By hosting and then redirecting individuals from their site to the respective pages, for instance to the Elections Department, the process is made lean. Furthermore, people are immediately able to act on the new information that they possess without having to conduct the search to the Election Department's website themselves. Therefore, FRRC's service comprehensively includes all relevant information and weblinks to empower returning citizens to take action immediately. They bolster their online services with a toll-free hotline, yet another means of ensuring digital inclusion.

FRRC maintains 4 social media accounts - Facebook , Instagram , Twitter and YouTube. Its Facebook page has garnered nearly 17000 'likes' and has close to 18000 followers. Their Instagram page, with 745 posts as of 11 December, has over 14000 followers. Likewise, on Twitter, they have 2343 tweets and over 12000 followers. Overall, their online engagement constantly sends one clear message - the importance of voting and therefore voting rights of the individual. The FRRC's online presence targets mainly the advocacy and awareness building aspects. Their social media platforms feature stories of returning citizens and their experiences of being able to vote again thanks to FRRC’s help. Not only is their website a repository of resources for returning citizens to find avenues of help, the general public who wishes to contribute towards the cause is able to donate or register to be a volunteer with FRRC. All in, FFRC's online presence bolsters its position as a grassroots organisation, solidifying its work on the ground with continued outreach online.

As a grassroots organisation, FRRC is able to speak up for people and harness the voice of the people to reach out to more. They utilise the immense potential afforded by the Internet to share the importance of restoring voting rights of ex-convicts while walking the ground and advocating for real change by speaking to the community. Their local knowledge shapes and empowers the previously disenfranchised and restores their sense of dignity, voice and ownership over the community they are reintegrating into. The Coalition’s unique position makes both their online and offline activities important. FRRC strategically differentiates its online presence from its offline work and uses its website as well as social media platforms to outreach to its target audience. FRRC's offline work alone seems insufficient to fulfil its agenda; hence, the maintenance of a robust online system to facilitate donations, information and resource amalgamation, among others, helps FRRC to build its brand and broaden its mission.

The tremendous impact both FairFight as well as FRRC and other grassroot organisations have had in the recent US election. They are in part responsible for the historic voter turnout by registering, motivating and supporting thousands of unregistered but also disenfranchised voters. Moreover, grassroot organisations all over the US fought hard for the right to early and absentee voting. But, as they say, the fight is not over: newly registered and motivated voters can change the political balance. The fight against voter suppression remains crucial also in times with no election in order to have a healthy, diverse and lively democracy.

Yamunna Ramakrishna Rao specialised in management and organisation with a focus on digital governance, public sector innovation and active citizenry during her studies at the Hertie School. She works and lives in Singapore and is an active volunteer with the West Coast Community Centre. Johanna Rick is completing her Master’s degree in International Relations and Diplomacy at Leiden University in the Netherlands. She has worked at the World Economic Forum in the Civil Society Team on multi-stakeholderism and the value of direct democracy. Both Yamunna and Johanna are part of the Digital Democracy Research Team in the Institute for Internet & Just Society.

Aim & Shoot

Sat, 09 Jan 2021 23:09:48 GMT

PSYCHOMETRIC TARGETING

Aim & Shoot

Exploring how digital presence is used to detect people’s personal traits & vulnerabilities and how these can potentially be exploited to undermine democracy.

By Claire Daniolou

January 10, 2021

What is psychometric targeting?

Psychometry is a technique through which one can evaluate a person’s beliefs and personality . The word “Psychometry” derives from “psyche” and “metric”. The former stands for an individual’s mind and ideology and the latter refers to a system of measurements . This is a technique used in psychology, health, and other similar fields to provide robust measures for reaching conclusions .

Modern companies use the science of psychometry to create profiles on certain groups of people based not on their demographic data, but the actual underlying traits that dictate their behaviour. This way their marketing strategies are personalised to attract larger audiences more efficiently based on the predictions they make of the subject’s reaction to the content. Since targeting is such an effective marketing technique, political offices have also recognised it and used to promote their agenda. Therefore, from the data retrieved from one’s online activities , persuasive, targeted ads are used to interfere with personal ideas and even manipulate one’s vote.

How does it operate?

“Are you a student? 100£ of Amazon vouchers available for 10 minutes of your time. Tell us about your future career in this survey!” Similarly titled emails often appear in my university mailbox. “What is the harm?”, I have always thought, “I may even buy my sister a nice Christmas gift!” Unfortunately, that is not exactly the case.

Psychometric targeting mechanisms use basic user digital footprint to develop focused strategies. The data retrieved are sometimes directly acquired from surveys and then used to create user profiles. According to Christopher Wylie , a former employee at Cambridge Analytica, these surveys would commonly be completed by people lured by a small financial incentive or by ones who are, simply, bored. He describes that the latter category mostly refers to “wealthy white women”. However, to examine how data collection is performed on a larger scale can be quite interesting. As explained in his interview, while these people log in the surveys to complete them, data in the form of “likes”, “shares” etc. is retrieved from the surveyed user’s social media profile, as well as from all their virtual friends. Psychologists David Stillwell and Michal Kosinski confirm that “likes” can be used to accurately predict personal traits.

To demonstrate the elementary character of these predictions, here is a simplified visual example:

Imagine person X would like to persuade their colleague, person Y, to reach a certain decision (that is, the star in the GIF above). X may not know Y personally, but X takes a brief look on Y’s desk. X sees an ice-blue jacket on Y’s desk chair, a dark blue ocean on Y’s screensaver, and a turquoise frame with Y’s partner smiling under a teal blanket on his desk. Which colour should X coat the proposal with? The blue one could unconsciously make Y more prone to like the idea.

Is it really effective?

One of the most widely used psychometric models in social media is called OCEAN as its measures and scales that following traits: Openness, Contentiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism. Psychologists believe that based on these traits, one can predict with high accuracy a subject’s decision-making process. These traits comprise basic pillars through which a person’s personality, hence their way of thinking, can be described.

The National Academy of Science published an article entitled “ Psychological targeting in digital mass persuasion ” that concludes psychometric targeted messages resulted in 40% more clicks and 50% more purchases than mismatching or non-personalised messages.

Such results back up the logical assumptions that expect a person to be more prone to respond to a message that appeals to the person’s ideas. Additionally, political ads and speeches use persuasive language to shape audience perceptions. Therefore, if the political ads speak the same "language" as their audience, they would be even more effective. After the first presidential debate of the 2020 U.S. elections, ads from the Trump campaign accused Joe Biden to have been wearing an earpiece to be provided help from his team during the broadcast. The used phrasing “[Biden] DECLINED an earpiece inspection” is indubitably more influential than “[The candidates] did not undergo extensive scrutiny”.

What risks does it pose relating to democracy?

In Netflix’s documentary The Great Hack , it is explained that since digital footprint can predict human behaviour, it can also predict one’s political preferences. One example that illustrates this is the Cambridge Analytica scandal of the 2016 U.S. elections. The company identified the segments of society that were predicted to be undecided with respect to their vote. Afterwards, through the methods described above, Cambridge Analytica micro-targeted this specific audience that it could effectively persuade.

The problem occurs when the message one conveys is biased. If the social media platforms themselves are the ones that decide who has access to their data, they control this bias. Therefore, should social media platforms be partisans, they offer very powerful tools unevenly to the parties involved. That is not necessarily impactful if implemented on a small scale. For private individuals, it is only natural to support the political forces that represent their beliefs and promote their opinions in their social circle. But when it comes to social media corporations, such influence is extended to the whole of the digital population. The effect this has on a global level is imperative for future international socioeconomic situations and should not be freely monitored by a small number of business executives.

What can be done?

At this point, it is important to understand that social media and the recording of user data are inherently linked. The only way these platforms exist is by using these data to suggest, promote, and display relevant content to support the user in their endeavour to connect with the world. Advertisement is also the core source of income of the platforms. So, for social media to be used, data will always be recorded. However, the stakes are high when considering the effect the above may have on imperative issues, such as elections. For if the results of the elections were affected by non-democratic influences, even global health would depend on a handful of irrelevant to health tech companies. Therefore, it is imperative to monitor the power such firms have over election outcomes and embrace the fundamental values of a democratic society. Otherwise, with a cap on freedom of thought, democracy ceases to exist. Consequently, more control is needed to guarantee ethical and safe data usage.

The suggested strategies involve three aspects. Firstly, legislation should hold companies accountable for online harms due to targeting. Some analyses suggest that targeting and misinformation may have even promoted the Rohingya genocide . Secondly, transparency is an absolute necessity. The technologies might not be understood by all, but they affect all. Therefore, data should have a more public nature; what is stored, how it used and protected, and for how long should be readily answerable questions. Lastly, user empowerment is a key attribute. More information and control over how users are targeted should be provided. This should be subject to personal preferences so that people can be able to own their data.

Taking a step back, it is quite shocking to see how people’s “likes” can be used against themselves; the Facebook team that created it perceived it as a way to spread positivity, as is discussed in Netflix’s documentary The Social Dilemma . There is a need for the button to serve its initial cause.

Claire Daniolou is currently pursuing her Bachelor’s degree in Electrical & Electronic Engineering at the University of Bristol. She has been awarded the Bristol PLUS Award for her extracurricular activities. She is currently in the committee of the student-led charity Bristol Volunteers for Development Abroad, taking action to support villages in Nepal with the Partnership for Sustainable Development. She is fluent in English and Greek, and advanced in French.

Hey Google, Stop Climate Change

Sat, 09 Jan 2021 23:04:32 GMT

CLIMATE CHANGE

Hey Google, Stop Climate Change

Digitalisation must be steered in a way that benefits both people and the planet.

By Josephine Andersen

January 10, 2021

Digital makes possible

Digitalisation and new technologies have become major drivers of societal change and come with the promise of being the necessary tools to solve global challenges. In the world of the economist Mariana Mazzucato from University College London digital transformation needs purpose . That purpose should be to solve societal challenges, and the climate challenge is undoubtedly the biggest challenge ahead. But digitalization in itself does not achieve sustainable societies. Instead, digital makes possible – it has the potential to accelerate current environmental efforts through better information sharing, more efficient processes, increased connectivity and by the gathering, sharing and analysis of data. It is not about the technologies themselves, but the impact these will have on how our societies function. Digital transformation will happen one way or another, and it is essential that its transformational power is harnessed to achieve a circular and sustainable transformation.

Digital enables green

It is often said that there is no resource problem, we just need to use the resources we have in a smarter way. In this sense, digitalisation has the potential to decouple economic growth from material use, meaning increased growth without requiring increased material consumption. This is the essence of the circular economy . A circular economy is restorative and regenerative in the way things are designed and it aims to keep products, components and materials at their highest utility and value at all times and for as long as possible. It is a system of production and consumption that shifts processes within all sectors to harness economic and environmental benefits. In many ways, a circular economy is an information problem and digital technologies and solutions can bridge this information gap and enable a shift from a linear to a circular economy, characterized by smarter use of resources . How is this related to climate change? A transition to a circular economy contributes to reducing material relation emissions and decreases the material intensity and the environmental footprint of the current economic system (Berg et al. 2020) . As the following examples will illustrate, digital technologies can enable a sustainable shift for products, platforms and processes at all levels of society.

Citizens

It has become evident that the current way of consuming is not sustainable. A circular transition entails a shift away from the linear ‘take-make-dispose’ system to a ‘reduce-reuse-recycle’ model. For citizens this means a different way of using and disposing products, but also introduces new products and services through digitally-enabled business models. Take for example the role of digital sharing platforms that are becoming increasingly mainstream, such as the FoodCloud , an Irish online platform and app that automatically notifies charities about unsold food surpluses available for pickup. Finally, digitalisation can also be used to better inform, educate and influence people to help them make more sustainable choices through scanning apps that provide information about a product’s level of sustainability or traceability services that increases transparency of a product’s value chain. Apps and digital platforms can connect citizens to their local authorities to report litter in public areas like the LitterGram -app in London or the FixMyStreet -app in Brussels.

Industry

Digitalisation of industrial processes, or the so-called Fourth Industrial Revolution , has the capacity to unlock the circular potential of manufacturing and other industrial processes and reduce emissions. It describes the increasing application of technological innovation such as artificial intelligence (AI) and Internet of Things (IoT) devices at industry scale that can have a transformative impact on products and processes. Zooming in, this can be in the form of ‘industrial symbiosis’ where one factory’s waste serves as input for another, with by-products of operations existing in closed-loops enabled by online platforms .

These platforms have software that allows users to locate nearby industrial material flows that can be exchanged, with waste-to-resource matching by big data analysis ( Kristoffersen et al. 2020 ). Another example is within the construction sector where digital material passports are deployed to make necessary information on materials available for the necessary actors to achieve better reuse from one construction site to another. One such emerging solution is the Excess Materials Exchange (EME) that relies on digital material passports and traceability technology that enables businesses to exchange materials through an online platform. Widespread application of digital material and product passports within a data architecture that rests on common standards will be a key enabler for recycling and reuse at a large scale and an entry point to the circular economy. In combination with other digital technologies, the tracing of products, components and materials can unleash circular manufacturing by making information available to actors across industry life cycles.

Urban

Cities are a main part of the climate challenge as large emitters, responsible for 60-80% of GHG emissions and consume 75% of the world’s natural resources ( Sukhdev et al. 2017) . But cities are also a part of the future, shaped by digital and sustainability agendas. A ‘smart city’ is a city where ICT is merged with physical infrastructure ( Batty et al. 2012 ). The development of the smart city concept has increasingly been focusing on climate change mitigation and adaptation ( Balogun et al. 2020 ) and the digital upgrade of cities can have enormous benefits for the environmental footprint of cities. By expanding the smart city concept to also include circular principles, digital technologies are applied to monitor the urban metabolism of cities, which entails everything from AI applied to waste management or electricity supply in combination with IoT and sensor technology to regulate traffic, monitor pollution and build more efficient and intelligent buildings. Digital solutions can create the necessary linkages for the flow of information on products, components, energy and materials in urban areas. By making this data available in a secure way, it can optimize resource use and achieve a more sustainable urban environment.

Greening of ICT-sector and (mis)information on the Internet

As highlighted by the previous article in the ClimaTech-series, the ICT sector is in itself a part of the problem just as much as the solution. The challenge is twofold with both the growing energy consumption of data centres and the material consumption of electric and electronic products are areas that must be addressed to meet with the demands of tomorrow. The COVID-19 crisis shifted much of daily life to the digital sphere resulting in an unprecedented surge and expansion of the Internet ( Heaven 2020 ). While it is easy to imagine digital services as something “up there in the cloud”, it is very much present on the ground with some data centres consuming more energy than certain countries ( Jones 2018 ). As a rebound effect of increased digitalization, the overuse of e-commerce, energy and raw materials can slow down the very process it was meant to accelerate.

Climate change as a topic has been particularly polluted with misinformation on the internet. In the first article of the series , the problem of misinformation on social media platforms and search engines related to climate change was raised. The wider issue of fake news and misinformation spreading on platforms like Facebook and Twitter are upsetting public debate and sowing doubt around scientific facts is also impacting global climate efforts. Online communities of climate sceptics, enabled and artificially promoted by platform algorithms, create “echo chambers” where misinformation continues to spread. Intentional efforts and campaigns to discredit mainstream science on climate change through targeted campaigns with specific targets has the potential to politicize the debate around certain environmental policies and can ultimately prevent the implementation of these as a result of public backlash. Despite growing consensus and understanding on the role of social media in the dissemination of information and the impact it can have on shaping public opinion, misleading information on climate change continues to spread and can ultimately “ push climate inaction to the point of disaster ”.

Bridging of agendas

To fully unleash the transformational potential of digital technologies as an accelerator of the green transition, several barriers must be overcome. To reinvent ecosystems and break down silos, a lot of information is needed, i.e a lot of data is needed. As the value of data arises only when shared, digital infrastructure and standards must be developed to make the data comparable and operational between sectors and countries to provide a basis for change.

Digitalisation and sustainability are two trends shaping the world we live in. Digital solutions can decrease energy demand through more efficient processes, but this cannot happen without an increase of digital infrastructure which again increases the demand for energy and materials. Digital transformation is necessary to achieve environmental targets, but it is not the only solution. To not fall victim to “ technological solutionism ” we must recognize the complexity of the problem and accept that it will also require fundamental change at individual and societal levels.

Josephine Andersen is a graduate student at Sciences Po Paris at the Paris School of International Affairs. She is currently an intern with the Centre for European Policy Studies where she conducts research on topics related to energy and circular economy.

How To Stop The Climate Fake?

Sat, 09 Jan 2021 22:59:09 GMT

MISINFORMATION

How To Stop The Climate Fake?

Misinformation on social media is a hurdle that threatens global efforts to address the climate crisis. What can be done about it?

By Javier Canales Luna

January 9, 2021

Dar riu

2020 will not be well remembered in Oregon. The nightmare, started with the covid-19 pandemic and followed by a summer of mass protests claiming justice for the killing of George Floyd , reached its climax in September. The Pacific State was blanketed with the smoke of destructive wildfires, resulting in the death of at least 11 people and countless land and housing damage. Experts were firm: the unprecedented fires across the West Coast were a consequence of climate change. However, some people believed a different story that went viral on social media, that pointed to “Antifa”, a term to refer to anti-fascist activists, as the authors of the wildfires. Despite the efforts of police departments to counter the unsubstantiated information, by the time Facebook took action to remove it from the platform, the rumours had been shared by thousands of users. In the meantime, the false news led to threats to journalists, vigilante violence and numerous people ignoring evacuation orders.

The events of Oregon sums up the problem social media is encountering to deal with misinformation. Not long ago, social networks appeared in our lives as neutral, safe platforms, where users were free to say anything. However, as Google, Facebook, Twitter and so have turned into big giants, with billions of daily users and humongous profits, their influence in the public opinion has become overwhelming. Public and official concern is scaling, as dangerous or misleading information has recursively spread on sensitive issues such as democratic processes , vaccinations , or the coronavirus pandemic , aiding the rise of populism and the increasing polarisation of political and media debate.

The climate fake

A topic that has been particularly polluted with fake news is climate change. Climate change misinformation refers to the types of behaviours and information which question or try to discredit mainstream climate science knowledge and well-supported research about climate change (Treen et al., 2020 ). A broader yet contested definition would also include climate alarmism, that is, exaggerated claims about climate change that are not supported by science.

The main strategy of climate deniers is to pollute the public debate on climate change with doubt, to create what has been called the “paralyzing fog of doubt around climate change” (Begley, 2017 ). Climate sceptics tend to focus on three key issues: the reality of climate change, the urgency to take action, and the credentials of climate scientists. (Treen et al., 2020 ).

Tracing the life-cycle of climate denial campaigns on social media is a hard task. Multiple groups seem to be involved in the funding, creation and spreading of climate misinformation, including governments, contrarian scientists, political and religious organizations and carbon major industries such as coal, steel or car manufacturers, the media, particularly those outlets with right-wing affiliates, and the public (Björnberg, 2017 ). Once the content is out, actors with high visibility and influence, like media outlets, politicians or prominent bloggers, help spread and amplify the information to a wider public.

How climate change misinformation spreads on social networks

Here is where algorithm engineering enters the scene. Today’s social networks are constantly developing and fine-tuning their algorithms to “improve” the user experience. While the functioning of algorithms differs from one network to another, it is possible to highlight some basic features. First, recommendation engines based on artificial intelligence usually suggest users new connections based on common networks and common interests. This idea is grounded on homophily, the deep-rooted human tendency to make bonds with those who are similar to themselves (Aiello et al., 2012 ). The artificially promoted communities result in “echo chambers”, where information and beliefs are shared and amplified inside a closed network. Certain contents within echo chambers are then algorithmically ranked based on the user's previously viewed material rather than trustworthiness, which leads to “algorithm bias” (Sîrbu, 2019 ).

The algorithm ecosystem has proved particularly fertile ground for misinformation to spread. Scholars have found that false news travels faster, farther and deeper in Twitter than true news (Vosoughi et al., 2018 ). To add complexity, humans are not the sole responsible for the dissemination of false information. Increasingly sophisticated bots have been used to amplify online propaganda and misinformation campaigns. For example, A 2020 study cited in an article from The Guardian, a media outlet, suggests that bots are behind the unproportionate spread of climate denialist messages on Twitter.

Risks, regulation and the environmental ethics

It is difficult to assess the extent to which exposure to fake news affects people's opinions. But social concern is rising, as more and more people believe that social media has a negative effect . With increasing public and official pressure to moderate content, it seems that social media is entering a new era in its short history. However, regulating platforms that have come to support free expression worldwide poses highly complex and sensitive dilemmas . Major concerns stand on who, governments or tech giants, should set the rules and boundaries of online debate, what kind and to what extent (mis)information should be controlled, and what technical measures should be taken.

Take, for example, Facebook’s strategy to address climate misinformation. Amid growing critics, legal challenges and advertising boycotts, Facebook is tightening its self-governance policies (in a new attempt to keep the shadow of regulation away). The company has recently created a Climate Science Information Center to connect people to climate information from official sources and established a number of fact-checking programs with third parties. Posts with debunked claims have less visibility in the platform and are labelled on top so people can understand they have been rated false. Controversy, under Facebook’s guidelines, climate content can be classified as an opinion and thus exempted from fact-checking intervention, which has been seen by some commentators as a loophole for climate misinformation . Asked about this issue, Andy Stone, Facebook’s policy communications director, argued that the company flagging and banning decisions are mostly directed to content that could lead to imminent harm to human health and safety.

Mr. Stone’s reply -the same words were used to justify the removal of false claims related to the wildfires in Oregon- points to one of the key challenges in the fight against climate change: the urgent need to take decisive action. In 2018, the United Nation Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change published a special report saying that the next ten years will be crucial to limit a climate change catastrophe. Even so, and despite the growing scientific consensus on the anthropogenic cause of climate change, governments, major polluters and other key actors remain resistant to tackle the crisis seriously. This arguably includes social networks. Social media is a powerful tool to disseminate information, shape public discourse and increase environmental awareness. On the contrary, the spread of climate misinformation on social media contributes to public confusion and political inaction, refusal or limited support for climate policies, and further polarisation on the political debate around climate change (Lewandowsky, 2017 ).

Misleading climate information on social media might push climate inaction to the point of disaster. Against this existential crisis, social media have the moral responsibility to firmly address climate misinformation, either by themselves or, preferably, in the context of a legal framework and close collaboration with governments. Even if the causal link between climate misinformation and human health or environmental damage is not always crystal clear, internationally agreed environmental principles such as the Precautionary Principle , should provide solid ground for action. This principle states that where stakes are high that particular processes generate a risk of serious or irreversible harm, the lack of scientific certainty should not be used as an excuse for not taking preventive action. The principle has been adopted in a number of international treaties and national legislations, and it is primarily directed to policy-makers. However, why should not social networks embrace it?

Any proposal to regulate social media leads inevitably to the question on who should be the custodian of freedom of speech. While governments should be at the forefront of this process, the policy-making process is often tedious and cumbersome. Also, it is not clear whether legal regulation is a well-suited instrument to keep pace with technology and innovation. But the absence of legal guidance should not refrain social networks from taking action against climate misinformation. A storm is coming, and media and environmental ethics is probably the best compass social networks will have to navigate amid the waves.

Javier Canales holds a Dual Bachelor in Law and Political Science from Carlos III University and a LL.M. in European Law from Maastricht University. After completing his legal studies, he specialised in the field of data science. He currently works as a Data Analyst at Trecone Solutions and part-time teacher in course of Big Data and Python Programming.

Cosmonaut

Twitter’s whistleblower problem vs. Elon Musk’s commitment to walk away from his $44bn Twitter deal

Only in the Shadows

The UNFCCC Goes Digital-ish

COP 26

﻿

Consequences of Going Digital-ish

Looking at the Future: Going Fully Digital

Closing Remarks

TikTok-ing on the National Security Defence

Legal Professional Privilege in the Context of Competition Law: Turkey and Ukraine

Australia’s ACCC taking on Google’s ad tech business

Current focus

Ad Tech Inquiry

Google is the dominant player in ad tech

Consequences?

Conclusion

Brazilian Antitrust and Vertical Integration in Streaming Platforms

A brief overview of antitrust in Brazil

The “Claro-iMusica” Case

Why is this case relevant?

Regulatory Sandboxes & AI Innovation

Ideology

Queer ID 2

Artificial Intelligence Transforming our Societal Structure - The Rise Useless Class

NFTs: what they are and how they are transforming the art world?

Queer ID

Digital Fashion

Music and Artificial Intelligence

Emojis and Digital Communication

Rules are necessary: Data Feminism and its seven principles

The Digital Transformation of Public Administration

Challenges and Opportunities of AI in Outer Space

Challenges and opportunities for Intelligent Autonomy in Mars exploration

Conclusion

References

Transforming Public Action - eGovernment in France

References & Link

Why a Small Town in Upstate NY Banned Cryptocurrencies

Crypto Background

Crypto’s Carbon Footprint

Why Massena?

Closing Remarks

Consuming Deepfakes with Awareness

The Evolution of Deepfakes

What has been done and what can be done

Competition Law and Promoting Frugal Innovation in India

Facial Recognition

COSMONAUT

S E R I E S

Itay Alon

Orenda Graphic

Facial Recognition & Recruitment

Facial Recognition & Policing

Mapping of subjects and purposes

Regulatory Initiatives

Closing remarks

Facial Recognition & Education

Facial Recognition: An Introduction

The era of Big Data and Automated Algorithms

A focus on facial recognition

How it works?

Opportunities and Risks

Computational Antitrust

Digital Education? Bring It On.

Digital Education? Bring It On!

Showdown Down Under?

Introduction

Status Quo

Consequences

Criticism

Anti-competitive behavior?

International

Conclusion

Myanmar's Keyboard Warriors

Challenges of Digital Vaccine Passports

Fernando Ron Pedrique

Social Media and Iran – A Messy Relationship?

How to Facilitate International Space Cooperation with China?

Are Dystopian Novels a Cautionary Warning?