• Selected
• Entire List

Abstract:
Although the human rights and access to knowledge movements share many of the same goals, their legal and regulatory agendas concerning Internet regulation have historically had little in common. While state censorship online has been a central concern for human rights advocates, this issue has largely not been a focus of the access to knowledge movement. Likewise, human rights advocates have failed to examine the cumulative effect of expanding copyright protections on education and culture, an issue of critical importance for access to knowledge. These disparate agendas reflect fundamentally different views about the nature of the harms associated with state regulation of online content - and thus the solutions that might be implemented to address these harms. Overcoming this divide is critical to ensuring the movements can draw on their respective strengths to address the pressing issues we face at the intersection of access to knowledge and human rights.

This article bridges the "human rights/access to knowledge divide" in two ways. First, it explores how the origin of each movement has led to such different conceptions of the harms associated with regulatory authority in the online context. The article maintains that this divide reflects a deeper unresolved debate about the proper division of authority between state and international institutions and that lack of agreement on this issue has inhibited coherent regulation of the Internet. Second, building on recent literature concerning the design of international institutions, the article develops a model of "flexible harmonization" - employing imprecise but binding international norms - that responds to the regulatory concerns of both movements. The article uses this model to evaluate two proposed frameworks for Internet governance and examines the conditions under which a model of flexible harmonization can be employed in other contexts.

international law, access to knowledge, human rights, internet, internet governance, internet regulation, intellectual property, international intellectual property, cyberlaw, institutional design

Abstract:
Although many contend that human rights law is a justification for intellectual property rights, precisely the opposite is true. Human rights law is far more a limit on intellectual property rights than a rationale for such regimes. In a variety of ways, human rights law requires states to take specific, concrete steps to limit the effects of intellectual property rights in order to protect international human rights. This powerful and emancipatory dimension of human rights law has unfortunately been overshadowed by those who claim human rights as a basis for granting exclusive rights.

The U.N. Committee on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights – the body created to monitor state compliance with the terms of an international treaty called the International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights – is in the process of drafting a General Comment that will interpret the “right to take part in cultural life,” a right protected under Article 15(1)(a) of the treaty. This submission was designed to provide the Committee with an overview of some of the ways in which intellectual property rights can affect this right and what states may be required to do to protect the ability of individuals to participate in cultural life.

international human rights, human rights, international law, intellectual property, international intellectual property, right to participate in cultural life, cultural participation

Abstract:
The same technologies that groups of ordinary citizens are using to write operating systems and encyclopedias are fostering a quiet revolution in another area - social activism. On websites such as Avaaz.org and Wikipedia, citizens are forming groups to report on human rights violations and organize email writing campaigns, activities formerly the prerogative of professionals. This article considers whether the participatory potential of technology can be used to mobilize ordinary citizens in the work of human rights advocacy.

Existing online advocacy efforts reveal a de facto inverse relationship between broad mobilization and deep participation. Large groups mobilize many individuals, but each of those individuals has only a limited ability to participate in decisions about the group’s goals or methods. Thus, although we currently have the tools necessary for individuals to engage in advocacy without the need for professional organizations, we are still far from realizing an ideal of fully decentralized, user-generated activism.

Drawing on the insights of network theory, the article proposes a model of “networked activism” that would help ensure both deep participation and broad mobilization by encouraging the formation of highly participatory small groups while providing opportunities for those small groups to connect with one another. Based on a series of interviews with human rights and other civil society organizations, the article recommends specific design elements that might foster a model of networked activism. The article concludes that although online activism is unlikely to replace some of the functions served by human rights organizations, efforts to create synergies between traditional and online efforts have the potential to provide avenues for real, meaningful, and effective citizen participation in human rights advocacy.

international human rights, human rights, social movements, internet, social networking, peer production, online organizing, online activism, citizen activism, network theory, technology, human rights reporting, human rights research

Abstract:
The growth of collaborative technologies has spurred the development of projects such as Wikipedia, in which large groups of volunteers contribute to production in a decentralized and open format. The author analyzes how these methods of peer-based production can be applied to advance international human rights as well as the limitations of such a model in this field. An underlying characteristic of peer-based production, amateurism, increases capacity and participation. However, the involvement of ordinary individuals in the production of human rights reporting is also its greatest disadvantage, since human rights reports generated by citizen activists are less likely to be perceived as accurate, thereby detracting from the effectiveness of those reports. The author examines methods by which these disadvantages might be overcome and concludes by advocating for a collaborative approach, whereby peer-based production is augmented by training and certification by local professionals.

international human rights, human rights, social movements, internet, social networking, peer production, online organizing, online activism, citizen activism, technology, human rights reporting, human rights research