However, despite the fact  that freedom of expression depends on the free flow of information, there is a tendency for national and regional laws to intervene in the end-to-end architecture of the Internet, prevent the free flow of information and thus undermine the rights of every citizen to freedom of expression and privacy. Several Latin American governments and governments around the world, allegedly for the fight against piracy or the sake of security, have proposed legal texts that impose criminalization of legitimate expressions; liability of intermediaries; and disconnection of users on the pretext of violations to copyright or transmission of illegal information (such as pornography, drug trafficking, cyber attacks, etc.), or that simply establish arbitrary mechanisms to filter, block and remove content from the net and fail to provide an adequate protection of the rights to privacy and protection of personal data.

All these provisions are rather reprehensible, as they not only jeopardize the fundamental rights to privacy and freedom of expression of citizens, but also pose a threat to some of the key elements of the network architecture, such as neutrality and openness. No wonder yesterday’s movements have reached such enormous popularity, with more than 10 thousand websites shutting down in protest against SOPA – the subject is alive and kicking. Wikipedia, Google, Facebook, Mozilla, Wired, Reporters Without Borders, Greenpeace, IDEC and many others have joined the ranks of protesters. This context shows how utterly important it is to watch abusive Internet legislation worldwide. This is the intent of the book “Towards an Internet Free of Censorship”, published by CELE (Center for Research on Free Speech and Access to Knowledge), in which researchers Joana Varon Ferraz, Carlos Affonso Pereira de Souza, Bruno Magrani and Walter Britto participate with the chapter entitled “Content Filtering in Latin America: Reasons and Impacts on Freedom of Expression”.

As the Internet in nature knows no bounds, establishing regulations influences the freedom of expression and access to knowledge of the other countries; therefore, it is important that developing countries also define standards to be evaluated and discussed globally. While developed countries have already established a legal framework for the Internet, the movement in Latin America is still recent. This context provides more room for reflection, both if we observe the criticisms against foreign regulations, or if we strive to evaluate and think of access and freedom-related issues for our specific regional scenario.

The book is available for download here.

Esses projetos, chamados SOPA (Stop Online Piracy Act) e PIPA (Protect Intellectual Property Act), se forem aprovados, instituirão ferramentas de controle de conteúdo na web que alteram de forma crucial o funcionamento da própria rede. Eles impõem medidas severas para impedir violações a direitos autorais, como alterações no sistema de nomes de domínio, filtragem em mecanismos de busca para que sites não sejam encontrados, além de instruções de bloqueio a operações financeiras, como doações feitas em apoio ao site supostamente infrator.

Legislações como as propostas nos EUA, mais do que uma questão interna de cada país, desafiam a própria arquitetura da rede como uma infra-estrutura aberta que incentiva a participação e a criação colaborativa.

O Centro de Tecnologia e Sociedade, da Escola de Direito da Fundação Getulio Vargas/RJ, defende que a tutela dos direitos intelectuais não deve ser exercida em detrimento de outros direitos fundamentais, como a privacidade, a liberdade de expressão, e principalmente o acesso ao conhecimento e à informação. Mesmo com a recente declaração da Casa Branca contra o SOPA, e com todos os esforços na rede até agora, a ameaça ainda não cessou. E por isso o CTS se junta ao protesto internacional contra os referidos projetos de lei, retirando do ar os sites de seus projetos de pesquisa nessa quarta-feira, dia 18/01/2012.

Para saber mais sobre a discussão e declarar apoio ao movimento, há diversos caminhos:

Strike Against SOPA: cadastro de sites que apóiam o movimento e uma lista dos sites que participarão do blecaute.
#BlackOutSOPA: movimento nas redes sociais de demonstração de repúdio à SOPA.
Don’t Break the Internet: artigo publicado na Stanford Law Review analisando os perigos da nova legislação.
How PIPA and SOPA violate White House principles supporting Free Speach and Innovation: artigo da EFF tratando dos mecanismos de controle de conteúdo implementados pelos projetos.

Participam do protesto os seguintes sites administrados pelo CTS:

• A2K Brasil
• Creative Commons Brasil
• Cultura Livre
• CTS Game Studies
• Estrombo
• Observatório da Internet
• Open Business

The new possibilities for licensing the use of somebody’s work are one amongst many transformations brought upon the music production chain by technological advancements. Through public licenses like Creative Commons, for example, the musician is capable of pre-stating his preferences about the usage of his or her work.

Such flexibility is welcomed by new Internet-based distribution mediums. Licenses such as Creative Commons allow artists to permit certain uses of their work while restricting others (like commercial use, for example), using the free-flow of information on the web as a benefit. There are millions of books, images and musics circulating the Internet with these licenses. One of these is Metá-Metá, an album by Juçara Marçal, Thiago França and Kiko Dinucci that’s been getting nothing but positive reviews lately. Check out the following interview with Kiko Dinucci.

Why use a Creative Commons license?

I chose CC as an additional advantage; I’m certainly not in love with the idea of having to license my work so that everyone could listen to it, but that’s the best option comparatively to the old copyright models. It was very important to put the CC mark on the site, it made people more comfortable to download and share and bloggers more willing to spread my art. It’s been clearly publicized, my audience has grown after that. I had a gig in Brasilia last week and most of the people sang along, I sold a lot more CDs after the show than I would in stores, it was great for me. Free music is my vehicle, my radio. I throw my bottle to the sea in hopes someone will read the message I left inside.

Was it also the broadening of the circulation of its music that made Metá-Metá join the app Bagagem?

What got my attention was this new digital format that in a way reminded me of the old record covers. When the CD got popular, it was terrible to see shrinked covers of “Sargent Pepper’s” and such, it took long for a visual language to develop for the CD. Digital music is also going trough the same crisis. I found it appealing to see imaging as an extension of the album itself. Our friends from Axial had already joined and we were fascinated and decided to enter Bagagem too. The app really helped spreading our work, for it wasn’t only an MP3 download, there was a whole universe inside it.

Do you think these new licensing methods and sharing option are renewing the music business?

I’m sure of it, at least in my case, an independent artist who’s accustomed to work by myself, without any middlemen. But I believe everything is renewing in the market. The world itself is changing, and it is up to each one to change along with it. In Europe, for example, they’re not used to free culture on the web, they usually pay for it. In Brazil the free culture isn’t 100% free, either, you still have to pay for the server, the ISP etc., even if I put my work on the web free of charge. My work circulating freely on the web was certainly what took me away from anonymity. If the only available model was that of the pre-90′s I wouldn’t have recorded any albums yet. For me, the only viable alternative is the free licensing. Of course I’d like to profit from my downloads, have bigger wages, but in the midst of an economic crisis, with so many changes, I’m managing to survive. I can’t tell how long it’ll last, but the movement favors my art, slowly, but it does.

- x -

As mentioned by the musician, the Bagagem app, crafted by Felipe Julian from Axial Project, creates a visual interface for digital networks. Axial’s rok is also distributed under CC and last week their most recent album turned physical: the book-cd “Simbiose”. Felipe explains it as “a certain need to go back to actual objects, as a response to the ‘digitalization’ of everything”: “The goal was to create a sensitive experience in which there are two independent products that complement each other”, tells the musician. He adds that the CD must be an artistic experience, not only a disposable object. As of now, the book-cd Simbiose is only sold through Axial Project’s recently-launched online store.

Join this discussion. Download Bagagem and get to know the Creative Commons licenses.

Estrombo is also at the social networks: Twitter, Facebook and YouTube.

The digital age we now live in provides technology which could allow blind, partially sighted and other reading disabled people across the world to both receive and impart information regardless of frontiers, and therefore enjoy this human right fully.
This should be a wonderfully empowering development, helping reading disabled people to access information on an equal basis with others for the first time in history. However, the reality is starkly different. Blind and partially sighted people face a “book famine” in which the vast majority of books are never made into accessible formats like braille, audio or large print.

WIPO SCCR23 has an opportunity and a responsibility to help to solve this problem, by removing the copyright barriers which prevent access for reading disabled people. To that end, the Committee has a draft text for consideration which could and should form the basis for a binding treaty (SCCR_22_16).
http://www.wipo.int/meetings/en/doc_details.jsp?doc_id=188547

In my capacity as UN Special Rapporteur on the promotion and protection of the right to freedom of opinion and expression, I urge all WIPO Member States’ delegates of SCCR23 to work assiduously to agree a binding WIPO treaty for blind and other reading disabled people, and to thereby open a door to reading, ideas and information for reading disabled people across the world.”

Frank La Rue

Relator Especial

Published by TransAtlantic Consumer Dialogue (TACD)

The Brazilian Federal Service for Data Processing (SERPRO) has announced this thursday, 03/11/11, the Creative Commons-based licensing of some of its resources. There are fourteen courses on various subjects, from “Ethics at the Public School” to Ubuntu and “Using Mozilla Firefox”. The content was developed by Serpro’s Corporative University (UniSerpro) and is available for download at www.serpro.gov.br/inclusao/conteudos-educacionais-livres (it requires Moodle: moodle.org/downloads/). All material is under the license “Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0“. The goal is to provide easier access to educational resources to the population.

Read about it the SERPRO website.

Answers from comments proposed on the document, mainly by African Group, are still to be delivered to move forward on the approval (or not) of the proposal.

“Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, it is with measure pleasure that Brazil notes that we started this second week of the 22nd SCCR with a text on the table that’s co-sponsored by Australia Brazil now Cuba Mexico Paraguay and the United States and that is also supported by the EU. For Brazil this text has always been negotiated with a view to becoming the basis of an international treaty on exceptions and limitations to copyright for persons with print disabilities.

Brazil was looking forward with both hope and humility to further listening to the remarks, suggestions and criticisms from all Member States as well as from Civil Society organizations, which are following closely this negotiating process.

This process is now two years old. Time is right to take a few more steps towards a truly historic achievement in this UN organisation. We are indeed in a position to make a significant contribution to mitigate the plight of more than 150 million human beings. These are people who have limited access to education and culture. Not because lack of drive to work hard. Not because of lack of thirst of knowledge and not because of lack of aspiration to play their part in the material and cultural welfare of our countries. For unforeseen circumstances that science cannot still remedy they are deprived on the basic right to equal opportunity.

Mr. Chairman, back in 2009 Brazil decided to table in this committee a draft treaty on exceptions and limitations guided by two assumptions the first one the international treaty we are seeking to conclude must be a useful instrument for persons with print disabilities. This is why we tabled the text originally elaborated by the World Blind Union by people who know best the reality on the ground. Second, the international copyright regime is a mature system with more than 120 years of implementation, experience in many countries. It is feasible to craft precise and effective exceptions and limitation norms without depriving the rights of authors to reap the benefits of their creativity. We all recognize those rights and are fully committed to defend them, that there be no doubt about it.

Those two assumptions remain the guiding principles underlying Brazil’s position. We are committed to help bringing this negotiating process to a successful outcome. For Brazil a successful outcome is an international instrument which will be useful and effective. An effective instrument which makes clear the firm commitment on the ground of all Member States to mitigating the book famine of more than 150 million people worldwide.

At the end of the process there must be a treaty. There is no reason why we should not aim for a treaty. This question, whether we should or not aim for a treaty should also be answered also bearing in mind the broader background of all of the themes under discussion in this committee.  We see emerging consensus gathering around the texts around the protection of audiovisual performances. Nobody is questioning that if this consensus prevails a diplomatic conference should be convened to adopt a treaty on the protection of audiovisual performances. If we succeed in forging consensus around the texts on exceptions and limitations for persons with print disabilities we should also in a precise point in time convene a diplomatic conference to adopt a treaty.

We do not see why there should be a substantive difference of treatment between the negotiations under protection of audiovisual performances and the negotiations on exceptions and limitations for people with print disabilities. We see rather a strong ethical case for adopting a treaty on exceptions and limitations for persons with print disabilities.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.”

Excellency President Rousseff,

This letter is an expression of citizens and civil society organizations and seeks to express our extreme discomfort with the changes in the field of cultural policies, annulling eight years of accumulated discussions and advancements that gave visibility and a role in dialogue to a Ministry that hitherto had been subordinate. Frustrating those who saw the symbolism of appointing the first woman to Minister of Culture of Brazil as a victory, this administration quickly undertook to deconstruct not only the achievements of the previous administration, but especially the original, rich and productive environment of debate that had been established.

The signatories of this letter believe in the need for continuing and deepening of the successful policies of the Lula government. These policies are summarized in the National Plan for Culture, which is the result of a process of extensive public consultations and was signed into law by the president, but is now being ignored by the minister. We affirm that where the previous administration had successes, it was because the Ministry approached the prime movers of culture, understanding the new protagonism of individuals, groups and parts of the population that hitherto were considered “peripheral” and the extraordinary possibilities of Digital Culture. This is not just a discussion about technological and legal tools, but about a whole new creative and cultural context, as these technologies have been appropriated and reinvented in various ways by these new actors. It is essential in this territory to place Digital Culture at the heart of the discussions of cultural policies of the Ministry and to pursue the capillarity of programmes like Cultura Viva and the Points of Culture where the Minister strongly signaled a setback.

By blocking the reform of the copyright law and ignoring the opinions received during six years of debate, 150 meetings held throughout the country, nine national and international conferences, 75 days of public consultation on the Internet which received 7,863 contributions, the Minister affronts the entire enormous democratic effort of understanding and elaboration. If there is a compelling explanation for the urgency to obstruct such a healthy political dynamic, it is to come to the rescue of institutions threatened in their privileges, such as the music collecting society ECAD (Central Bureau of Collection and Distribution) and the associations that compose it, which in the presidential election campaign explicitly and determinedly supported cultural policies and the candidate that were defeated.

But this “rescue” is contrary to the Law 12.343 of 2 December 2010, which approved the National Plan for Culture and clearly establishes the obligation to reform the copyright law (according to clauses 1.9.1 and 1.9.2 that stipulate “the creation of an institution specifically dedicated to the promotion and regulation of copyright and the activities of collection and distribution of copyright royalties” and “the review of the Brazilian copyright legislation, in order to balance the interests of creators, investors and users, establishing fairer contractual relationships and more transparent criteria for royalty collection and distribution”). By alleging that the text of the law is “dictatorial” and that the proposal developed during the Lula government is “controversial” and does not meet the “interests of the authors,” the Minister deliberately confounds the interests of creators with those of exploiters and smuggles into the midst of the government Dilma precisely those positions that were defeated in the presidential elections.

The issue of withdrawing the Creative Commons license from the webportal of the Ministry of Culture is also worth mentioning for its symbolism. The Ministry of Culture of the Lula government was a pioneer in recognizing that the laws that govern the rights of authors are not in step with the practices of our times and that it is imperative to improve them in favor of creators and broad access to culture. This advance was expressed in the National Plan for Culture in clause 1.9.13, which provides for “the encouragement and promotion of the development of knowledge- and technology-intensive cultural products and content, especially under flexible intellectual property regimes.” Contrary to what the minister has said, the CC and similar licenses are intended to regulate the form of remuneration of the artist, not prevent it. They seek to expand the power of the author in relation to his work and adapt it to new forms of production, distribution and remuneration and to the new business models that these technologies enable.

Thus, we believe that the initiatives of the current administration of the Ministry of Culture are not faithful to your presidential campaign, nor to the National Plan for Culture, nor to the accumulated discussions, representing at best an uninformed and disastrous voluntarism and at worst a deliberate step backwards. We support President Rousseff in her declared intention to continue enhancing and promoting Brazilian culture and strengthening a global leadership in discussions where our innovative approach has been highlighting the conservative models consolidated by the hegemonic culture industry of the United States and Europe. This requires that the Ministry of Culture is consistent with the perspective of the government Dilma Rousseff in understanding, deepening and expanding the achievements of the cultural policies of the Lula government.

Privacy advocates have observed for years that countries hosting the Olympic Games introduce increasingly heightened security and surveillance measures for the event, but rarely cut back on public surveillance after the games are finished. Because these expanded surveillance measures are often made permanent, we noted with interest a report released by the whistle-blower website Wikileaks that detailed how the United States lobbied Brazil about security and information-sharing strategies after the latter was chosen to host the 2016 Olympic Games.

Despite lengthy diplomatic cables on this issue, the cables from the U.S. that have been made public did not address the very serious privacy, civil liberties and public accountability implications of the widespread use of surveillance technologies. It remains to be seen what types of security and privacy protocols Brazil will be implement in the coming years. But history shows that the Olympic Games often result in increased security and public surveillance measures that persist long after the games end – to the detriment of privacy.

According to the cables released by Wikileaks, the U.S. Embassy in Brasilia reported on opportunities for the United States Government (USG) to take advantage of the Games to broaden their influence on the government of Brazil and to strengthen cooperation in broader security issues.

“Given the high degree of interest in the Olympics among Brazilians and the high value Brazil places on conducting a successful Game, there are already opportunities for the USG to pursue cooperation toward the Games, and to use such cooperation to further broader USG objectives in Brazil, including increased cooperation and Brazilian expertise on counterterrorism activities. As we look ahead, taking advantage of the Games to work security issues should be a priority, as should cooperation on cybercrime and broader information security (see ref B for additional areas for potential cooperation). We should also look to build in offers for dialogue on preparations for major sporting events as part of all high-level contacts with the Brazilians.”

A few weeks before this December 24, 2009 cable, the U.S. Embassy in Brasilia had sent another cable on December 1, 2009 titled, “The Future is Now.” In this cable, the U.S. Embassy encouraged U.S. agencies to use concerns about a power blackout, and infrastructure challenges in the run up to the 2016 Olympics, to make a case for expanded involvement of the United States government with Brazil in critical infrastructure and cybersecurity.

“The newly heightened concerns about Brazil’s infrastructure as a result of this blackout, combined with the need to address infrastructure challenges in the run-up to the 2014 World Cup and 2016 Olympics, present the United States opportunities for engagement on infrastructure development as well critical infrastructure protection and possibly cyber security,” reads a December 1, 2009 cable from the U.S Embassy in Brasilia.

In addition cable dated December 24, 2009 shows that the Embassy in Brasilia further anticipates that “the next [Brazilian] Administration may organize preparations differently,” “…or even establish a new agency specifically to coordinate Olympics infrastructure and security planning and logistics.”

The privacy situation in Brazil isn’t promising. Brazil does not currently have a privacy law but it is debating one. The draft bill would protect the collection, use and disclosure of personal information of Brazilians. However, privacy advocates in Brazil have criticized the draft bill since it will exempt databases created for the sole purposes of public security, national security, and law enforcement activities. These would be subject to separate legislation.

We are disturbed to see the U.S. lobbying to push the Brazilian government to increase security measures in advance of the 2016 Olympic Games in Brazil. Privacy advocates who have analyzed previous Olympics security plans, noted that Olympic organizers have contributed to a “climate of fear and surveillance” to the “detriment of democracy, transparency, and international and national human rights law.”

For example, as reported in a recent study, Greek law enforcement and intelligence agencies used over 1,000 surveillance cameras in the 2004 Athens games – which continued to be used by the police even after the games. The cameras were employed not only to monitor high traffic roads, which were their stated purpose, but also to surveil public spaces, including demonstrations in those places. After a heated battle with law enforcement officials, the head of the Greek Data Protection Authority and his deputies resigned. The Authority stated that police use of surveillance cameras for secondary purposes “directly breached” the Authority’s privacy regulations.” Moreover, the Greek data protection law was amended to exempt surveillance cameras from its privacy provisions.

Similarly, in advance of the 2008 Olympic Games, Chinese authorities installed over 200,000 cameras and other surveillance measures in Beijing. They also ordered foreign-owned hotels to install Internet monitoring equipment to spy on hotel guests during the Games.

Taking security precautions prior to the Olympics should not result in implementing public surveillance without any regard to privacy. Prior to the 2010 Winter Olympics in Vancouver, privacy advocates urged the Canadian government to adopt several measures to protect privacy and security; notably:

• “to moderate the escalation of security measures for Vancouver 2010 and to strive to respect the true spirit of the event;
• to be as open as possible about the necessary security and surveillance practices;
• to conduct a full, independent public assessment of the security and surveillance measures, once the Games are over, addressing their costs (financial and otherwise), their effectiveness, and lessons to be learned for future mega-events;
• not to assume a permanent legacy of increased video surveillance and hardened security measures in the Vancouver/Whistler area, and to have full and open public discussion on any such proposed legacy.”

In the run-up to the Games, the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada, in conjunction with the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner of British Columbia, issued a series of recommendations seeking to ensure that surveillance and other security measures would not unduly infringe individual’s rights.

“[The] Olympic Games pose unique and difficult challenges from a public security perspective,” said Jennifer Stoddart, Privacy Commissioner of Canada. “And yet, the duty of governments to provide for the security of citizens must, in democratic societies, be tempered by the values that underpin our way of life. That is why the right to privacy must be upheld, even during mega-events like the Olympic games, where the threat to security is higher than usual.”

Tamir Israel, of the Canadian Internet Policy and Public Interest Clinic, also expressed concern that the recent increase in public security measures could result in lasting changes to the Canadian security landscape: “It is already clear that the event allowed for new surveillance technologies to gain a foothold in Vancouver that would never otherwise have been accepted.”

The public should carefully monitor security and privacy steps that new Brazilian government might be considering as the 2014 World Cup soccer and 2016 Olympics approach. There must be an informed and open debate about privacy and security. The public must also be told whether enhanced security measures will be reversed after the games. The Olympics are an opportunity for cultural exchange, not an excuse for trampling civil liberties.

The  acronym of the Brazilian Ministry of Culture (MinC) gained another “C” from Creative Commons and formed the slogan I am MinCC

English: http://www.nosdigitais.teia.org.br/imagens/IamminCC.png

Spanish: http://www.nosdigitais.teia.org.br/imagens/soymin%28CC%29.png

The word MinC was also combined with the symbol of copyleft:

Spanish: http://www.nosdigitais.teia.org.br/imagens/soymin%28%C9%94%29.png

English: http://www.nosdigitais.teia.org.br/imagens/Iammin%28%C9%94%29.png

A Twibbon has also been developed: http://twibbon.com/join/Sou-MinCC

The Commons Strategies Group with a little help from some friends has drafted an open letter to Brazil’s President Dilma Rousseff to be signed by international organizations, academics and activists in support of the work of the Brazilian society and government for the cultural commons. The Open Letter is to be issued at the World Social Forum in Dakar, Senegal, this week. It follows an Open Letter by the Brazilian civil society in December expressing concern that Rousseff’s appointment of Ana de Hollanda as new Minister of Culture might lead to a reversal of the progressive policies under the Ministers Gilberto Gil and Juca Ferreira. The letter points out a range of achievements by the previous Ministry of Culture (MinC), including the Points of Culture, the support for free software, the Development Agenda at WIPO, an open inclusive dialogue in society about culture policies, the adoption of free licenses such as those of Creative Commons and the copyright bill. The concern was fueled by the first activities of the new Minister Ana de Hollanda. She announced that she will need to review the copyright bill that was ready to be send to Congress and she withdrew the CC licence from the ministry’s website. For some background on the issues see here.

The WSF Open Letter can be viewed here: .pdf / .odt. After the release it will move to its own web-page for signature collection. If your group wants to be among the initial signatories please e-mail your endorsement to Silke.Helfrich@gmx.de of the Commons Strategies Group until Thursday 10 February at 9 a.m. Central European Time. The letter and signatures will be presented at the World Social Forum in Dakar on that day.