Dear all,
I would like to share a brief report on our RightsCon meeting, for those who were not able to participate.
The discussion focused on the organization of our IGF session; on the concrete output that we are elaborating ahead of the IGF (i.e. the special issue of the Computer Law & Security Review, dedicated to "Platform Values: Conflicting Rights, Artificial Intelligence and Tax Avoidance" https://www.journals.elsevier.com/computer-law-and-security-review/call-for-papers/platform-values-conflicting-rights-artificial-intelligence ) and on the strategies we may implement to stimulate better synergies between various stakeholder composing the coalition.
It was stressed that the IGF Session would benefit from the participation of both a representative of a platform and of a business that is being disrupted by digital platforms. As regards the former, it was stressed it would be better to avoid having the “classic” Google, FB, etc but rather involving a different kind of platform. Elsevir, which is developing AI solutions to manage its platform has expressed interest to join the debate. It was also suggested to have a professional journalist on the panel to represent the views of newspapers regarding and how they are coping with platforms’ “disruption”.
These speakers will be included in addition to the contributors to the special issue, who will briefly present their findings.
As regards the special issue, I provided a brief update of the ongoing elaboration process. We received a good number of contributions, which are now under peer review. Many of the contributions will be presented by the authors and discussed on the 19th of July at the dedicated workshop we announced in the call for papers, to be held at FGV Law School. An important update as regards the special issue is that we negotiated with the Computer Law & Security Review to have the text in open access for one year.
Lastly, we agreed on the importance of organising the usual coalition reunion after our IGF session and to make an effort to include specially journalists, activists and regulators that may be interested in using the research featured in the special issue as well as the Best Practices that will also be annexed to the special issue. Both the special issue and the best practices will be considered out outcome and it was suggeste we should try to make an effort to make the outcomes visible to those stakeholders that may concretely using them. Civil society advocates and regulators would be particularly critical to involve in this perspective.
Please feel free to share any other information I might have forgotten.
All the best
Luca
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Luca Belli, PhDProfessor of Internet Governance and Regulation, FGV Law School, Rio de JaneiroChercheur Associé, Centre de Droit Public Comparé, Université Paris 2@1lucabelli------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
This message, as well as any attached document, may contain personal data and information that is confidential and privileged and is intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying or distribution of this email or attached documents, or taking any action in reliance on the contents of this message or its attachments is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. Please contact the sender if you believe you have received this email by mistake._______________________________________________
CPR mailing list
CPR@listas.altermundi.net
https://listas.altermundi.net/mailman/listinfo/cpr