DE FILIPPI Primavera

No summary available.

Bitcoin introduces many new challenges and opportunities for Intellectual Property. It is the dichotomy between blockchain technology as a regulatory technology and its potential use as an unregulatable technology that makes it so interesting from a legal perspective. The distinctive features of a blockchain—in terms of transparency, resiliency, and incorruptibility—can be regarded simultaneously as the greatest gift and as the greatest curse for intellectual property. While they might strengthen the ability for right holders to enforce their intellectual property rights, they may also lead to the demise of the current copyright regime, as well as other laws aimed at restricting the flow of information.

The blockchain: a revolution equivalent to the invention of the Internet? At least that's what people sometimes say. But what exactly is this new technology and what are its real repercussions? Popularized by the explosion of the Bitcoin price, a cryptocurrency allowing to exchange value in a decentralized and secured way, the blockchain extends to much wider fields, such as the certification and authentication of documents, or the automation of transactions. The promise is to disintermediate by moving from a trust-based system to a proof-based system. Giving an overview of the applications still in development, Primavera De Filippi examines nothing less than the political and social implications of this new technology that has not finished making news.

No summary available.

While most of these blockchain-based organizations have been—thus far—developed mostly to facilitate the coordination of individuals in the digital world, the possibilities provided by these new organisational structures can also be found in the physical world. Cities, municipalities and local communities can leverage the power of blockchain technology in order to increase transparency and accountability in many sectors of activities, while providing new opportunities for anyone to engage and participate in the local economy. Enabling local processes of production to reduce the impact of the current industrial globalisation is crucial, but enabling mechanisms to incentivise, accelerate and scale this process is fundamental and urgent. This is where blockchain technology could come at hand by creating an open platform and decentralized incentivization scheme that can be articulated between multiple stakeholders.

However much attention is paid to the design phase, the entire balance of a contract can be called into question by the poor execution (voluntary or by negligence) of its clauses, so conscientiously negotiated. This risk is proportional to the flexibility that can be used to contract (framework contracts are certainly among the worst off) and is increased when the initial balance is already fragile (in terms of licenses associated with the use of a technology, the execution sometimes differs so much from the contractual framework that one often wonders if the actual contract is not in a gray area halfway between what was written and the actual usage). With Blockchain technology and Smart Contracts, a technical answer seems to be emerging to reconcile the parties to the contract, their advisors who assist them and those who ensure the implementation of these commitments. Particularly developed on Ethereum 1 , Smart Contracts are software programs executed in a decentralized manner on the Blockchain, whose functionalities are triggered by the fulfillment of predefined conditions (which may have their origins in a classic contract). Benefiting from the strengths of the blockchain, which are the inalterability and verifiability of transactions, they are of great interest in the context of future contractual relations between individuals and, even more so, through interposed objects: Bruno's connected car will "contract" directly with Joseph's phone to benefit from his music subscription or - perhaps - with Sandra's car, which will lend him extra energy. With the democratization of the IoT (Internet of Things) and since we must remember that all everyday acts hide contracts, it is our entire future that could be a gigantic testing ground for the potential of Blockchain technology and Smart Contracts by automating contractual relationships to the extreme and creating increasingly horizontal products and services.

On May 13, 2014, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) issued the Google Spain ruling, which granted European citizens the right to request the deletion of search results leading to websites containing inaccurate, inadequate or excessive information about them. The right to be forgotten is based on the protection of privacy: it implies/assumes that individuals do not have to account indefinitely for shameful or unpleasant events with which they have been associated in the distant past. More broadly, the right to be forgotten could be described as an attempt to reconcile the human need to be rehabilitated or forgiven with the role of the Internet as a digital record of history (Leta Jones, 2016). This opposition has become even stronger since the emergence of new decentralized databases, known as blockchains, the technology used by the Bitcoin network. Insofar as the blockchain is unalterable and resistant to censorship and modification by design, it is in direct conflict with the right to be forgotten. This contribution seeks to analyze the challenges posed by these emerging technologies vis-à-vis the right to be forgotten. We will first introduce the right to be forgotten (I) and the blockchain (II), we will then analyze whether the right to be forgotten is applicable to the blockchain (III) and, if so, we will further examine whether and how obligations related to the right to be forgotten can be enforced on the blockchain. (IV).

La 4e de couverture indique : "The ways in which Internet traffic is managed have direct consequences on Internet users' rights as well as on their capability to compete on a level playing field. Network neutrality mandates to treat Internet traffic in a non-discriminatory fashion in order to maximise end users' freedom and safeguard an open Internet. This book is the result of a collective work aimed at providing deeper insight into what is network neutrality, how does it relates to human rights and free competition and how to properly frame this key issue through sustainable policies and regulations. The Net Neutrality Compendium stems from three years of discussions nurtured by the members of the Dynamic Coalition on Network Neutrality (DCNN), an open and multi-stakeholder group, established under the aegis of the United Nations Internet Governance Forum (IGF).".

Crowdfunding relies on the contribution of a large number of individuals in order to finance the production of a particular work. Already a few crowdfunding platforms have been deployed on the blockchain, rewarding people's financial contributions to a project with actual shares of the project. Their interests become therefore more aligned with that of the author, since anyone investing in the project becomes an active shareholder, whose return on investment ultimately depends on the success or failure of that project.

The press often talks about young people born between the early 1980s and the mid-1990s, who have grown up with new information and communication technologies (NICTs), particularly social media, and who are referred to as "Generation Y". The first part of the book highlights, based on the work of researchers, some of the characteristics of Generation Y, in particular its close relationship with NICTs. The second part of the book analyzes the ways in which French, European and foreign administrations are adapting. In addition to reflecting on human resources management practices, this book invites managers in the public and private sectors to undergo a profound cultural change.

In this paper, we focus on an ongoing—though too often neglected—phenomenon of decentralization in telecommunications networks: we show how the current revival of grassroots community networks can counterbalance the erosion of autonomy of Internet users that results from current telecom policies. As opposed to more larger and centralized network infrastructures owned and managed by powerful third parties (such as the state or large, highly capitalized Internet Service Providers (ISPs)), grassroots community networks are deployed by the community and for the community at the local or regional level. Rather than being driven by profits, they focus on the actual needs of the needs of its participants. They also experiment with novel models of distributed governance relying on cooperation and sharing among a community of peers (from a dozen to tens of thousands participants), and that are reminiscent of commons-based peer production schemes (Benkler 2006). In our study, we focus on 'Wireless Community Networks' (WCN) (i.e those community networks providing connectivity through radio technologies, and Wi-Fi especially). While many community networks do not rely on radio technologies, those who do exhibit particular features that contrast more strongly from the dominant model found in traditional ISPs. In particular, to the extent that they rely solely and exclusively on free-to-use airwaves (or 'spectrum commons'), WCN are to some extent more independent from incumbent ISPs than landline community networks who necessarily have to enter into a contractual relationship with the owners of the 'last-mile' landline network infrastructure.

Digital media allowed for the emergence of new artistic practices and innovative modes of production. In particular, the advent of Internet and digital technologies drastically enhanced the ability for multiple authors to collaborate towards the creation of large-scale collaborative works, which stand in contrast to the traditional understanding that artistic production is essentially an individual activity. The significance of these practices in the physical world is illustrated by the recent deployment of FabLabs: Fabrication Laboratories that employ innovative technologies – such as, most notably, 3D printing, which is recently gaining the most interest – to encourage the development of new methods of artistic production based on participation and interaction between peers. By promoting a Do It Yourself (DIY) approach, Fablabs constitute an attempt to transpose the open source mode of production from the domain of software into the field of art and design. Yet, as opposed to the information realm (where scarcity has been added artificially – by legal means – to inherently abundant resources like software and creative expression), artistic and design production in the physical world is riddled by the problem of material scarcity: physical resources are inherently limited and cannot be reproduced without using, converting or otherwise disposing of others kinds of resources. Over time, open source practices have managed to “hack” these provisions by means of contractual instruments designed to eliminate artificial scarcity so as re-instate the original state of abundance in the information realm. One has to wonder whether similar instruments could be conceived to eliminate – or,at least, reduce – material scarcity in the physical world. The underlying question that will be addressed throughout the paper is, therefore, “how could we hack the law to turn technical material scarcity into artificial material abundance?”.

Open Data is an important public policy that contributes to achieving greater transparency and broader access to information, more citizen participation and engagement, while also supporting innovation and economic growth. The pace at which the Open Data movement is spreading in different fields of endeavour can be taken as an illustration that society is evolving towards greater openness, transparency and accountability. Yet, several constraints and legal uncertainties subsist beyond the façade of Open Data. This article investigates different layers of rights that regulate the use and re-use of data: from the copyright vesting in the content and/or structure of a particular dataset, to the sui-generis right protecting against the substantial reproduction and/or extraction of the content of a database. The objective is, ultimately, to illustrate the conflict-ual relationship that subsists between the underlying principles of Open Data, which purports to promote the free use and re-use of information, and the underlying legal system, whose provisions are increasingly relied upon to establish an exclusive right on public sector information.

Internet and digital technologies allowed for the emergence of new modes of production involving cooperation and collaboration amongst peers (peer-production). In contrast with traditional models of production oriented towards the maximization of profits, these alternative modes of production are, more often than not, oriented towards the maximization of the common good. To ensure that content will always remain available to the public, the output of production is often released under a specific regime that prevents anyone from subsequently turning it into a commodity (the regime of information commons). While this might reduce the likelihood of commodification, information commons can nonetheless be exploited by the market economy. Indeed, since they have been made available for use by anyone, large online service providers can indirectly benefit from the commons by capturing the value derived from it. While this is not a problem per se, problems arise when the exploitation of the commons by one agent is likely to preclude others from doing the same—often as a result of commodification. This is especially true in the context of cloud computing, where the content holder has become as powerful as, if not more powerful than, the copyright owner. Nowadays, regardless of their legal status, information commons are increasingly controlled by large corporations who can precisely define the manner in which they can be used or accessed.

Commons-based peer-production (CBPP) constitutes today an important driver for innovation and cultural development, both online and offline. This led to the establishment of an alternative, Commons-based ecosystem, based on peer-production and collaboration of peers contributing to a common good. Yet, to the extent that this operates outside of the market economy, we cannot rely on traditional market mechanisms (such as pricing) to estimate the value of CBPP. We present here a system-which we will name Sabir-that can resolve some of the most recurrent problems encountered within CBPP communities. The Sabir system 1 is composed of three layers that will help us: (1) Understanding the social value-as opposed to market value-of different CBPP communities, so as to compare them to one another. (2) Identifying the value generated by individuals contributing to the Commons and evaluating it through a common denominator of value. (3) Creating an interface between the market and the CBPP ecosystem so that the two can interact, and benefit from each other.

The paper explores the mechanisms that led to the current crisis of copyright law in the digital environment (understood as its inability to regulate social dynamics as regards the production, dissemination and access to creative works) by applying the concept of law as an autopoietic system. It analyses how the copyright regime (a subsystem of the legal system) evolved over time, by scrutinizing the interdependencies between copyright law and the other constitutive systems of its environment: the creative system (concerned with the creation, reproduction, distribution, and access to creative works) the political system (comprising both the State and the Church), the economic system (ruled by right holders and intermediaries on the market for creative works), and the technological system. It will be shown that every new development in the technological system irritated the remaining systems, thereby stimulating the evolution of the overall ecosystem. For a long time, copyright law managed to properly adjust to the environmental changes brought by technological developments, so as to successfully regulate the production, dissemination and access to creative works. It is only with the advent of Internet and digital technologies that copyright law's selective response to environmental stimuli resulted in its failure to adapt to the new reality and, consequently, in the loss of its regulative power. Reacting mostly to the pressures of the economic and political systems (i.e. the lobbying of right holders and intermediaries), while neglecting the needs of the creative system, and even failing to adjust to the specificities of the changing technological system, copyright law eventually disrupted the balance of the surrounding environment. Furthering the economic interests of intermediaries (often at the expense of the public and in certain cases of the authors) created a series of divergences between legal norms - increasingly restricting the access, use and reuse of creative works - and social norms (produced within the creative system, and supported by the new opportunities of digital technologies), which advocate for the free use and reuse of digital works. Over the years, copyright law distanciated itself so much from the social reality in which it operates that it has lost most of its credibility and applicability in the digital world. Hence, the paper contends that, for copyright law to successfully regulate the production, dissemination and access to cultural works, it must be radically reformed in light of the intrinsic logic and needs of all constitutive systems of modern society, without favoring those of the economic and political systems over those of the creative system. It concludes that society (as a whole) might only benefit from the new opportunities offered by digital technologies if copyright law properly adapts to the digital era by embracing - rather than opposing - the specificities of the digital world.

This paper analyses the evolution of the Internet, shifting from a decentralized architecture designed around the end-to-end principle with powerful mainframe/personal computers at each end, to a more centralized network designed according to the mainframe model, with increasingly weaker user's devices that no longer have the ability to run a server nor to process any consistent amount of data or information. The advantages of ubiquitous computing (allowing data to become available from anywhere and at any time regardless of the device) should thus be counterbalanced with the costs it entails (loss of users' autonomy, concerns as regards privacy, and freedom of expression, etc.).

The report explores some of the most crucial facets of Network Neutrality, underscoring its close relationship with the full enjoyment of end-users fundamental rights. The report also includes a proposal for a Model Framework on Network Neutrality that has been elaborated by the Dynamic Coalition through an open, inclusive and multi-stakeholder effort, in order to promote an efficient safeguard of the Net Neutrality principle in accordance with international human rights standards.