This paper asks the following research question: What are the policy dynamics of copyright regulation for digital audiovisual (AV) archives in Europe and what is their…
This paper asks the following research question: What are the policy dynamics of copyright regulation for digital audiovisual (AV) archives in Europe and what is their potential impact? The paper aims to discuss the social relevance of archives, European cultural policies targeting operationalisation of these archives and underpinnings and sought implementation of copyright policies.
Drawing upon three European cultural policy approaches, namely, democratisation of culture, cultural democracy and governmentalisation of culture, the discussion aims to situate current legislative attempts within digital content governance and examine policy as to its proclaimed aims of broadening access. The authors deployed macro-level legal analyses of key legislative acts of the European Union (EU) with direct relevance to the availability of and accessibility to digital historical content by European citizens. The authors juxtapose relevant cultural policy interventions with the corresponding legal rules and norms in copyright legislation. The authors evaluate the ways in which normative arguments are reflected in these acts and propose reflections on documented and possible impact.
The authors argue that the EU’s legal direction is characterised by uncertainty of conviction and internal tensions regarding the place of common cultural heritage in EU policy, and they present a restrictive acknowledgement of what culture and heritage policy entail and, by extension, how cultural matters should be governed. Cultural heritage AV archives are examples of digital content whose governance was almost “automatically” linked to copyright.
The paper links copyright and cultural policy and demonstrates that although the EU cultural policy is based on access, availability and usability, copyright is unnecessarily restraining them with the improper design and implementation of exceptions and limitations. This reflects EU’s focus on the single market, which, in this case, is pursued at the expense of building of a European identity with shared memories.
This paper is concerned with the place of human rights in the process of technological development but specifically as this process is situated within the…
This paper is concerned with the place of human rights in the process of technological development but specifically as this process is situated within the corporate-technological complex of modern digital communications and their derivatives. This paper aims to argue that expecting and institutionalizing the incorporation of human rights in the process of technological innovation and production, particularly in the context of global economic actors, constitutes a necessary act if we want to navigate the immediate future of artificial intelligence and ubiquitous connectivity in ways that protect democracy and human dignity.
The discussion presents the case for defending human rights through a social control perspective, which assumes the conscious quest for impacting change and cartographing a path of actions and intentions. The authors approach the problem from James Ralph Beniger’s theory of the Control Revolution (1986) to explain the emergence of a new social order and to outline the main challenges brought particularly by media and information and communication technology (ICT) corporations as global actors of power.
Ethics initiatives, considering human rights as an ethical framework for media and ICT businesses, can be based on social control perspectives to regard the more complex variables interacting in the formation of effective policy making. It is the right to participate in the construction of knowledge in society and, informed by this knowledge, help manage or control democratic issues, including influencing on the regulation of technology and other cultural formats of control (Altheide, 1995). Knowing social control tools enable citizens to lead their destinies, plan their freedom and the change what they wish in the societies they live in.
Social control is often understood as a term taken for granted and many times faced as representing malignant and anti-democratic forms. Here, the authors try to build a theoretical ground where both sides – the benign and the malignant – can be taken in consideration to bring awareness to the need to discuss social control as a democratic endeavor, and consider human rights as part of this and not something apart and idealized. The practice of human rights is directly associated with social control forms and is from within these practices individuals must understand its role on social control and act.