2023.02.15

Digital Rights Archive Newsletter - Third edition

Like most people in and around tech, I’ve got ChatGPT on the brain, trying to figure out its implications for everything from search to education, to the fate of science itself. ChatGPT may have caught the public surprise, but this month’s newsletter reminds us that people have been thinking about the implications of this tech for a long time. There’s NYU professor Julia Lane, whose book, Democratizing our Data: A Manifesto, came out in 2021, speaking about AI policy. Josh Simon’s book, Algorithms for the People, considers how to regulate algorithms in the public interest. 

From a slightly different angle, Julien Onneo’s article on the quantified self may not seem to have much to do with large language models, but its discussion about data’s inherent subjectiveness should remind us that, whether it’s a health app or a large language model, digital data doesn’t equal objective knowledge.

And while Michael Geist’s discussion on the CBC podcast Front Burner about Bill C-18, which requires large digital platforms to make payments to Canadian news outlets, was recorded before Google and Microsoft announced they were incorporating generative AI into their search engines, I can already imagine the follow-up discussion: How does providing summaries (accurate or not) that will induce users not to follow the links to the original material change (allowing search engines to suck up even more ad revenue) change the platform-payments-to-websites debate?

While these power moves are reminding us of the potency of private power, many of our other readings this month centre the ongoing importance of state power, often in conflict or cooperation with private. Alessio Guissani reports from Greece on an ongoing state-surveillance scandal, that he argues “must be interpreted in the international context of a thriving spyware industry.” For his part, Andreas Baur tackles the political economy of cloud computing, and the PEGA Committee considers the proliferation of commercial spyware in democratic and authoritarian countries.

Max Tretter’s article about contact tracing apps, meanwhile, reminds us that sovereignty is always contested and contestable.

We also highlight articles that consider how our ideas about the future are constructed and constrained, via Vivien Butot and Liesbet van Zoonen’s article on 5G in the Netherlands, and a wide-ranging series of articles from the Transnational Institute. They’re all worth reading, but I’d highlight in particular Julia Choucair Vizoso and Chris Byrnes on Abolitionist creativity. It offers a creative rethinking of how we might use intellectual property to confront digital power, including rethinking previously comfortable truisms. My favourite: their argument that “Open-access movements must also confront an uncomfortable fact: Big Tech is on their side.” Watching large tech companies use their billions to construct “bullshit generators” from their access to the open web highlights what those involved with Traditional Knowledge have always known: that openness can also be an expression of power that favours some and hurts others.

While I’m not fully convinced that creators retaking their copyrights is the best way to address concentrated corporate power, in working through the actual effects of IP, including the potential negative effects of open access, they’re asking the right question, for IP and generative AI alike: Who benefits?

- Blayne Haggart

Podcast
Document
Document
Podcast
Article
Book
Journalism
Article
Article
Article