Education and Technology Hub

right to education panel – a2k4

February 12, 2010August 12, 2018 mtadros

Some of the questions to be pursued by this panel include:

Does the greater cost-effectiveness of online venues strengthen the argument to recognize a more universal human right to higher education? Alternatively, could the availability of free online resources become an undesirable substitute for public efforts to promote traditional education?

Is digital education more democratic than previous forms of education? How can we ensure that preexisting social inequities – of gender, race, class, and linguistic background – are not replicated or reinforced in ways that violate the right to equal educational opportunities?

What are roadblocks to digital education in areas such as telecommunication policies, broadband infrastructures and access, and accreditation. What are the new business models or institutional forms that can support the expansion of digital education? What is the necessary role of the state and of companies that may not self-consciously see themselves as providing digital education, although their tools and services may be essential to this end?

Source: http://yaleisp.org/2010/02/a2k4education/

right to health panel – a2k4 – public awareness and shared global responsibility

February 12, 2010February 28, 2018 mtadros

A2K4 Panel III. The Right to Health: Promoting Innovation and Equity

Thana Cristina de Campos, Fundação Getúlio Vargas Law School – Sao Paulo

Wants to raise public awarness on a shared global responsiblity. Phramaceutical companies have the knowledge and power and responsibility bec it places us in a position to act.

Access to medicine is a human right. 4 principles: availability, accessibility, treatment acceptablity, and good quality. Accessibility is most important esp in marginalized communities.

Amy Kapczynski, UC Berkeley School of Law

What do we mean by human rights in this context? is it a philosophical perception or economic and welfare system etc. There is also the human rights machinery. Focusing on access to medicine issues because they are the most developed in human rights health issues.

There are issues of obligations to non-state parties, and also obligations to non-nationals. How does the right to medicine apply transnationally? It is hard to talk about corporate responsibility and about transnational responsibility.

Talha Syed, UC Berkeley School of Law

Distributed justice is much better framework than human rights. Information economics is not that bad.

Christopher Mason, Weill Cornell Medical College of Cornell University

Patenting Genes: what are genomic rights? What if someone took some of the cells you leave behind when you walk or sit and created a clone of you? this is not illegal, but it is most certainly disturbing. There is precedent to genomic rights in US history.

technologies of dissent – a2k4 – human rigths usa and EFF

February 12, 2010 mtadros

Theresa Harris, Human Rights USA

Filtering is the best example of censorship. Eg. in Saudi Arabia or taking down videos of police brutality in Egypt. This software is provided by US companies. How can you provide facebook to Iranians without it being used to arrest protestsors? should we provide this software or shouldn’t we?

Many have been dealing with this dilemma and the comapnies have not been held accountable. Comapnies claim that it is ‘business as usual’, and that they are not responsible for what those countries do with them.

We tend to focus on the technology and not the govt abuse of it. That is why the human rights framework is important. How is it different? It is a using a universal standard and not putting one country’s interest over another. Tying technology to progressive issues – eg. freedom of speech etc..

What are the steps to implement that? There could be voluntary codes of conduct for corporations. We could have domestic regulations. Putting this on an international treaty.

Eddan Katz, Electronic Frontier Foundation

Hilary Clinton’s speech was important bec it was well articulated. The freedom to connect helps transform society and that is described in Clinton’s speech. The US engages in practices of surveillance and the echelon system is also maintained. How do we then talk of the disruption of networks?

Censorship: gvt. providing money to develop technologies to express themselves.

Reservations about the speech: absence of freedom of speech framework and anonymity because of terrorism issues. EFF stands firm on the side of anonymity.

The issue of the protection of IP: technologies of surveillance are in place and being developed to apply copyright infringements.

Many companies are building the surveillance infra-structure. EFF proposes an instrumental approach: a direct action with the person causing harm; the capabilities approach; the ethics approach is not enough but we need the socio-technical impact. We can create an interesting balance between the human rights discourse and the technological infrastructure.

Read white paper called Surveillance Self-Defense International.

technologies of dissent – a2k4 – anupam chander

February 12, 2010August 12, 2018 mtadros

Anupam Chander, UC Davis School of Law

We might see the perfection of surveillance. Because dissidents use the internet to identify dissent. Coffee shops were considered places where dissent plots occurred and were shut down in the 1700s. There is a narrowness of the pre-internet discourse. Traditional media failed and continues to fail in providing voices for the masses. Nowhere is this more apparent than in undemocratic societies.

Technologies of dissent cannot be undermined. The internet is helping develop a critical public sphere. The internet offers a means to express dissatisfaction. Bloggers and twitterers have a big impact – videos of incidents [such as that in Iran] are prevalent.

What should citizens of developed countries do? they should resist surveillance and providing surveillance to autocratic and non-democratic countries. New media can either give voice to dissent or quite the contrary.