With the adoption of a progressive legislation on internet rights, Brazil is taking the lead in digital freedom, but more works needs to be done to protect freedom of expression.
Key debates are under way at international level on internet governance, with crucial decisions up for grabs that could determine whether the internet remains a broadly free and open space, with a bottom up approach to its operation – as exemplified in part by the multistakeholder approach – or becomes a top-down controlled space as pushed for by China and Russia, supported to some extent by several other countries.
Brazil is the world’s second-biggest user of both Facebook and Twitter, with already 65 million Facebook users and 41.2 million tweeters and counting.
The archdiocese of Rio is offended and reportedly threatening to sue Italian broadcaster RAI for an advert showing the Christ The Redeemer statue wearing the Italy Jersey. Such complaints of “offence” are really demands for “respect” — in the Corleone sense
When it comes to the internet, Brazil is a conundrum. On the one hand it is among the top requesters to Google and other internet firms for content takedowns. On the other hand, Brazil has passed a progressive law — Marco Civil — putting it on a footing to be one of the world leaders on internet freedom.
Against the backdrop of the World Cup in Brazil, we ask how, during global sporting events, should we respond to countries that repress their citizen’s free expression? Should we engage or ignore?
World Cup host country Brazil has the potential to become an influential, global leader in digital rights — but that will depend on key decisions taken in the coming months
A request to remove 16 videos from YouTube has sparked a broad debate on the limits of freedom of speech and religious expression in Brazil. Simone Marques reports
The US Congress has made it clear by passing the USA Freedom Act that compromise is one way of doing nothing, a form of sanctified inertia. Binoy Kampmark writes
In this counterpoint to the Index position on the right to be forgotten, Graham Ginsberg argues that individuals should have the right to request search results be amended