List of proposals for EuroDIG 2023: Difference between revisions

From EuroDIG Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
No edit summary
No edit summary
(6 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 27: Line 27:
! Suggested issue
! Suggested issue
|- id="prop_1"
|- id="prop_1"
| 1 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre05_23 | Pre 5 ]] || Amali De Silva-Mitchell || UN IGF Dynamic Coalition on Data Driven Health Technologies || Other || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || What is the optimal ecosystem to accelerate the space of data driven health technologies ? Are there better ways to build back stronger and faster ? What should we pursue and what should we shed from the experience of using telemedicine during covid ?
| 1 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre07_23 | Pre 7 ]] || Amali De Silva-Mitchell || UN IGF Dynamic Coalition on Data Driven Health Technologies || Other || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || What is the optimal ecosystem to accelerate the space of data driven health technologies ? Are there better ways to build back stronger and faster ? What should we pursue and what should we shed from the experience of using telemedicine during covid ?
|- id="prop_2"
|- id="prop_2"
| 2 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre05_23 | Pre 5 ]] || Amali De Silva-Mitchell || UN IGF Dynamic Coalition on Data Driven Health Technologies || Other || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || || Doctor, medical staff, medical equipment and service access is in shortage and will reach a crisis soon. How can the internet and emerging technologies be used to assist healthcare, research, collaboration for service delivery and development, Including education?  
| 2 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre07_23 | Pre 7 ]] || Amali De Silva-Mitchell || UN IGF Dynamic Coalition on Data Driven Health Technologies || Other || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || || Doctor, medical staff, medical equipment and service access is in shortage and will reach a crisis soon. How can the internet and emerging technologies be used to assist healthcare, research, collaboration for service delivery and development, Including education?  
|- id="prop_3"
|- id="prop_3"
| 3 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub1_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 1 ]] <br /> [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub2_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Stephanie Teeuwen || Netherlands IGF (NL IGF) || Civil society || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Internet fragmentation and the three categories of causes (technical, political, economic) and the two areas that are affected by internet fragmentation (economic, human rights).
| 3 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub1_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 1 ]] <br /> [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub2_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Stephanie Teeuwen || Netherlands IGF (NL IGF) || Civil society || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Internet fragmentation and the three categories of causes (technical, political, economic) and the two areas that are affected by internet fragmentation (economic, human rights).
Line 35: Line 35:
| 4 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#flash03_23 | Flash 3 ]] || Dennis Redeker || Universität Bremen || Academia || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Quantum technology, including quantum cryptography, might upend the current system of (asymmetric) encryption including on the protocol level (if it ever comes to full implementation). Europe and European stakeholders should be prepared to co-design new post-quantum encryption, protocols and legal and ethical guidelines. This issue relates to privacy and human rights as well as demanding (potentially) new international agreements and institutions to govern a potential quantum future.  
| 4 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#flash03_23 | Flash 3 ]] || Dennis Redeker || Universität Bremen || Academia || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Quantum technology, including quantum cryptography, might upend the current system of (asymmetric) encryption including on the protocol level (if it ever comes to full implementation). Europe and European stakeholders should be prepared to co-design new post-quantum encryption, protocols and legal and ethical guidelines. This issue relates to privacy and human rights as well as demanding (potentially) new international agreements and institutions to govern a potential quantum future.  
|- id="prop_5"
|- id="prop_5"
| 5 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre05_23 | Pre 5 ]] || Amali De Silva - Mitchell || UN IGF DC DDHT || Other || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || In the media we are increasingly hearing about the lack of awareness and sensitivity to secure the medical internet of things, associated devices and services, access, privacy of data and all matters of risk for the internet. It can be a matter of life or death if a device or service is compromised, or data corrupted. The need to ensure the UN Sendai principles is also key. As customized patient care from home, which is remote, becomes more internet dependent in real time, should an enhanced set of ethical, protection and technical internet standards, for devices and services, for the medical internet of things be developed and adopted ? The patient is a vulnerable individual in the community increasingly dependent on the internet.  
| 5 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre07_23 | Pre 7 ]] || Amali De Silva - Mitchell || UN IGF DC DDHT || Other || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || In the media we are increasingly hearing about the lack of awareness and sensitivity to secure the medical internet of things, associated devices and services, access, privacy of data and all matters of risk for the internet. It can be a matter of life or death if a device or service is compromised, or data corrupted. The need to ensure the UN Sendai principles is also key. As customized patient care from home, which is remote, becomes more internet dependent in real time, should an enhanced set of ethical, protection and technical internet standards, for devices and services, for the medical internet of things be developed and adopted ? The patient is a vulnerable individual in the community increasingly dependent on the internet.  
|- id="prop_6"
|- id="prop_6"
| 6 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Mathieu Paapst || University of Groningen || Other || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || || In Europe, we not only have the GDPR, but we also have the ePrivacy Directive. This contains rules concerning the use of cookies, local storage, pixels, API calls, and other resources that can store or read data from the device of an end user. According to these rules, the end users should be informed about the function and purposes of these resources. In general, we can distinguish five purposes: Statistics, Statistics-anonymous, marketing/tracking, Functional and Preferences. The larger problem is that there is no consensus about those purposes. For example, one website may speak about the "functional purpose" for a particular cookie, whereas other websites call the purpose for that same cookie "Technical pur", " Essential", or " strictly necessary". "Statistics" or " analytics" are sometimes also called "Performance", and marketing/tracking is sometimes known as "ad-storage". Preferences Cookies are in some jurisdictions known as functionality. This is of course not transparent to the end-users. We should therefore find consensus in order to standardize the names of these purposes.  
| 6 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Mathieu Paapst || University of Groningen || Other || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || || In Europe, we not only have the GDPR, but we also have the ePrivacy Directive. This contains rules concerning the use of cookies, local storage, pixels, API calls, and other resources that can store or read data from the device of an end user. According to these rules, the end users should be informed about the function and purposes of these resources. In general, we can distinguish five purposes: Statistics, Statistics-anonymous, marketing/tracking, Functional and Preferences. The larger problem is that there is no consensus about those purposes. For example, one website may speak about the "functional purpose" for a particular cookie, whereas other websites call the purpose for that same cookie "Technical pur", " Essential", or " strictly necessary". "Statistics" or " analytics" are sometimes also called "Performance", and marketing/tracking is sometimes known as "ad-storage". Preferences Cookies are in some jurisdictions known as functionality. This is of course not transparent to the end-users. We should therefore find consensus in order to standardize the names of these purposes.  
Line 41: Line 41:
| 7 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#ws02_23 | WS 2 ]] || Pekka Mustonen || The Pirate Party of Finland || Other || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || || While technology is developing and our everyday life is getting more and more digital we also have people who don't have access to any of this. There still are many senior citizens who have never touched a computer/mobile phone. How can we make sure that everyone is still able to survive in more and more digital world?  
| 7 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#ws02_23 | WS 2 ]] || Pekka Mustonen || The Pirate Party of Finland || Other || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || || While technology is developing and our everyday life is getting more and more digital we also have people who don't have access to any of this. There still are many senior citizens who have never touched a computer/mobile phone. How can we make sure that everyone is still able to survive in more and more digital world?  
|- id="prop_8"
|- id="prop_8"
| 8 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre05_23 | Pre 5 ]] || Frédéric Cohen || UN DESA/IGF - DC DDHT || Intergovernmental organisation || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || The use of robotics as a model of life to develop health technologies  
| 8 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre07_23 | Pre 7 ]] || Frédéric Cohen || UN DESA/IGF - DC DDHT || Intergovernmental organisation || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || The use of robotics as a model of life to develop health technologies  
|- id="prop_9"
|- id="prop_9"
| 9 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#ws02_23 | WS 2 ]] || Esa Sirkkunen || Tampere University || Academia || || || || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Internet and media platforms<br />update 2023/01/26<br />https://trepo.tuni.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/134781/978-952-03-2110-9.pdf?sequence=2<br />Strengthening the communication rights of citizens is essential for developing platform politics for Europe and Finland. Here are some tentative recommendations:<br />
| 9 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#ws02_23 | WS 2 ]] || Esa Sirkkunen || Tampere University || Academia || || || || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Internet and media platforms<br />update 2023/01/26<br />https://trepo.tuni.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/134781/978-952-03-2110-9.pdf?sequence=2<br />Strengthening the communication rights of citizens is essential for developing platform politics for Europe and Finland. Here are some tentative recommendations:<br />
Line 73: Line 73:
| 19 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub3_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 3]] || Chris Buckridge || RIPE NCC || Technical community || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Is the UN commitment to a multistakeholder approach to Internet governance (as enshrined in the Tunis Agenda) at risk as we move towards the WSIS 20-year review? Is there a need to better shape, define and evolve multistakeholder processes and modalities for Internet governance?
| 19 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub3_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 3]] || Chris Buckridge || RIPE NCC || Technical community || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Is the UN commitment to a multistakeholder approach to Internet governance (as enshrined in the Tunis Agenda) at risk as we move towards the WSIS 20-year review? Is there a need to better shape, define and evolve multistakeholder processes and modalities for Internet governance?
|- id="prop_20"
|- id="prop_20"
| 20 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic1_sub2_23 | Topic 1 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Karen Mulberry || IEEE || Technical community || || || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || || Cybersecurity by Design - Building in Resilience Cloud security technologies are procedures and technologies designed to address external and internal threats to an organisation’s security. Despite ongoing technology improvements, gaps in cloud forensics have been found involving a number of stakeholders, including cloud service providers, cloud application developers, and cloud service users. Considering cybersecurity needs in the design stage of products or services is critical, as is convening all of the affected stakeholders in the process. The standards creation process can help bring together a wide variety of stakeholders to have the conversations needed, and to contribute to structuring the process of making systems safe and trustworthy for all. This is an especially pertinent topic for Europe, as it recently proposed in the EU Cybersecurity Act, which strengthens the EU Agency for cybersecurity (ENISA) and establishes a cybersecurity certification framework for products and services. https://engagestandards.ieee.org/cybersecurity.html
| 20 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Karen Mulberry || IEEE || Technical community || || || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || || Cybersecurity by Design - Building in Resilience Cloud security technologies are procedures and technologies designed to address external and internal threats to an organisation’s security. Despite ongoing technology improvements, gaps in cloud forensics have been found involving a number of stakeholders, including cloud service providers, cloud application developers, and cloud service users. Considering cybersecurity needs in the design stage of products or services is critical, as is convening all of the affected stakeholders in the process. The standards creation process can help bring together a wide variety of stakeholders to have the conversations needed, and to contribute to structuring the process of making systems safe and trustworthy for all. This is an especially pertinent topic for Europe, as it recently proposed in the EU Cybersecurity Act, which strengthens the EU Agency for cybersecurity (ENISA) and establishes a cybersecurity certification framework for products and services. https://engagestandards.ieee.org/cybersecurity.html
|- id="prop_21"
|- id="prop_21"
| 21 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic1_sub2_23 | Topic 1 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Karen Mulberry || IEEE || Technical community || || || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || || Trust, Authorization and Cybersecurity Risks – Defining the Digital Future As Europe works to bolster the pending Cyber Resilience Act, including rules to ensure more secure hardware and software products, cloud computing becomes a critical component, including the need for authorization decisions based on projected cyber risk and authentication-based trust factors; defining security guardrails around identity, platform, and application-level security in remote access scenarios; and addressing how to dynamically alter security and auditing controls based on importance of data, the environment context, and the level of risk in authorised activities. Common technical standards can help implement the draft act. https://standards.ieee.org/industry-connections/cybersecurity-agile-cloud-computing/
| 21 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Karen Mulberry || IEEE || Technical community || || || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || || Trust, Authorization and Cybersecurity Risks – Defining the Digital Future As Europe works to bolster the pending Cyber Resilience Act, including rules to ensure more secure hardware and software products, cloud computing becomes a critical component, including the need for authorization decisions based on projected cyber risk and authentication-based trust factors; defining security guardrails around identity, platform, and application-level security in remote access scenarios; and addressing how to dynamically alter security and auditing controls based on importance of data, the environment context, and the level of risk in authorised activities. Common technical standards can help implement the draft act. https://standards.ieee.org/industry-connections/cybersecurity-agile-cloud-computing/
|- id="prop_22"
|- id="prop_22"
| 22 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub1_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 1 ]] <br /> [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub2_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Vittorio Bertola || Open-Xchange || Private sector || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || || - European regulation and Internet fragmentation In the last couple of years, the calls against "Internet fragmentation" have been multiplying; "avoiding fragmentation" has even become a theme at the IGF. However, there are parties that consider the new wave of European Internet regulation, and sometimes even the GDPR, as a form of fragmentation, as they impose localisation requirements, break data flows to countries that do not align with the GDPR, and create content control and moderation requirements that push the development of EU-specific services. Is this correct or not? Is national and regional regulation a form of fragmentation, and when: always, never, under some conditions? Are there any principles that could be suggested to promote good regulation that protects user rights while ensuring alignment with local values and jurisdictions?
| 22 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub1_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 1 ]] <br /> [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub2_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Vittorio Bertola || Open-Xchange || Private sector || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || || - European regulation and Internet fragmentation In the last couple of years, the calls against "Internet fragmentation" have been multiplying; "avoiding fragmentation" has even become a theme at the IGF. However, there are parties that consider the new wave of European Internet regulation, and sometimes even the GDPR, as a form of fragmentation, as they impose localisation requirements, break data flows to countries that do not align with the GDPR, and create content control and moderation requirements that push the development of EU-specific services. Is this correct or not? Is national and regional regulation a form of fragmentation, and when: always, never, under some conditions? Are there any principles that could be suggested to promote good regulation that protects user rights while ensuring alignment with local values and jurisdictions?
Line 85: Line 85:
| 25 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub1_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 1 ]] || Menno Ettema || Council of Europe || Intergovernmental organisation || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || || Suicides by youngsters such as Amanda Todd in 2012 and Molly Russel in 2017 are widely covered in the media, exemplifying the ultimate psychological impact that hate speech and other harmful content online can have. The impact of hate speech on targeted individuals and groups is widely documented by institutional monitoring bodies, such as the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance of the Council of Europe, and NGOs. Yet, most hate speech goes unreported, and users, getting accustomed to hate speech, either believe that they can handle it or are too ashamed to seek support or unaware where to find it. How can we reach out to victims and, more broadly, how to support all those targeted by hate speech, before it’s too late? Are there appropriate support services in place, and are they up to the task? What is missing and which measures can different stakeholders, including internet platforms, NGOs and State authorities set up? The Council of Europe will conclude in the spring of 2023 a review study of support mechanisms for those targeted by hate speech across a selection of member states and providing examples of promising programmes, activities and policies. The study builds on the Recommendation CM/Rec (2022)16 on Combating Hate Speech adopted in May 2022, and it will serve as a strong bases to review how a comprehensive and multi-stakeholder approach can ensure effective support for the victims and targets of hate speech and other harmful content.
| 25 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub1_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 1 ]] || Menno Ettema || Council of Europe || Intergovernmental organisation || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || || Suicides by youngsters such as Amanda Todd in 2012 and Molly Russel in 2017 are widely covered in the media, exemplifying the ultimate psychological impact that hate speech and other harmful content online can have. The impact of hate speech on targeted individuals and groups is widely documented by institutional monitoring bodies, such as the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance of the Council of Europe, and NGOs. Yet, most hate speech goes unreported, and users, getting accustomed to hate speech, either believe that they can handle it or are too ashamed to seek support or unaware where to find it. How can we reach out to victims and, more broadly, how to support all those targeted by hate speech, before it’s too late? Are there appropriate support services in place, and are they up to the task? What is missing and which measures can different stakeholders, including internet platforms, NGOs and State authorities set up? The Council of Europe will conclude in the spring of 2023 a review study of support mechanisms for those targeted by hate speech across a selection of member states and providing examples of promising programmes, activities and policies. The study builds on the Recommendation CM/Rec (2022)16 on Combating Hate Speech adopted in May 2022, and it will serve as a strong bases to review how a comprehensive and multi-stakeholder approach can ensure effective support for the victims and targets of hate speech and other harmful content.
|- id="prop_26"
|- id="prop_26"
| 26 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub1_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 1 ]] || Menno Ettema || Council of Europe || Intergovernmental organisation || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 m-a-c">n</span> || || || || The surge of hate speech at the start of Russian Federation’s war against Ukraine raised multiple questions, including whether a different approach to moderating online hate speech should apply in times of conflict. The Covid19 health crisis equally sparked waves of hate speech against specific groups, to the point that the World Health Organisation announced that the pandemic was accompanied by an “infodemic”, constituting a serious risk to public health and public action. Recommendation CM/Rec (2022)16 on Combating Hate Speech, adopted in May 2022, provides guidance to member states and other relevant stakeholders towards a comprehensive and properly calibrated set of legal and non-legal measures to prevent and combat hate on- and offline. Effectively implemented, the measures proposed can build social resilience against hate speech in society. It also ensures key-stakeholders can quickly upscale efforts to fight online hate speech and provide support those targeted. Cooperation among all relevant actors, including state authorities, internet platforms and CSOs, proves crucial in times of crisis, to ensure that human rights and democratic principles prevail. The Council of Europe will conduct a study in 2023 on effective practices to combat hate speech in time of crisis. The EuroDIG session will inform the study by reviewing how a comprehensive and multi-stakeholder approach can deliver quicker and more effective response to hate speech in time of crisis.
| 26 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic1_sub3_23 | Topic 1 / Subtopic 3 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub1_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 1 ]] || Menno Ettema || Council of Europe || Intergovernmental organisation || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 m-a-c">n</span> || || || || The surge of hate speech at the start of Russian Federation’s war against Ukraine raised multiple questions, including whether a different approach to moderating online hate speech should apply in times of conflict. The Covid19 health crisis equally sparked waves of hate speech against specific groups, to the point that the World Health Organisation announced that the pandemic was accompanied by an “infodemic”, constituting a serious risk to public health and public action. Recommendation CM/Rec (2022)16 on Combating Hate Speech, adopted in May 2022, provides guidance to member states and other relevant stakeholders towards a comprehensive and properly calibrated set of legal and non-legal measures to prevent and combat hate on- and offline. Effectively implemented, the measures proposed can build social resilience against hate speech in society. It also ensures key-stakeholders can quickly upscale efforts to fight online hate speech and provide support those targeted. Cooperation among all relevant actors, including state authorities, internet platforms and CSOs, proves crucial in times of crisis, to ensure that human rights and democratic principles prevail. The Council of Europe will conduct a study in 2023 on effective practices to combat hate speech in time of crisis. The EuroDIG session will inform the study by reviewing how a comprehensive and multi-stakeholder approach can deliver quicker and more effective response to hate speech in time of crisis.
|- id="prop_27"
|- id="prop_27"
| 27 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub1_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 1 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#ws02_23 | WS 2 ]] || Mikko Salo || Faktabaari || Civil society || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || || || || || || || Digital information literacy is a modern civic skill that underpins participation in democratic decision-making. Finland is renowned for its high literacy rate, and the teaching of multiple literacies has been integrated into current curricula from early childhood education onwards. However, on digital platforms we all are confronted with a bewildering flood of information that they may not be able to filter out with the skills they have acquired in the school community and at home: claims about products by influencers, search results tailored by commercial algorithms, cleverly scripted propaganda and authorisations to track online behaviour or physical movement in urban space hidden behind countless 'yes' buttons. It is therefore important to strengthen the digital information literacy of all the web users, especially young people, in order to identify how we are being influenced online. Finnish Faktabaari has recently published within EDMO NORDIS project a Digital Information Literacy Guide for citizens in the digital age also in English and would be interested to compare views on how to concretely build awareness and engage people for healthier digital information ecosystems: https://faktabaari.fi/dil/digital-information-literacy-guide/
| 27 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub1_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 1 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#ws02_23 | WS 2 ]] || Mikko Salo || Faktabaari || Civil society || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || || || || || || || Digital information literacy is a modern civic skill that underpins participation in democratic decision-making. Finland is renowned for its high literacy rate, and the teaching of multiple literacies has been integrated into current curricula from early childhood education onwards. However, on digital platforms we all are confronted with a bewildering flood of information that they may not be able to filter out with the skills they have acquired in the school community and at home: claims about products by influencers, search results tailored by commercial algorithms, cleverly scripted propaganda and authorisations to track online behaviour or physical movement in urban space hidden behind countless 'yes' buttons. It is therefore important to strengthen the digital information literacy of all the web users, especially young people, in order to identify how we are being influenced online. Finnish Faktabaari has recently published within EDMO NORDIS project a Digital Information Literacy Guide for citizens in the digital age also in English and would be interested to compare views on how to concretely build awareness and engage people for healthier digital information ecosystems: https://faktabaari.fi/dil/digital-information-literacy-guide/
|- id="prop_28"
|- id="prop_28"
| 28 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Desara Dushi || Vrije Universiteit Brussel || Academia || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || || In May 2022 the European Commission proposed a “Regulation laying down rules to prevent and combat child sexual abuse” material online. The proposal provides a uniform approach to detecting and reporting child sexual abuse imposing obligations on online service providers. But it has been criticized for including measures which put the vital integrity of secure communications at risk and opening the door for a range of authoritarian surveillance tactics. The proposal allows the scanning of private communication with the purpose of searching not only for verified illegal child sexual abuse material (CSAM), but also for new photos and videos, as well as evidence of text-based “grooming”. Is this proposal balanced and proportional or will this mark the end of end-to-end encryption? Despite several safeguards, should providers have a duty to scan our conversations? In the long debates of child protection and privacy so far it seems that children have always been the ones to be sacrificed and this proposal is trying to change the situation. Can we have both privacy and child protection online without either one diminishing the other? Is this regulation the solution to child sexual abuse online? Can we fight these types of crime by changing technical standards?
| 28 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#ws05_23 | WS 5 ]] || Desara Dushi || Vrije Universiteit Brussel || Academia || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || || In May 2022 the European Commission proposed a “Regulation laying down rules to prevent and combat child sexual abuse” material online. The proposal provides a uniform approach to detecting and reporting child sexual abuse imposing obligations on online service providers. But it has been criticized for including measures which put the vital integrity of secure communications at risk and opening the door for a range of authoritarian surveillance tactics. The proposal allows the scanning of private communication with the purpose of searching not only for verified illegal child sexual abuse material (CSAM), but also for new photos and videos, as well as evidence of text-based “grooming”. Is this proposal balanced and proportional or will this mark the end of end-to-end encryption? Despite several safeguards, should providers have a duty to scan our conversations? In the long debates of child protection and privacy so far it seems that children have always been the ones to be sacrificed and this proposal is trying to change the situation. Can we have both privacy and child protection online without either one diminishing the other? Is this regulation the solution to child sexual abuse online? Can we fight these types of crime by changing technical standards?
|- id="prop_29"
|- id="prop_29"
| 29 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub1_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 1 ]] <br /> [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub2_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 2 ]] || David Frautschy || Internet Society || Civil society || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || The fragmentation of the Internet is pressing issue for Europe as well as the world at large. Governments and businesses across the world are increasingly making risky decisions that have the potential to adversely impact the open, global Internet - and they might not even know it. Risks to the Internet’s infrastructure can take many shapes - regulation of internetworking, sanctions impacting the availability of and trustworthiness of the Internet’s infrastructure, dangers to data security, and centralization of control - and can lead to geographical, political or experiential fragmentation of the Internet. This not only impacts the efficiency, agility and interoperability offered by the Internet but also has severe impacts on the global economy, innovation and access.
| 29 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub1_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 1 ]] <br /> [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub2_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 2 ]] || David Frautschy || Internet Society || Civil society || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 i-a-e">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || The fragmentation of the Internet is pressing issue for Europe as well as the world at large. Governments and businesses across the world are increasingly making risky decisions that have the potential to adversely impact the open, global Internet - and they might not even know it. Risks to the Internet’s infrastructure can take many shapes - regulation of internetworking, sanctions impacting the availability of and trustworthiness of the Internet’s infrastructure, dangers to data security, and centralization of control - and can lead to geographical, political or experiential fragmentation of the Internet. This not only impacts the efficiency, agility and interoperability offered by the Internet but also has severe impacts on the global economy, innovation and access.
Line 103: Line 103:
| 34 || [[YOUthDIG_2023 | YOU<sup>th</sup>DIG]] || Regina Filipová Fuchsová || EURid vzw, DCDT || Technical community || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || <span class="table-squares-23 m-a-c">n</span> || || || || We would like to discuss the impact of poor data and misinformation on young people. Is there some particularity valid for this group of stakeholders? We would like to look into the question whether young people want greater data security and what they are willing to pay for that.
| 34 || [[YOUthDIG_2023 | YOU<sup>th</sup>DIG]] || Regina Filipová Fuchsová || EURid vzw, DCDT || Technical community || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || <span class="table-squares-23 m-a-c">n</span> || || || || We would like to discuss the impact of poor data and misinformation on young people. Is there some particularity valid for this group of stakeholders? We would like to look into the question whether young people want greater data security and what they are willing to pay for that.
|- id="prop_35"
|- id="prop_35"
| 35 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre03_23 | Pre 3 ]] || Regina Filipová Fuchsová || EURid vzw, DCDT || Technical community || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || We would like to discuss the role of data accuracy as a tool for law enforcement authorities and those institutions enforcing intellectual property rights (and eventually consumer protection ones). Some registries as well as registrars (as part of the DNS) introduced self-regulatory measures to increase the data accuracy, what is the effectiveness from the viewpoint of the organisations representing law enforcement, intellectual property rights or consumer protection.
| 35 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#pre04_23 | Pre 4 ]] || Regina Filipová Fuchsová || EURid vzw, DCDT || Technical community || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || We would like to discuss the role of data accuracy as a tool for law enforcement authorities and those institutions enforcing intellectual property rights (and eventually consumer protection ones). Some registries as well as registrars (as part of the DNS) introduced self-regulatory measures to increase the data accuracy, what is the effectiveness from the viewpoint of the organisations representing law enforcement, intellectual property rights or consumer protection.
|- id="prop_36"
|- id="prop_36"
| 36 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub1_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 1 ]] || André Melancia || Technical Community || Technical community || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 m-a-c">n</span> || || || || Fake news, disinformation and manipulation: How the last 5 years saw extreme-right wing rulers get elected based on lies (USA, Brazil, Brexit, Italy, etc.), and what the Internet and media need to do to fight populism and misinformation to support truly Democratic processes. Having fact-checkers doesn't work (there's fact-checkers to check other fact-checkers, all have lost all credibility). Normal newspapers and media channels have lost journalistic integrity. What measures should be taken? How can we guarantee credible and verifiable content on the Internet? What legislative steps should be taken to prevent extreme-right funding of bots and sites spreading misinformation? Etc.
| 36 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub1_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 1 ]] || André Melancia || Technical Community || Technical community || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || <span class="table-squares-23 m-a-c">n</span> || || || || Fake news, disinformation and manipulation: How the last 5 years saw extreme-right wing rulers get elected based on lies (USA, Brazil, Brexit, Italy, etc.), and what the Internet and media need to do to fight populism and misinformation to support truly Democratic processes. Having fact-checkers doesn't work (there's fact-checkers to check other fact-checkers, all have lost all credibility). Normal newspapers and media channels have lost journalistic integrity. What measures should be taken? How can we guarantee credible and verifiable content on the Internet? What legislative steps should be taken to prevent extreme-right funding of bots and sites spreading misinformation? Etc.
Line 111: Line 111:
| 38 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic1_sub2_23 | Topic 1 / Subtopic 2 ]] || André Melancia || Technical Community || Technical community || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Processes (political, legislative, technical community awareness, etc.) to guarantee the implementation of Technically proven solutions to many problems of today's Internet, including IPv4 address exhaustion (causing a disparity of costs in different countries in the world and limiting access) by using IPv6, guaranteeing digitally signed and also encrypted DNS (for security and privacy, with many technical options available), guaranteeing cheap or free (and facilitated) access to HTTPS encryption certificates and their effective usage (for security and privacy), IoT implementation issues (including tampering, communication and storage security, etc.), and much more. Please note many of these issues are critical in today's non-Democratic scenarios (censorship, war, etc.)  
| 38 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic1_sub2_23 | Topic 1 / Subtopic 2 ]] || André Melancia || Technical Community || Technical community || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Processes (political, legislative, technical community awareness, etc.) to guarantee the implementation of Technically proven solutions to many problems of today's Internet, including IPv4 address exhaustion (causing a disparity of costs in different countries in the world and limiting access) by using IPv6, guaranteeing digitally signed and also encrypted DNS (for security and privacy, with many technical options available), guaranteeing cheap or free (and facilitated) access to HTTPS encryption certificates and their effective usage (for security and privacy), IoT implementation issues (including tampering, communication and storage security, etc.), and much more. Please note many of these issues are critical in today's non-Democratic scenarios (censorship, war, etc.)  
|- id="prop_39"
|- id="prop_39"
| 39 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#flash09_23 | Flash 9 ]] || Callum Voge || Internet Society || Civil society || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Both the European Union and the United Kingdom have proposed new rules that seek to improve safety online. While these rules are well intended, both proposals take an approach that places an obligation on online communication service providers to screen private communications to detect harmful content. This obligation would, in practice, push service providers to either weaken or remove end-to-end encryption entirely. Encryption is an integral building block for the open, globally connected, secure and trustworthy Internet. Decisions made in the EU or the UK have global appeal and would be copied by other government around the world, including those that would exploit the loss of encryption for political control and censorship. Relevant documents: EU proposal for a regulation laying down rules to prevent and combat child sexual UK Online Safety Bill  
| 39 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] / [[consolidated_programme_2023#ws05_23 | WS 5 ]] || Callum Voge || Internet Society || Civil society || || || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 s-a-c">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Both the European Union and the United Kingdom have proposed new rules that seek to improve safety online. While these rules are well intended, both proposals take an approach that places an obligation on online communication service providers to screen private communications to detect harmful content. This obligation would, in practice, push service providers to either weaken or remove end-to-end encryption entirely. Encryption is an integral building block for the open, globally connected, secure and trustworthy Internet. Decisions made in the EU or the UK have global appeal and would be copied by other government around the world, including those that would exploit the loss of encryption for political control and censorship. Relevant documents: EU proposal for a regulation laying down rules to prevent and combat child sexual UK Online Safety Bill  
|- id="prop_40"
|- id="prop_40"
| 40 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub3_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 3]] || Sébastien Bachollet || Interne Society France (&) EURALO || Civil society || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Improving Digital cooperation is a key priority of the United Nations both at the global level and local level. Building on the roadmap for digital cooperation which suggested strengthening the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) ecosystem, it is essential to foster a multi-stakeholder approach and improve digital cooperation at the national and local levels. Cooperation between European IGFs, local and regional (NRIs), and between NRIs and the European institutions is key to enabling tangible outcomes for stakeholders.Improving Multi-stakeholder fora is a key priority for Internet end users and the other stakeholder groups. Their participation at all levels (national, regional and global) is very important for the various actors but also for the future of Internet Governance.Key questions arise: what role could the IGF and NRIs play after 2025? How to strengthen multi stakeholder cooperation at the local and regional level? How to take the messages developed at those levels to the global IGFs? How to encourage tangible outcomes for Internet users?
| 40 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub3_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 3]] || Sébastien Bachollet || Interne Society France (&) EURALO || Civil society || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Improving Digital cooperation is a key priority of the United Nations both at the global level and local level. Building on the roadmap for digital cooperation which suggested strengthening the Internet Governance Forum (IGF) ecosystem, it is essential to foster a multi-stakeholder approach and improve digital cooperation at the national and local levels. Cooperation between European IGFs, local and regional (NRIs), and between NRIs and the European institutions is key to enabling tangible outcomes for stakeholders.Improving Multi-stakeholder fora is a key priority for Internet end users and the other stakeholder groups. Their participation at all levels (national, regional and global) is very important for the various actors but also for the future of Internet Governance.Key questions arise: what role could the IGF and NRIs play after 2025? How to strengthen multi stakeholder cooperation at the local and regional level? How to take the messages developed at those levels to the global IGFs? How to encourage tangible outcomes for Internet users?
|- id="prop_41"
|- id="prop_41"
| 41 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub2_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 2 ]] <br /> [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub2_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Lucien Castex || Internet Governance and Regulation Research Group, CIS CNRS || Academia || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Internet fragmentation and human rights. Is Internet fragmentation already there? Access restrictions, automated customisation, regulation have resulted in divergences in the way content and services are available to internet users. How should we assess the impact of the ‘splintering’ of the internet on Human Rights in the wake of the EU legislative agenda? The UN Secretary-General' report, Our Common Agenda, proposes a Global Digital Compact expected to outline shared principles and address key digital issues such as avoiding Internet fragmentation and applying human rights online as well as improving digital cooperation. How can EU commitment to promoting the development of a single, open, neutral, free and secure Internet be combined with a human right centric approach amid a tense geopolitical environment? This topic is particularly important for European Stakeholders in the “times of trouble”.
| 41 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub1_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 1 ]] <br /> [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub2_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Lucien Castex || Internet Governance and Regulation Research Group, CIS CNRS || Academia || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || <span class="table-squares-23 hu-ri">n</span> || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 t-a-o">n</span> || Internet fragmentation and human rights. Is Internet fragmentation already there? Access restrictions, automated customisation, regulation have resulted in divergences in the way content and services are available to internet users. How should we assess the impact of the ‘splintering’ of the internet on Human Rights in the wake of the EU legislative agenda? The UN Secretary-General' report, Our Common Agenda, proposes a Global Digital Compact expected to outline shared principles and address key digital issues such as avoiding Internet fragmentation and applying human rights online as well as improving digital cooperation. How can EU commitment to promoting the development of a single, open, neutral, free and secure Internet be combined with a human right centric approach amid a tense geopolitical environment? This topic is particularly important for European Stakeholders in the “times of trouble”.
|- id="prop_42"
|- id="prop_42"
| 42 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub3_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 3]] || Giacomo Mazzone || Eurovisioni || Civil society || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || <span class="table-squares-23 m-a-c">n</span> || || || || THE MANIFESTO OF PUBLIC SERVICE INTERNET TWO YEARS LATER: the manifesto about PSI signed by Habermas and Chomsky among many others, imagined that a different Internet is possible. a model based on public service principle, and different from the merely commercial one proposed by Internet Platforms giants as well as diverse from the model of social control proposed by China. What was seen at the time of its publication as a visionary proposal, now that EU rules over the platforms are entering in force (GPDR, data protection, DSA-DMA), seems possible and affordable. Having a debate around this proposal (and other similar, such as the "Solid" project of Tim Berners Lee) at EuroDIG 2023 seems very timely and appropriate, to check if a European way to the Internet of the future is really possible.  
| 42 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic2_sub3_23 | Topic 2 / Subtopic 3]] || Giacomo Mazzone || Eurovisioni || Civil society || || <span class="table-squares-23 ig-eco">n</span> || || || <span class="table-squares-23 m-a-c">n</span> || || || || THE MANIFESTO OF PUBLIC SERVICE INTERNET TWO YEARS LATER: the manifesto about PSI signed by Habermas and Chomsky among many others, imagined that a different Internet is possible. a model based on public service principle, and different from the merely commercial one proposed by Internet Platforms giants as well as diverse from the model of social control proposed by China. What was seen at the time of its publication as a visionary proposal, now that EU rules over the platforms are entering in force (GPDR, data protection, DSA-DMA), seems possible and affordable. Having a debate around this proposal (and other similar, such as the "Solid" project of Tim Berners Lee) at EuroDIG 2023 seems very timely and appropriate, to check if a European way to the Internet of the future is really possible.  
Line 123: Line 123:
| 44 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub3_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 3 ]] || Stephen Wyber || International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions || Civil society || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || || || || || || || Echoing a proposal made by the National Parliamentary Library of Georgia, we would like to suggest that an issue that could be usefully explored is how we can make for meaningful and effective media and information literacy in Europe as a support for citizenship. A debate should draw on the experience of different actors in working to build individuals' own resilience and resistance to misinformation online during the pandemic. This would mirror the extensive work already done by the European Commission around codes of conduct for social media platforms by putting a welcome focus on empowering and enabling individuals, helping ensure a more rounded European response.  In particular, discussion about such issues should get beyond more basic approaches and look in depth at what does and doesn't seem to work, as well as the interaction between media and information literacy and wider citizenship education. It could draw on researchers from different fields to help inform policy discussion as well, and make sure that we avoid overly simplistic or ineffective solutions.  We would recommend that there is consideration, in this context, of how existing networks can be drawn on, in particular libraries, which have strong existing links with communities and  experience and expertise in collecting and sharing knowledge with all, rather than any one single group such as school-age children.
| 44 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub3_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 3 ]] || Stephen Wyber || International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions || Civil society || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || || || || || || || Echoing a proposal made by the National Parliamentary Library of Georgia, we would like to suggest that an issue that could be usefully explored is how we can make for meaningful and effective media and information literacy in Europe as a support for citizenship. A debate should draw on the experience of different actors in working to build individuals' own resilience and resistance to misinformation online during the pandemic. This would mirror the extensive work already done by the European Commission around codes of conduct for social media platforms by putting a welcome focus on empowering and enabling individuals, helping ensure a more rounded European response.  In particular, discussion about such issues should get beyond more basic approaches and look in depth at what does and doesn't seem to work, as well as the interaction between media and information literacy and wider citizenship education. It could draw on researchers from different fields to help inform policy discussion as well, and make sure that we avoid overly simplistic or ineffective solutions.  We would recommend that there is consideration, in this context, of how existing networks can be drawn on, in particular libraries, which have strong existing links with communities and  experience and expertise in collecting and sharing knowledge with all, rather than any one single group such as school-age children.
|- id="prop_45"
|- id="prop_45"
| 45 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#ws05_23 | WS 5 ]] || Stephen Wyber || International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions || Civil society || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || || || || || || || Not all internet access is equal. The sort of global standards used by the ITU and Broadband Commission too often also include infrequent or low quality access that are far from being able to provide the meaningful internet access that is needed to deliver on the full potential of connectivity. Beyond simple connectivity, quality of access is also strongly dependent on skills, confidence, and access to content.  Delivering on this can stray far beyond core digital policies, and require engagement with and contributions from other policy areas, not least education, urban development, and culture. It can also imply a more comprehensive set of solutions for access itself, including public access and secondary access solutions in times of disaster.  It would therefore be valuable to use the opportunity provided by the evidence of the pandemic in order to think again about what it means for Europe to promote inclusive and meaningful internet access.  
| 45 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#flash09_23 | Flash 9 ]] || Stephen Wyber || International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions || Civil society || <span class="table-squares-23 a-a-l">n</span> || || || || || || || || Not all internet access is equal. The sort of global standards used by the ITU and Broadband Commission too often also include infrequent or low quality access that are far from being able to provide the meaningful internet access that is needed to deliver on the full potential of connectivity. Beyond simple connectivity, quality of access is also strongly dependent on skills, confidence, and access to content.  Delivering on this can stray far beyond core digital policies, and require engagement with and contributions from other policy areas, not least education, urban development, and culture. It can also imply a more comprehensive set of solutions for access itself, including public access and secondary access solutions in times of disaster.  It would therefore be valuable to use the opportunity provided by the evidence of the pandemic in order to think again about what it means for Europe to promote inclusive and meaningful internet access.  
|- id="prop_46"
|- id="prop_46"
| 46 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Stephen Wyber || International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions || Civil society || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 m-a-c">n</span> || || || || The internet brings huge possibilities to boost Europe’s capacity for education, research and access to culture. The pandemic – for those with the skills and connectivity to benefit – demonstrated how much progress could be possible towards a more inclusive Europe through providing remote access. However, it became clear that laws around online content – and in particular copyright – were far from well suited to this, and that too often, the possibility to continue with key public interest activities was dependent on the discretion of rightholders and other gatekeepers.  It would therefore be valuable, building on previous discussions at EuroDIG around the Digital Single Market (DSM) Directive, to look holistically at how well current rules and practices are serving us in terms of enabling access and use. In particular, it would be worth looking at unfinished business from the DSM Directive, as well as in the wider framework, in order to inform early thinking about what could be achieved under the next Commission.  
| 46 || [[consolidated_programme_2023#topic3_sub2_23 | Topic 3 / Subtopic 2 ]] || Stephen Wyber || International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions || Civil society || || || || || <span class="table-squares-23 m-a-c">n</span> || || || || The internet brings huge possibilities to boost Europe’s capacity for education, research and access to culture. The pandemic – for those with the skills and connectivity to benefit – demonstrated how much progress could be possible towards a more inclusive Europe through providing remote access. However, it became clear that laws around online content – and in particular copyright – were far from well suited to this, and that too often, the possibility to continue with key public interest activities was dependent on the discretion of rightholders and other gatekeepers.  It would therefore be valuable, building on previous discussions at EuroDIG around the Digital Single Market (DSM) Directive, to look holistically at how well current rules and practices are serving us in terms of enabling access and use. In particular, it would be worth looking at unfinished business from the DSM Directive, as well as in the wider framework, in order to inform early thinking about what could be achieved under the next Commission.  

Revision as of 16:01, 30 March 2023

During the call for issues for EuroDIG we received 60 submissions in the period from 12 September till 31 December 2022. You can see the breakdown of proposals here and download the list of proposals as of 31 December 2022, 24:00 CET as pdf file. The list below is a rolling document where proposals will be added during the review period. Proposals marked with an asterisk * have been added after 31 Dec. 2022.

Categories are coloured as follows: (up to three categories per proposal could be selected)

 Access & literacy   Development of IG ecosystem   Human rights & data protection   Innovation and economic issues   Media & content   Cross cutting / other issues   Security and crime   Technical & operational issues 

You may sort the table by clicking at the head of the column. To restore the original sorting, just reload the page.