[globalsouthdata] Beyond Digital Rights: Towards a Fair Information Ecosystem?

[Rafael Zanatta]

 *Beyond Digital Rights: Towards a Fair Information Ecosystem?*

*Published on Tech Policy Press, February 28 2025
<https://www.techpolicy.press/beyond-digital-rights-towards-a-fair-information-ecosystem/>*
by Bruno Bioni, Mariana Rielli & Rafael Zanatta

One of the major challenges in the field of digital rights
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights> is the tendency toward
segmentation and hyper-specialization in topics such as privacy, freedom of
expression, net neutrality, data protection, and the regulation of AI
systems.

While these areas are crucial and must be defended in the 21st century, we
need a more holistic perspective to address the complex intersection of
technology and society. The relationship between living beings and their
environment is increasingly mediated by digital intermediation and
technological affordances. This shift demands an ecological vision
<https://brunobioni.com.br/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/Ecology-Bioni.pdf>
that considers the broader implications of digital transformation and its
political economy.

We are witnessing intense datafication
<https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/20539517241227875?af=R>,
platformization, and a reconfiguration of power dynamics among
corporations, states, and citizens. Only through a comprehensive
understanding of these shifts in our information ecosystem can we develop
effective strategies for advancing social justice and democracy, which is
increasingly under threat from populism and its tactical alliances with
oligarchs in the tech sector.

To achieve this, we must move beyond certain outdated paradigms. The
cyber-libertarian notion of the internet as an ethereal, separate
space—distinct from the material world—is a persistent illusion. In
reality, the internet and digital technologies depend on physical
infrastructure, Earth’s resources, and human labor. It is time to abandon
the conceptual repertoire of the 1990s—expressions such as "cyberspace" and
"cloud computing"—and instead revive the principles
<https://www.itu.int/net/wsis/docs/geneva/official/dop.html> established at
the World Summit on the Information Society, which recognized human dignity
and environmental protection as foundational to a healthier information
society.

Similarly, we must reassess long-standing beliefs about deregulation and
the notion that an unregulated digital economy fosters innovation,
competition, and dynamism. The legal frameworks designed to support
platform economies and grant them broad immunities have largely failed in
their original objectives. Instead, we see increasing economic
concentration, stagnation in meaningful innovation, and higher barriers to
entry—particularly in AI-driven markets, where access to vast amounts of
data and computing power has created insurmountable advantages for dominant
players.

The prevailing narratives of “Internet Freedom” and “individual human
rights online” have reached their limits, in a certain way. This
recognition is why, in the digital rights field in Brazil, we are now
focusing on more structural elements and on fostering a fair information
ecosystem.

For the past four years, Brazil has actively debated artificial
intelligence legislation and has recently approved and reviewed its
national AI strategy. Both prioritize people by balancing a rights-based
approach with a risk-based one. This combination inherently incorporates
the environmental impact concerns of how AI—particularly its intensive
water and energy consumption—disproportionately affects marginalized
communities. At the same time, Brazil is geopolitically well-positioned to
tackle these ecological challenges, as it not only possesses one of the
world's largest clean and renewable energy matrices but is also advancing
research and innovation to further expand it.

Brazilian legislative and public policy efforts
<https://www.dataprivacybr.org/en/the-artificial-intelligence-legislation-in-brazil-technical-analysis-of-the-text-to-be-voted-on-in-the-federal-senate-plenary/>
are responding to these challenges by placing human dignity, the fight
against inequality, and environmental sustainability at the heart of the AI
governance framework.

A fair information ecosystem also requires recognizing and protecting the
rights of content creators and artists in relation to AI-generated works.
Creators must be able to object to the use of their works and receive fair
compensation when their intellectual property is exploited, especially in
training datasets used by monopolistic AI firms to generate synthetic
media. This concern has prompted some of Brazil's most celebrated
artists—such as Milton Nascimento, Marisa Monte, and Caetano Veloso—to sign
an open letter
<https://veja.abril.com.br/coluna/matheus-leitao/artistas-apoiam-pl-que-regulamenta-inteligencia-artificial>
to the Federal Senate advocating for the inclusion of copyright protections
in AI legislation. Their call underscores the need to uphold the
personality rights of the creative industry in the digital age.

In collaboration with the Coalizão Direitos na Rede, a coalition of 60
civil society organizations, we are advancing an agenda
<https://direitosnarede.org.br/2024/04/09/aprovacao-pl2630-fundamental-para-regular-plataformas-e-defender-democracia-brasileira/>
for the economic regulation of digital platforms. This agenda seeks to
address issues such as data-driven mergers that stifle competition and the
significant asymmetries between tech giants and smaller, sector-specific
companies operating in areas like education, finance, and fraud prevention.
The Brazilian government is preparing a new piece of legislation, largely
inspired by Europe’s Digital Markets Act (DMA) and the Digital Services Act
(DSA).

Additionally, a fair information ecosystem requires robust mechanisms for
public participation in negotiations over fair data flows and effective
redress for those whose rights have been violated. This is why we advocate
for empowering civil society organizations to initiate collective legal
actions and provide mechanisms for group-based redress
<https://cetic.br/media/docs/publicacoes/6/20230727104238/iso-year-xv-n-2-personal-data-protection.pdf>.
Individuals and collectives harmed by automated decision-making systems
must have avenues for seeking compensation and legal redress. Data
protection authorities must coexist with access to justice in courts.

>From a data justice perspective
<https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2053951717736335>, it is
crucial to establish democratic processes that give communities a say in
how their data is used, particularly in initiatives like Digital Public
Infrastructure
<https://www.techpolicy.press/digital-public-services-for-whom-participation-and-care-as-prerequisites-for-efficiency/>.
This vision moves beyond the traditional model of individual consent and
isolated petitions, recognizing that data justice demands
community-centered deliberation and equitable governance. Communities that
generate data should have a voice in determining how its value is
recognized and managed in the public interest. It is time to shift from the
so-called informational self-determination—primarily individualistic, based
on an abstract view of the data subject as a rational economic agent—to
what we have been calling informational co-deliberation
<https://www.amazon.com.br/Regula%C3%A7%C3%A3o-Prote%C3%A7%C3%A3o-Dados-Pessoais-Accountability-ebook/dp/B0B61QZSR3>.
This approach emphasizes a collective effort and, ultimately, public
deliberation
<https://www.csisac-community.org/news/42-ministerial-day-1-csisac-participated-in-a-workshop-on-immersive-technologies>
between individuals and groups to foster more equitable value distribution
and political resistance through data flows.

In a globalized world, local struggles are interconnected with
international policymaking. As the Brazilian geographer and intellectual Milton
Santos
<https://www.amazon.com.br/Milton-Santos-Pioneer-Critical-Geography/dp/331953825X>
emphasized, these fights do not occur in isolation. The digital policy
battles currently unfolding in Brazil—such as securing AI legislation
centered on labor and sustainability, enacting economic regulations for
large platforms, and developing digital public infrastructure projects
grounded in data justice—have broader geopolitical implications. These
initiatives can contribute to international discussions
<https://www.dataprivacybr.org/en/g20-engagement-groups-issue-joint-declaration-on-artificial-intelligence/>,
including the G20 processes in South Africa and the formulation of global
cooperation strategies.

Adopting the framework of a fair informational ecosystem might offer an
opportunity for citizens, activists, industry and policymakers to expand
their analytical perspectives, beyond the traditional digital rights
approach of the beginning of the century. At the very least, this is the
approach we have been pursuing in Brazil and in our dialogues with civil
society organizations from the Global South
<https://www.dataprivacybr.org/en/documentos/southern-alliance-for-the-global-digital-compact-2/>
.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listas.tiwa.net.br/pipermail/globalsouthdata/attachments/20250305/e6481a80/attachment.htm>