Suchergebnisse

In response to the controversy surrounding the publication in a Danish newspaper of cartoons depicting Islam's prophet, Muhammed, we, the Association of the Manifeste des Libertés, insist on a dual commitment. We condemn fundamentalism and those who feed it. And we reassert and nourish hope for a democratic, common future together, with pluralism of cultural backgrounds. This hope is hated by the extreme right parties in Europe and by the radical Islamists. They throw the ball back and forth between each other. We aim to seize it.

AbstractWould suppressing deepfakes violate freedom of expression norms? The question is pressing because the deepfake phenomenon in its more poisonous manifestations appears to call for a response, and automated targeting of some kind looks to be the most practically viable. Two simple answers are rejected: that deepfakes do not deserve protection under freedom of expression legislation because they are fake by definition; and that deepfakes can be targeted if but only if they are misleadingly presented as authentic. To make progress, following a discussion of why freedom of expression deserves protection in a democracy, the question is reframed. At issue is not whether the arrival of deepfakes brings new and potentially serious dangers (it does), nor whether these dangers call for measures that potentially limit freedom of expression (they do), but whether the need for such measures raises any new and unfamiliar freedom-of-expression challenges. The answer to that question, surprisingly, is no. The balancing act needed to cope with the arrival of deepfakes brings plenty of difficulties, certainly, but none of the measures likely to be effective in tackling deepfake harms raises freedom-of-expression concerns that aren't familiar from consideration of non-deepfake harms. In that respect, at least, the arrival of deepfakes makes no difference.

Human rights — Freedom of expression — Article 10 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Article 9 of Austrian State Treaty — Prohibition of National Socialism — Whether statements of university professor as public servant questioning occurrence of the Holocaust protected by freedom of expressionHuman rights — Right to a fair trial — Article 6 of European Convention on Human Rights, 1950 — Disciplinary proceedings — Impartiality of judges — Whether participation of members of disciplinary commission in earlier decisions on interim suspension leading to those members being biased — The law of Austria

South Korea is widely considered a consolidated democracy, but there is growing evidence that freedom of expression in South Korea has lagged behind that of comparable Asian countries and that it has deteriorated since 2008. Freedom House downgraded South Korea's "freedom of the press" status from "free" to "partly free" in 2010 and other international reports also raised concerns on the status of freedom of expression in the country. We identify five problems that have contributed to the deterioration in South Korea's rankings with respect to civil liberties: abuse of criminal defamation, the rules governing election campaigns, national security limitations on free speech, restrictions related to the internet and partisan use of state power to control the media. We close by considering possible explanations of the phenomenon, ranging from more distant cultural factors and the influence of the Japanese legal systems through the enduring impact of the Cold War. However, the main problems appear political. Governments on both the political right and left have placed limits on freedom of expression in order to contain political opposition, and constitutional, legal and political checks have proven insufficient to stop them.

South Korea is widely considered a consolidated democracy, but there is growing evidence that freedom of expression in South Korea has lagged behind that of comparable Asian countries and that it has deteriorated since 2008. Freedom House downgraded South Korea's "freedom of the press" status from "free" to "partly free" in 2010 and other international reports also raised concerns on the status of freedom of expression in the country. We identify five problems that have contributed to the deterioration in South Korea's rankings with respect to civil liberties: abuse of criminal defamation, the rules governing election campaigns, national security limitations on free speech, restrictions related to the internet and partisan use of state power to control the media. We close by considering possible explanations of the phenomenon, ranging from more distant cultural factors and the influence of the Japanese legal systems through the enduring impact of the Cold War. However, the main problems appear political. Governments on both the political right and left have placed limits on freedom of expression in order to contain political opposition, and constitutional, legal and political checks have proven insufficient to stop them.

En este artículo vamos a presentar una muestra de la manera como en Francia, la aclamada cuna y morada de la libertad de expresión, se censura, persigue, e incluso se encarcela a quienes se atreven a criticar el lobby israelí o sus posturas no están en sintonía con el pensamiento "tibio", de derecha, del mundo académico y cultural.

This volume examines three questions: Why do we value freedom of speech and expression? How does freedom balance multicultural sensitivity, minority rights and prevention of violence? Can traditional defenses of freedom of speech translate to other cultures?.