The following are the outputs of the captioning taken during an IGF virtual intervention. Although it is largely accurate, in some cases it may be incomplete or inaccurate due to inaudible passages or transcription errors. It is posted as an aid, but should not be treated as an authoritative record.
***
>>CARLOS AFONSO: Hi. I'm Carlos Afonso, member of the Multistakeholder Advisory Group of the Internet Governance Forum for 2020 and a co-facilitator of the Best Practice Forum on Local Content.
The BPFs are a unique platform for multistakeholder discussion on topics relevant to the future of the Internet. They aim at facilitating dialogue and collecting emerging and existing practices to address specific issues or policy questions.
BPFs are an intersessional activity. An important part of the work is done in the months ahead of the annual IGF meeting. BPF outcomes in the form of compilations of good practices and recommendations are intended to help inform policy debates and serve as inputs into other pertinent forums.
BPFs carry their work in an open and consultative manner. All interested stakeholders are encouraged to contribute through public consultation, service mailing list discussions and online meetings.
Taking a look at the BPF on Local Content, since it started in the IGF 2014, Istanbul, when it established a focus on how to create an enabling environment for the development of local content, which is part of one of the action lines of the Geneva Plan of Action.
In 2017 in Geneva, the BPF collected examples of initiatives that succeeded in stimulating the creation of local cultural assets. The goal was to inspire policymakers and other stakeholders.
The BPF in Paris examined the relationship between local Internet access provision and the development of locally relevant content and services in order to enable a sustainable local content value chain.
In Berlin in 2019, it extended the scope with an emphasis on preservation and promotion of languages and heritage under conditions in which cultural and linguistic diversity, artifacts and histories are sometimes at risk as a result of political and social shifts.
Several issues from 2019 are still pertinent. Practices demonstrating the benefits and risks of enforcing author or community rights on cultural assets. State support for creativity in all cultural fields is central, a major export item in developed countries. How the UNESCO Convention on cultural diversity may positively impact the fair trade of digital cultural goods. Various mechanisms of direct or indirect support to local content production, not only state aids and grants but also other indirect mechanisms, such as quotas of local production, private sector supporting local cultural production, stimulus to public service media.
Cases which illustrates how Internet platforms contribute to the production and circulation of local content to the benefit of local national cultures. Developing local capacities for proper digitization of local content, creating an enabling environment to secure digital assets while minimizing barriers to their broad use.
Encouraging learning and use of cryptography for protection of sensitive content, creative use of local networks and encrypted tools by communities to protect their content without renouncing broader communications in a safer way.
Free or affordable use of locally available spectrum to effectively enable community networks and media.
The issue of digital sovereignty raised by the European Union and by some European governments applies also to these specific fields where localization of citizens' data related to content and content itself ought to be considered.
The consultant and the co-facilitators of the BPF on Local Content are proposing that in 2020 the BPF concentrates its work in one key element which emerged from the 2019 outcome report: The need to further explore issues related to the protection, preservation, and remuneration of creative work and collective wisdom, from a local content perspective.
As such, the BPF will focus on how to protect, preserve, and remunerate creative work and collective wisdom in order to create a sustainable model for the production, distribution, and local fruition of local content in the digital age. This may involve intellectual ownership rights, communities' intellectual property rights, ownership of national or community identifiers of natural resources, and protection of creative works, and so on.
There are several issues related to the new focus. For instance, successful examples of remuneration and protection of traditional/collective wisdom, traditional and innovative ones over the Internet. Comparison for various existing models to protect different kinds of rights, and the opportunities and challenges they bring when it comes to the development and protection of local content.
Successful examples of approaches that help local communities develop their creative products and services.
Best practices about the creation of virtues circles to put in direct relations producers and final users through innovative solutions.
Approaches for protecting against risks of commercial takeover of local and indigenous identifiers of national/cultural assets. Examples, the cases of babaçu, cupuaçu, and the Japanese food companies.
There is a timeline for a BPF on Local Content. From May to September, community work, calls, surveys, outreach. In October, draft report issued for comments. November, BPF session at the IGF 2020. And December, the final report.
A final word is that the IGF intersessional work makes no sense without the effective participation of the community. The secretariat provides the mechanisms to enable this participation, through lists, online meetings, and support to the facilitators. This is especially the case of the Best Practice Forums which rely on exchange of knowledge on experiences provided by participants. We therefore encourage you to contribute to this work.
The presentation shows local content BPF web page, the BPF Local Content mailing list, and the BPF local work plan document.
Thank you.