首页> 外文期刊>World trade review >Why Trade Agreements are not Setting Information Free: The Lost History and Reinvigorated Debate over Cross-Border Data Flows, Human Rights, and National Security
【24h】

Why Trade Agreements are not Setting Information Free: The Lost History and Reinvigorated Debate over Cross-Border Data Flows, Human Rights, and National Security

机译:为什么贸易协定不能免费提供信息:关于跨境数据流,人权和国家安全的失落历史和令人振奋的辩论

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

Herein, we examine how the United States and the European Union use trade agreements to advance the free flow of information and to promote digital rights online. In the 1980s and 1990s, after US policymakers tried to include language governing the free flow of information in trade agreements, other nations feared a threat to their sovereignty and their ability to restrict cross-border data flows in the interest of privacy or national security. In the twenty-first century, again many states have not responded positively to US and EU efforts to facilitate the free flow of information. They worry that the US dominates both the Internet economy and Internet governance in ways that benefit its interests. After the Snowden allegations, many states adopted strategies that restricted rather than enhanced the free flow of information. Without deliberate intent, efforts to set information free through trade liberalization may be making the Internet less free. Finally, the two trade giants are not fully in agreement on Internet freedom, but neither has linked policies to promote the free flow of information with policies to advance digital rights. Moreover, they do not agree as to when restrictions on information are necessary and when they are protectionist.
机译:本文中,我们研究了美国和欧盟如何使用贸易协定来促进信息的自由流通和在线促进数字版权。在1980年代和1990年代,在美国政策制定者试图将支配信息自由流通的语言纳入贸易协定之后,其他国家担心其主权受到威胁,并担心出于隐私或国家安全的考虑限制其跨境数据流量的能力。在二十一世纪,许多州再次对美国和欧盟为促进信息自由流通所做的努力没有作出积极回应。他们担心美国会以有利于美国利益的方式主导互联网经济和互联网治理。在斯诺登指控之后,许多州采取了限制而不是增强信息自由流通的策略。如果没有刻意的意图,通过贸易自由化来释放信息的努力可能会使互联网的自由度降低。最后,两家贸易巨头并未就互联网自由达成完全共识,但也没有将促进信息自由流通的政策与促进数字权利的政策联系起来。此外,他们不同意何时需要限制信息和何时实行保护主义。

著录项

  • 来源
    《World trade review》 |2015年第4期|671-700|共30页
  • 作者

    Aaronson Susan;

  • 作者单位

    GWU, Inst Int Econ Policy, Washington, DC 20052 USA;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

  • 入库时间 2022-08-17 14:18:42

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号