Rethinking the Internet from a Human Sensibility —A Cutting-Edge Critic Discusses the Present State of the Net and Creativity ~Entrepreneur and Researcher Dominic Chen

Creative Commons promotes a unique global movement: "Some rights reserved" instead of "All rights reserved." By opening copyright rights to the public under certain conditions, it aims to foster open creativity online. Dominique Chen, who has been involved in promoting this movement in Japan, is also gaining attention as a prominent critic focusing on "creation" in the internet world. His activities span diverse fields, including developing and operating unique community sites and pioneering collaborations with novelists in art exhibitions. This time, Chen freely shared his current thoughts.
(Interviewer: Yuzo Ono, Director of Planning and Promotion, Digital Business Division, Dentsu Digital Inc.)

Dominique Chen
French national. Graduated from UCLA (majoring in Design/Media Arts), Ph.D. (Interdisciplinary Information Studies, University of Tokyo). Director of the non-profit organization Commonsphere (formerly Creative Commons Japan). Co-founder and Director of Divual Inc. Author of books including "Biologizing the Internet: The Philosophy and Practice of Prochronism" and "Guidebook for Creating Free Culture: The Creative Commons Cycle of Creation."

　
※Creative Commons:
　
Creative Commons is a movement that aims to allow anyone to freely use text, music, images, videos, and other works published online under certain conditions. It differs from traditional copyright, which generally prohibits anyone other than the author from modifying or using the work. Unlike current copyright law, which offers only two choices—"all rights protected" or "all rights waived"—Creative Commons sets multiple levels of rights in between. This encourages secondary use of works by many people. For example, you might publish a photo online and allow anyone to freely incorporate it into designs (images, videos, etc.) for secondary use, but restrict the use to non-commercial activities.

 

■ The spread of Creative Commons' philosophy transformed online creation

 

──Please tell us about your first encounter with the internet and the impression you had at that time.

Chen: I was born in 1981, placing me right on the border between digital natives and the generation before them. When I was 12, attending a French school in Tokyo, I was already using computers to create various things. I remember finding a call for submissions from a French digital art community, casually sent in my work, and the next day seeing it featured on their homepage. That experience was profoundly moving. The thrill of being recognized in a space beyond the real world, through the internet, became a foundational experience for me.

──That seems like a foundational experience connected to your later work. You've been involved with Creative Commons activities in Japan for a long time. What insights have you gained from that?

Chen: Creative Commons is a system that allows creators themselves to open up their work for reuse—work that would otherwise be uniformly restricted under current copyright law. It's something only possible because of the internet. If you post an artist's work on your homepage without permission, it violates their reproduction rights and public transmission rights. In this context, for example, in the early 2000s in the US, artists actually sued fans for listening to music that violated reproduction rights. But artists certainly don't want to sue their own fans, and that's where the distortion in the current legal system lies. Creative Commons was created to bridge the gap in perception between the real world and the online world that had emerged in this way. By enabling case-by-case responses for each work, we can create multiple intermediate levels of rights—distinct from the current copyright system's binary world of "protect all rights" or "waive all rights." If we can establish common understanding among many people, we believe it will improve the flow of culture on the internet. This initiative has grown over ten years to the point where over 800 million open works can now be found online. We consider this a passing grade for adoption and feel it has inspired movements beyond Creative Commons itself. For example, the Piapro Character License behind Hatsune Miku fan creations was developed with significant reference to Creative Commons. While a proliferation of licenses isn't ideal, it's encouraging that the concept and mindset of opening rights to create win-win relationships is gaining traction.

──I see. To put it extremely, one could say the ideas promoted by Creative Commons indirectly gave birth to "Hatsune Miku."

Chen: It might be presumptuous to go that far, but the very origin of Creative Commons itself is free software. We imported that concept into the world of content. For example, digital native generation kids use Creative Commons as naturally as breathing, simply because it's convenient, as one way to share what they've created. Rather than creating alone, the concept of "social capital" – where what you create becomes part of someone else's creation through derivative works, and that becomes a source of joy – is becoming increasingly visible in the content world. I believe we've entered an era of truly social creation, where you can create while feeling free.

■ The Chain of Inspiration Born from Content "Grazing"

 

──That said, it seems like there are hardly any examples of collective intelligence producing works in the broader cultural sphere, outside of software and such.

Chen: I think the definition of "creating together" varies by genre. For example, film requires a large-scale, multifaceted production process, making it the last stronghold difficult to create solely through online collective intelligence. Still, it's conceivable through the use of materials. For instance, using freely available images published online as backgrounds in films—that form of derivative work exists. If you upload photos to Flickr, it's possible that one day, out of the blue, an offer might come your way. Book royalties involve a more proactive expectation of results, but in the world of derivative works, it feels more like "grazing" content, with the mindset that maybe someday, if something comes back, that's fine. When humans create something, it's born from a chain of various inspirations; in Buddhist terms, it's like "karma." I think the interesting thing about the internet is that it makes this chain visible, like a filigree.

──I see. When it comes to collective intelligence-driven creation, perhaps the very concept of creation itself is changing, shifting towards something rooted in derivative works.

Chen: Exactly. And I think we need to consider models tailored to each form of expression. For example, in programming, there's source code. It's only because this is open that derivative works become possible. In the world of content, I don't think true open-sourcing can happen unless it follows the same principle. It's like a recipe for cooking. For music, video, and photography, the program data files that serve as the equivalent source code are becoming relatively more accessible. On the other hand, literature's source code is just text—it's the smallest and lightest in size, and it's easy to copy and paste. In a way, I think literature is what humanity has collectively created through collective intelligence over thousands of years. In any case, I believe the greatest benefit of becoming so open is the learning effect. For example, in the world of programming, seeing the history of how others thought and wrote their source code is incredibly educational.

'08.2.17. Literature's Tactile Exhibition Final Day
by dividual (CC:BY-NC-SA 2.0)

From that perspective, I previously created software called "Type Trace" that can reproduce and analyze the process of how writers construct their style when composing text. This aims to create a digital equivalent of the "raw manuscript" on manuscript paper used for handwritten writing. Specifically, it visualizes everything: additions and deletions made by the author after writing, choices made from kanji predictive conversion, copy-and-paste operations, and even the speed at which characters were input and confirmed. It's truly open-source literature. With the cooperation of novelist Otaro Maijo, we exhibited this at the Tokyo Photographic Art Museum (photo). Mr. Maijo is famous as a masked writer who never reveals his face, but this allowed us to gain a sense of seeing inside the mind of a writer previously shrouded in mystery. And there are people who want to use this software as an educational tool. I believe people create when inspired by someone else's creation.

──In your previous work, you wrote that "the democratization of creation" is your dream.

Chen: Yes, that might have been a bit too grand a statement. But I think it's more accurate to say that creation is already happening daily at the grassroots level and within people's unconscious minds; society simply lacked the net to catch it. The internet provides that receptacle, and through it, the potential for individual creation to scale up has emerged.

■ The Internet Needs Another Driving Principle Beyond Business

 

──While the internet has broadened the base of creative activity, leading to new talents emerging, there's also criticism that overall quality has declined.

Chen: Previously, only a select few creative works were visible. The internet has made diverse creations visible, allowing us to see a wider range of work. Some people describe this situation as a "decline in quality," but I feel that's not the essence of it; it's simply fear of change. There might also be an element of professional creators envying amateur creators who have gained fame. We are currently in a phase where new standards are emerging. For example, even if a YouTuber has talent, for it to scale out widely in society, management becomes crucial—like advertising agencies discovering them and promoting them through media. Thus, broad-based culture cannot thrive without both amateurs and professionals.

──So at least when it comes to creation, we shouldn't leave it solely to algorithms.

Chen: Exactly. Right now, it's just Google, Facebook, and Amazon. Take books, for instance—sales volume on Amazon has become the sole metric. Google's search results, Facebook's EdgeRank—enormous power is concentrated in the hands of a single private company. Consequently, the function for evaluating content remains underdeveloped; we don't yet see how truly good content should be assessed. I believe introducing a time dimension as one metric for evaluating content could be beneficial. Beyond just sales figures, we could consider a thought experiment: measuring the social impact—what someone who received a piece of content went on to express next, how it influenced them, or whether it gave them the power to become a source of new actions.

──Companies like Google, Facebook, and Amazon operate within marketing-driven principles, which are certainly convenient and beneficial. However, from a cultural perspective—like that of creation—I feel we need other driving principles that can coexist alongside them.

Chen: Exactly. Right now, I think we're in a situation where business alone can drive things, and culture is being held hostage. Developing regulations or alternative forms that can serve as substitutes for this is something worth continuing to consider.

■ In a society increasingly driven by big data, we should embrace a positive sense of being a "cog in the machine"

 

── In your dialogue with Michio Nishigaki in the magazine Gendai Shiso, your discussion on big data being merely empiricism and thus "anti-intellectualism" was striking. What are your thoughts on the potential and challenges of big data?

Chen: I believe individuals should reclaim control over how big data is used and manage it themselves. Big data is an accumulation of individuals' "digital exhaust," but unless we can recognize it like a household ledger, we won't be able to mediate social friction. Currently, people don't grasp their data well enough to judge how it circulates online, how it might be used, or the pros and cons involved. It would be beneficial if people could more actively consider the advantages of sharing their data with businesses and government agencies. What I'm currently envisioning is a community system where users openly express their true feelings, hobbies, and preferences without hiding them. This would enable them to receive highly targeted, "super-advertisements" tailored to be most beneficial to them.

──In online advertising, a new field leveraging massive data—known as "programmatic advertising"—is growing. Some point out that even online games are increasingly created from an "operational" perspective rather than purely "production." Could books and music online also be created in the future from this data-driven, "operational" viewpoint?

Chen: I believe so. For e-books, we might first release various versions, evaluate KPIs, and then publish a more refined version on a similar theme a month later. As this progresses, it could be like seeing more delicious fast food options emerge. However, if it becomes only fast food, people will crave a French course meal. I think we'll see a world where both coexist. Also, how much tolerance do people have for content being improved by data? If it's imposed unilaterally, it creates a sense of unease. So, it's not about doing something just because machines can do it; a human-first approach—considering how much people actually want it—will be crucial.

──In that discussion, you wrote about "the awareness that we are always just one sample in a population of n=100 million." If such awareness takes root through big data, will people's ways of thinking and society change?

Chen: In a positive sense, I think it would be good if people came to see themselves as cogs in society. There are no longer any phenomena without "connections." While we might feel exhausted or annoyed by the overload of information and communication, we can also think of ways to alleviate that suffocating feeling. I hope we can design and control the degree of our connections ourselves, enabling a use of big data that doesn't make people uncomfortable.

──That's an idealistic view, but is it actually possible? Some people already feel they have no choice but to minimize their digital exposure as much as possible.

Chen: I believe reducing digital exposure is necessary. Personally, I already feel the sheer volume of digital information exceeds our physical limits. Providers do everything they can, without considering our physical burden. Therefore, it's crucial to position ourselves where we can step away anytime. This would also force businesses to create sustainable services.

■ In the internet age, to bridge thought and practice

 

──Looking back now on the history of the internet, what do you feel?

Chen: Around 1970, when the internet truly began, it was used internally by university students, young researchers, and engineers. They shared programming languages and didn't assert rights. As it became commercialized by companies like IBM and AT&T, they started enclosing it with rights. In reaction to this, the free software movement for open innovation began. I still believe the ideal of the Internet boils down to open innovation. Even Microsoft, which dominated the market, began showing a stance toward openness in the 2000s. I think the essence of the Internet, as a sensibility of the times, has never been lost.

On the other hand, as the internet permeates daily life, significant privacy issues have emerged. For example, ad technology using big data probably understands what you're doing better than you do yourself. However, framing this solely as corporate exploitation leads to unproductive discourse. Reality is far more complex and requires objective analysis. Yet, the tendency to frame it solely as good versus evil, as a binary 0 or 1, is a problem of societal consensus. Ad technology is essentially a form of transaction with users, and we need to develop that understanding.

Moreover, the cost of utilizing technologies like programming and algorithm design is decreasing. Take cloud storage: costs have halved, embodying Moore's Law (the empirical rule that the cost of information processing has consistently decreased at a significant rate). This means even middle schoolers can manage systems on a pocket money budget, enabling individuals to launch ventures using big data analytics. The impact is significant. Even without programming skills, environments exist where understanding the underlying concepts allows individuals to launch businesses. Services provided by such individuals will collectively raise the overall standard. This will also create positive pressure on established power structures like large corporations and governments.

──Mr. Chen, you seem to approach the internet ideologically while championing "theory and practice." I feel more critics and writers are adopting this ideological perspective on the internet. Is this an inevitability of our times?

Chen: What people in philosophy or sociology are advocating is nothing but "criticism." Essentially, they're criticizing algorithms through text. This represents the so-called divide between the humanities and sciences. Criticism from the humanities only reaches the humanities and lacks practical effectiveness, so it remains mere criticism. But for example, if you truly want to critique Facebook, you could respond by creating a new SNS as an alternative, and embed your ideas within that. I want to express ideas not by writing short texts, but by creating things like software or apps that take time to build and embody those ideas.

──Many writers argue that the internet's advancement of globalization leads to a crisis for the Japanese language. You speak English and French, among other languages. How do you perceive Japanese within that context?

Chen: Overall, I believe there are phenomena that can only be conceived in Japanese. I noticed this while conducting the "Type Trace" experiment we discussed earlier—Japanese seems better suited for compressing meaning. This is similar to German. Language is like cuisine; it possesses sensory qualities akin to the subtlety of Japanese cuisine or the richness of French cuisine. Since language is a living thing, it inevitably follows an evolutionary process. If you see a problem there, you'd have to apply pressure to stop it, which is an interesting thought. But personally, I'm not overly concerned about Japanese being in crisis. I don't think Japanese will become extinct. However, specifically regarding the internet, Japanese will likely be weakened. This is simply a matter of power dynamics.

──How will digital technology and the internet evolve from here, and how will they transform society and culture?

Chen: I believe the body's counterattack has begun. It's a growing awareness that digital and the internet are affecting not just abstract concepts, but our physical bodies. Information overload is a concrete, pressing problem that affects our health and mental well-being. How we respond is crucial. Rather than extreme arguments about cutting off digital and the internet, we need to consider how to engineer solutions for the negative aspects of the internet, which has both good and bad sides. For this, human sensibility will become increasingly necessary. The online world has historically been shaped primarily by men with science backgrounds. Homogeneous organizations struggle to generate new ideas, so I believe humanities scholars and women have greater opportunities to conceive products and systems that transform society. It would be fascinating if we returned to the fundamental premise that humans have physical bodies and built a society where we can discuss this through products and services.