Child pages
  • UMA legal subgroup notes

Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.



Attending: Eve, Andi, Cigdem, Tim, Colin, Mark, Nancy

Lisa and Eve subsequently discussed the intro section and Eve did some more editing of it. This led her to bring up a few more legal party terminology and definition questions. It looks like we can remove the "Individual or Legal Person" phrases where they occur currently in the definitions of RRA and RqP. Let's do that. (Eve edited this live on the call, in both the canonical spreadsheet version and in the report.)

We discussed the question of Requesting Agent/Requesting Party. Tim made the excellent point that, until we hear that the outside world has a problem with the terms, we probably don't want to obsess any more about it. We could change it later if it turns out to present friction. We acknowledge that "agent" is a very different thing in the legal and technical worlds. Capitalized words are used in their legal party senses and we say that in the report, so legal experts and similar should be prepared to understand such terms in their legal senses.

We discussed whether to cram mentions of "agency contract" and "access contract" into the pentagram diagram (new nickname!). Should we do "progressive disclosure" in the document and have a version that has just the dashed pentagram, possibly with the agency and access contract wording added, and then a version with the delegation and license details added? If he is willing, let's ask Domenico to create a short series of diagrams.

AI: Eve/Domenico: Eve to ask Domenico to create several pentagrams (these are all additive):

  • One with just the dashed pentagram lines and agency contract/access contract labels (as illustrated on the old "spaghetti" diagram on slide 7 here) – delegation/licensing relationship arrows removed
  • One with all the delegation/licensing relationship arrows added back, as currently exist in the diagram
  • One with a "spur on the left side with Data Subject-to-RRA relationship arrows added (as illustrated on the left side of slide 9 here)
  • One with a "spur" on the right side with a Requesting Party-to-Requesting Agent arrow added (as illustrated on the right side of slide 9 here)

AI: Eve/Domenico: Eve to ask Domenico to create two table-oriented "state" diagrams (slides 3 and 4 here):

  • One without arrows
  • One to reflect the state changes with the arrows


Attending: Eve, Domenico, Lisa, Nancy (regrets: Tim)