[Wg-p3] privacy commons
info at smartspecies.com
Tue Oct 20 20:01:46 EDT 2009
Privacy commons is something I think came out of a discussion on
privacy icons from other forums I am apart of a few years ago.
Definitely and idea that has been gathering interest for awhile.
These topics has been batted around IGF-Privacy Coalition, and Privacy
Open Space (POS) so I have followed up original emails of interest
with an email requesting more information as well as inviting people
to take a look at this working group.
Parts of one email that may be of interest I have pasted in below.
(check out icons links) I have more research that I am trying to digg
out of backup. One thing for sure, I am interested in knowing why this
hasnt already progressed, it is possible that no one group has been
strong enough or organised enough to step up to the plate and make
this type of effort work.
Until I get more information I would be hesitant to endorse anything,
there is history here.
*** Some information from an email dated December, 2007 ***
> Bottom line: I want to be able to tell entities that collect
> about me how long they can keep it. I want to be able to tell them
> they can do with this. And I want the technology that allows me to
> do this.
> This would allow more granularity than the usual opt-in or opt-out,
> only agree or not.
> Conceptually, these ideas have been around for a while. The best
> article I
> am aware of is by Victor Mayer-Schönberger from Harvard:
> The technology for handling this at the back-end is also there,
> e.g. EPAL <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epal>, though there are some
> patent issues, as far as I am aware.
> This is also called "sticky policy" because meta-information on
> uses travels with the data.
> Recently even an iconography (similar to creative commons) has been
> <http://identityproject.lse.ac.uk/mary.pdf> (from IGF 2006)
> Next steps would have to be:
> - a good front-end / GUI for this.
> - standard applications that incorporate these ideas
> - usage of this by many data handlers
> Basically, this all would boil down to a DRM for personal data,
> where it
> would be absolutely approporiate
--- SNIP ---
On 15 Oct 2009, at 18:57, Susan Landau wrote:
> In principle, I think the idea of endorsing the privacy commons seems
> quite reasonable for us to be doing. However, in practice, it seems
> there is not a huge amount up on the web site. I Aaron said there is
> more in the password-protected area, but FTC is unlikely to go looking
> there (as are other people).
> I suggest that others take a look before our next call. I like
> approach, but so far there is only an approach, and not much else.
> Wg-p3 mailing list
> Wg-p3 at kantarainitiative.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Wg-p3