Date   

Re: Selling personal data -- an experiment

susan morrow <susiemorrow@...>
 

And switching it around to the actual human part of the transaction...

I am a woman with a 3-month old baby and nowhere to live. I am sofa surfing to keep my baby from living on the streets. I use a friend's computers but I still have online accounts because I wasn't always homeless and won't always be so (although I don't know that at the time) - so I do have digital data to sell. I go online using a friend's computer and see that I can now sell my data. Bloody great because I am totally skint and my baby needs a warm coat for the winter. I sell to whoever and however because I do not have the luxury of choice and consent is a joke when there is no choice.

You are creating a dystopian stick to hit people without choice if you make personal data a commodity - I don't like nanny states but this is not about that. If we were working in health or science we'd have to have an ethical framework to work off. Technologists don't seem to care coz it's about the money.

I am going back to my cave.

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 11:51 PM Johannes Ernst <jernst@...> wrote:
To shed some light about the viability of selling personal data, on a non-trivial scale, by “consumers" to one or more “vendors" — which I think is the scenario being discussed — I suggest a thought experiment.

Let’s say I am willing to sell my personal data (I’m not, but let’s assume I am), any of it, as long as the price is right.

For the purposes of this experiment, let’s also assume that there are no technical hurdles that make this impractical — all relevant data exists in electronic form, is standardized, easily shareable etc.

You are the “vendor” who wants to buy some of that personal data from me:

* Who are you? (Industry, product, …)
* What data do you want to buy from me?
* How is receiving that data from me materially going to improve your business?
* How is buying that data from me better for you than the alternatives? (e.g. asking nicely :-))
* How are you avoiding being gamed?

I’d love to hear some compelling stories. Because so far I haven’t heard any :-)

Cheers,




Johannes.




Johannes Ernst

Encryption preferred. GPG fingerprint: 106E F92A BEBD 0C31 1DAF 7CD8 5726 2658 070F 1088




Re: Selling personal data -- an experiment

 

On Jul 24, 2020, at 16:16, Iain Henderson <iain.henderson@...> wrote:

I’d disagree,

Excellent :-)

But … (below)

it is very easy to illustrate what is currently happening in the market and how that can be bettered.

That said, I think selling personal data is the wrong framing; that’s not how it is going to work. It will work through reciprocity - i.e. mutually beneficial relationships.

(Re-reading before hitting Send I realize you are actually making my point here. Providing, yes, please. Selling, not so much. So you may agree with much that I typed below.)

* Who are you? (Industry, product, …)

I am a mid range, mass market car manufacturer, currently paying a range of intermediaries between £100 and £200 per qualified lead; i.e. people who are actively in the market for things like that which I sell.

* What data do you want to buy from me?

I want to buy the details of your requirement (spec, timing, optional points, price sensitivity)

* How is receiving that data from me materially going to improve your business? 

If you can get me that data either ’same data bit cheaper’, or ‘better data, same price’ or, ‘much more qualifying data at higher price’ then it would be economically stupid of me not to buy from you.

* How is buying that data from me better for you than the alternatives? (e.g. asking nicely :-))

As above - same date but cheaper, or better data same price; or much better data, higher price 

Can you describe the mechanics by which this is supposed to work?

In our example, You are trying to market a car to Me. You want to focus your marketing dollars on people who are likely going to buy that car, and not on those who aren’t. So far, so good. 

You currently pay a third party for identifying prospects, such as Me, to You. You hand them money. They hand you a list of prospects. Ok. But you want to take that third party out of the equation, right?

So how do you identify prospects such as Me? Are you going to offer “everybody" some money to provide their requirements to you, and then you market your car only to those people whose data matches? Or …? (Because if so, I doubt that you’ll end up with less spend on lead generation. At least the math is not obvious.)

And how do you solve the problem of even communicating the “money for your data” offer to everybody? Don’t you have a similar marketing problem there, just for a different product (data, rather than car)?


* How are you avoiding being gamed?

I only pay out when the purchase has been made and verified (either through myself or a competitor)

So You are telling Me, in our example: “Please provide this data to me, and if you buy a car within 3 months, I will give you $50” (or whatever the price).

I have a hard time seeing that I would do that. For one, the amount is small compared to the eventual price of the car, so I’d much rather resolve to negotiate a better purchase price if I indeed buy that car within 3 months. Also, I am quite certain I would come away with the impression that if You make offers like this, You most likely also just raised the prices of your cars by $50 which is not a good start if you want to sell me something.


I could fill in the above very easily for about 30 different sectors in which paying for qualified leads is absolutely business as usual.

I agree that if this car example can be made to work, it will likely also work for other sectors. If...

To be clear, I believe in customer-provided data. I just don’t see that selling such data has any incremental, substantial benefits for these kinds of interactions beyond providing for free as part of a relationship.

Cheers,


Johannes.




Johannes Ernst

Encryption preferred. GPG fingerprint: 106E F92A BEBD 0C31 1DAF 7CD8 5726 2658 070F 1088




Re: Selling personal data -- an experiment

 

On Jul 24, 2020, at 15:58, Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:

Three aren’t any. It’s up to us to step up and create them for people. 

That’s exactly why I proposed the thought experiment. Let’s see how this could actually work, hypothetically, because that would be the first step in “creat[ing] them for people”.

Cheers,




Johannes.




Johannes Ernst

Encryption preferred. GPG fingerprint: 106E F92A BEBD 0C31 1DAF 7CD8 5726 2658 070F 1088




Re: Selling personal data -- an experiment

Milton Pedraza
 

I respect that. To be discussed. Will reach out.

 There are many well intentioned people out there, sitting in their  luxury fortress, making decisions for poor people,  who are totally clueless what it’s like to be poor. So they don’t think cash in hand matters. Or know what it’s like to be African American, or Hispanic, or another subtly and overtly suppressed minority group. Imagine being poor in this pandemic.  Most of us can’t fathom that. No empathy. Just sympathy. It’s too scary. So we think cause we’re smart and educated we know what is best for these people. We were helicoptered into third base so we pretend we hit a triple. 

That’s a major part of the world and they need representation and real time resources. Their data is a vast resource for them. We can and should help them. And we should help ethical brands to connect with them in a fair data exchange relationship. And it seems to me that whatever we call it, it’s a marketplace and an exchange of value. 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988
mpedraza@...


On Jul 24, 2020, at 7:16 PM, Iain Henderson <iain.henderson@...> wrote:

 I’d disagree, it is very easy to illustrate what is currently happening in the market and how that can be bettered.

That said, I think selling personal data is the wrong framing; that’s not how it is going to work. It will work through reciprocity - i.e. mutually beneficial relationships.

* Who are you? (Industry, product, …)

I am a mid range, mass market car manufacturer, currently paying a range of intermediaries between £100 and £200 per qualified lead; i.e. people who are actively in the market for things like that which I sell.

* What data do you want to buy from me?

I want to buy the details of your requirement (spec, timing, optional points, price sensitivity)

* How is receiving that data from me materially going to improve your business? 

If you can get me that data either ’same data bit cheaper’, or ‘better data, same price’ or, ‘much more qualifying data at higher price’ then it would be economically stupid of me not to buy from you.

* How is buying that data from me better for you than the alternatives? (e.g. asking nicely :-))

As above - same date but cheaper, or better data same price; or much better data, higher price 

* How are you avoiding being gamed?

I only pay out when the purchase has been made and verified (either through myself or a competitor)

I could fill in the above very easily for about 30 different sectors in which paying for qualified leads is absolutely business as usual.

This article might be also useful background.


Cheers

Iain



On 24 Jul 2020, at 23:58, Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:

Three aren’t any. It’s up to us to step up and create them for people. 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 24, 2020, at 6:51 PM, Johannes Ernst <jernst@...> wrote:


To shed some light about the viability of selling personal data, on a non-trivial scale, by “consumers" to one or more “vendors" — which I think is the scenario being discussed — I suggest a thought experiment.

Let’s say I am willing to sell my personal data (I’m not, but let’s assume I am), any of it, as long as the price is right.

For the purposes of this experiment, let’s also assume that there are no technical hurdles that make this impractical — all relevant data exists in electronic form, is standardized, easily shareable etc.

You are the “vendor” who wants to buy some of that personal data from me:

* Who are you? (Industry, product, …)
* What data do you want to buy from me?
* How is receiving that data from me materially going to improve your business? 
* How is buying that data from me better for you than the alternatives? (e.g. asking nicely :-))
* How are you avoiding being gamed?

I’d love to hear some compelling stories. Because so far I haven’t heard any :-)

Cheers,




Johannes.




Johannes Ernst

Encryption preferred. GPG fingerprint: 106E F92A BEBD 0C31 1DAF 7CD8 5726 2658 070F 1088


<indie-computing-logo-01.png>

<indie-computing-logo-01.png>


Re: Selling personal data -- an experiment

Iain Henderson
 

I’d disagree, it is very easy to illustrate what is currently happening in the market and how that can be bettered.

That said, I think selling personal data is the wrong framing; that’s not how it is going to work. It will work through reciprocity - i.e. mutually beneficial relationships.

* Who are you? (Industry, product, …)

I am a mid range, mass market car manufacturer, currently paying a range of intermediaries between £100 and £200 per qualified lead; i.e. people who are actively in the market for things like that which I sell.

* What data do you want to buy from me?

I want to buy the details of your requirement (spec, timing, optional points, price sensitivity)

* How is receiving that data from me materially going to improve your business? 

If you can get me that data either ’same data bit cheaper’, or ‘better data, same price’ or, ‘much more qualifying data at higher price’ then it would be economically stupid of me not to buy from you.

* How is buying that data from me better for you than the alternatives? (e.g. asking nicely :-))

As above - same date but cheaper, or better data same price; or much better data, higher price 

* How are you avoiding being gamed?

I only pay out when the purchase has been made and verified (either through myself or a competitor)

I could fill in the above very easily for about 30 different sectors in which paying for qualified leads is absolutely business as usual.

This article might be also useful background.


Cheers

Iain



On 24 Jul 2020, at 23:58, Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:

Three aren’t any. It’s up to us to step up and create them for people. 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 24, 2020, at 6:51 PM, Johannes Ernst <jernst@...> wrote:


To shed some light about the viability of selling personal data, on a non-trivial scale, by “consumers" to one or more “vendors" — which I think is the scenario being discussed — I suggest a thought experiment.

Let’s say I am willing to sell my personal data (I’m not, but let’s assume I am), any of it, as long as the price is right.

For the purposes of this experiment, let’s also assume that there are no technical hurdles that make this impractical — all relevant data exists in electronic form, is standardized, easily shareable etc.

You are the “vendor” who wants to buy some of that personal data from me:

* Who are you? (Industry, product, …)
* What data do you want to buy from me?
* How is receiving that data from me materially going to improve your business? 
* How is buying that data from me better for you than the alternatives? (e.g. asking nicely :-))
* How are you avoiding being gamed?

I’d love to hear some compelling stories. Because so far I haven’t heard any :-)

Cheers,




Johannes.




Johannes Ernst

Encryption preferred. GPG fingerprint: 106E F92A BEBD 0C31 1DAF 7CD8 5726 2658 070F 1088


<indie-computing-logo-01.png>

<indie-computing-logo-01.png>


Re: Selling personal data -- an experiment

Milton Pedraza
 

Three aren’t any. It’s up to us to step up and create them for people. 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988
mpedraza@...


On Jul 24, 2020, at 6:51 PM, Johannes Ernst <jernst@...> wrote:


To shed some light about the viability of selling personal data, on a non-trivial scale, by “consumers" to one or more “vendors" — which I think is the scenario being discussed — I suggest a thought experiment.

Let’s say I am willing to sell my personal data (I’m not, but let’s assume I am), any of it, as long as the price is right.

For the purposes of this experiment, let’s also assume that there are no technical hurdles that make this impractical — all relevant data exists in electronic form, is standardized, easily shareable etc.

You are the “vendor” who wants to buy some of that personal data from me:

* Who are you? (Industry, product, …)
* What data do you want to buy from me?
* How is receiving that data from me materially going to improve your business?
* How is buying that data from me better for you than the alternatives? (e.g. asking nicely :-))
* How are you avoiding being gamed?

I’d love to hear some compelling stories. Because so far I haven’t heard any :-)

Cheers,




Johannes.




Johannes Ernst

Encryption preferred. GPG fingerprint: 106E F92A BEBD 0C31 1DAF 7CD8 5726 2658 070F 1088


<indie-computing-logo-01.png>


Selling personal data -- an experiment

 

To shed some light about the viability of selling personal data, on a non-trivial scale, by “consumers" to one or more “vendors" — which I think is the scenario being discussed — I suggest a thought experiment.

Let’s say I am willing to sell my personal data (I’m not, but let’s assume I am), any of it, as long as the price is right.

For the purposes of this experiment, let’s also assume that there are no technical hurdles that make this impractical — all relevant data exists in electronic form, is standardized, easily shareable etc.

You are the “vendor” who wants to buy some of that personal data from me:

* Who are you? (Industry, product, …)
* What data do you want to buy from me?
* How is receiving that data from me materially going to improve your business?
* How is buying that data from me better for you than the alternatives? (e.g. asking nicely :-))
* How are you avoiding being gamed?

I’d love to hear some compelling stories. Because so far I haven’t heard any :-)

Cheers,




Johannes.




Johannes Ernst

Encryption preferred. GPG fingerprint: 106E F92A BEBD 0C31 1DAF 7CD8 5726 2658 070F 1088




Re: While I'm forwarding resources...

Milton Pedraza
 

Will reach out to you 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988
mpedraza@...


On Jul 24, 2020, at 3:10 PM, Iain Henderson <iain.henderson@...> wrote:

 By implication, what would help a lot would be a standardised list of data uses, and better still a standardised list of data types.

Most (especially those with something to gain from that not being that) will tell you that is impossible, but I don’t believe it is; at least not if one applies the 80/20 rule.

That’s one of the most useful things that could/ should emerge from MyData et al.

Iain

On 24 Jul 2020, at 20:04, Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:

Yes I get it now. I see and that’s what Richard said thank you all. It’s not easy to educate a Milton 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 24, 2020, at 2:12 PM, Iain Henderson <iain.henderson@...> wrote:

 I have some material to dig out re how one would value data; but the long and short is that i’d agree with Scott that it will be much easier to identity value by looking at data use (rights/ purposes) than the data itself.

Iain

On 24 Jul 2020, at 17:38, Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:

Really fascinating. So Where do we land ? Can we own, and or control, our data and donate, sell, exchange it or not? The world is a complex adaptive system, and many concepts are hard to pin down, but even racism, sexual harassment and job discrimination have been defined for practical actionability and legal purposes. Can’t we define personal data for practical purposes? So that a legal, ethical valuation and marketplace can emerge ? 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 24, 2020, at 11:50 AM, Doc Searls via groups.io <doc@...> wrote:

 I love how much work you put into this, Scott. It's rare to get deep thinking and rich detail all in one go, but you give that to us here.

I also think all of what you say here inconveniences conceiving data as a commodity or as property in the tangible sense. 

I tried to do the same a couple years ago, here: https://blogs.harvard.edu/doc/2018/09/18/data/.

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 1:59 PM, sldavid <sldavid@...> wrote:

Iain and Milton -  I am interested in the topic of data valuation as well.  Please consider my request to be included in that discussion/information flow.

Here are a couple of random ideas that may or may not be useful in the analysis:

  1. Value in what market?  Price discovery is a feature of markets.  Data is traded in black market, advertising market, etc., each with its own usage patterns and value propositions for stakeholders.
  2. Intrinsic value or extrinsic value of data? Where one instance of data can "inform" parties in multiple contexts (and is of value to each of them), what method should apply to "average" or account for the price discrepancies?
  3. Reasoning by analogy since IP laws don't directly protect usage of data), International businesses frequently use IP laws (copyright, patent, TM) to divide territory for their sales and brand strategies. Resale of their product is prohibited by their government-granted IP monopoly in the form of IP rights. In a post Schrems-II world, will data localization rules become the vehicle for market-segregation for commercial applications of personal data.  If so, will people have "private rights of action" (as opposed to government enforcement) and "class action" rights to pursue their rights to benefit from the data-localization rules?  On the latter, note that some TOS/TOUs have started to limit class actions as part of their arbitration rules, following in the footsteps of the credit card companies, etc.
  4. Are valuation approaches useful?  For example, real estate is typically valued by some combination of comparable sales, income generation and cost.  Are subsets of that and similar analyses useful here?  Is this analysis affected by the resistance to viewing data as property?  Are those issues ameliorated by considering "data rights" (but not data itself) as "intangible property" akin to other contractual/statutory/regulatory rights?
  5. Consider valuation that is based on the value of the thing exchanged for data.  (Compare tax case: Philadelphia Park Amusement Company (the "rainbow bridge" case).
  6. Consider dynamic issues in valuation and how value can change over time. Information about a newly famous person increases in value as their fame grows. etc.  (Compare "amortization" issues in "Associated Patentees" case that allowed for amortization deductions for patent creation costs proportional to the accumulated income generation experience from the patents, which changed over the years).
  7. If, and to the extent, that "data plus meaning equals information" is data valuation necessary but insufficient for information value determination.  What are the mechanisms for understanding the value of "meaning" and information?  Is it "avoided costs" in the case where being informed enabled a party to mitigate risks in future interactions?  What about situations where the informed party seeks "leverage" rather than just "risk reduction?"  In the case of leverage, would data costs be included in the cost of services provided?  Might a VAT (Value added tax) type model or analysis help to parse the relative contributions of data and meaning to information applied in future interactions?
  8. What, if any, role do statutory penalties for data breach play in determining value?  Are there other mechanisms by which the calculation of compensation for damages associated with data misuse, negligence, exceeding authority, etc. could inform data "value"
  9. Is it tractable to assert that the value could be ascribed by reference to the value of the companies that exploit it.  Is the value of facebook data about person X equal to the market capitalization of facebook, minus its costs of operation, divided by the number of facebook users?  Would valuation of cooperatives (mutual insurance companies, credit unions, dairy coops, etc.) be helpful in valuing parts of companies supported ultimately by data flows.
  10. To what extent is data a "commodity" versus more like a "bespoke" product or service?  Is data sufficiently fungible so that it can be valued in general (like corn or other items for which the UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) allows for "cover")?  If data in general is not fungible, are there elements of data rights that are sufficiently fungible to lend themselves to trading at large scales and in large markets where "value" would be less subject to manipulation by a few large players.
  11. How will "data markets" affect pricing of data?  It would have the indirect effect of making "losses" from data breaches more calculable (if data value is set in independent markets).  Of course, just knowing the value of data is not enough to state a claim, because "causation" must also be demonstrated, requiring tying the data breach event to the complained about identity theft event.  (Kahler case I recall was dismissed for inability to demonstrate causation).
Lots of interesting challenges here, as well as opportunities to craft logical framings for valuation that can address issues above.  All of my prior analysis suggests that the focus should be on value of a given data right (or set of data rights), rather than looking at the value of the data itself (lawyers might say as "data qua data").  In that regard, I personally conclude that data value is extrinsic to the data, and depends on context, use and user where it is "converted" into valuable information.  To me, data is an artifact of interactions, and its use is primarily in its application by stakeholders to de-risk or leverage future interactions.  The "trading" is nominally in the data (and the meaning), but is actually trading in "risk," and data in context permits the mitigation of threat and vulnerability associated with future interactions with people, institutuions and things.  Data (like rocks) is also "dual use" so that its value (and its potential for harm) might not be calculable prior to that use (see Associated Patentees above for dynamic pricing notion)

But I digress. . . .

Warm regards, 
Scott

Scott L. David

Executive Director
Information Risk Research Initiative 
University of Washington - Applied Physics Laboratory

m- 206-715-0859
Tw - @ScottLDavid



From: main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io <main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io> on behalf of Iain Henderson <iain.henderson@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 12:52 PM
To: main@me2balliance.groups.io <main@me2balliance.groups.io>
Cc: Me2BAlliance@groups.io <Me2BAlliance@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Me2BAlliance] While I'm forwarding resources...
 
I’ve done a lot on that Milton; ping me the requirement and I’ll jot down how one might go about it.

Cheers 

Iain

On 23 Jul 2020, at 20:41, Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:

 Doc and members, is there anyone out there who is an expert in valuing personal data ? Any pioneers perhaps who have developed basic economic principles or other ideas ? 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 23, 2020, at 3:01 PM, Doc Searls via groups.io <doc@...> wrote:

 It's five years old now, but as valid as ever. I've pointed to it many times in writings since then. Examples:

Joseph Turow, one of the authors of the study, also reached out to me recently, and I reached back; but there hasn't been more follow-up. Should be. 

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 7:19 AM, Lisa LeVasseur <lisa.levasseur@...> wrote:

You all may already be familiar with this work from 2015, but I came upon it recently:  https://www.asc.upenn.edu/news-events/publications/tradeoff-fallacy-how-marketers-are-misrepresenting-american-consumers-and





Re: While I'm forwarding resources...

Iain Henderson
 

By implication, what would help a lot would be a standardised list of data uses, and better still a standardised list of data types.

Most (especially those with something to gain from that not being that) will tell you that is impossible, but I don’t believe it is; at least not if one applies the 80/20 rule.

That’s one of the most useful things that could/ should emerge from MyData et al.

Iain

On 24 Jul 2020, at 20:04, Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:

Yes I get it now. I see and that’s what Richard said thank you all. It’s not easy to educate a Milton 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 24, 2020, at 2:12 PM, Iain Henderson <iain.henderson@...> wrote:

 I have some material to dig out re how one would value data; but the long and short is that i’d agree with Scott that it will be much easier to identity value by looking at data use (rights/ purposes) than the data itself.

Iain

On 24 Jul 2020, at 17:38, Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:

Really fascinating. So Where do we land ? Can we own, and or control, our data and donate, sell, exchange it or not? The world is a complex adaptive system, and many concepts are hard to pin down, but even racism, sexual harassment and job discrimination have been defined for practical actionability and legal purposes. Can’t we define personal data for practical purposes? So that a legal, ethical valuation and marketplace can emerge ? 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 24, 2020, at 11:50 AM, Doc Searls via groups.io <doc@...> wrote:

 I love how much work you put into this, Scott. It's rare to get deep thinking and rich detail all in one go, but you give that to us here.

I also think all of what you say here inconveniences conceiving data as a commodity or as property in the tangible sense. 

I tried to do the same a couple years ago, here: https://blogs.harvard.edu/doc/2018/09/18/data/.

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 1:59 PM, sldavid <sldavid@...> wrote:

Iain and Milton -  I am interested in the topic of data valuation as well.  Please consider my request to be included in that discussion/information flow.

Here are a couple of random ideas that may or may not be useful in the analysis:

  1. Value in what market?  Price discovery is a feature of markets.  Data is traded in black market, advertising market, etc., each with its own usage patterns and value propositions for stakeholders.
  2. Intrinsic value or extrinsic value of data? Where one instance of data can "inform" parties in multiple contexts (and is of value to each of them), what method should apply to "average" or account for the price discrepancies?
  3. Reasoning by analogy since IP laws don't directly protect usage of data), International businesses frequently use IP laws (copyright, patent, TM) to divide territory for their sales and brand strategies. Resale of their product is prohibited by their government-granted IP monopoly in the form of IP rights. In a post Schrems-II world, will data localization rules become the vehicle for market-segregation for commercial applications of personal data.  If so, will people have "private rights of action" (as opposed to government enforcement) and "class action" rights to pursue their rights to benefit from the data-localization rules?  On the latter, note that some TOS/TOUs have started to limit class actions as part of their arbitration rules, following in the footsteps of the credit card companies, etc.
  4. Are valuation approaches useful?  For example, real estate is typically valued by some combination of comparable sales, income generation and cost.  Are subsets of that and similar analyses useful here?  Is this analysis affected by the resistance to viewing data as property?  Are those issues ameliorated by considering "data rights" (but not data itself) as "intangible property" akin to other contractual/statutory/regulatory rights?
  5. Consider valuation that is based on the value of the thing exchanged for data.  (Compare tax case: Philadelphia Park Amusement Company (the "rainbow bridge" case).
  6. Consider dynamic issues in valuation and how value can change over time. Information about a newly famous person increases in value as their fame grows. etc.  (Compare "amortization" issues in "Associated Patentees" case that allowed for amortization deductions for patent creation costs proportional to the accumulated income generation experience from the patents, which changed over the years).
  7. If, and to the extent, that "data plus meaning equals information" is data valuation necessary but insufficient for information value determination.  What are the mechanisms for understanding the value of "meaning" and information?  Is it "avoided costs" in the case where being informed enabled a party to mitigate risks in future interactions?  What about situations where the informed party seeks "leverage" rather than just "risk reduction?"  In the case of leverage, would data costs be included in the cost of services provided?  Might a VAT (Value added tax) type model or analysis help to parse the relative contributions of data and meaning to information applied in future interactions?
  8. What, if any, role do statutory penalties for data breach play in determining value?  Are there other mechanisms by which the calculation of compensation for damages associated with data misuse, negligence, exceeding authority, etc. could inform data "value"
  9. Is it tractable to assert that the value could be ascribed by reference to the value of the companies that exploit it.  Is the value of facebook data about person X equal to the market capitalization of facebook, minus its costs of operation, divided by the number of facebook users?  Would valuation of cooperatives (mutual insurance companies, credit unions, dairy coops, etc.) be helpful in valuing parts of companies supported ultimately by data flows.
  10. To what extent is data a "commodity" versus more like a "bespoke" product or service?  Is data sufficiently fungible so that it can be valued in general (like corn or other items for which the UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) allows for "cover")?  If data in general is not fungible, are there elements of data rights that are sufficiently fungible to lend themselves to trading at large scales and in large markets where "value" would be less subject to manipulation by a few large players.
  11. How will "data markets" affect pricing of data?  It would have the indirect effect of making "losses" from data breaches more calculable (if data value is set in independent markets).  Of course, just knowing the value of data is not enough to state a claim, because "causation" must also be demonstrated, requiring tying the data breach event to the complained about identity theft event.  (Kahler case I recall was dismissed for inability to demonstrate causation).
Lots of interesting challenges here, as well as opportunities to craft logical framings for valuation that can address issues above.  All of my prior analysis suggests that the focus should be on value of a given data right (or set of data rights), rather than looking at the value of the data itself (lawyers might say as "data qua data").  In that regard, I personally conclude that data value is extrinsic to the data, and depends on context, use and user where it is "converted" into valuable information.  To me, data is an artifact of interactions, and its use is primarily in its application by stakeholders to de-risk or leverage future interactions.  The "trading" is nominally in the data (and the meaning), but is actually trading in "risk," and data in context permits the mitigation of threat and vulnerability associated with future interactions with people, institutuions and things.  Data (like rocks) is also "dual use" so that its value (and its potential for harm) might not be calculable prior to that use (see Associated Patentees above for dynamic pricing notion)

But I digress. . . .

Warm regards, 
Scott

Scott L. David

Executive Director
Information Risk Research Initiative 
University of Washington - Applied Physics Laboratory

m- 206-715-0859
Tw - @ScottLDavid



From: main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io <main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io> on behalf of Iain Henderson <iain.henderson@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 12:52 PM
To: main@me2balliance.groups.io <main@me2balliance.groups.io>
Cc: Me2BAlliance@groups.io <Me2BAlliance@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Me2BAlliance] While I'm forwarding resources...
 
I’ve done a lot on that Milton; ping me the requirement and I’ll jot down how one might go about it.

Cheers 

Iain

On 23 Jul 2020, at 20:41, Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:

 Doc and members, is there anyone out there who is an expert in valuing personal data ? Any pioneers perhaps who have developed basic economic principles or other ideas ? 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 23, 2020, at 3:01 PM, Doc Searls via groups.io <doc@...> wrote:

 It's five years old now, but as valid as ever. I've pointed to it many times in writings since then. Examples:

Joseph Turow, one of the authors of the study, also reached out to me recently, and I reached back; but there hasn't been more follow-up. Should be. 

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 7:19 AM, Lisa LeVasseur <lisa.levasseur@...> wrote:

You all may already be familiar with this work from 2015, but I came upon it recently:  https://www.asc.upenn.edu/news-events/publications/tradeoff-fallacy-how-marketers-are-misrepresenting-american-consumers-and





Re: While I'm forwarding resources...

Milton Pedraza
 

Yes I get it now. I see and that’s what Richard said thank you all. It’s not easy to educate a Milton 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988
mpedraza@...


On Jul 24, 2020, at 2:12 PM, Iain Henderson <iain.henderson@...> wrote:

 I have some material to dig out re how one would value data; but the long and short is that i’d agree with Scott that it will be much easier to identity value by looking at data use (rights/ purposes) than the data itself.

Iain

On 24 Jul 2020, at 17:38, Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:

Really fascinating. So Where do we land ? Can we own, and or control, our data and donate, sell, exchange it or not? The world is a complex adaptive system, and many concepts are hard to pin down, but even racism, sexual harassment and job discrimination have been defined for practical actionability and legal purposes. Can’t we define personal data for practical purposes? So that a legal, ethical valuation and marketplace can emerge ? 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 24, 2020, at 11:50 AM, Doc Searls via groups.io <doc@...> wrote:

 I love how much work you put into this, Scott. It's rare to get deep thinking and rich detail all in one go, but you give that to us here.

I also think all of what you say here inconveniences conceiving data as a commodity or as property in the tangible sense. 

I tried to do the same a couple years ago, here: https://blogs.harvard.edu/doc/2018/09/18/data/.

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 1:59 PM, sldavid <sldavid@...> wrote:

Iain and Milton -  I am interested in the topic of data valuation as well.  Please consider my request to be included in that discussion/information flow.

Here are a couple of random ideas that may or may not be useful in the analysis:

  1. Value in what market?  Price discovery is a feature of markets.  Data is traded in black market, advertising market, etc., each with its own usage patterns and value propositions for stakeholders.
  2. Intrinsic value or extrinsic value of data? Where one instance of data can "inform" parties in multiple contexts (and is of value to each of them), what method should apply to "average" or account for the price discrepancies?
  3. Reasoning by analogy since IP laws don't directly protect usage of data), International businesses frequently use IP laws (copyright, patent, TM) to divide territory for their sales and brand strategies. Resale of their product is prohibited by their government-granted IP monopoly in the form of IP rights. In a post Schrems-II world, will data localization rules become the vehicle for market-segregation for commercial applications of personal data.  If so, will people have "private rights of action" (as opposed to government enforcement) and "class action" rights to pursue their rights to benefit from the data-localization rules?  On the latter, note that some TOS/TOUs have started to limit class actions as part of their arbitration rules, following in the footsteps of the credit card companies, etc.
  4. Are valuation approaches useful?  For example, real estate is typically valued by some combination of comparable sales, income generation and cost.  Are subsets of that and similar analyses useful here?  Is this analysis affected by the resistance to viewing data as property?  Are those issues ameliorated by considering "data rights" (but not data itself) as "intangible property" akin to other contractual/statutory/regulatory rights?
  5. Consider valuation that is based on the value of the thing exchanged for data.  (Compare tax case: Philadelphia Park Amusement Company (the "rainbow bridge" case).
  6. Consider dynamic issues in valuation and how value can change over time. Information about a newly famous person increases in value as their fame grows. etc.  (Compare "amortization" issues in "Associated Patentees" case that allowed for amortization deductions for patent creation costs proportional to the accumulated income generation experience from the patents, which changed over the years).
  7. If, and to the extent, that "data plus meaning equals information" is data valuation necessary but insufficient for information value determination.  What are the mechanisms for understanding the value of "meaning" and information?  Is it "avoided costs" in the case where being informed enabled a party to mitigate risks in future interactions?  What about situations where the informed party seeks "leverage" rather than just "risk reduction?"  In the case of leverage, would data costs be included in the cost of services provided?  Might a VAT (Value added tax) type model or analysis help to parse the relative contributions of data and meaning to information applied in future interactions?
  8. What, if any, role do statutory penalties for data breach play in determining value?  Are there other mechanisms by which the calculation of compensation for damages associated with data misuse, negligence, exceeding authority, etc. could inform data "value"
  9. Is it tractable to assert that the value could be ascribed by reference to the value of the companies that exploit it.  Is the value of facebook data about person X equal to the market capitalization of facebook, minus its costs of operation, divided by the number of facebook users?  Would valuation of cooperatives (mutual insurance companies, credit unions, dairy coops, etc.) be helpful in valuing parts of companies supported ultimately by data flows.
  10. To what extent is data a "commodity" versus more like a "bespoke" product or service?  Is data sufficiently fungible so that it can be valued in general (like corn or other items for which the UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) allows for "cover")?  If data in general is not fungible, are there elements of data rights that are sufficiently fungible to lend themselves to trading at large scales and in large markets where "value" would be less subject to manipulation by a few large players.
  11. How will "data markets" affect pricing of data?  It would have the indirect effect of making "losses" from data breaches more calculable (if data value is set in independent markets).  Of course, just knowing the value of data is not enough to state a claim, because "causation" must also be demonstrated, requiring tying the data breach event to the complained about identity theft event.  (Kahler case I recall was dismissed for inability to demonstrate causation).
Lots of interesting challenges here, as well as opportunities to craft logical framings for valuation that can address issues above.  All of my prior analysis suggests that the focus should be on value of a given data right (or set of data rights), rather than looking at the value of the data itself (lawyers might say as "data qua data").  In that regard, I personally conclude that data value is extrinsic to the data, and depends on context, use and user where it is "converted" into valuable information.  To me, data is an artifact of interactions, and its use is primarily in its application by stakeholders to de-risk or leverage future interactions.  The "trading" is nominally in the data (and the meaning), but is actually trading in "risk," and data in context permits the mitigation of threat and vulnerability associated with future interactions with people, institutuions and things.  Data (like rocks) is also "dual use" so that its value (and its potential for harm) might not be calculable prior to that use (see Associated Patentees above for dynamic pricing notion)

But I digress. . . .

Warm regards, 
Scott

Scott L. David

Executive Director
Information Risk Research Initiative 
University of Washington - Applied Physics Laboratory

m- 206-715-0859
Tw - @ScottLDavid



From: main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io <main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io> on behalf of Iain Henderson <iain.henderson@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 12:52 PM
To: main@me2balliance.groups.io <main@me2balliance.groups.io>
Cc: Me2BAlliance@groups.io <Me2BAlliance@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Me2BAlliance] While I'm forwarding resources...
 
I’ve done a lot on that Milton; ping me the requirement and I’ll jot down how one might go about it.

Cheers 

Iain

On 23 Jul 2020, at 20:41, Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:

 Doc and members, is there anyone out there who is an expert in valuing personal data ? Any pioneers perhaps who have developed basic economic principles or other ideas ? 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 23, 2020, at 3:01 PM, Doc Searls via groups.io <doc@...> wrote:

 It's five years old now, but as valid as ever. I've pointed to it many times in writings since then. Examples:

Joseph Turow, one of the authors of the study, also reached out to me recently, and I reached back; but there hasn't been more follow-up. Should be. 

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 7:19 AM, Lisa LeVasseur <lisa.levasseur@...> wrote:

You all may already be familiar with this work from 2015, but I came upon it recently:  https://www.asc.upenn.edu/news-events/publications/tradeoff-fallacy-how-marketers-are-misrepresenting-american-consumers-and




Re: While I'm forwarding resources...

Iain Henderson
 

I have some material to dig out re how one would value data; but the long and short is that i’d agree with Scott that it will be much easier to identity value by looking at data use (rights/ purposes) than the data itself.

Iain

On 24 Jul 2020, at 17:38, Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:

Really fascinating. So Where do we land ? Can we own, and or control, our data and donate, sell, exchange it or not? The world is a complex adaptive system, and many concepts are hard to pin down, but even racism, sexual harassment and job discrimination have been defined for practical actionability and legal purposes. Can’t we define personal data for practical purposes? So that a legal, ethical valuation and marketplace can emerge ? 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 24, 2020, at 11:50 AM, Doc Searls via groups.io <doc@...> wrote:

 I love how much work you put into this, Scott. It's rare to get deep thinking and rich detail all in one go, but you give that to us here.

I also think all of what you say here inconveniences conceiving data as a commodity or as property in the tangible sense. 

I tried to do the same a couple years ago, here: https://blogs.harvard.edu/doc/2018/09/18/data/.

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 1:59 PM, sldavid <sldavid@...> wrote:

Iain and Milton -  I am interested in the topic of data valuation as well.  Please consider my request to be included in that discussion/information flow.

Here are a couple of random ideas that may or may not be useful in the analysis:

  1. Value in what market?  Price discovery is a feature of markets.  Data is traded in black market, advertising market, etc., each with its own usage patterns and value propositions for stakeholders.
  2. Intrinsic value or extrinsic value of data? Where one instance of data can "inform" parties in multiple contexts (and is of value to each of them), what method should apply to "average" or account for the price discrepancies?
  3. Reasoning by analogy since IP laws don't directly protect usage of data), International businesses frequently use IP laws (copyright, patent, TM) to divide territory for their sales and brand strategies. Resale of their product is prohibited by their government-granted IP monopoly in the form of IP rights. In a post Schrems-II world, will data localization rules become the vehicle for market-segregation for commercial applications of personal data.  If so, will people have "private rights of action" (as opposed to government enforcement) and "class action" rights to pursue their rights to benefit from the data-localization rules?  On the latter, note that some TOS/TOUs have started to limit class actions as part of their arbitration rules, following in the footsteps of the credit card companies, etc.
  4. Are valuation approaches useful?  For example, real estate is typically valued by some combination of comparable sales, income generation and cost.  Are subsets of that and similar analyses useful here?  Is this analysis affected by the resistance to viewing data as property?  Are those issues ameliorated by considering "data rights" (but not data itself) as "intangible property" akin to other contractual/statutory/regulatory rights?
  5. Consider valuation that is based on the value of the thing exchanged for data.  (Compare tax case: Philadelphia Park Amusement Company (the "rainbow bridge" case).
  6. Consider dynamic issues in valuation and how value can change over time. Information about a newly famous person increases in value as their fame grows. etc.  (Compare "amortization" issues in "Associated Patentees" case that allowed for amortization deductions for patent creation costs proportional to the accumulated income generation experience from the patents, which changed over the years).
  7. If, and to the extent, that "data plus meaning equals information" is data valuation necessary but insufficient for information value determination.  What are the mechanisms for understanding the value of "meaning" and information?  Is it "avoided costs" in the case where being informed enabled a party to mitigate risks in future interactions?  What about situations where the informed party seeks "leverage" rather than just "risk reduction?"  In the case of leverage, would data costs be included in the cost of services provided?  Might a VAT (Value added tax) type model or analysis help to parse the relative contributions of data and meaning to information applied in future interactions?
  8. What, if any, role do statutory penalties for data breach play in determining value?  Are there other mechanisms by which the calculation of compensation for damages associated with data misuse, negligence, exceeding authority, etc. could inform data "value"
  9. Is it tractable to assert that the value could be ascribed by reference to the value of the companies that exploit it.  Is the value of facebook data about person X equal to the market capitalization of facebook, minus its costs of operation, divided by the number of facebook users?  Would valuation of cooperatives (mutual insurance companies, credit unions, dairy coops, etc.) be helpful in valuing parts of companies supported ultimately by data flows.
  10. To what extent is data a "commodity" versus more like a "bespoke" product or service?  Is data sufficiently fungible so that it can be valued in general (like corn or other items for which the UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) allows for "cover")?  If data in general is not fungible, are there elements of data rights that are sufficiently fungible to lend themselves to trading at large scales and in large markets where "value" would be less subject to manipulation by a few large players.
  11. How will "data markets" affect pricing of data?  It would have the indirect effect of making "losses" from data breaches more calculable (if data value is set in independent markets).  Of course, just knowing the value of data is not enough to state a claim, because "causation" must also be demonstrated, requiring tying the data breach event to the complained about identity theft event.  (Kahler case I recall was dismissed for inability to demonstrate causation).
Lots of interesting challenges here, as well as opportunities to craft logical framings for valuation that can address issues above.  All of my prior analysis suggests that the focus should be on value of a given data right (or set of data rights), rather than looking at the value of the data itself (lawyers might say as "data qua data").  In that regard, I personally conclude that data value is extrinsic to the data, and depends on context, use and user where it is "converted" into valuable information.  To me, data is an artifact of interactions, and its use is primarily in its application by stakeholders to de-risk or leverage future interactions.  The "trading" is nominally in the data (and the meaning), but is actually trading in "risk," and data in context permits the mitigation of threat and vulnerability associated with future interactions with people, institutuions and things.  Data (like rocks) is also "dual use" so that its value (and its potential for harm) might not be calculable prior to that use (see Associated Patentees above for dynamic pricing notion)

But I digress. . . .

Warm regards, 
Scott

Scott L. David

Executive Director
Information Risk Research Initiative 
University of Washington - Applied Physics Laboratory

m- 206-715-0859
Tw - @ScottLDavid



From: main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io <main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io> on behalf of Iain Henderson <iain.henderson@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 12:52 PM
To: main@me2balliance.groups.io <main@me2balliance.groups.io>
Cc: Me2BAlliance@groups.io <Me2BAlliance@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Me2BAlliance] While I'm forwarding resources...
 
I’ve done a lot on that Milton; ping me the requirement and I’ll jot down how one might go about it.

Cheers 

Iain

On 23 Jul 2020, at 20:41, Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:

 Doc and members, is there anyone out there who is an expert in valuing personal data ? Any pioneers perhaps who have developed basic economic principles or other ideas ? 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 23, 2020, at 3:01 PM, Doc Searls via groups.io <doc@...> wrote:

 It's five years old now, but as valid as ever. I've pointed to it many times in writings since then. Examples:

Joseph Turow, one of the authors of the study, also reached out to me recently, and I reached back; but there hasn't been more follow-up. Should be. 

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 7:19 AM, Lisa LeVasseur <lisa.levasseur@...> wrote:

You all may already be familiar with this work from 2015, but I came upon it recently:  https://www.asc.upenn.edu/news-events/publications/tradeoff-fallacy-how-marketers-are-misrepresenting-american-consumers-and




Re: While I'm forwarding resources...

Milton Pedraza
 

Thank you all work is insightful 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988
mpedraza@...


On Jul 24, 2020, at 1:44 PM, Eve Maler <eve@...> wrote:


Regarding criminals vs. honest people: criminals usually have fewer regulations. ;)

Regarding people doing work in this area: Alessandro Acquisti is the main person I'm aware of who does research in this area, but I don't know if he's considered to be on the side of doing it "wrong" or "right".

Eve Maler
Cell or Signal +1 425.345.6756 | Skype: xmlgrrl | Twitter: @xmlgrrl



On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 12:26 PM Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:
Maybe, I just think that markets have developed value exchange for so many tangible and intangible ideas, even labor, and intellectual property, so I don’t get why data generated by individuals can’t be, at least for some major and key elements, be owned and controlled  by individuals. If you want to put a big dent in inequality let people own, control and exchange value for their data, with fiduciary representation.  I have yet to read an article where I can say-oh I totally get why I can’t Own, control and do whatever I please with my data. Lots of intellectual reasoning, but it makes me think that slave owners probably articulated some great reasons why they should never free people. Sports team owners with control of players too. And why many Silicon Valley companies create so called objective algorithms to identify workers who fit their cultures who happen to be of a certain profile. 

Open to learning but I haven’t been convinced yet. Still looking 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 24, 2020, at 1:10 PM, Richard Whitt <richard@...> wrote:


I wonder if the better approach is shifting the ownership/control question to the point of access.  We can establish one's rights of access to data, and leave the actual defining of the data itself -- as real property, as labor, as commons, as monetizable commodity, or something else entirely -- to the intentions of the affected individuals or collectives.


On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 9:38 AM Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:
Really fascinating. So Where do we land ? Can we own, and or control, our data and donate, sell, exchange it or not? The world is a complex adaptive system, and many concepts are hard to pin down, but even racism, sexual harassment and job discrimination have been defined for practical actionability and legal purposes. Can’t we define personal data for practical purposes? So that a legal, ethical valuation and marketplace can emerge ? 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 24, 2020, at 11:50 AM, Doc Searls via groups.io <doc=searls.com@groups.io> wrote:

 I love how much work you put into this, Scott. It's rare to get deep thinking and rich detail all in one go, but you give that to us here.

I also think all of what you say here inconveniences conceiving data as a commodity or as property in the tangible sense. 

I tried to do the same a couple years ago, here: https://blogs.harvard.edu/doc/2018/09/18/data/.

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 1:59 PM, sldavid <sldavid@...> wrote:

Iain and Milton -  I am interested in the topic of data valuation as well.  Please consider my request to be included in that discussion/information flow.

Here are a couple of random ideas that may or may not be useful in the analysis:

  1. Value in what market?  Price discovery is a feature of markets.  Data is traded in black market, advertising market, etc., each with its own usage patterns and value propositions for stakeholders.
  2. Intrinsic value or extrinsic value of data? Where one instance of data can "inform" parties in multiple contexts (and is of value to each of them), what method should apply to "average" or account for the price discrepancies?
  3. Reasoning by analogy since IP laws don't directly protect usage of data), International businesses frequently use IP laws (copyright, patent, TM) to divide territory for their sales and brand strategies. Resale of their product is prohibited by their government-granted IP monopoly in the form of IP rights. In a post Schrems-II world, will data localization rules become the vehicle for market-segregation for commercial applications of personal data.  If so, will people have "private rights of action" (as opposed to government enforcement) and "class action" rights to pursue their rights to benefit from the data-localization rules?  On the latter, note that some TOS/TOUs have started to limit class actions as part of their arbitration rules, following in the footsteps of the credit card companies, etc.
  4. Are valuation approaches useful?  For example, real estate is typically valued by some combination of comparable sales, income generation and cost.  Are subsets of that and similar analyses useful here?  Is this analysis affected by the resistance to viewing data as property?  Are those issues ameliorated by considering "data rights" (but not data itself) as "intangible property" akin to other contractual/statutory/regulatory rights?
  5. Consider valuation that is based on the value of the thing exchanged for data.  (Compare tax case: Philadelphia Park Amusement Company (the "rainbow bridge" case).
  6. Consider dynamic issues in valuation and how value can change over time. Information about a newly famous person increases in value as their fame grows. etc.  (Compare "amortization" issues in "Associated Patentees" case that allowed for amortization deductions for patent creation costs proportional to the accumulated income generation experience from the patents, which changed over the years).
  7. If, and to the extent, that "data plus meaning equals information" is data valuation necessary but insufficient for information value determination.  What are the mechanisms for understanding the value of "meaning" and information?  Is it "avoided costs" in the case where being informed enabled a party to mitigate risks in future interactions?  What about situations where the informed party seeks "leverage" rather than just "risk reduction?"  In the case of leverage, would data costs be included in the cost of services provided?  Might a VAT (Value added tax) type model or analysis help to parse the relative contributions of data and meaning to information applied in future interactions?
  8. What, if any, role do statutory penalties for data breach play in determining value?  Are there other mechanisms by which the calculation of compensation for damages associated with data misuse, negligence, exceeding authority, etc. could inform data "value"
  9. Is it tractable to assert that the value could be ascribed by reference to the value of the companies that exploit it.  Is the value of facebook data about person X equal to the market capitalization of facebook, minus its costs of operation, divided by the number of facebook users?  Would valuation of cooperatives (mutual insurance companies, credit unions, dairy coops, etc.) be helpful in valuing parts of companies supported ultimately by data flows.
  10. To what extent is data a "commodity" versus more like a "bespoke" product or service?  Is data sufficiently fungible so that it can be valued in general (like corn or other items for which the UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) allows for "cover")?  If data in general is not fungible, are there elements of data rights that are sufficiently fungible to lend themselves to trading at large scales and in large markets where "value" would be less subject to manipulation by a few large players.
  11. How will "data markets" affect pricing of data?  It would have the indirect effect of making "losses" from data breaches more calculable (if data value is set in independent markets).  Of course, just knowing the value of data is not enough to state a claim, because "causation" must also be demonstrated, requiring tying the data breach event to the complained about identity theft event.  (Kahler case I recall was dismissed for inability to demonstrate causation).
Lots of interesting challenges here, as well as opportunities to craft logical framings for valuation that can address issues above.  All of my prior analysis suggests that the focus should be on value of a given data right (or set of data rights), rather than looking at the value of the data itself (lawyers might say as "data qua data").  In that regard, I personally conclude that data value is extrinsic to the data, and depends on context, use and user where it is "converted" into valuable information.  To me, data is an artifact of interactions, and its use is primarily in its application by stakeholders to de-risk or leverage future interactions.  The "trading" is nominally in the data (and the meaning), but is actually trading in "risk," and data in context permits the mitigation of threat and vulnerability associated with future interactions with people, institutuions and things.  Data (like rocks) is also "dual use" so that its value (and its potential for harm) might not be calculable prior to that use (see Associated Patentees above for dynamic pricing notion)

But I digress. . . .

Warm regards, 
Scott

Scott L. David

Executive Director
Information Risk Research Initiative 
University of Washington - Applied Physics Laboratory

m- 206-715-0859
Tw - @ScottLDavid



From: main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io <main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io> on behalf of Iain Henderson <iain.henderson@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 12:52 PM
To: main@me2balliance.groups.io <main@me2balliance.groups.io>
Cc: Me2BAlliance@groups.io <Me2BAlliance@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Me2BAlliance] While I'm forwarding resources...
 
I’ve done a lot on that Milton; ping me the requirement and I’ll jot down how one might go about it.

Cheers 

Iain

On 23 Jul 2020, at 20:41, Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:

 Doc and members, is there anyone out there who is an expert in valuing personal data ? Any pioneers perhaps who have developed basic economic principles or other ideas ? 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 23, 2020, at 3:01 PM, Doc Searls via groups.io <doc@...> wrote:

 It's five years old now, but as valid as ever. I've pointed to it many times in writings since then. Examples:

Joseph Turow, one of the authors of the study, also reached out to me recently, and I reached back; but there hasn't been more follow-up. Should be. 

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 7:19 AM, Lisa LeVasseur <lisa.levasseur@...> wrote:

You all may already be familiar with this work from 2015, but I came upon it recently:  https://www.asc.upenn.edu/news-events/publications/tradeoff-fallacy-how-marketers-are-misrepresenting-american-consumers-and




--
______________________________________________


Richard S. Whitt

President, GLIA Foundation

richard@... | 650.450.1705

Building a more trustworthy and human-agential Web

Check out my brand new law journal article on digital fiduciaries, my recent podcast on human agency in the digital era, and my Medium series (parts one, two, and three) making the case for personal AIs.


Re: While I'm forwarding resources...

Eve Maler
 

Regarding criminals vs. honest people: criminals usually have fewer regulations. ;)

Regarding people doing work in this area: Alessandro Acquisti is the main person I'm aware of who does research in this area, but I don't know if he's considered to be on the side of doing it "wrong" or "right".

Eve Maler
Cell or Signal +1 425.345.6756 | Skype: xmlgrrl | Twitter: @xmlgrrl



On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 12:26 PM Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:
Maybe, I just think that markets have developed value exchange for so many tangible and intangible ideas, even labor, and intellectual property, so I don’t get why data generated by individuals can’t be, at least for some major and key elements, be owned and controlled  by individuals. If you want to put a big dent in inequality let people own, control and exchange value for their data, with fiduciary representation.  I have yet to read an article where I can say-oh I totally get why I can’t Own, control and do whatever I please with my data. Lots of intellectual reasoning, but it makes me think that slave owners probably articulated some great reasons why they should never free people. Sports team owners with control of players too. And why many Silicon Valley companies create so called objective algorithms to identify workers who fit their cultures who happen to be of a certain profile. 

Open to learning but I haven’t been convinced yet. Still looking 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 24, 2020, at 1:10 PM, Richard Whitt <richard@...> wrote:


I wonder if the better approach is shifting the ownership/control question to the point of access.  We can establish one's rights of access to data, and leave the actual defining of the data itself -- as real property, as labor, as commons, as monetizable commodity, or something else entirely -- to the intentions of the affected individuals or collectives.


On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 9:38 AM Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:
Really fascinating. So Where do we land ? Can we own, and or control, our data and donate, sell, exchange it or not? The world is a complex adaptive system, and many concepts are hard to pin down, but even racism, sexual harassment and job discrimination have been defined for practical actionability and legal purposes. Can’t we define personal data for practical purposes? So that a legal, ethical valuation and marketplace can emerge ? 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 24, 2020, at 11:50 AM, Doc Searls via groups.io <doc=searls.com@groups.io> wrote:

 I love how much work you put into this, Scott. It's rare to get deep thinking and rich detail all in one go, but you give that to us here.

I also think all of what you say here inconveniences conceiving data as a commodity or as property in the tangible sense. 

I tried to do the same a couple years ago, here: https://blogs.harvard.edu/doc/2018/09/18/data/.

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 1:59 PM, sldavid <sldavid@...> wrote:

Iain and Milton -  I am interested in the topic of data valuation as well.  Please consider my request to be included in that discussion/information flow.

Here are a couple of random ideas that may or may not be useful in the analysis:

  1. Value in what market?  Price discovery is a feature of markets.  Data is traded in black market, advertising market, etc., each with its own usage patterns and value propositions for stakeholders.
  2. Intrinsic value or extrinsic value of data? Where one instance of data can "inform" parties in multiple contexts (and is of value to each of them), what method should apply to "average" or account for the price discrepancies?
  3. Reasoning by analogy since IP laws don't directly protect usage of data), International businesses frequently use IP laws (copyright, patent, TM) to divide territory for their sales and brand strategies. Resale of their product is prohibited by their government-granted IP monopoly in the form of IP rights. In a post Schrems-II world, will data localization rules become the vehicle for market-segregation for commercial applications of personal data.  If so, will people have "private rights of action" (as opposed to government enforcement) and "class action" rights to pursue their rights to benefit from the data-localization rules?  On the latter, note that some TOS/TOUs have started to limit class actions as part of their arbitration rules, following in the footsteps of the credit card companies, etc.
  4. Are valuation approaches useful?  For example, real estate is typically valued by some combination of comparable sales, income generation and cost.  Are subsets of that and similar analyses useful here?  Is this analysis affected by the resistance to viewing data as property?  Are those issues ameliorated by considering "data rights" (but not data itself) as "intangible property" akin to other contractual/statutory/regulatory rights?
  5. Consider valuation that is based on the value of the thing exchanged for data.  (Compare tax case: Philadelphia Park Amusement Company (the "rainbow bridge" case).
  6. Consider dynamic issues in valuation and how value can change over time. Information about a newly famous person increases in value as their fame grows. etc.  (Compare "amortization" issues in "Associated Patentees" case that allowed for amortization deductions for patent creation costs proportional to the accumulated income generation experience from the patents, which changed over the years).
  7. If, and to the extent, that "data plus meaning equals information" is data valuation necessary but insufficient for information value determination.  What are the mechanisms for understanding the value of "meaning" and information?  Is it "avoided costs" in the case where being informed enabled a party to mitigate risks in future interactions?  What about situations where the informed party seeks "leverage" rather than just "risk reduction?"  In the case of leverage, would data costs be included in the cost of services provided?  Might a VAT (Value added tax) type model or analysis help to parse the relative contributions of data and meaning to information applied in future interactions?
  8. What, if any, role do statutory penalties for data breach play in determining value?  Are there other mechanisms by which the calculation of compensation for damages associated with data misuse, negligence, exceeding authority, etc. could inform data "value"
  9. Is it tractable to assert that the value could be ascribed by reference to the value of the companies that exploit it.  Is the value of facebook data about person X equal to the market capitalization of facebook, minus its costs of operation, divided by the number of facebook users?  Would valuation of cooperatives (mutual insurance companies, credit unions, dairy coops, etc.) be helpful in valuing parts of companies supported ultimately by data flows.
  10. To what extent is data a "commodity" versus more like a "bespoke" product or service?  Is data sufficiently fungible so that it can be valued in general (like corn or other items for which the UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) allows for "cover")?  If data in general is not fungible, are there elements of data rights that are sufficiently fungible to lend themselves to trading at large scales and in large markets where "value" would be less subject to manipulation by a few large players.
  11. How will "data markets" affect pricing of data?  It would have the indirect effect of making "losses" from data breaches more calculable (if data value is set in independent markets).  Of course, just knowing the value of data is not enough to state a claim, because "causation" must also be demonstrated, requiring tying the data breach event to the complained about identity theft event.  (Kahler case I recall was dismissed for inability to demonstrate causation).
Lots of interesting challenges here, as well as opportunities to craft logical framings for valuation that can address issues above.  All of my prior analysis suggests that the focus should be on value of a given data right (or set of data rights), rather than looking at the value of the data itself (lawyers might say as "data qua data").  In that regard, I personally conclude that data value is extrinsic to the data, and depends on context, use and user where it is "converted" into valuable information.  To me, data is an artifact of interactions, and its use is primarily in its application by stakeholders to de-risk or leverage future interactions.  The "trading" is nominally in the data (and the meaning), but is actually trading in "risk," and data in context permits the mitigation of threat and vulnerability associated with future interactions with people, institutuions and things.  Data (like rocks) is also "dual use" so that its value (and its potential for harm) might not be calculable prior to that use (see Associated Patentees above for dynamic pricing notion)

But I digress. . . .

Warm regards, 
Scott

Scott L. David

Executive Director
Information Risk Research Initiative 
University of Washington - Applied Physics Laboratory

m- 206-715-0859
Tw - @ScottLDavid



From: main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io <main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io> on behalf of Iain Henderson <iain.henderson@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 12:52 PM
To: main@me2balliance.groups.io <main@me2balliance.groups.io>
Cc: Me2BAlliance@groups.io <Me2BAlliance@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Me2BAlliance] While I'm forwarding resources...
 
I’ve done a lot on that Milton; ping me the requirement and I’ll jot down how one might go about it.

Cheers 

Iain

On 23 Jul 2020, at 20:41, Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:

 Doc and members, is there anyone out there who is an expert in valuing personal data ? Any pioneers perhaps who have developed basic economic principles or other ideas ? 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 23, 2020, at 3:01 PM, Doc Searls via groups.io <doc@...> wrote:

 It's five years old now, but as valid as ever. I've pointed to it many times in writings since then. Examples:

Joseph Turow, one of the authors of the study, also reached out to me recently, and I reached back; but there hasn't been more follow-up. Should be. 

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 7:19 AM, Lisa LeVasseur <lisa.levasseur@...> wrote:

You all may already be familiar with this work from 2015, but I came upon it recently:  https://www.asc.upenn.edu/news-events/publications/tradeoff-fallacy-how-marketers-are-misrepresenting-american-consumers-and




--
______________________________________________


Richard S. Whitt

President, GLIA Foundation

richard@... | 650.450.1705

Building a more trustworthy and human-agential Web

Check out my brand new law journal article on digital fiduciaries, my recent podcast on human agency in the digital era, and my Medium series (parts one, two, and three) making the case for personal AIs.


Re: While I'm forwarding resources...

Milton Pedraza
 

Maybe, I just think that markets have developed value exchange for so many tangible and intangible ideas, even labor, and intellectual property, so I don’t get why data generated by individuals can’t be, at least for some major and key elements, be owned and controlled  by individuals. If you want to put a big dent in inequality let people own, control and exchange value for their data, with fiduciary representation.  I have yet to read an article where I can say-oh I totally get why I can’t Own, control and do whatever I please with my data. Lots of intellectual reasoning, but it makes me think that slave owners probably articulated some great reasons why they should never free people. Sports team owners with control of players too. And why many Silicon Valley companies create so called objective algorithms to identify workers who fit their cultures who happen to be of a certain profile. 

Open to learning but I haven’t been convinced yet. Still looking 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988
mpedraza@...


On Jul 24, 2020, at 1:10 PM, Richard Whitt <richard@...> wrote:


I wonder if the better approach is shifting the ownership/control question to the point of access.  We can establish one's rights of access to data, and leave the actual defining of the data itself -- as real property, as labor, as commons, as monetizable commodity, or something else entirely -- to the intentions of the affected individuals or collectives.


On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 9:38 AM Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:
Really fascinating. So Where do we land ? Can we own, and or control, our data and donate, sell, exchange it or not? The world is a complex adaptive system, and many concepts are hard to pin down, but even racism, sexual harassment and job discrimination have been defined for practical actionability and legal purposes. Can’t we define personal data for practical purposes? So that a legal, ethical valuation and marketplace can emerge ? 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 24, 2020, at 11:50 AM, Doc Searls via groups.io <doc=searls.com@groups.io> wrote:

 I love how much work you put into this, Scott. It's rare to get deep thinking and rich detail all in one go, but you give that to us here.

I also think all of what you say here inconveniences conceiving data as a commodity or as property in the tangible sense. 

I tried to do the same a couple years ago, here: https://blogs.harvard.edu/doc/2018/09/18/data/.

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 1:59 PM, sldavid <sldavid@...> wrote:

Iain and Milton -  I am interested in the topic of data valuation as well.  Please consider my request to be included in that discussion/information flow.

Here are a couple of random ideas that may or may not be useful in the analysis:

  1. Value in what market?  Price discovery is a feature of markets.  Data is traded in black market, advertising market, etc., each with its own usage patterns and value propositions for stakeholders.
  2. Intrinsic value or extrinsic value of data? Where one instance of data can "inform" parties in multiple contexts (and is of value to each of them), what method should apply to "average" or account for the price discrepancies?
  3. Reasoning by analogy since IP laws don't directly protect usage of data), International businesses frequently use IP laws (copyright, patent, TM) to divide territory for their sales and brand strategies. Resale of their product is prohibited by their government-granted IP monopoly in the form of IP rights. In a post Schrems-II world, will data localization rules become the vehicle for market-segregation for commercial applications of personal data.  If so, will people have "private rights of action" (as opposed to government enforcement) and "class action" rights to pursue their rights to benefit from the data-localization rules?  On the latter, note that some TOS/TOUs have started to limit class actions as part of their arbitration rules, following in the footsteps of the credit card companies, etc.
  4. Are valuation approaches useful?  For example, real estate is typically valued by some combination of comparable sales, income generation and cost.  Are subsets of that and similar analyses useful here?  Is this analysis affected by the resistance to viewing data as property?  Are those issues ameliorated by considering "data rights" (but not data itself) as "intangible property" akin to other contractual/statutory/regulatory rights?
  5. Consider valuation that is based on the value of the thing exchanged for data.  (Compare tax case: Philadelphia Park Amusement Company (the "rainbow bridge" case).
  6. Consider dynamic issues in valuation and how value can change over time. Information about a newly famous person increases in value as their fame grows. etc.  (Compare "amortization" issues in "Associated Patentees" case that allowed for amortization deductions for patent creation costs proportional to the accumulated income generation experience from the patents, which changed over the years).
  7. If, and to the extent, that "data plus meaning equals information" is data valuation necessary but insufficient for information value determination.  What are the mechanisms for understanding the value of "meaning" and information?  Is it "avoided costs" in the case where being informed enabled a party to mitigate risks in future interactions?  What about situations where the informed party seeks "leverage" rather than just "risk reduction?"  In the case of leverage, would data costs be included in the cost of services provided?  Might a VAT (Value added tax) type model or analysis help to parse the relative contributions of data and meaning to information applied in future interactions?
  8. What, if any, role do statutory penalties for data breach play in determining value?  Are there other mechanisms by which the calculation of compensation for damages associated with data misuse, negligence, exceeding authority, etc. could inform data "value"
  9. Is it tractable to assert that the value could be ascribed by reference to the value of the companies that exploit it.  Is the value of facebook data about person X equal to the market capitalization of facebook, minus its costs of operation, divided by the number of facebook users?  Would valuation of cooperatives (mutual insurance companies, credit unions, dairy coops, etc.) be helpful in valuing parts of companies supported ultimately by data flows.
  10. To what extent is data a "commodity" versus more like a "bespoke" product or service?  Is data sufficiently fungible so that it can be valued in general (like corn or other items for which the UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) allows for "cover")?  If data in general is not fungible, are there elements of data rights that are sufficiently fungible to lend themselves to trading at large scales and in large markets where "value" would be less subject to manipulation by a few large players.
  11. How will "data markets" affect pricing of data?  It would have the indirect effect of making "losses" from data breaches more calculable (if data value is set in independent markets).  Of course, just knowing the value of data is not enough to state a claim, because "causation" must also be demonstrated, requiring tying the data breach event to the complained about identity theft event.  (Kahler case I recall was dismissed for inability to demonstrate causation).
Lots of interesting challenges here, as well as opportunities to craft logical framings for valuation that can address issues above.  All of my prior analysis suggests that the focus should be on value of a given data right (or set of data rights), rather than looking at the value of the data itself (lawyers might say as "data qua data").  In that regard, I personally conclude that data value is extrinsic to the data, and depends on context, use and user where it is "converted" into valuable information.  To me, data is an artifact of interactions, and its use is primarily in its application by stakeholders to de-risk or leverage future interactions.  The "trading" is nominally in the data (and the meaning), but is actually trading in "risk," and data in context permits the mitigation of threat and vulnerability associated with future interactions with people, institutuions and things.  Data (like rocks) is also "dual use" so that its value (and its potential for harm) might not be calculable prior to that use (see Associated Patentees above for dynamic pricing notion)

But I digress. . . .

Warm regards, 
Scott

Scott L. David

Executive Director
Information Risk Research Initiative 
University of Washington - Applied Physics Laboratory

m- 206-715-0859
Tw - @ScottLDavid



From: main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io <main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io> on behalf of Iain Henderson <iain.henderson@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 12:52 PM
To: main@me2balliance.groups.io <main@me2balliance.groups.io>
Cc: Me2BAlliance@groups.io <Me2BAlliance@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Me2BAlliance] While I'm forwarding resources...
 
I’ve done a lot on that Milton; ping me the requirement and I’ll jot down how one might go about it.

Cheers 

Iain

On 23 Jul 2020, at 20:41, Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:

 Doc and members, is there anyone out there who is an expert in valuing personal data ? Any pioneers perhaps who have developed basic economic principles or other ideas ? 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 23, 2020, at 3:01 PM, Doc Searls via groups.io <doc@...> wrote:

 It's five years old now, but as valid as ever. I've pointed to it many times in writings since then. Examples:

Joseph Turow, one of the authors of the study, also reached out to me recently, and I reached back; but there hasn't been more follow-up. Should be. 

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 7:19 AM, Lisa LeVasseur <lisa.levasseur@...> wrote:

You all may already be familiar with this work from 2015, but I came upon it recently:  https://www.asc.upenn.edu/news-events/publications/tradeoff-fallacy-how-marketers-are-misrepresenting-american-consumers-and




--
______________________________________________


Richard S. Whitt

President, GLIA Foundation

richard@... | 650.450.1705

Building a more trustworthy and human-agential Web

Check out my brand new law journal article on digital fiduciaries, my recent podcast on human agency in the digital era, and my Medium series (parts one, two, and three) making the case for personal AIs.


Re: While I'm forwarding resources...

Richard Whitt
 

I wonder if the better approach is shifting the ownership/control question to the point of access.  We can establish one's rights of access to data, and leave the actual defining of the data itself -- as real property, as labor, as commons, as monetizable commodity, or something else entirely -- to the intentions of the affected individuals or collectives.


On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 9:38 AM Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:
Really fascinating. So Where do we land ? Can we own, and or control, our data and donate, sell, exchange it or not? The world is a complex adaptive system, and many concepts are hard to pin down, but even racism, sexual harassment and job discrimination have been defined for practical actionability and legal purposes. Can’t we define personal data for practical purposes? So that a legal, ethical valuation and marketplace can emerge ? 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 24, 2020, at 11:50 AM, Doc Searls via groups.io <doc=searls.com@groups.io> wrote:

 I love how much work you put into this, Scott. It's rare to get deep thinking and rich detail all in one go, but you give that to us here.

I also think all of what you say here inconveniences conceiving data as a commodity or as property in the tangible sense. 

I tried to do the same a couple years ago, here: https://blogs.harvard.edu/doc/2018/09/18/data/.

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 1:59 PM, sldavid <sldavid@...> wrote:

Iain and Milton -  I am interested in the topic of data valuation as well.  Please consider my request to be included in that discussion/information flow.

Here are a couple of random ideas that may or may not be useful in the analysis:

  1. Value in what market?  Price discovery is a feature of markets.  Data is traded in black market, advertising market, etc., each with its own usage patterns and value propositions for stakeholders.
  2. Intrinsic value or extrinsic value of data? Where one instance of data can "inform" parties in multiple contexts (and is of value to each of them), what method should apply to "average" or account for the price discrepancies?
  3. Reasoning by analogy since IP laws don't directly protect usage of data), International businesses frequently use IP laws (copyright, patent, TM) to divide territory for their sales and brand strategies. Resale of their product is prohibited by their government-granted IP monopoly in the form of IP rights. In a post Schrems-II world, will data localization rules become the vehicle for market-segregation for commercial applications of personal data.  If so, will people have "private rights of action" (as opposed to government enforcement) and "class action" rights to pursue their rights to benefit from the data-localization rules?  On the latter, note that some TOS/TOUs have started to limit class actions as part of their arbitration rules, following in the footsteps of the credit card companies, etc.
  4. Are valuation approaches useful?  For example, real estate is typically valued by some combination of comparable sales, income generation and cost.  Are subsets of that and similar analyses useful here?  Is this analysis affected by the resistance to viewing data as property?  Are those issues ameliorated by considering "data rights" (but not data itself) as "intangible property" akin to other contractual/statutory/regulatory rights?
  5. Consider valuation that is based on the value of the thing exchanged for data.  (Compare tax case: Philadelphia Park Amusement Company (the "rainbow bridge" case).
  6. Consider dynamic issues in valuation and how value can change over time. Information about a newly famous person increases in value as their fame grows. etc.  (Compare "amortization" issues in "Associated Patentees" case that allowed for amortization deductions for patent creation costs proportional to the accumulated income generation experience from the patents, which changed over the years).
  7. If, and to the extent, that "data plus meaning equals information" is data valuation necessary but insufficient for information value determination.  What are the mechanisms for understanding the value of "meaning" and information?  Is it "avoided costs" in the case where being informed enabled a party to mitigate risks in future interactions?  What about situations where the informed party seeks "leverage" rather than just "risk reduction?"  In the case of leverage, would data costs be included in the cost of services provided?  Might a VAT (Value added tax) type model or analysis help to parse the relative contributions of data and meaning to information applied in future interactions?
  8. What, if any, role do statutory penalties for data breach play in determining value?  Are there other mechanisms by which the calculation of compensation for damages associated with data misuse, negligence, exceeding authority, etc. could inform data "value"
  9. Is it tractable to assert that the value could be ascribed by reference to the value of the companies that exploit it.  Is the value of facebook data about person X equal to the market capitalization of facebook, minus its costs of operation, divided by the number of facebook users?  Would valuation of cooperatives (mutual insurance companies, credit unions, dairy coops, etc.) be helpful in valuing parts of companies supported ultimately by data flows.
  10. To what extent is data a "commodity" versus more like a "bespoke" product or service?  Is data sufficiently fungible so that it can be valued in general (like corn or other items for which the UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) allows for "cover")?  If data in general is not fungible, are there elements of data rights that are sufficiently fungible to lend themselves to trading at large scales and in large markets where "value" would be less subject to manipulation by a few large players.
  11. How will "data markets" affect pricing of data?  It would have the indirect effect of making "losses" from data breaches more calculable (if data value is set in independent markets).  Of course, just knowing the value of data is not enough to state a claim, because "causation" must also be demonstrated, requiring tying the data breach event to the complained about identity theft event.  (Kahler case I recall was dismissed for inability to demonstrate causation).
Lots of interesting challenges here, as well as opportunities to craft logical framings for valuation that can address issues above.  All of my prior analysis suggests that the focus should be on value of a given data right (or set of data rights), rather than looking at the value of the data itself (lawyers might say as "data qua data").  In that regard, I personally conclude that data value is extrinsic to the data, and depends on context, use and user where it is "converted" into valuable information.  To me, data is an artifact of interactions, and its use is primarily in its application by stakeholders to de-risk or leverage future interactions.  The "trading" is nominally in the data (and the meaning), but is actually trading in "risk," and data in context permits the mitigation of threat and vulnerability associated with future interactions with people, institutuions and things.  Data (like rocks) is also "dual use" so that its value (and its potential for harm) might not be calculable prior to that use (see Associated Patentees above for dynamic pricing notion)

But I digress. . . .

Warm regards, 
Scott

Scott L. David

Executive Director
Information Risk Research Initiative 
University of Washington - Applied Physics Laboratory

m- 206-715-0859
Tw - @ScottLDavid



From: main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io <main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io> on behalf of Iain Henderson <iain.henderson@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 12:52 PM
To: main@me2balliance.groups.io <main@me2balliance.groups.io>
Cc: Me2BAlliance@groups.io <Me2BAlliance@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Me2BAlliance] While I'm forwarding resources...
 
I’ve done a lot on that Milton; ping me the requirement and I’ll jot down how one might go about it.

Cheers 

Iain

On 23 Jul 2020, at 20:41, Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:

 Doc and members, is there anyone out there who is an expert in valuing personal data ? Any pioneers perhaps who have developed basic economic principles or other ideas ? 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 23, 2020, at 3:01 PM, Doc Searls via groups.io <doc@...> wrote:

 It's five years old now, but as valid as ever. I've pointed to it many times in writings since then. Examples:

Joseph Turow, one of the authors of the study, also reached out to me recently, and I reached back; but there hasn't been more follow-up. Should be. 

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 7:19 AM, Lisa LeVasseur <lisa.levasseur@...> wrote:

You all may already be familiar with this work from 2015, but I came upon it recently:  https://www.asc.upenn.edu/news-events/publications/tradeoff-fallacy-how-marketers-are-misrepresenting-american-consumers-and




--
______________________________________________


Richard S. Whitt

President, GLIA Foundation

richard@... | 650.450.1705

Building a more trustworthy and human-agential Web

Check out my brand new law journal article on digital fiduciaries, my recent podcast on human agency in the digital era, and my Medium series (parts one, two, and three) making the case for personal AIs.


Re: While I'm forwarding resources...

Milton Pedraza
 

Really fascinating. So Where do we land ? Can we own, and or control, our data and donate, sell, exchange it or not? The world is a complex adaptive system, and many concepts are hard to pin down, but even racism, sexual harassment and job discrimination have been defined for practical actionability and legal purposes. Can’t we define personal data for practical purposes? So that a legal, ethical valuation and marketplace can emerge ? 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988
mpedraza@...


On Jul 24, 2020, at 11:50 AM, Doc Searls via groups.io <doc@...> wrote:

 I love how much work you put into this, Scott. It's rare to get deep thinking and rich detail all in one go, but you give that to us here.

I also think all of what you say here inconveniences conceiving data as a commodity or as property in the tangible sense. 

I tried to do the same a couple years ago, here: https://blogs.harvard.edu/doc/2018/09/18/data/.

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 1:59 PM, sldavid <sldavid@...> wrote:

Iain and Milton -  I am interested in the topic of data valuation as well.  Please consider my request to be included in that discussion/information flow.

Here are a couple of random ideas that may or may not be useful in the analysis:

  1. Value in what market?  Price discovery is a feature of markets.  Data is traded in black market, advertising market, etc., each with its own usage patterns and value propositions for stakeholders.
  2. Intrinsic value or extrinsic value of data? Where one instance of data can "inform" parties in multiple contexts (and is of value to each of them), what method should apply to "average" or account for the price discrepancies?
  3. Reasoning by analogy since IP laws don't directly protect usage of data), International businesses frequently use IP laws (copyright, patent, TM) to divide territory for their sales and brand strategies. Resale of their product is prohibited by their government-granted IP monopoly in the form of IP rights. In a post Schrems-II world, will data localization rules become the vehicle for market-segregation for commercial applications of personal data.  If so, will people have "private rights of action" (as opposed to government enforcement) and "class action" rights to pursue their rights to benefit from the data-localization rules?  On the latter, note that some TOS/TOUs have started to limit class actions as part of their arbitration rules, following in the footsteps of the credit card companies, etc.
  4. Are valuation approaches useful?  For example, real estate is typically valued by some combination of comparable sales, income generation and cost.  Are subsets of that and similar analyses useful here?  Is this analysis affected by the resistance to viewing data as property?  Are those issues ameliorated by considering "data rights" (but not data itself) as "intangible property" akin to other contractual/statutory/regulatory rights?
  5. Consider valuation that is based on the value of the thing exchanged for data.  (Compare tax case: Philadelphia Park Amusement Company (the "rainbow bridge" case).
  6. Consider dynamic issues in valuation and how value can change over time. Information about a newly famous person increases in value as their fame grows. etc.  (Compare "amortization" issues in "Associated Patentees" case that allowed for amortization deductions for patent creation costs proportional to the accumulated income generation experience from the patents, which changed over the years).
  7. If, and to the extent, that "data plus meaning equals information" is data valuation necessary but insufficient for information value determination.  What are the mechanisms for understanding the value of "meaning" and information?  Is it "avoided costs" in the case where being informed enabled a party to mitigate risks in future interactions?  What about situations where the informed party seeks "leverage" rather than just "risk reduction?"  In the case of leverage, would data costs be included in the cost of services provided?  Might a VAT (Value added tax) type model or analysis help to parse the relative contributions of data and meaning to information applied in future interactions?
  8. What, if any, role do statutory penalties for data breach play in determining value?  Are there other mechanisms by which the calculation of compensation for damages associated with data misuse, negligence, exceeding authority, etc. could inform data "value"
  9. Is it tractable to assert that the value could be ascribed by reference to the value of the companies that exploit it.  Is the value of facebook data about person X equal to the market capitalization of facebook, minus its costs of operation, divided by the number of facebook users?  Would valuation of cooperatives (mutual insurance companies, credit unions, dairy coops, etc.) be helpful in valuing parts of companies supported ultimately by data flows.
  10. To what extent is data a "commodity" versus more like a "bespoke" product or service?  Is data sufficiently fungible so that it can be valued in general (like corn or other items for which the UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) allows for "cover")?  If data in general is not fungible, are there elements of data rights that are sufficiently fungible to lend themselves to trading at large scales and in large markets where "value" would be less subject to manipulation by a few large players.
  11. How will "data markets" affect pricing of data?  It would have the indirect effect of making "losses" from data breaches more calculable (if data value is set in independent markets).  Of course, just knowing the value of data is not enough to state a claim, because "causation" must also be demonstrated, requiring tying the data breach event to the complained about identity theft event.  (Kahler case I recall was dismissed for inability to demonstrate causation).
Lots of interesting challenges here, as well as opportunities to craft logical framings for valuation that can address issues above.  All of my prior analysis suggests that the focus should be on value of a given data right (or set of data rights), rather than looking at the value of the data itself (lawyers might say as "data qua data").  In that regard, I personally conclude that data value is extrinsic to the data, and depends on context, use and user where it is "converted" into valuable information.  To me, data is an artifact of interactions, and its use is primarily in its application by stakeholders to de-risk or leverage future interactions.  The "trading" is nominally in the data (and the meaning), but is actually trading in "risk," and data in context permits the mitigation of threat and vulnerability associated with future interactions with people, institutuions and things.  Data (like rocks) is also "dual use" so that its value (and its potential for harm) might not be calculable prior to that use (see Associated Patentees above for dynamic pricing notion)

But I digress. . . .

Warm regards, 
Scott

Scott L. David

Executive Director
Information Risk Research Initiative 
University of Washington - Applied Physics Laboratory

m- 206-715-0859
Tw - @ScottLDavid



From: main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io <main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io> on behalf of Iain Henderson <iain.henderson@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 12:52 PM
To: main@me2balliance.groups.io <main@me2balliance.groups.io>
Cc: Me2BAlliance@groups.io <Me2BAlliance@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Me2BAlliance] While I'm forwarding resources...
 
I’ve done a lot on that Milton; ping me the requirement and I’ll jot down how one might go about it.

Cheers 

Iain

On 23 Jul 2020, at 20:41, Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:

 Doc and members, is there anyone out there who is an expert in valuing personal data ? Any pioneers perhaps who have developed basic economic principles or other ideas ? 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 23, 2020, at 3:01 PM, Doc Searls via groups.io <doc@...> wrote:

 It's five years old now, but as valid as ever. I've pointed to it many times in writings since then. Examples:

Joseph Turow, one of the authors of the study, also reached out to me recently, and I reached back; but there hasn't been more follow-up. Should be. 

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 7:19 AM, Lisa LeVasseur <lisa.levasseur@...> wrote:

You all may already be familiar with this work from 2015, but I came upon it recently:  https://www.asc.upenn.edu/news-events/publications/tradeoff-fallacy-how-marketers-are-misrepresenting-american-consumers-and



Re: While I'm forwarding resources...

Doc Searls
 

I love how much work you put into this, Scott. It's rare to get deep thinking and rich detail all in one go, but you give that to us here.

I also think all of what you say here inconveniences conceiving data as a commodity or as property in the tangible sense. 

I tried to do the same a couple years ago, here: https://blogs.harvard.edu/doc/2018/09/18/data/.

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 1:59 PM, sldavid <sldavid@...> wrote:

Iain and Milton -  I am interested in the topic of data valuation as well.  Please consider my request to be included in that discussion/information flow.

Here are a couple of random ideas that may or may not be useful in the analysis:

  1. Value in what market?  Price discovery is a feature of markets.  Data is traded in black market, advertising market, etc., each with its own usage patterns and value propositions for stakeholders.
  2. Intrinsic value or extrinsic value of data? Where one instance of data can "inform" parties in multiple contexts (and is of value to each of them), what method should apply to "average" or account for the price discrepancies?
  3. Reasoning by analogy since IP laws don't directly protect usage of data), International businesses frequently use IP laws (copyright, patent, TM) to divide territory for their sales and brand strategies. Resale of their product is prohibited by their government-granted IP monopoly in the form of IP rights. In a post Schrems-II world, will data localization rules become the vehicle for market-segregation for commercial applications of personal data.  If so, will people have "private rights of action" (as opposed to government enforcement) and "class action" rights to pursue their rights to benefit from the data-localization rules?  On the latter, note that some TOS/TOUs have started to limit class actions as part of their arbitration rules, following in the footsteps of the credit card companies, etc.
  4. Are valuation approaches useful?  For example, real estate is typically valued by some combination of comparable sales, income generation and cost.  Are subsets of that and similar analyses useful here?  Is this analysis affected by the resistance to viewing data as property?  Are those issues ameliorated by considering "data rights" (but not data itself) as "intangible property" akin to other contractual/statutory/regulatory rights?
  5. Consider valuation that is based on the value of the thing exchanged for data.  (Compare tax case: Philadelphia Park Amusement Company (the "rainbow bridge" case).
  6. Consider dynamic issues in valuation and how value can change over time. Information about a newly famous person increases in value as their fame grows. etc.  (Compare "amortization" issues in "Associated Patentees" case that allowed for amortization deductions for patent creation costs proportional to the accumulated income generation experience from the patents, which changed over the years).
  7. If, and to the extent, that "data plus meaning equals information" is data valuation necessary but insufficient for information value determination.  What are the mechanisms for understanding the value of "meaning" and information?  Is it "avoided costs" in the case where being informed enabled a party to mitigate risks in future interactions?  What about situations where the informed party seeks "leverage" rather than just "risk reduction?"  In the case of leverage, would data costs be included in the cost of services provided?  Might a VAT (Value added tax) type model or analysis help to parse the relative contributions of data and meaning to information applied in future interactions?
  8. What, if any, role do statutory penalties for data breach play in determining value?  Are there other mechanisms by which the calculation of compensation for damages associated with data misuse, negligence, exceeding authority, etc. could inform data "value"
  9. Is it tractable to assert that the value could be ascribed by reference to the value of the companies that exploit it.  Is the value of facebook data about person X equal to the market capitalization of facebook, minus its costs of operation, divided by the number of facebook users?  Would valuation of cooperatives (mutual insurance companies, credit unions, dairy coops, etc.) be helpful in valuing parts of companies supported ultimately by data flows.
  10. To what extent is data a "commodity" versus more like a "bespoke" product or service?  Is data sufficiently fungible so that it can be valued in general (like corn or other items for which the UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) allows for "cover")?  If data in general is not fungible, are there elements of data rights that are sufficiently fungible to lend themselves to trading at large scales and in large markets where "value" would be less subject to manipulation by a few large players.
  11. How will "data markets" affect pricing of data?  It would have the indirect effect of making "losses" from data breaches more calculable (if data value is set in independent markets).  Of course, just knowing the value of data is not enough to state a claim, because "causation" must also be demonstrated, requiring tying the data breach event to the complained about identity theft event.  (Kahler case I recall was dismissed for inability to demonstrate causation).
Lots of interesting challenges here, as well as opportunities to craft logical framings for valuation that can address issues above.  All of my prior analysis suggests that the focus should be on value of a given data right (or set of data rights), rather than looking at the value of the data itself (lawyers might say as "data qua data").  In that regard, I personally conclude that data value is extrinsic to the data, and depends on context, use and user where it is "converted" into valuable information.  To me, data is an artifact of interactions, and its use is primarily in its application by stakeholders to de-risk or leverage future interactions.  The "trading" is nominally in the data (and the meaning), but is actually trading in "risk," and data in context permits the mitigation of threat and vulnerability associated with future interactions with people, institutuions and things.  Data (like rocks) is also "dual use" so that its value (and its potential for harm) might not be calculable prior to that use (see Associated Patentees above for dynamic pricing notion)

But I digress. . . .

Warm regards, 
Scott

Scott L. David

Executive Director
Information Risk Research Initiative 
University of Washington - Applied Physics Laboratory

m- 206-715-0859
Tw - @ScottLDavid



From: main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io <main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io> on behalf of Iain Henderson <iain.henderson@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 12:52 PM
To: main@me2balliance.groups.io <main@me2balliance.groups.io>
Cc: Me2BAlliance@groups.io <Me2BAlliance@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Me2BAlliance] While I'm forwarding resources...
 
I’ve done a lot on that Milton; ping me the requirement and I’ll jot down how one might go about it.

Cheers 

Iain

On 23 Jul 2020, at 20:41, Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:

 Doc and members, is there anyone out there who is an expert in valuing personal data ? Any pioneers perhaps who have developed basic economic principles or other ideas ? 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988


On Jul 23, 2020, at 3:01 PM, Doc Searls via groups.io <doc@...> wrote:

 It's five years old now, but as valid as ever. I've pointed to it many times in writings since then. Examples:

Joseph Turow, one of the authors of the study, also reached out to me recently, and I reached back; but there hasn't been more follow-up. Should be. 

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 7:19 AM, Lisa LeVasseur <lisa.levasseur@...> wrote:

You all may already be familiar with this work from 2015, but I came upon it recently:  https://www.asc.upenn.edu/news-events/publications/tradeoff-fallacy-how-marketers-are-misrepresenting-american-consumers-and



Re: While I'm forwarding resources...

Jeff Orgel
 

Agreed Doc!  Great awareness optics indeed!

 

At Your Service,

 

Jeff Orgel

Primary Consultant

 

 TAG!  We're I.T.!

Technical Associates Group, LLC

 

What is Your Real-I/T?!

 

From: main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io <main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io> On Behalf Of Doc Searls via groups.io
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 2:01 PM
To: main@me2balliance.groups.io
Cc: Me2BAlliance@groups.io
Subject: Re: [Me2BAlliance] While I'm forwarding resources...

 

It's five years old now, but as valid as ever. I've pointed to it many times in writings since then. Examples:

 

Joseph Turow, one of the authors of the study, also reached out to me recently, and I reached back; but there hasn't been more follow-up. Should be. 

 

Doc



On Jul 23, 2020, at 7:19 AM, Lisa LeVasseur <lisa.levasseur@...> wrote:

 

You all may already be familiar with this work from 2015, but I came upon it recently:  https://www.asc.upenn.edu/news-events/publications/tradeoff-fallacy-how-marketers-are-misrepresenting-american-consumers-and

 


Re: While I'm forwarding resources...

Jeff Orgel
 

The UPenn report is the item I  referred to a few times over the past year or so.  It is very good and a very familiar circumstance I see in the “Me-s” world quite regularly.

 

Thanks for surfacing it again!

 

At Your Service,

 

Jeff Orgel

Primary Consultant

 

 TAG!  We're I.T.!

Technical Associates Group, LLC

 

What is Your Real-I/T?!

 

From: main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io <main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io> On Behalf Of Lisa LeVasseur via groups.io
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 9:20 AM
To: Me2BAlliance@groups.io
Subject: [Me2BAlliance] While I'm forwarding resources...

 

You all may already be familiar with this work from 2015, but I came upon it recently:  https://www.asc.upenn.edu/news-events/publications/tradeoff-fallacy-how-marketers-are-misrepresenting-american-consumers-and


Re: While I'm forwarding resources...

Milton Pedraza
 

Yes let’s discuss. It’s amazing that the criminals have markets but honest people do not. 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988
mpedraza@...


On Jul 23, 2020, at 5:00 PM, sldavid <sldavid@...> wrote:


Iain and Milton -  I am interested in the topic of data valuation as well.  Please consider my request to be included in that discussion/information flow.

Here are a couple of random ideas that may or may not be useful in the analysis:

  1. Value in what market?  Price discovery is a feature of markets.  Data is traded in black market, advertising market, etc., each with its own usage patterns and value propositions for stakeholders.
  2. Intrinsic value or extrinsic value of data? Where one instance of data can "inform" parties in multiple contexts (and is of value to each of them), what method should apply to "average" or account for the price discrepancies?
  3. Reasoning by analogy since IP laws don't directly protect usage of data), International businesses frequently use IP laws (copyright, patent, TM) to divide territory for their sales and brand strategies. Resale of their product is prohibited by their government-granted IP monopoly in the form of IP rights. In a post Schrems-II world, will data localization rules become the vehicle for market-segregation for commercial applications of personal data.  If so, will people have "private rights of action" (as opposed to government enforcement) and "class action" rights to pursue their rights to benefit from the data-localization rules?  On the latter, note that some TOS/TOUs have started to limit class actions as part of their arbitration rules, following in the footsteps of the credit card companies, etc.
  4. Are valuation approaches useful?  For example, real estate is typically valued by some combination of comparable sales, income generation and cost.  Are subsets of that and similar analyses useful here?  Is this analysis affected by the resistance to viewing data as property?  Are those issues ameliorated by considering "data rights" (but not data itself) as "intangible property" akin to other contractual/statutory/regulatory rights?
  5. Consider valuation that is based on the value of the thing exchanged for data.  (Compare tax case: Philadelphia Park Amusement Company (the "rainbow bridge" case).
  6. Consider dynamic issues in valuation and how value can change over time. Information about a newly famous person increases in value as their fame grows. etc.  (Compare "amortization" issues in "Associated Patentees" case that allowed for amortization deductions for patent creation costs proportional to the accumulated income generation experience from the patents, which changed over the years).
  7. If, and to the extent, that "data plus meaning equals information" is data valuation necessary but insufficient for information value determination.  What are the mechanisms for understanding the value of "meaning" and information?  Is it "avoided costs" in the case where being informed enabled a party to mitigate risks in future interactions?  What about situations where the informed party seeks "leverage" rather than just "risk reduction?"  In the case of leverage, would data costs be included in the cost of services provided?  Might a VAT (Value added tax) type model or analysis help to parse the relative contributions of data and meaning to information applied in future interactions?
  8. What, if any, role do statutory penalties for data breach play in determining value?  Are there other mechanisms by which the calculation of compensation for damages associated with data misuse, negligence, exceeding authority, etc. could inform data "value"
  9. Is it tractable to assert that the value could be ascribed by reference to the value of the companies that exploit it.  Is the value of facebook data about person X equal to the market capitalization of facebook, minus its costs of operation, divided by the number of facebook users?  Would valuation of cooperatives (mutual insurance companies, credit unions, dairy coops, etc.) be helpful in valuing parts of companies supported ultimately by data flows.
  10. To what extent is data a "commodity" versus more like a "bespoke" product or service?  Is data sufficiently fungible so that it can be valued in general (like corn or other items for which the UCC (Uniform Commercial Code) allows for "cover")?  If data in general is not fungible, are there elements of data rights that are sufficiently fungible to lend themselves to trading at large scales and in large markets where "value" would be less subject to manipulation by a few large players.
  11. How will "data markets" affect pricing of data?  It would have the indirect effect of making "losses" from data breaches more calculable (if data value is set in independent markets).  Of course, just knowing the value of data is not enough to state a claim, because "causation" must also be demonstrated, requiring tying the data breach event to the complained about identity theft event.  (Kahler case I recall was dismissed for inability to demonstrate causation).
Lots of interesting challenges here, as well as opportunities to craft logical framings for valuation that can address issues above.  All of my prior analysis suggests that the focus should be on value of a given data right (or set of data rights), rather than looking at the value of the data itself (lawyers might say as "data qua data").  In that regard, I personally conclude that data value is extrinsic to the data, and depends on context, use and user where it is "converted" into valuable information.  To me, data is an artifact of interactions, and its use is primarily in its application by stakeholders to de-risk or leverage future interactions.  The "trading" is nominally in the data (and the meaning), but is actually trading in "risk," and data in context permits the mitigation of threat and vulnerability associated with future interactions with people, institutuions and things.  Data (like rocks) is also "dual use" so that its value (and its potential for harm) might not be calculable prior to that use (see Associated Patentees above for dynamic pricing notion)

But I digress. . . .

Warm regards, 
Scott

Scott L. David


Executive Director

Information Risk Research Initiative 

University of Washington - Applied Physics Laboratory


m- 206-715-0859

Tw - @ScottLDavid



From: main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io <main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io> on behalf of Iain Henderson <iain.henderson@...>
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2020 12:52 PM
To: main@me2balliance.groups.io <main@me2balliance.groups.io>
Cc: Me2BAlliance@groups.io <Me2BAlliance@groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Me2BAlliance] While I'm forwarding resources...
 
I’ve done a lot on that Milton; ping me the requirement and I’ll jot down how one might go about it.

Cheers 

Iain

On 23 Jul 2020, at 20:41, Milton Pedraza <mpedraza@...> wrote:

 Doc and members, is there anyone out there who is an expert in valuing personal data ? Any pioneers perhaps who have developed basic economic principles or other ideas ? 

Milton Pedraza
CEO
Luxury Institute, LLC
917-657-4988
mpedraza@...


On Jul 23, 2020, at 3:01 PM, Doc Searls via groups.io <doc@...> wrote:

 It's five years old now, but as valid as ever. I've pointed to it many times in writings since then. Examples:

Joseph Turow, one of the authors of the study, also reached out to me recently, and I reached back; but there hasn't been more follow-up. Should be. 

Doc

On Jul 23, 2020, at 7:19 AM, Lisa LeVasseur <lisa.levasseur@...> wrote:

You all may already be familiar with this work from 2015, but I came upon it recently:  https://www.asc.upenn.edu/news-events/publications/tradeoff-fallacy-how-marketers-are-misrepresenting-american-consumers-and