Date   

Re: Best practice templates for tech governance

Jeff Orgel
 

Great conversation!

- via TAG Mobile


From: main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io <main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io> on behalf of Richard Whitt via groups.io <Richard@...>
Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2020 12:41:22 PM
To: main@me2balliance.groups.io <main@me2balliance.groups.io>
Subject: Re: [Me2BAlliance] Best practice templates for tech governance
 
Johannes:

I believe there are a good number of governance templates possible.  My particular area of focus is the governance family of what you could call trust institutions -- fiduciaries, legal trusts, stewards, custodians, certified professions.  These are rooted in the common law, with the express acknowledgement of power asymmetries between individuals and entities, based on significant gaps in expertise and the necessary sharing of sensitive information (think your doctor, your lawyer).  The common law for much of this would impose certain enforceable duties and obligations (care, loyalty, good faith, confidentiality, etc.) as a way to both reduce those power asymmetries, and empower the individual.  Some believe we can place the trust element within our tech (blockchain/distributed ledgers, for example), but I am sceptical that tech alone is the answer.  At the end of the day, we still need an accountable human being in whom to place our trust.

As you suggest, ideally each of those trust institutional models would have its own governance template, and people could pick and choose the one(s) they prefer to adopt (as entities) and deal with (as individuals).  My conception is that we may well end up with multiple kinds of digital trust institutions in our lives -- trustmediaries, information fiduciaries, data trusts, data commons, and so on -- each with a particular purpose.  Messy, most likely, and would bring the friction/costs of intermediaries back into the Web.  But at least it would give people some options.  I'm trying to do my part to flesh out the concept of the trustmediary, for example, and working with folks at Mozilla Foundation and elsewhere to create actual prototypes.

-Richard

On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 10:20 PM Johannes Ernst <jernst@...> wrote:
Do you think it would be fair to say that the trustmediary model is one — or perhaps one family of — templates for governance, in my terminology here?

If somebody wanted to set up a trustmediary, they could use the/a “trustmediary template” from the library and by adhering to that template (which, as part of it, would have monitoring capabilities that confirm the governance is actually being executed as intended) they could communicate to their customers/prospects that they are indeed trustworthy?

(It seems that multiple trustmediaries will probably end up with comparable governance models, …?)


On Jun 17, 2020, at 12:57, Richard Whitt <richard@...> wrote:

Thanks Johannes.  FWIW, I find the concept of templatizing digital governance for the entities themselves (beyond their products and services) germane to the longer term work of the PaLs (Policy and Legal stuff) Working Group.  It may also come up as an option in the current work on our "alt-consent" proposals.

As you know, I'm a fan of the digital trustmediary model, buttressed by various compliance/enforcement mechanisms (professional code of conduct, government procurement requirements, legal safeguards, etc.).  But there are potentially a number of different pathways to creating good governance.

-Richard


On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 11:47 AM Johannes Ernst <jernst@...> wrote:
Is this conceivably within the scope of Me2BA? (maybe not now / soon but some day?)




Johannes Ernst

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






--
______________________________________________

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.



Johannes Ernst

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





--
______________________________________________


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: Best practice templates for tech governance

Richard Whitt
 

Johannes:

I believe there are a good number of governance templates possible.  My particular area of focus is the governance family of what you could call trust institutions -- fiduciaries, legal trusts, stewards, custodians, certified professions.  These are rooted in the common law, with the express acknowledgement of power asymmetries between individuals and entities, based on significant gaps in expertise and the necessary sharing of sensitive information (think your doctor, your lawyer).  The common law for much of this would impose certain enforceable duties and obligations (care, loyalty, good faith, confidentiality, etc.) as a way to both reduce those power asymmetries, and empower the individual.  Some believe we can place the trust element within our tech (blockchain/distributed ledgers, for example), but I am sceptical that tech alone is the answer.  At the end of the day, we still need an accountable human being in whom to place our trust.

As you suggest, ideally each of those trust institutional models would have its own governance template, and people could pick and choose the one(s) they prefer to adopt (as entities) and deal with (as individuals).  My conception is that we may well end up with multiple kinds of digital trust institutions in our lives -- trustmediaries, information fiduciaries, data trusts, data commons, and so on -- each with a particular purpose.  Messy, most likely, and would bring the friction/costs of intermediaries back into the Web.  But at least it would give people some options.  I'm trying to do my part to flesh out the concept of the trustmediary, for example, and working with folks at Mozilla Foundation and elsewhere to create actual prototypes.

-Richard

On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 10:20 PM Johannes Ernst <jernst@...> wrote:
Do you think it would be fair to say that the trustmediary model is one — or perhaps one family of — templates for governance, in my terminology here?

If somebody wanted to set up a trustmediary, they could use the/a “trustmediary template” from the library and by adhering to that template (which, as part of it, would have monitoring capabilities that confirm the governance is actually being executed as intended) they could communicate to their customers/prospects that they are indeed trustworthy?

(It seems that multiple trustmediaries will probably end up with comparable governance models, …?)


On Jun 17, 2020, at 12:57, Richard Whitt <richard@...> wrote:

Thanks Johannes.  FWIW, I find the concept of templatizing digital governance for the entities themselves (beyond their products and services) germane to the longer term work of the PaLs (Policy and Legal stuff) Working Group.  It may also come up as an option in the current work on our "alt-consent" proposals.

As you know, I'm a fan of the digital trustmediary model, buttressed by various compliance/enforcement mechanisms (professional code of conduct, government procurement requirements, legal safeguards, etc.).  But there are potentially a number of different pathways to creating good governance.

-Richard


On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 11:47 AM Johannes Ernst <jernst@...> wrote:
Is this conceivably within the scope of Me2BA? (maybe not now / soon but some day?)




Johannes Ernst

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






--
______________________________________________

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.



Johannes Ernst

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





--
______________________________________________


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: Best practice templates for tech governance

 

Do you think it would be fair to say that the trustmediary model is one — or perhaps one family of — templates for governance, in my terminology here?

If somebody wanted to set up a trustmediary, they could use the/a “trustmediary template” from the library and by adhering to that template (which, as part of it, would have monitoring capabilities that confirm the governance is actually being executed as intended) they could communicate to their customers/prospects that they are indeed trustworthy?

(It seems that multiple trustmediaries will probably end up with comparable governance models, …?)


On Jun 17, 2020, at 12:57, Richard Whitt <richard@...> wrote:

Thanks Johannes.  FWIW, I find the concept of templatizing digital governance for the entities themselves (beyond their products and services) germane to the longer term work of the PaLs (Policy and Legal stuff) Working Group.  It may also come up as an option in the current work on our "alt-consent" proposals.

As you know, I'm a fan of the digital trustmediary model, buttressed by various compliance/enforcement mechanisms (professional code of conduct, government procurement requirements, legal safeguards, etc.).  But there are potentially a number of different pathways to creating good governance.

-Richard


On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 11:47 AM Johannes Ernst <jernst@...> wrote:
Is this conceivably within the scope of Me2BA? (maybe not now / soon but some day?)




Johannes Ernst

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






--
______________________________________________

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.



Johannes Ernst

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




Data for Black Lives Roundtable Pulse check

Lisa LeVasseur
 


Re: Best practice templates for tech governance

Richard Whitt
 

Thanks Johannes.  FWIW, I find the concept of templatizing digital governance for the entities themselves (beyond their products and services) germane to the longer term work of the PaLs (Policy and Legal stuff) Working Group.  It may also come up as an option in the current work on our "alt-consent" proposals.

As you know, I'm a fan of the digital trustmediary model, buttressed by various compliance/enforcement mechanisms (professional code of conduct, government procurement requirements, legal safeguards, etc.).  But there are potentially a number of different pathways to creating good governance.

-Richard


On Wed, Jun 17, 2020 at 11:47 AM Johannes Ernst <jernst@...> wrote:
Is this conceivably within the scope of Me2BA? (maybe not now / soon but some day?)




Johannes Ernst

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




--
______________________________________________


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.


Best practice templates for tech governance

 

Is this conceivably within the scope of Me2BA? (maybe not now / soon but some day?)




Johannes Ernst

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



FW: Join us for another movement pulse check.

Lisa LeVasseur
 

Hi friends,

 

I am a believer in the work that d4bl is doing—it aligns with both our principles and our work.  Please don’t click on the RSVP link below, as it may be tied to my ID.  Sign up here:   https://us02web.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_IAy2aS--SA6ibOifcUfnbA

 

Lisa

 

From: Yeshimabeit, Data for Black Lives <info@...>
Sent: Friday, June 12, 2020 1:25 PM
To: lisa@...
Subject: Join us for another movement pulse check.

 

View this email in your browser

 

d4bl
data as protest. accountability.
& collective action. 

 

Dear friends, 
 

Like many of you, I have lived my entire life in a police state.

I grew up in communities where incarceration was imminent and law enforcement ubiquitous. Survival meant learning early on that the inherent feature of the law enforcement apparatus was its ability to camouflage, to adapt. To be ever present, always felt, though never fully seen. 
 

The police state was physical in the form of patrol vehicles and traffic stops, but also social, through a culture of policing that had come to impact every aspect of our lives. I loved school, but receiving an education meant navigating the ever present threat of suspensions and arrests, policies that turned our school into sites of crime fighting instead of learning. As a child I learned that to be Black and to be poor was to be a problem, a criminal in the eyes of the world. 

 

RSVP to Join Us on June 17 at 5pm EST for the Data for Black Lives Movement Roundtable


When my grandmother lost her home as a result of a predatory loan, it wasn’t the bank we interacted with, but the police. I learned then that police existed to protect capital, and that behind the most aggressive policing practices were the most brutal inequalities.

Like clockwork officers showed up when the notice to vacate expired, armed and dangerous as they ordered us to leave the property. It was difficult to avoid feelings of despair as we stood and watched them move our meager belongings to the street. It was easy to believe there was no recourse, no accountability, that we had no power over the decisions that impacted our lives. 
 

When I was first introduced to abolition as a youth organizer, it was as if a whole new world had opened up to me. Abolition became the answer - it was about dismantling the structures that once seemed so permanent and powerful, but it was also about creating something totally new. For us, abolition meant doing the important work of changing policy, but most importantly, it was the performance of liberation, the creation of new infrastructures for self-determination, under conditions of duress. For the first time in my life, I felt possibility. Abolition was the framework that turned my despair into hope, and then into action. 
 

The current uprising is about the murders of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor, and all whose lives have been stolen by police violence. But it is also about living for too long under the heavy hand of state violence and political domination that has stolen our agency and our ability to have a say over what happens to us and to our communities. This uprising is about exercising our right to self-determination. 
 

What does it mean for us to practice abolition in this moment -- to demand and build the infrastructure for collective self-determination for Black communities nationwide?

Next Wednesday, June 17th, we will be convening a roundtable of organizers, activists, and practitioners to discuss how we can organize, mobilize and coordinate in this moment and for the long haul. 
 

We invite you to join us for this pulse check, but also to be part of what we are building. I look forward to seeing you on Wednesday. 

The love and care I have for you all is infinite. 
 

Love, 

Yeshi
 

 

 

Data as Protest: Data for Black Lives with Yeshi Milner 

 

How can we claim agency over data systems to fight for racial justice? What is Data for Black Lives? How can you join the movement?

Listen to our Executive Director Yeshimabeit Milner answer these questions and more on the Radical AI podcast. Her episode has the most single day downloads of any episode yet, a testament to the power of our collective work in this moment. 

Available on the Radical AI site and on all platforms. 

 

 

Twitter

Facebook

Website

 

 

Copyright © 2020 Data for Black Lives, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in via our website.

Our mailing address is:

Data for Black Lives

620 Wilson Ave #248

Brooklyn, New York 11207


Add us to your address book



Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list.


Re: Apple crushes one-man repair shop in Norway’s Supreme Court, after three-year battle

Lisa LeVasseur
 

Yes, currently captured in harms dictionary:

 

LICA.3

Disallowing people to modify hardware and software configurations for  purchased hardware and software.

A range of decisions concerning a "free and clear purchased hardware and software" does not exist without a form of penalty.  Acting outside of certain bounds is penalized actively or passively, it is not supported and seen as a hack from Apple's perspective.

The Lock-In is positioned as a protective "feature" of iOS.

Apple states "unauthorized modification of iOS is a violation of the iOS end-user software license agreement and because of this, Apple may deny service for an iPhone, iPad, or iPod touch that has installed any unauthorized software"

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT201954   ([15], 2018)

Value judgement:

Is it worth losing warranty for freedom?

 

 

From: main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io <main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io> On Behalf Of Iain Henderson
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 2:39 PM
To: Me2BAlliance@groups.io
Subject: [Me2BAlliance] Apple crushes one-man repair shop in Norway’s Supreme Court, after three-year battle

 

I think this is an example of a tech company behaviour that our assessment criteria should be calling out.

 

Monopoolistic approaches to repair.

 

Iain



Begin forwarded message:

 

From: Chloé <info@...>

Subject: Apple crushes one-man repair shop in Norway’s Supreme Court, after three-year battle

Date: 8 June 2020 at 16:46:54 BST

Reply-To: info@...

 

We’re reaching out with a heavy heart. 

 

Right to Repair Europe has been supporting Norwegian independent repairer Henrik Huseby in his fight against $1 trillion company Apple. This David vs Goliath match up ended last week when Norway’s Supreme Court ruled in favor of Apple after a 3-year legal battle.

Illustration by John Rowley

 

With this decision, Apple confirms it’s able to weaponize intellectual property law to shut down independent repair. This will not only ultimately raise prices for consumers, if they are forced to choose Apple's far more expensive authorised repairers who have access to new, genuine parts, it’s also bad for the planet, as high prices for repair push consumers to cycle through products faster and faster.

 

 

We will not be discouraged. While this is a considerable setback, we'll keep fighting to prevent other repairers like Huseby having to go through this again and advocate for a universal right to repair for repair professionals but also consumers. 

 

But for this we need you! Here’s what you can do to express your support:

 

  1. Support Huseby’s legal fees if you can on his crowdfunder (the Court stated he owes over 23.000 euros in legal fees to Apple).
  2. If you haven't already signed our petition on smartphones, do it now to demand a universal access to affordable genuine spare parts for all electronics for both repair professionals and consumers.
  3. Donate to the campaign so we can keep on fighting for people like Huseby but also for everyone who wants the Right to Repair.

Meanwhile, in Belgium, our campaign members have launched a national Right to Repair campaign aimed at fighting obsolescence and making products more repairable by targeting policy makers and manufacturers! If you live in Belgium, you can sign the manifesto in French or in Dutch.

Thank you for your support, 

Chloé, on behalf of Right to Repair Europe 

Sent via ActionNetwork.org. To update your email address, change your name or address, or to stop receiving emails from Right to Repair - Europe, please click here.

 

 


Apple crushes one-man repair shop in Norway’s Supreme Court, after three-year battle

Iain Henderson
 

I think this is an example of a tech company behaviour that our assessment criteria should be calling out.

Monopoolistic approaches to repair.

Iain

Begin forwarded message:

From: Chloé <info@...>
Subject: Apple crushes one-man repair shop in Norway’s Supreme Court, after three-year battle
Date: 8 June 2020 at 16:46:54 BST
Reply-To: info@...

We’re reaching out with a heavy heart. 


Right to Repair Europe has been supporting Norwegian independent repairer Henrik Huseby in his fight against $1 trillion company Apple. This David vs Goliath match up ended last week when Norway’s Supreme Court ruled in favor of Apple after a 3-year legal battle.

Illustration by John Rowley


With this decision, Apple confirms it’s able to weaponize intellectual property law to shut down independent repair. This will not only ultimately raise prices for consumers, if they are forced to choose Apple's far more expensive authorised repairers who have access to new, genuine parts, it’s also bad for the planet, as high prices for repair push consumers to cycle through products faster and faster.




We will not be discouraged. While this is a considerable setback, we'll keep fighting to prevent other repairers like Huseby having to go through this again and advocate for a universal right to repair for repair professionals but also consumers. 


But for this we need you! Here’s what you can do to express your support:


  1. Support Huseby’s legal fees if you can on his crowdfunder (the Court stated he owes over 23.000 euros in legal fees to Apple).

  2. If you haven't already signed our petition on smartphones, do it now to demand a universal access to affordable genuine spare parts for all electronics for both repair professionals and consumers.

  3. Donate to the campaign so we can keep on fighting for people like Huseby but also for everyone who wants the Right to Repair.

Meanwhile, in Belgium, our campaign members have launched a national Right to Repair campaign aimed at fighting obsolescence and making products more repairable by targeting policy makers and manufacturers! If you live in Belgium, you can sign the manifesto in French or in Dutch.

Thank you for your support, 

Chloé, on behalf of Right to Repair Europe 

Sent via ActionNetwork.org. To update your email address, change your name or address, or to stop receiving emails from Right to Repair - Europe, please click here.



FW: Tool to help streamline data sharing during and after SARS-COVID 19 pandemic

Lisa LeVasseur
 

This work from Scott et al I think is hugely beneficial in vendor evaluation and qualification.  It’s also a great tool to broach the necessary and deeper conversations [disclosures] that need to be happening in vendor selection.  If you’re a product manager, or involved in vendor selection/procurement, this is an excellent resource.  Also helpful to compare against our test criteria, within the Me2BA.

 

Thanks Scott!

 

Lisa

 

From: Scott David <sldavid@...>
Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2020 4:55 PM
To: Derek O'Halloran <Derek.OHalloran@e.weforum.org>; Thomas Hardjono <hardjono@...>; colin@...; Jamie Clark <Jamie Clark@...>; Duane Blanchard <Duane Blanchard@...>; Eve Maler <eve@...>; Feo, John T <john.feo@...>; Marshall-Johnson, Gina M. <Marshall-Johnson@...>; John Havens <john.havens.us@...>; mary hodder <mary hodder@...>; Joni Brennan <jbrennan@...>; Jack McLaughlin <Jack McLaughlin@...>; John, Anil <John@...>; james.g.hazard@...; John Best <jb@...>; Wolf, Katherine E <Wolf@...>; Mike Simon <Mike Simon@...>; 'nicolas.decordes@...' <nicolas.decordes@...>; Phil Windley <phil@...>; Ruth Puente <Ruth Puente@...>; Ruth Atherton <Ruth.Atherton@...>; Raadhakrishnan Poovendran <rp3@...>; Gilad L. Rosner <Gilad L.Rosner@...>; Tom Muehleisen <rgrmule@...>; Tim Reiniger <tsreiniger@...>; Mihaela Ulieru <Mihaela Ulieru@...>; Urs Gasser <Urs Gasser@...>; Zach Verdin <Zach Verdin@...>; Luk Vervenne <Luk Vervenne@...>; Wolf Yeigh <yeigh@...>; Don Thibeau <don.thibeau@...>; =Drummond Reed <=Drummond Reed@...>; jim kragh <kragh65@...>; Ashley Taylor <Ashley Taylor@...>; Eric Scace <Eric Scace@...>; Lauren Woodman (NH) <lauren.woodman@...>; Maria.Vachino@...; Pradeep Sharma <Pradeep Sharma@...>; Elizabeth Kirby <Elizabeth Kirby@...>; Sunita Tripathy <stripathy@...>; sandy@...; Marcel van Galen <Marcel van Galen@...>; Skip Walter <skip.walter@...>; Yogesh Pai <Yogesh Pai@...>; Edgar, Timothy <timothy_edgar@...>; Bouma, Tim <Bouma@...>; Robin Wilton <Robin Wilton@...>; Lapes, Robert <robert.lapes@...>; Tiell, Steven C. <steven.c.tiell@...>; steve.stein@...; Steve Davis <Steve Davis@...>; ChristopherA@...; Seth Ayers <Seth Ayers@...>; Jay Glasgow <appdreamer@...>; Mike Eisenberg <Mike Eis@...>
Cc: stefaan@...; Andrew Young <andrew@...>; Hayden Dahmm <hayden.dahmm@...>; jessica.espey@...; William Hoffman <william.hoffman@...>; Margarida Saragoça <MS@...>; Inês Antas de Barros <iab@...>; hcm@...; MPC@...; Marta Graça <mgg@...>; Tom Orrell <tom.orrell@...>
Subject: Tool to help streamline data sharing during and after SARS-COVID 19 pandemic

 

Hi folks - My apologies for the interruption.

 

In this email, we have attached a draft tool that you might find immediately useful.  

 

It is a list of suggested questions (in plain English) to consider when reviewing or negotiating a DATA SHARING or DATA USE AGREEMENT in any context - including, most immediately, pandemic response and recovery.  

 

We suggest you keep a copy available as a handy checklist of questions for the next time "data sharing" issues are raised in your organization.

 

For large organizations that enter many data sharing-type arrangements, we suggest that you consider using the tool as an internal mechanism for aligning the data sharing discussions among your various divisions, branches, managers, etc. to minimize the number of different types of data sharing approaches (and legal terms !) with which your organization must comply, and to reduce errors and costs for your organization.

 

That's it.  Please see the attachment for a copy of the tool.

 

Please feel free to share the tool and this email with other data-sharing stakeholders who might find it useful.

 

 

Details and further information follow:

 

The Need:

 

Organizations need help recalibrating their institutional communications, interaction rules, governance and risk management practices to adjust to the "new normal" during and after the pandemic.

 

The Internet dis-intermediated organizational communications and weakened traditional institutional governance.  The SARS-COVID 19 pandemic has exposed the system performance challenges of those many interaction-related disintermediations.

 

Individuals and institutions are scrambling to put in place new relationships, collaborations, supply chains, distribution channels, etc. to provide essential and critical public health services and other commercial, governmental and social services upended by the behavioral constraints necessitated for pandemic response and the many concurrent interaction displacements across the globe.

 

Institutions need simple frameworks for reliable and predictable "re-intermediation" of new sorts of interactions and relationships with new and unfamiliar organizations during this period when relationship networks and supply chains quickly reconfigure for active pandemic response.

 

In the longer term, organizations will also need similar frameworks for organizing and operating in the post-pandemic "new normal" environment where myriad interaction variables (and corresponding new threats and vulnerabilities) emerge from quickly evolving business, operating, legal, technical and social (collectively "BOLTS") considerations.

 

Data Sharing (and Data Access) arrangements are core elements of ALL organizational communications, interactions, governance and risk management decisions.  Data informs all these processes.  Organizations need to restore and evolve high integrity systems to reliably manage these data flows so that they can support trusted interactions.

 

 

Our Approach:

 

The attached tool is an "ice breaker" to help foster efficient and effective data sharing and data use discussions, whether or not a separate and formal legal "data sharing" agreement is entered into.

The tool provides a shared, structured narrative platform for parties to discuss their respective data sharing desires and concerns, and a checklist for leveling the playing field in data access discussions.


The challenges of the SARS-COVID pandemic have disrupted many forms of established organizational communications and institutional governance structures both within and beyond public health-related supply chains.  New supply chains and new outsourcing-dependent organizational structures are scaffolded with unfamiliar communications and untested data sharing arrangements.


The attached tool is intended to facilitate communication and a "meeting of the minds" among parties involved in such new and unfamiliar relationships that involve access to data held by one or more parties.

 

The attached tool can help make the re-intermediation efforts easier and less costly for ALL stakeholders of organizational communications, interactions, governance and risk management.

 

 

Benefits:

 

The attached tool can help you to restore and refit your organization's interaction "plumbing" for the post-pandemic "new normal." 

 

Parties that apply the tool in their negotiations (or as a review checklist) are more likely to identify and resolve important "data sharing/data use" issues, and to avoid misunderstandings with other stakeholders.  

Well-framed questions lead more readily to available solutions. The shared questions are intended to help parties to focus on recognized clusters of data sharing issues, which will help lead them to make choices and select solutions for which examples of practices are more readily available.

 

The attached tool also starts to coax new and novel data sharing discussions in the direction of categories of issues that can more readily be analyzed, addressed, resolved and documented based on existing standard tools used by business managers, lawyers, engineers, risk officers, accountants and other organizational representatives with responsibilities for an organization's data sharing arrangements.  

 

In addition to facilitating inter-organizational interactions, the tool can also help align an organization's internal policy and decision-making apparatus.  Specifically, we crafted the "plain language" questions to allow the issues to be equally understandable to representatives of your organization involved in any of the business, operational, legal, technical and social domains.  Each representative will have their own set of issues that they are assigned to handle for the organization, and their own metrics and language to describe the issues, but all can provide feedback on the questions in the tool that inform data sharing arrangements.  The tool invites compilation of that internal feedback, which can then be synthesized into policy/negotiating positions for your organization.

 

 

The C4DC Project:

This current tool was developed by the C4DC (Contracts for Data Collaboration) consortium which currently includes the organizations listed below. 

 

Our intention in developing this tool is to support a more uniform and complete conversation among parties entering data sharing and other data use agreements.  We hope that this tool will help to improve the reliability and predictability of these simple yet important agreements.

 

Please let any of us know if you have any questions or comments. Our contact information is in the cc line of this email.

 

Also, please let us know if your organization is interested in joining or supporting future C4DC tool development work.

 

On behalf of the C4DC consortium including:

 

University of Washington - 

Information Risk Research Initiative ((IRRI) at the Applied Physics Lab) - 

Scott David

 

NYU (Gov Lab)

Stefaan Verhulst 

Andrew Young

 

UN SDSN 

Hayden Dahmm

Jessica Espey

Tom Orrell

 

World Economic Forum

William Hoffman

 

Viera de Almeida (law firm)

Ines Antas de Barros

Magda Cocco

Margarida Couto

Marta Graca

Helena Correia Mendonca

 

 

Kind regards, 

Scott

 

Scott L. David

 

Executive Director

Information Risk Research Initiative 

University of Washington - Applied Physics Laboratory

 

m- 206-715-0859

Tw - @ScottLDavid

 


Upcoming Event: Me2B Alliance Monthly Call - Mon, 06/01/2020 8:00am-9:00am #cal-reminder

main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io Calendar <main@...>
 

Reminder: Me2B Alliance Monthly Call

When: Monday, 1 June 2020, 8:00am to 9:00am, (GMT-07:00) America/Los Angeles

View Event

Organizer: Megan Bekolay

Description:

Lisa LeVasseur is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
 
Topic: Me2B Alliance
Time: Mar 2, 2020 08:00 AM Pacific Time (US and Canada)
        Every month on the First Mon, until Aug 3, 2020, 6 occurrence(s)
        Mar 2, 2020 08:00 AM
        Apr 6, 2020 08:00 AM
        May 4, 2020 08:00 AM
        Jun 1, 2020 08:00 AM
        Jul 6, 2020 08:00 AM
        Aug 3, 2020 08:00 AM
Please download and import the following iCalendar (.ics) files to your calendar system.
Monthly: https://zoom.us/meeting/vpMoce6qqDkph3jl_ajkRgY0KikqhW7ZHQ/ics?icsToken=98tyKuqvqz0tGNKXs1_Hf6kqE9r8b9_qknkdoK9inRXuMSdqMij_PfNKBeVFOOmB
 
Join Zoom Meeting
https://zoom.us/j/375672623
 
Meeting ID: 375 672 623
 
One tap mobile
+16699006833,,375672623# US (San Jose)
+14086380968,,375672623# US (San Jose)
 
Dial by your location
        +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
        +1 408 638 0968 US (San Jose)
        +1 646 876 9923 US (New York)
Meeting ID: 375 672 623
Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/acUTI5Weo
 


Re: DotEveryone

Jim Pasquale <jim@...>
 

This is a good set of stats to be used in for the webinar series for bth Me-s and B-s



On May 28, 2020, at 5:02 PM, Lisa LeVasseur via groups.io <lisa.levasseur@...> wrote:

Perhaps most importantly, the highlights from their 2020 digital attitudes report identifies key opportunities and research areas for us—particularly relating to the 5th item in the list <image001.png>
 
From: main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io <main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io> On Behalf Of Lisa LeVasseur
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 9:34 AM
To: Me2BAlliance@groups.io
Subject: [Me2BAlliance] DotEveryone
 
A couple weeks ago I posted about the DotEveryone People, Power and Technology: 2020 Digital Attitudes report (https://www.doteveryone.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/PPT-2020_Soft-Copy.pdf) 
 
Today, I learn that they are stopping their work---but their materials will continue to be available.  https://www.doteveryone.org.uk/2020/05/five-years-fighting-for-better-tech-for-everyone/
 
 




Disclaimer

The information contained in this communication from the sender is confidential. It is intended solely for use by the recipient and others authorised to receive it. If you are not the recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or taking action in relation of the contents of this information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have received this email in error, please delete it and advise the sender.

.


Re: DotEveryone

Lisa LeVasseur
 

Perhaps most importantly, the highlights from their 2020 digital attitudes report identifies key opportunities and research areas for us—particularly relating to the 5th item in the list

 

From: main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io <main@Me2BAlliance.groups.io> On Behalf Of Lisa LeVasseur
Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2020 9:34 AM
To: Me2BAlliance@groups.io
Subject: [Me2BAlliance] DotEveryone

 

A couple weeks ago I posted about the DotEveryone People, Power and Technology: 2020 Digital Attitudes report (https://www.doteveryone.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/PPT-2020_Soft-Copy.pdf)

 

Today, I learn that they are stopping their work---but their materials will continue to be available.  https://www.doteveryone.org.uk/2020/05/five-years-fighting-for-better-tech-for-everyone/

 

 


DotEveryone

Lisa LeVasseur
 

A couple weeks ago I posted about the DotEveryone People, Power and Technology: 2020 Digital Attitudes report (https://www.doteveryone.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/PPT-2020_Soft-Copy.pdf)

 

Today, I learn that they are stopping their work---but their materials will continue to be available.  https://www.doteveryone.org.uk/2020/05/five-years-fighting-for-better-tech-for-everyone/

 

 


Re: COVID Data Demands - Data for Black Lives

Kevin Cox
 

Iain,

Here is an outline of how an app can be built to address the "tracing" problem.  It is a single component of the MyData vision and it only concerns itself with location and time. It communicates with the same app on other phones and groups phones so the communication is anonymous.

Kevin


On Fri, 22 May 2020 at 05:24, Iain Henderson <iain.henderson@...> wrote:
Noted thanks Lisa.

Here’s a presentation I gave in the MyData Corona call today. Deep technical details in there, and a bit of a rant up front.

Iain



On 21 May 2020, at 14:18, Lisa LeVasseur <lisa.levasseur@...> wrote:

Hi folks,
 
I know many of us are working on COVID-19 related technology or other efforts.  Please take note of this report by Data For Black Lives---it  captures several presentations from an excellent roundtable event last month. In addition, the report adds on a final section called Covid-19 Data Demands, which is particularly useful—should be factored in as product requirements as appropriate.
 
 
 


Academic style articles on Me2B topics

Iain Henderson
 

We have discussed a couple of times whether there is any academic research on Me2B type approaches.


I don’t think there are too many that directly tackle this space, but I have attached some history that may be of interest.

The two Alan Mitchell books were very good, and introduced the concept of ‘value gaps’; i.e. that which Me’s value but organisations cannot deliver for various structural reasons.

Much of this dialogue bubbled up in London around 2000 where a bunch of us (Alan Mitchell, Liz Brandt, Liz Brown at that stage, myself and others) formed the ‘Buyer Centric Commerce Forum’.

Might be worth skim reading some of these articles.

Cheers

Iain

Alan Mitchell



Maxmin and Zuboff


Henderson, Mitchell and Searls


Scott Galloway (the best of the marketing writers)





Re: COVID Data Demands - Data for Black Lives

Iain Henderson
 

Noted thanks Lisa.

Here’s a presentation I gave in the MyData Corona call today. Deep technical details in there, and a bit of a rant up front.

Iain



On 21 May 2020, at 14:18, Lisa LeVasseur <lisa.levasseur@...> wrote:

Hi folks,
 
I know many of us are working on COVID-19 related technology or other efforts.  Please take note of this report by Data For Black Lives---it  captures several presentations from an excellent roundtable event last month. In addition, the report adds on a final section called Covid-19 Data Demands, which is particularly useful—should be factored in as product requirements as appropriate.
 
 
 


COVID Data Demands - Data for Black Lives

Lisa LeVasseur
 

Hi folks,

 

I know many of us are working on COVID-19 related technology or other efforts.  Please take note of this report by Data For Black Lives---it  captures several presentations from an excellent roundtable event last month. In addition, the report adds on a final section called Covid-19 Data Demands, which is particularly useful—should be factored in as product requirements as appropriate.

 

http://d4bl.org/reports

 

 


Developing a Me-friendly version of a Customer Engagement Model

Lisa LeVasseur
 

Hi friends,

 

The B-s working group is kicking off work this week on a Me-friendly version of the [typically corporate-viewed] customer engagement model.  This work is crucial to create a reconciling and common understanding of:

  • How companies view the overall customer engagement lifecycle, including when the individual is both in, and outside of, a legal Me2B Relationship; and
  • How people view their overall lifecycle with a particular product or service.

 

Another key output from this project will be to paint a clearer vision of what a Me2B friendly lifecycle looks like in the future—and we’ve got a lot of this work already in and around the greater We2B Community.  Assembling the “design fiction” future interaction scenarios into a common framework that both B-s and Me-s understand is an exciting and incredibly valuable tool for the whole community. 

 

Please join Iain and Jim kicking off this activity in the B-s WG tomorrow morning, 9:30am PT:

 

Link (web url)

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81369559665

Description

Topic: Me2B B-s WG

Join Zoom Meeting
https://us02web.zoom.us/j/81369559665<br<br

Meeting ID: 813 6955 9665
One tap mobile
+13126266799,,81369559665# US (Chicago)
+16468769923,,81369559665# US (New York)

Dial by your location
+1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
+1 646 876 9923 US (New York)
+1 301 715 8592 US (Germantown)
+1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)
+1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)
+1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
+1 408 638 0968 US (San Jose)
Meeting ID: 813 6955 9665
Find your local number: https://us02web.zoom.us/u/kxIATGPt5

 

 

Lisa


Browser Privacy work -> Chromium Privacy Sandbox

Lisa LeVasseur
 

Hi friends,

 

Continuing with the browser information as day 2 of the Privacy CG meeting continues.  The Chromium Privacy Sandbox is an interesting and good look at the view from the provider’s side:  https://www.chromium.org/Home/chromium-privacy/privacy-sandbox

 

 

Lisa