Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Privacy, prosumer law & competition workshop, 2 June EDPS

1,011 views

Published on

Published in: Government & Nonprofit
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Privacy, prosumer law & competition workshop, 2 June EDPS

  1. 1. WORKSHOP ON PRIVACY CONSUMERS, COMPETITION AND BIG DATA EDPS/EPARL 2 JUNE 2014 Professor Chris Marsden, University of Sussex Thematic discussion 3: How to encourage a market for privacy-enhancing services
  2. 2. Quinn Norton: Everything Is Broken  “Facebook and Google seem very powerful,  but they live about a week from total ruin all the time.  They know the cost of leaving social networks individually is high, but en masse, becomes next to nothing.  Windows could be replaced with something better written.  Corporations and governments would rather bend to demands than die.  These entities do everything they can get away with—but we’ve forgotten that we’re the ones that are letting them get away with things.”  https://medium.com/message/81e5f33a24e1
  3. 3. Regulating Privacy  Much of what I am going to say is taken from my book with Oxford’s Ian Brown:  (2013) Regulating Code, MIT Press  See Ian Brown (2012) Privacy attitudes, incentives and behaviours  https://www.slideshare.net/blogzilla/privacy- attitudes-incentives-and-behaviours"
  4. 4. Conclusion: more privacy regulation  Social networks already regulate user privacy  Dominant and arguably irreplicable advantages  They dictate which code can be used  Widespread regulation of social networking  Including in US – Federal Trade Commission 1. European Court cases –data retention and deletion 2. European Parliament pressure post-Snowden 3. NRA decisions on cloud, Streetview and others  New European Data Protection Regulation?
  5. 5. Social networks: US solutions instead of EU non-enforcement  Facebook’s 400m European users  28 national regulators of personal data.  Facebook regulator relocated in 2006  from Dublin to Portarlington, Co. Laois  Google is also regulated from Portarlington.  Ireland on edge of bankruptcy in 2009-13
  6. 6. Ireland unsinkable aircraft carrier?  While German state and federal regulators and others may rattle sabres at Facebook,  Irish regulator audited Facebook 2012  insisting on remedial action on nine counts
  7. 7. 50 ways to leave Facebook  Not sufficient to permit data deletion  as that only covers the user’s tracks.  Interconnection and interoperability,  more than transparency and  theoretical possibility to switch.  Prosumers to interoperate to permit exit  Lower entry barriers lead to increased consumer welfare
  8. 8. Prosumers not super-users  Web 2.0 and related tools make for active users, not passive consumers  US administrative & academic arguments  self-regulation may work for geeks,  but what about the other 99%?  European regulatory space  more fertile ground to explore prosumerism  as both a market-based and  citizen-oriented regulatory tool
  9. 9. We are silk worms not oil
  10. 10. Personal data is NOT metaphorical oil in digital economy  unless bodies have seeped into the sediment.  Personal data accumulate with our journey into cyberspace  Better metaphor is silk,  woven into tapestry of online personality.  Potential to move beyond a caterpillar-like role as a producer of raw silk  Ability to regenerate into a butterfly or moth?
  11. 11. Silkworms that turned  Weaving of a web by billions of prosumer-created sites.  Silk created tapestries Wikipedia, Facebook and MySpace  Arguably loss of ownership led MySpace decline.  Prosumer boycott led by those preferring control of own data  cocooned in their own personal form: chrysalis or pupae  Such boycotts rapidly create a landscape of zombie users:  ancient Hotmail and MySpace accounts that are undead, unchecked, unmourned, useless to advertisers, and  antithetical to network effects that feed a successful business.
  12. 12. Facebook bought WhatsApp: $18b  Why? WhatsApp is free  500m users  50bilion daily messages  Facebook IM client specific to mobile 1. So why are FBK buying WhatsApp? 2. Is there a market for free messages? 3. Is Facebook a monopoly?  Answers: No, No, No – say “experts”  Who owns the experts?
  13. 13. Valuation is right
  14. 14. €1trillion research question  Why do social networks decline? MySpace/Bebo/Orkut/Friends Reunited  Is the visceral nature of offline social networking responsible for success online  dating sites approximate strong human contact better: Facebook, Tindr – Twitter?  Or bad code, European data protection  and a more ‘aspirational’ demographic  Facebook v. MySpace/Bebo
  15. 15.  Experts have severely criticized timing and content of FTC settlement  Competition investigation:  proposal to EC Feb 2013  Immediately rejected by competitors Google FTC and EC cases Source: Google proposal leaked to SearchEngineLand, 25/4/13
  16. 16. Settled with US FTC 3/1/2013  Grimmelman argued: • “If the final FTC statement had been any more favourable to Google • I’d be checking the file metadata • to see whether Google wrote it.”
  17. 17. Internet Science: evidence-based policy  Until we have empirical evidence  how personal data control affects social networking business models  We are arguing from old economic models that we know to be inappropriate  New tools and methods need developing:  Neuro-scientists and evolutionary economists  http://www.internet-science.eu/jra6-official-workshop
  18. 18. Developing study of code regulation  Similarities and cross-over with complexity science network science web science/graph theory  EC Network of Excellence on Internet Science
  19. 19. More information  @ChrisTMarsden  www.regulatingcode.blogspot.com  http://internetsussex.blogspot.co.uk/  http://www.internet-science.eu/

×