Network neutrality has been at the center of intense political discussions about Internet regulation. Net neutrality is the principle that all content on the Internet should be equally available to users without discrimination by service providers. Establishing legal protections for net neutrality is a necessary component to providing equitable access to online educational materials and services.
Cyber Libertarianism - Real Internet Freedom (Thierer & Szoka)Adam Thierer
Adam Thierer & Berin Szoka of The Progress & Freedom Foundation are attempting to articulate the core principles of cyber-libertarianism to provide the public and policymakers with a better understanding of this alternative vision for ordering the affairs of cyberspace. We invite comments and suggestions regarding how we should refine and build-out this outline. We hope this outline serves as the foundation of a book we eventually want to pen defending what we regard as “Real Internet Freedom.”
Network neutrality has been at the center of intense political discussions about Internet regulation. Net neutrality is the principle that all content on the Internet should be equally available to users without discrimination by service providers. Establishing legal protections for net neutrality is a necessary component to providing equitable access to online educational materials and services.
Cyber Libertarianism - Real Internet Freedom (Thierer & Szoka)Adam Thierer
Adam Thierer & Berin Szoka of The Progress & Freedom Foundation are attempting to articulate the core principles of cyber-libertarianism to provide the public and policymakers with a better understanding of this alternative vision for ordering the affairs of cyberspace. We invite comments and suggestions regarding how we should refine and build-out this outline. We hope this outline serves as the foundation of a book we eventually want to pen defending what we regard as “Real Internet Freedom.”
lecture on the politics of net neutrality, to be delivered in Noriko Hara's graduate seminar at Indiana University, School of Library and Information Science, on November 12, 2013
Dr. Alan Borning (University of Washington Computer Science professor emeritus), presents and leads a discussion on the true costs of "free" services such as Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc.
We Know What You Did Last Summer (and Last Night) - ForgeRock Identity Live A...ForgeRock
Stacey Higginbotham - Journalist - As we add the internet to more devices, we're also making more information about ourselves available online. Not necessarily to the public, but to family, marketers, and even law enforcement. What are we sharing? With whom? And what should we do about it?
What every product manager needs to know about online privacyTrevor Fox
This seminar will introduce the issue and describe the potential for new privacy laws in the US and in the EU that could affect the business model of social medial/Web 2.0/mobile app vendors.
Based on extensive data collected from over 2,500 HR managers in 65 countries across the globe, the Michael Page HR Barometer presents important findings from the global HR community.
Actualmente se viven tiempos muy turbulentos donde la esperanza de un mundo mejor queda muy lejano; sin embargo el vivir día a día buscando la santidad haría mejor el mundo para los seres humanos. Aquí se presenta un homenaje a esos modelos de vida que por su ejemplo se puede apreciar que se es posible vivir la caridad y los valores que son esencia de los humanos, y que por ambiciones y falta de fe, se han perdido poco a poco, cayendo en una desesperanza para la vida. Regresemos a la Fe y al reconocer y creerle a Jesucristo, que es la única esperanza para la humanidad dentro de este colapso.
lecture on the politics of net neutrality, to be delivered in Noriko Hara's graduate seminar at Indiana University, School of Library and Information Science, on November 12, 2013
Dr. Alan Borning (University of Washington Computer Science professor emeritus), presents and leads a discussion on the true costs of "free" services such as Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc.
We Know What You Did Last Summer (and Last Night) - ForgeRock Identity Live A...ForgeRock
Stacey Higginbotham - Journalist - As we add the internet to more devices, we're also making more information about ourselves available online. Not necessarily to the public, but to family, marketers, and even law enforcement. What are we sharing? With whom? And what should we do about it?
What every product manager needs to know about online privacyTrevor Fox
This seminar will introduce the issue and describe the potential for new privacy laws in the US and in the EU that could affect the business model of social medial/Web 2.0/mobile app vendors.
Based on extensive data collected from over 2,500 HR managers in 65 countries across the globe, the Michael Page HR Barometer presents important findings from the global HR community.
Actualmente se viven tiempos muy turbulentos donde la esperanza de un mundo mejor queda muy lejano; sin embargo el vivir día a día buscando la santidad haría mejor el mundo para los seres humanos. Aquí se presenta un homenaje a esos modelos de vida que por su ejemplo se puede apreciar que se es posible vivir la caridad y los valores que son esencia de los humanos, y que por ambiciones y falta de fe, se han perdido poco a poco, cayendo en una desesperanza para la vida. Regresemos a la Fe y al reconocer y creerle a Jesucristo, que es la única esperanza para la humanidad dentro de este colapso.
Como o RH se posiciona na linha de frente do crescimento e da transformação dos negócios
Baseado nos extensivos resultados coletados ao redor do mundo, o Barômetro revela mudanças no papel do RH que está se tornando a chave para o crescimento dos negócios e sua evolução em um parceiro estratégico e operacional.
This presentation by Geoffrey A. Manne, Founder & Executive Director of the International Center for Law and Economics was made during the discussion on "Big Data: Bringing competition policy to the digital era" held during the 126th meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 29 November 2016. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at www.oecd.org/daf/competition/big-data-bringing-competition-policy-to-the-digital-era.htm
Not fudging nudges: What Internet law can teach regulatory scholarshipChris Marsden
Paris GIGARTS Prosumer Law: Behavioural or ‘nudge’ regulation has become the flavour of the decade since Thaler and Sunstein’s eponymous monograph. The use of behavioural psychology insights to observe changes in regulated outcomes from the ‘bounded rational’ choices of consumers has been commonplace in Internet regulation since 1998, driven by co-regulatory interactions between governments, companies and users (or ‘prosumers’ as the European Commission terms us). Nudging was so familiar to Internet regulatory scholars in the late 1990s that it came to be termed the leading example of the ‘new Chicago School’ by Lessig (1998), recognising imperfect information, bounded rationality and thus less than optimal user responses to competition remedies, driven by insights from the Internet’s architecture and Microsoft’s dominance of computer platform architecture. Thus recent ‘nudge’ concerns by regulatory scholars and competition lawyers echo 1990s concerns by Internet regulation specialists. It is a mark of Internet regulation’s specialisation in Europe, and mainstream regulation and competition law’s failure to fully absorb the insights of that scholarship, that in 2016 the debate surrounding nudges and privacy affecting competition outcomes has yet to reinvent the 1990s wheel of nudge limitations. Learning their Internet regulatory history can help competition and regulation scholars not repeat the lessons of the 1990s Microsoft case. The competition and regulatory aspect of attempts to direct user and market behaviour are a key empirical perspective for regulatory scholars. The Internet is a network and a real-time laboratory for the distribution and manipulation of information, which is why it is unsurprising that the adaption of that information to affect user behaviour has been a commonplace online throughout the history of the Internet.
TRPC director Dr. John Ure's presented on "Preparing for tomorrow: Regulation in a data-drive connected world" at Session 2: "The changing rules of the game" at the Inaugural ICT Regulators' Leadership Retreat, that took place in Singapore from 18 to 20 March 2015, organized by the Telecommunication Development Bureau (BDT) and the Infocomm Development Authority of Singapore (IDA).
https://digitalguardian.com/blog/social-engineering-attacks-common-techniques-how-prevent-attack
Statement of Michelle Richardson, Director, Privacy & Data
Center for Democracy & Technology
before the
United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary
GDPR & CCPA: Opt-ins, Consumer Control, and the Impact on Competition and Innovation
March 12, 2019
On behalf of the Center for Democracy & Technology (CDT), thank you for the
opportunity to testify about the importance of crafting a federal consumer privacy law that
provides meaningful protections for Americans and clarity for entities of all sizes and sectors.
CDT is a nonpartisan, nonprofit 501(c)(3) charitable organization dedicated to advancing the
rights of the individual in the digital world. CDT is committed to protecting privacy as a
fundamental human and civil right and as a necessity for securing other rights such as access to
justice, equal protection, and freedom of expression. CDT has offices in Washington, D.C., and
Brussels, and has a diverse funding portfolio from foundation grants, corporate donations, and
individual donations.1
The United States should be leading the way in protecting digital civil rights. This hearing
is an opportunity to learn how Congress can improve upon the privacy frameworks offered in
the European Union via the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the California
Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) to craft a comprehensive privacy law that works for the U.S. Our
digital future should be one in which technology supports human rights and human dignity. This
future cannot be realized if people are forced to choose between protecting their personal
information and using the technologies and services that enhance our lives. This future depends
on clear and meaningful rules governing data processing; rules that do not simply provide
1 All donations over $1,000 are disclosed in our annual report and are available online at:
https://cdt.org/financials/.
2
people with notices and check boxes but actually protect them from privacy and security
abuses and data-driven discrimination; protections that cannot be signed away.
Congress should resist the narratives that innovative technologies and strong privacy
protections are fundamentally at odds, and that a privacy law would necessarily cement the
market dominance of a few large companies. Clear and focused privacy rules can help
companies of all sizes gain certainty with respect to appropriate and inappropriate uses of data.
Clear rules will also empower engineers and product managers to design for privacy on the
front end, rather than having to wait for a public privacy scandal to force the rollback of a
product or data practice.
We understand that drafting comprehensive privacy legislation is a complex endeavor.
Over the past year we have worked with partners in civil societ.
IT law : the middle kingdom between east and WestLilian Edwards
Privacy as a value is often as conflicting with and less important than other major societal goals such as nation state secureity and business profits. China as a socialist state emerging a a major digital economuic force may fall prey to both these assumptions. However the recent history in the West shows that over zealous national secueity infringing citizen privacy, as revealed in the recent Snowden PRISM/TEMPORA etc scandals, may backlash against business profits as well as reducing citizen trust in security.China can learn from these lessons as it expands its own privacy law especially in the IT/telecoms area.
“Permissionless Innovation” & the Grand Tech Policy Clash of Visions to ComeMercatus Center
Successful innovation, which is essential to better health, safety and security, requires freedom to experiment and develop. But there is an array of government rules and processes that increasingly prohibit “permissionless” innovation.
Technological innovation is reshaping markets and creating new opportunities for businesses at a faster rate than at any other time in living memory. But to realise the promise of greater economic growth, incumbent businesses, challengers and the policymakers who regulate them need to find a balance that encourages fairness without either stifling entrepreneurialism or compromising the public interest.
Finding this balance has proven difficult for businesses and industry regulators alike.
In order to build greater understanding of the trade-offs at play in ensuring a level playing field, this report explores the specific challenges that regulators face when it comes to disruptors, and explores workable models for increased collaboration between the public and private sectors.
Intermediary Accountability in the Digital AgeRichard Austin
Examination of the accountability of Internet Intermediaries with a focus on Online Reputation, Cambridge Analytica and Facebook and Competition issues
Marsden CELPU 2021 platform law co-regulationChris Marsden
12 November 2021 20th Annual International Conference, Center for Law & Public Utilities, School of Law, Seoul National University: The Wave of Digital Economy and Exploration of the Direction of Online Platform Regulation
Professor Chris Marsden, Sussex Law @SussCIGR
Discussion: Dr Eun-Jung Kwon (KISDI)
These slides by the OECD Competition Division introduce the OECD background note presented during the discussion on "Big Data: Bringing competition policy to the digital era" held during the 126th meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 29 November 2016. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at www.oecd.org/daf/competition/big-data-bringing-competition-policy-to-the-digital-era.htm
The future of regulation: Principles for regulating emerging technologiesDeloitte United States
As emerging technologies drive new business and service models, governments must rapidly create, modify, and enforce regulations. The preeminent issue is how to protect citizens and ensure fair markets while letting innovation and businesses flourish. https://deloi.tt/2NaeMRD
This presentation by Maurice E. Stucke from the Konkurrenz Group was made during the discussion on "Big Data: Bringing competition policy to the digital era" held during the 126th meeting of the OECD Competition Committee on 29 November 2016. More papers and presentations on the topic can be found out at www.oecd.org/daf/competition/big-data-bringing-competition-policy-to-the-digital-era.htm
Oxford Internet Institute 19 Sept 2019: Disinformation – Platform, publisher ...Chris Marsden
With the move to a more digital, mobile, and platform-dominated media environment people increasingly find and access news and information via platforms like search engines and social media. These have empowered citizens in many ways and are important drivers of attention to established publishers but have also enabled the distribution of disinformation from a range of different actors. In a context where citizens are often increasingly sceptical of both platforms, publishers, and public authorities, what do we know about the scale and scope of disinformation problems and what can different actors do to counter the problems we face?
https://www.scl.org/articles/10662-interoperability-an-answer-to-regulating-ai-and-social-media-platforms
Artificial intelligence governance in the Obama & Trump yearsAdam Thierer
This presentation briefly outlines how AI governance was being formulated in the United States from 2009 to 2020 during the presidencies of Barack Obama and Donald Trump. Although these two administrations differed on most policy matters, they shared a common approach to AI governance. Generally speaking, both administrations adopted a “light-touch” regulatory and industrial policy stance toward AI. Although both administrations highlighted potential areas of policy concern—safety and security issues, in particular—promoting the growth of AI sectors and technologies was prioritized over preemptively restricting them. “Soft law” mechanisms were typically tapped before hard law solutions. In this sense, AI policy in the Obama-Trump AI governance approach has been an extension of the governance vision previous administrations applied to the internet and digital commerce.
QUT Regulating Disinformation with AI Marsden 2024Chris Marsden
“It is the ‘AI regulation moment” intoned the Secretary General of both the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) and the United Nations itself, before the UN General Assembly passed a unanimous resolution on AI safety, and the G7 Hiroshima Dialogue of AI codes of conduct moved industrialised nations beyond self-regulation. Academic analysts and policymakers need to challenge a reversion to broken models, to ethics washing and to what is now being termed ‘AI washing’. I set out a critical agenda for remembering lessons from the Internet past to assert an AI co-regulatory future.
Today, I will be presenting on the topic of
"Generative AI, responsible innovation, and the law."
Artificial Intelligence has been making rapid strides in recent years,
and its applications are becoming increasingly diverse.
Generative AI, in particular, has emerged as a promising area of innovation, the potential to create highly realistic and compelling outputs.
Prosumer Law and Networked Platform Regulation: The Long View
Platform regulation has become the cause of technology regulation: a call to regulate the intermediaries who provide platforms for networked digital services. These include the GAFA giants: Google, Amazon, Facebook and Apple. Many policy entrepreneurs are peddling solutions as the policy cycle turns, in a classic Kingdon case of ‘solutions chasing a problem’. Yet networks are not new, and their platforms have been regulated for hundreds of years. In this paper, I take the long view, focussing on common carriage neutrality and the railways/telegraphy regulation of the 1840s in England. I offer some historical examples that may be highly relevant to ‘prosumer’ digital capitalism 180 years later.
Any Internet user who has posted content, from Facebook to Twitter to blog posts to podcasts, has become a prosumer – though there are very broad categories, ranging from the occasional tweeter to the fully developed hacker. Over two billion people now use Google to search for content, Facebook, Instagram and WhatsApp to share news, gossip and photos, YouTube to watch and upload videos, and Twitter/Snap and other sites to say just about anything. We are all becoming ‘prosumers’ sharing intimate details of our personal lives. But this ‘prosumer environment’ is currently either grossly unregulated, leaving users' data and content at the mercy of the multinationals who host it and sometimes claim to own it, or subject to knee-jerk over-regulation as with the current ‘fake news’ controversy in Germany. It is a new regulatory policy cycle in network regulation.
Regulatory responses are finally emerging, driven by both data protection and competition concerns, yet the over-arching need to ensure greater neutrality of intermediaries has largely been limited to last mile monopolists and mobile oligopolists: the legacy telecommunications companies who provide Internet access. What is needed is a comprehensive Prosumer Law solution that draws on fundamental human rights to privacy and free expression, competition, and technology regulation to ensure a fair and neutral deal for prosumers and citizens.
June 3, 2024 Anti-Semitism Letter Sent to MIT President Kornbluth and MIT Cor...Levi Shapiro
Letter from the Congress of the United States regarding Anti-Semitism sent June 3rd to MIT President Sally Kornbluth, MIT Corp Chair, Mark Gorenberg
Dear Dr. Kornbluth and Mr. Gorenberg,
The US House of Representatives is deeply concerned by ongoing and pervasive acts of antisemitic
harassment and intimidation at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). Failing to act decisively to ensure a safe learning environment for all students would be a grave dereliction of your responsibilities as President of MIT and Chair of the MIT Corporation.
This Congress will not stand idly by and allow an environment hostile to Jewish students to persist. The House believes that your institution is in violation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, and the inability or
unwillingness to rectify this violation through action requires accountability.
Postsecondary education is a unique opportunity for students to learn and have their ideas and beliefs challenged. However, universities receiving hundreds of millions of federal funds annually have denied
students that opportunity and have been hijacked to become venues for the promotion of terrorism, antisemitic harassment and intimidation, unlawful encampments, and in some cases, assaults and riots.
The House of Representatives will not countenance the use of federal funds to indoctrinate students into hateful, antisemitic, anti-American supporters of terrorism. Investigations into campus antisemitism by the Committee on Education and the Workforce and the Committee on Ways and Means have been expanded into a Congress-wide probe across all relevant jurisdictions to address this national crisis. The undersigned Committees will conduct oversight into the use of federal funds at MIT and its learning environment under authorities granted to each Committee.
• The Committee on Education and the Workforce has been investigating your institution since December 7, 2023. The Committee has broad jurisdiction over postsecondary education, including its compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, campus safety concerns over disruptions to the learning environment, and the awarding of federal student aid under the Higher Education Act.
• The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is investigating the sources of funding and other support flowing to groups espousing pro-Hamas propaganda and engaged in antisemitic harassment and intimidation of students. The Committee on Oversight and Accountability is the principal oversight committee of the US House of Representatives and has broad authority to investigate “any matter” at “any time” under House Rule X.
• The Committee on Ways and Means has been investigating several universities since November 15, 2023, when the Committee held a hearing entitled From Ivory Towers to Dark Corners: Investigating the Nexus Between Antisemitism, Tax-Exempt Universities, and Terror Financing. The Committee followed the hearing with letters to those institutions on January 10, 202
Macroeconomics- Movie Location
This will be used as part of your Personal Professional Portfolio once graded.
Objective:
Prepare a presentation or a paper using research, basic comparative analysis, data organization and application of economic information. You will make an informed assessment of an economic climate outside of the United States to accomplish an entertainment industry objective.
Normal Labour/ Stages of Labour/ Mechanism of LabourWasim Ak
Normal labor is also termed spontaneous labor, defined as the natural physiological process through which the fetus, placenta, and membranes are expelled from the uterus through the birth canal at term (37 to 42 weeks
Embracing GenAI - A Strategic ImperativePeter Windle
Artificial Intelligence (AI) technologies such as Generative AI, Image Generators and Large Language Models have had a dramatic impact on teaching, learning and assessment over the past 18 months. The most immediate threat AI posed was to Academic Integrity with Higher Education Institutes (HEIs) focusing their efforts on combating the use of GenAI in assessment. Guidelines were developed for staff and students, policies put in place too. Innovative educators have forged paths in the use of Generative AI for teaching, learning and assessments leading to pockets of transformation springing up across HEIs, often with little or no top-down guidance, support or direction.
This Gasta posits a strategic approach to integrating AI into HEIs to prepare staff, students and the curriculum for an evolving world and workplace. We will highlight the advantages of working with these technologies beyond the realm of teaching, learning and assessment by considering prompt engineering skills, industry impact, curriculum changes, and the need for staff upskilling. In contrast, not engaging strategically with Generative AI poses risks, including falling behind peers, missed opportunities and failing to ensure our graduates remain employable. The rapid evolution of AI technologies necessitates a proactive and strategic approach if we are to remain relevant.
Francesca Gottschalk - How can education support child empowerment.pptxEduSkills OECD
Francesca Gottschalk from the OECD’s Centre for Educational Research and Innovation presents at the Ask an Expert Webinar: How can education support child empowerment?
How to Make a Field invisible in Odoo 17Celine George
It is possible to hide or invisible some fields in odoo. Commonly using “invisible” attribute in the field definition to invisible the fields. This slide will show how to make a field invisible in odoo 17.
2. ‘Governments of the Industrial
World, you weary giants of
flesh and steel, I come from
Cyberspace, the new home of
the Mind. On behalf of the
future, I ask you of the past to
leave us alone. You are not
welcome among us. You have
John Perry Barlow
no sovereignty where we A Declaration of the
gather.’ Independence of Cyberspace
(1996)
response to CDA 1996
(partly struck down in Reno v. ACLU 1997)
3. Regulation and governance
Internet use now ubiquitous
◦ but governments, legislators and regulatory
agencies falling further behind rapidly
changing Internet technologies and uses
Critical analysis of regulatory shaping of
―code‖ or technological environment
◦ ‗Code is law‘ and coders operate within
normative framework
◦ More economically efficient and socially just
regulation
◦ Critical socio-technical and socio-legal
approach
4. Test the existing ‗received truths‘
1. Self-regulation and minimal state involvement
is most efficient in dynamic innovative
industries;
◦ technology is never neutral in societal impact
◦ network and scale effects drive massive
concentration
2. Self-regulation critically lacks constitutional
checks and balances for the private citizen,
including appeal
3. Multi-stakeholder co-regulation chance to
reconcile the market failures and constitutional
legitimacy failures in self-regulation
◦ voters will not allow governments to ignore the
Internet.
5. Empirical investigation
Five case studies and one ‗prior art‘
(encryption, anonymity, security)
◦ Multi-year empirical investigation
◦ Builds on various EC/other studies including
‗Self-regulation.info‘ (2001-4), ‗Co-regulation‘ (2006-8),
‗Towards a Future Internet‘ (2008-10), ‗Privacy Value
Networks‘ (2008-11), ‗Network neutrality‘ (2007-10)
‗Internet science‘ (2012-15)
Reassesses prior art in view of ‗hard cases‘
◦ Topics with no organised regulation/self-regulation
◦ Due to lack of consensus over solutions
◦ Clash between market outcomes and human
rights
6. Literature
Previous legal focus on elephant‘s trunk?
◦ Benkler, Wu, Lessig, Zittrain, Van Schewick
◦ General US scepticism of government action
◦ Leaves only bottom-up Wiki-panacea
Ohm‘s Myth of the Super-User
More empirical view:
◦ Mueller (2010), De Nardis (2009)
◦ Institutional economics and political science
7. Governance and Law
How suitable is our current system?
◦ Is it fit for 21st century?
Open data, open code, and human rights
Blizzard of Internet governance principles 2011
◦ Law/economics, or human rights, do not
translate
Urgent task: dialogue between discrete expert
fields
◦ ICT growth driver and transformative technology
◦ transformative role in communication
‗arms trade‘ in censorship technology;
Twitter ‗revolution‘ (sic)
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. Penguin and Leviathan?
Is the West (and East) already won?
◦ A billion Facebook users
◦ A billion Weibo users
Are we oil in the digital economy?
◦ Crushed under the elephants‘ feet?
Or silkworms unaware of our ‗owner‘s‘
◦ mingling of our silk into
their commercial tapestry?
10.
11. Case studies
1. Data protection in Social Networks
◦ Enforcement failures, Privacy by Design
◦ Dominance, network effects, corporate
social irresponsibility
2. Search Neutrality
◦ Net neutrality argument
◦ Code-based solution to competition
problem
◦ Prosumer focus cf. Microsoft
12. Approach embraces complexity
No easy examples that demonstrate 'truth' of
◦ technical, political, legal or economic solutions
◦ based on self-, co- or state regulatory approaches.
◦ Cf. Mansell (2012) Imagining the Internet
Examine the deficiencies and benefits
◦ Match market and social developments
◦ With human rights concerns
◦ E.g. In fields of privacy and freedom of expression
Note: analysis based on Art.19 UDHR not 1st Amendment
Most of world uses variants of Article 19
13. Government and market failure
Industry capture of regulators & legislators
Incumbents introduce new barriers to entry
Continued exclusion of wider civil society
◦ tenuous chain of accountability of participants
◦ to voters, shareholders and NGO stakeholders.
◦ effectiveness, accountability and legitimacy of
these groups in representing the public interest?
14. Towards interoperability as
prosumer law
Solution for prosumers & competition
◦ enhance competitive production of public
goods
◦ including innovation, public safety, and
fundamental democratic rights
Key aspect: interoperability (incl.
FRAND)
◦ (Note: this is detailed software
interoperability, not the general description
offered by Gasser/Palfrey 2012)
15. What regulation teaches about
code
Ex ante + ex post intervention
Interoperability
◦ Procurement policy + regulation/competition
A biased policy towards open code –
◦ Data open to mash-ups (government)
◦ Systems interoperable (procurement)
◦ Use of alternatives to market leader (e.g.
Linux)
Via competition remedies and sponsorship
16. Information regulation precedent
Must-carry/must-offer obligations,
◦ imposed on many market actors,
◦ including obliged to offer FRAND terms
(common carriers, broadband access providers, cable
broadcasters, electronic program guides);
Interconnection requirements on telcos,
◦ especially those with dominance—
◦ And AOL/Time Warner merger requirement for
instant messaging interoperability
Application programming interfaces (API)
disclosure requirements,
◦ placed on Microsoft by EC upheld by ECJ
17. Google: competition investigation
both sides of Atlantic since 2010
settled with US authorities 3 Jan 2013
settlement proposal to EC 1 Feb 2013
Experts have severely criticized both
◦ the timing and content of FTC settlement
◦ extremely favourable to Google
◦ composition of the outgoing FTC board,
◦ decision not to proceed on main issues
18. 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.‖
19. 4 lines of complaint
Search bias: Google favours own products over competitors in results
Vertical Search Opt-Out –
◦ Google don‘t let websites opt out of particular uses of pages it indexes.
◦ complete opt-out giving up all Google traffic, a significant driver of traffic –
◦ especially Europe: Google has 90% search market in UK, Nl, France, Germany
Restricted 3rd party use of AdWords:
◦ ―API Client may not [function] copies data between Google and 3rd Party.‖
◦ Companies can advertise on Google and Bing,
◦ but cannot use a program to copy Google AdWords campaigns over to Bing.
◦ dropped by Google as token interoperability sop to FTC‘s investigation;
Injunctions against standards-essential patents,
◦ including those by Google-acquired Motorola Mobility
see Posner‘s now–famous judgment in June 2012
◦ FTC concluded (4-1) unfair competition, Google agreed not to engage in it
◦ fires a shot not just at Google, but also at rivals –clever concession by Google!
20. Google and competitors routinely
privately regulate other‘s code
points 3 and 4,
Google claimed the right to regulate
others‘ use of code,
to use the AdWords API or
to use Motorola Mobility‘s patents..
21. ―Prosumer law‖ approach
interoperability and content neutrality
1. Google to reinforce search neutrality
1. NOT bias results with search algorithms
2. relatively trivial (by Google
standards) amendment to its code
1. allow websites more flexibility in listing,
2. rather than complete opt-out via the
existing robots.txt convention.
22. We do not make strong
normative claim that Google
should adopt neutral perspective
◦ (nor do we adopt approach to net neutrality),
We advocate truth-in-advertising
Any search engine (or ISP using search)
◦ claiming verifiably neutral results
◦ produce the same
23. Or prominently advertise its product as
1. commercially driven,
2. affiliate-biased
3. selective search engine.
24. Search neutrality: Internet search
engine provide search results
that correspond to its mission
to search the Internet for relevant products,
with any ‗promoted‘ products advertised as such
◦ separated from search results requested by the user.
this is exactly the solution that leading search
engines claim to provide,
‗sponsored links‘ separate from overall results
◦ in either a side-bar or more intrusive text box above
the main results.
◦ That would not prevent linking to an affiliated maps
provider, or shopping engine,
◦ as long as these links are not in the main results.
25. Requirement does not impose
significant regulatory burden
reinforces the brands of search providers
of integrity.
would not apply to selective search
providers if labelled such
‗a search engine which selectively
provides you with search results
according in part to its commercial
affiliations‘
◦ (or equivalent wording)
prominently displayed above search
results in that case.
26. Code-based solutions lighter than
€1b fines or structural separation
In book, we suggest similar approach
◦ to network neutrality violators
could not advertise their services as
allowing end-users‘ choice
◦ in accessing the ‗Internet‘
when in fact it is a commercial Intranet
◦ to which full access is provided.
27. Social networks: US solutions
instead of EU non-enforcement
Facebook‘s 400m European users
27 national regulators of personal data.
Facebook chose regulator relocated in 2006
◦ from Dublin to Portarlington, Co. Laois, Ireland,
◦ Google is also regulated from Portarlington.
While German state and federal regulators
and others may rattle sabres at Facebook,
Irish regulator audited Facebook spring 2012
insisting on remedial action on nine counts
28. Prosumer law: direct intervention
Abusive dominant social networking sites
prevent Facebook, Google+ any other
◦ from erecting a fence around its piece of the
information commons:
◦ ensure interoperability with open standards
Which lowers entry barriers (in theory!)
Enforcement of privacy law even in Portarlington
29. 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.
Ability for prosumers to interoperate to
permit exit
◦ Lower entry barriers tend to lead to increased
consumer welfare
30. US FTC constant audit
Class actions:
2011 $8.5m Google Buzz.
Jan 2013, Facebook $20m
Nov 2012, FTC Google settled for $22.5m
◦ tracking cookies for Safari browser users
2012, both agreed to settle privacy complaints
◦ FTC privacy audit of products for a 20-year period.
◦ That‘s until 2032!
Sector-specific regulation of social networking
already exists de facto in the United States,
Europeans wring their hands on the sidelines.
◦ proposed new European Regulation
◦ unlikely to be implemented before 2016.
31. Euro-Interoperability Framework
Response to multi-€bn competition
cases:
◦ Microsoft saga (to 2009), Intel (2009), Apple
(2010), Rambus (2009)
◦ Google (2013?) perhaps Facebook....
◦ Coates (2011: Chapters 5-6)
Announced by DG Comp (CONNECT)
Commissioner Kroes 2009-2010
Bias in favour of interoperability in policy
Concerns are broader than competition
◦ Include privacy, IPR, security, fundamental
rights
32. Developing study of code
regulation
Similarities and cross-over with
◦ complexity science
◦ network science
◦ web science/graph theory
Match Internet regulation to complexity theory
Longstaff (2003), Cherry (2008), Schneider/Bauer (2007)
Network science fusion of scientific/fundamental
elements from various components
Internet Science? EC Network of Excellence
33. Kroes‘ promise post-Microsoft
Will ―seriously explore all options to
ensure that significant market players
cannot just choose to deny
interoperability.
―The Commission should not need to
run an epic antitrust case every time
software lacks interoperability.‖
34. Questions?
Book published 22
March 2013
‗Prosumer law‘ article
(early version now on
SSRN)
Comments welcome