W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-egov-ig@w3.org > December 2008

RE: position paper: Social Media in eGovernment

From: Sheridan, John <John.Sheridan@nationalarchives.gov.uk>
Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 12:38:05 -0000
Message-ID: <88A6AFA61447AC4AB9F280FC6747F90811572FAC@na-exch1.in.tna.local>
To: "eGov IG" <public-egov-ig@w3.org>


Thanks for your comments - and yes we should absolutely debate these questions - which are designedly provocative, and aim to put the issues into an e-Government context.

There was one part I do have a little trouble with:

> With reference to the first question, I would make a plea for use of the
> word "stewardship" rather than "ownership" -- at least as far as public
> information is concerned.  (The notion that someone ... anyone ... could
> "own" a social network is also anathema to me.)  See the section entitled
> "Culture" at the bottom of page 10 (PDF page 16) of the document at
> http://www.defenselink.mil/cio-nii/docs/InfoSharingStrategy.pdf -- whose
> four enumerated goals are available in StratML format at
> http://xml.gov/stratml/DoDISS.xml 

To my mind, we can't just pretend that copyright and other intellectual property rights don't exist - there absolutely is *ownership* in social networks, with the nature of that ownership depending on their terms of use (e.g. many services allow me to retain ownership of *my* data, but grant extensive permission to the service provider).

We may like to live in a world of stewardship, but we actually live in a world of ownership - of intellectual property rights, copyright, and (in Europe) database rights. It is precisely because these networks have such value, that we should discuss who owns them - and ownership is absolutely the right word to use - because ownership inescapably exists and is important.

A rhetorical question: is there a major social networking service that doesn't address intellectual property rights, one way or another, in their terms of use?

That social networks are owned (somehow), is a fact. That they are (or should be) stewarded, is a point of view (and not necessarily one I disagree with by the way!).

If you like, "stewardship" is an answer to the "ownership" question.


-----Original Message-----
From: public-egov-ig-request@w3.org [mailto:public-egov-ig-request@w3.org]
On Behalf Of Jose M. Alonso
Sent: Wednesday, December 03, 2008 6:03 PM
To: eGov IG
Cc: John Sheridan; Kevin Novak
Subject: position paper: Social Media in eGovernment

Dear Group participants,

As discussed at the F2F, John drafted a position paper for the  
upcoming W3C workshop on the Future of Social Networking [1] that  
Kevin and I reviewed.

Paper is available at [2] and has just been sent to the programme  
committee. I'm very sorry that due to time constraints we were not  
able to share it with the Group ahead of time to get more comments  
from you. We'll update the Group at a future call or by email once we  
get more information from the PC.

This closes ACTION-30.


[1] http://www.w3.org/2008/09/msnws/
[2] http://www.w3.org/2008/12/egov-social-ws

Jose M. Alonso <josema@w3.org>    W3C/CTIC
eGovernment Lead                  http://www.w3.org/2007/eGov/

This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System.
For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email 

Please don't print this e-mail unless you really need to.
National Archives Disclaimer

This email message (and attachments) may contain information that is confidential  to The National Archives.  If you are not the intended recipient you cannot use, distribute or copy the message or attachments.  In such a case, please notify the sender by return email immediately and erase all copies of the message and attachments.  Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message and attachments that do not relate to the official business of The National Archives are neither given nor endorsed by it.
Received on Thursday, 4 December 2008 12:40:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:00:39 UTC