Re: personal data policy

On 7/9/14 10:52 AM, Tim Holborn wrote:
>>>> Government is only useful (re., construction and evolution of 
>>>> relevant laws) when they properly understand privacy in the digital 
>>>> realm.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think the laws exist. it’s about the implicit agreements made, and 
>>> the ‘catch-up’ needed for an LDP enabled world.  ATM; we’ve got 
>>> institutional fragmentation of identity related data.  If that’s 
>>> pulled into data-spaces, I think we need to be more explicit about 
>>> the use-cases we’re entering into, in relation to that data.
>>>
>>> Given the scope, i figured W3C community group might be a good 
>>> conduit; given the broad scope of engagement and perhaps also - 
>>> community groups located in local territories that might in-turn 
>>> assist in supporting local requirements, etc.  Yet, i’m not 
>>> particularly sure.  I know it’s relationship to RDF (especially) 
>>> whilst understanding the broader potential implications…
>>>
>>> Speaking with GOV. Rep. today - it seems he feels it’s not his role 
>>> to provide leadership in this area, which was disappointing, but 
>>> accepted.  Other groups provided enormously positive feedback - so, 
>>> i’m reflecting that back to the community in seeking to define some 
>>> next steps...
>>
>> If we map privacy in the real-world (sorta understood by politicians) 
>> to its equivalent in the digital realm (sorta understood by 
>> technologists) we will end up with what we need. Getting there, is 
>> the challenge as there are too many points of confusion (right now) 
>> impeding this desperately needed progress.
>>
>> Note, when I refer to "RDF" is am actually referring to a language 
>> rather than any specific notation used to inscribe data 
>> representation to documents. Unfortunately, specific notations 
>> orientation of most RDF specs is still a source of confusion and 
>> conflict :(
>>
>> We need to get the folks to perceive RDF as a Language for 
>> representing the nature and manifestation or entity relationships, 
>> using a variety of notations. Once that's out of the way, folks will 
>> start thinking more about the implications of entity relations 
>> semantics (which underlie everything) first, instead of thinking (as 
>> is often the case) first about who or how they are going to write a 
>> parser for a specific specific RDF notation (or which there are many: 
>> Plain Old Semantic HTML [POSH], "Link:" in HTTP, and the other usual 
>> suspects i.e., N-Triples, Turtle, RDFa, JSON-LD, Microdata etc..) .
>>
>
> The function provided by Creative Commons isn’t simply about 
> compliance or enforcement - it’s more about the agreement.  The fact 
> that someone who created something can assert a form of rights to it, 
> and seek that others respect that decision in relation to their 
> ‘stuff’.  Obviously data relating to a person is different to 
> traditional forms of content; and even within the greeny-grey, and 
> quite opaque sphere of the two fields - the use of ‘metadata’, 
> definitions of what is content and what is data - is often conveyed in 
> an array of different means and definitions.
>
> If the supplier of this data/content/metadata/identifier data/identity 
> data/sensor-data (etc) sought to assert a license-principle - then 
> overtime, even if it’s simply wordpress users deploying it to begin 
> with, i think, much like Creative Commons, it would slowly gain 
> acceptance.  once something like a cc license is inserted into a 
> table, in relation to data - the data can obviously be filtered in 
> relation to that field.. therein also, if/when compliance requirements 
> change, the cost of maintaining compliance might go down - or 
> moreover, customer relationships become enhanced - another means to 
> reduce unwanted traffic - a really sophisticated ‘web-sticker’ that 
> basically extends that concept of ‘no junk mail please’ to the era of 
> semantic web...
>
> I agree re: RDF.  the semantics of TTL, Semantic Web, JSON-LD and all 
> the other variants describing a similar function - well…  W3C 
> Standards orientated is the most important factor for me.  No point 
> breaking down SNS’s by creating a better, bigger, more uncontrollable 
> data funnel.  At least data is institutionally fragmented in its 
> current SNS structures; yet, i still think we can do better :)

You can use a CC license to describe rights. You can even check to see 
that your license terms are being honored via Linked Data -- basically 
follow-your-nose via HTTP logs to where you data might be in use etc..

-- 
Regards,

Kingsley Idehen	
Founder & CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com
Personal Weblog 1: http://kidehen.blogspot.com
Personal Weblog 2: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen
Twitter Profile: https://twitter.com/kidehen
Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/+KingsleyIdehen/about
LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Personal WebID: http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this