Tassilo Pellegrini

EU Parliament backs the rights of internet users

For the past several months the EU Commission and the EU Parliament were struggling over the so called “Telecom Package“, a legislative initiative promoted by the Commission under heavy advocacy of France. In a nutshell the Telecom Package contains a very problematic passage, which is meant to strengthen the rights of ISPs in being able to cut off the internet access of individual users, if any violations of existing or future copyright law were detected. In other words: ISPs would be able to control who gets access to the internet, violating the universal service doctrine, which is a basic cornerstone of democracy.

In their first reading on September 24, 2008 the European Prarliament voted against the the “Telecom Package” advocating the so called “Bono Amendment” – which refers to the French Socialist MEP Guy Bono – which basically states that that courts need to be involved in any disconnection procedure. In the original passage, quoted in a recent EU Observer article, it says:

No restriction may be imposed on the rights and freedoms of end users … without a prior ruling by the judicial authorities.”

This decision has some relevant implications for any future developments of the internet. While the telcos and the media companies are struggling hard to adapt to the social logic the internet, searching for new business models and lobbying for regulation in their favour, it is obvious that the existing abundance and innovativeness of the internet is hardly compatible with their notion of making money on the web – basically by restricting access and promoting artificial scarcity.

It also is relevant to developments like Linking Open Data, as in an increasingly interconnected and mashupped world it is getting harder and harder to comply with strict and rigid copy- & usage rights policies – even if they are published under any sort of commons license. In this respect it is important to mention that research on judicial problems arising from the automated processing of content released under differing commons licenses is still missing (as far as I know – does anybody have a hint for me?). But with the current decision of the European Parliament we can observe a very promising shift in the notion that the internet is made up of much more than its commercial exploitability. And that any attempt to stiffle this notion by imposing unbalanced regulatory restrictions on the rights of the users is a major threat not just to the internet as it exists but to democracy itself.

In this respect enjoy a great talk of Lawrence Lessig on this topic.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Tassilo Pellegrini

EU Commission started a Consultation on the Internet of Things aka Web 3.0

A few days ago I wrote about the the EU Commission’s definition of Web 3.0. Now they started a consultation on that topic.

To be precise it is about “early challenges regarding the Internet of Things”.

And it will focus on

architectures, control of critical infrastructures, emerging applications, security, privacy and data protection, spectrum management, regulations and standards, broader socio-economic aspects.

Contributions can be sent to infso-iot-europe@ec.europa.eu by 28th November 2008.

Take your chance! Visit their consultation site.

Author: Tassilo Pellegrini

Jana Herwig

Ken North: EU privacy laws are thought-leading

Ken North, LinkedData PlanetIn a recent interview just published on our web site, Ken North (from the LinkedData Planet conference faculty) suggested that EU privacy laws can be a guiding light in the process of modelling privacy regulations for the web of data:

Many members of the emergent Linked Data and Open Data developer communities are Europeans who are familiar with EU privacy laws. We need them to serve as thought leaders on ethical issues related to publishing open data, although we’ll still need global awareness of privacy issues. We also need an international agreement that provides a process for resolving disputes about the accuracy or removal of private and confidential data.

I’m currently having a mild case of tunnel vision regarding privacy issues, partly also because I attended the PRISE conference here in Vienna last week. It was the concluding conference for the PRISE project, the aim of which was to provide “criteria and guidelines for privacy enhancing security research and for the application of the developed security solutions. As a supporting activity under the PASR programme the project will assist the European Union in shaping forthcoming security research programmes in accordance with its fundamental values.” PRISE developed a framework to ensure that privacy policies are already considered in the design of research projects, and not simply taken care of as an ‘add-on’ shortly before the release of a prototype or publictaion of a research project. In other words: Research on privacy friendly research – I approve!

So if there’s anybody in the Linked Data and Open Data community eager on getting in touch with people familiar with the technological side of EU privacy laws: PRISE was coordinated by the Austrian Academy of Sciences, more specifically by Johann Cas at the Institute for Technology Assessment. I am also happy to put you in touch if need be! Also, don’t forget to read the full interview with Ken North.

Tassilo Pellegrini

Is OpenCalais becoming a Search Engine?

Open Calais Logo

From the very beginning I was wondering, what Reuters is going to do with all that data generated by OpenCalais. So I took a moment and browsed through the Privacy Statement (formerly their Terms Of Use), stepping over an enlightning paragraph:

We may build a search capability in the future. This capability would allow users to search the metadata repository and receive back a list of entries that match that search criteria. Unless you have authorized it via an API parameter, this list would not include the original metadata contained in the document but would expose the URL and description of the original document if you have provided it to us. If you do not want your content included in the search functionality you should indicate so in the appropriate area of the API. If you want to maximize the exposure of your content on the web you should not opt out of inclusion in the search functionality.

Hypothetical in wording this paragraph states it very clear: engagement in the search market is definitely an option. But they even go one step further.

We may build a syndication capability in the future. This capability would allow us to generate feeds of content that match certain selection criteria based on the metadata. As with search, unless you have authorized it via an API parameter, these feeds will not expose the original metadata contained in the document but would expose the URL and description of the original document if you have provided it to us. If you do not want your content included in the syndication functionality you should indicate so in the appropriate area of the API. If you want to maximize the exposure of your content on the web you should not opt out of inclusion in the syndication functionality.

This sounds to me like content reselling business. In this regard it might be interesting to take a look at the latest developments from IPTC: a policy standard called ACAP, which stands for Automated Content Access Protocol. Its designed to express access policies for robots on content items. Coupling ACAP with (hypothetical) search capabilities of OpenCalais could result in a major commercial distribution engine especially for traditional media content owners. Especially with the following marketing capabilities in mind:

We may build other products in the future based on statistical or other analysis of the metadata, such as trend analysis, emerging topics or others. In no case will these products expose the original document’s metadata.

Finally a business model for the Semantic Web? Whatever … smart guys, great service!