GNI Brainstorming: Difference between revisions
TylerLacey (talk | contribs) (New page: * Remember, GNI is about government privacy, not consumer privacy. *GNI is about free expression, privacy, responsible company decision making. = Problems = == Membership == # Who shoul...) |
TylerLacey (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
(8 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
== Membership == | == Membership == | ||
[[GNIAssociateMember]] | |||
# Who should be in the GNI? | # Who should be in the GNI? | ||
# Why do companies have to join GNI when they can just follow principles and not bind themselves and make themselves a target? | # Why do companies have to join GNI when they can just follow principles and not bind themselves and make themselves a target? | ||
# Do we need different GNIs? | # Do we need different GNIs? | ||
## One for hardware, for software, service providers? | ## One for hardware, for software, service providers? or different policies/implementation guidance? | ||
## Different tiers representing different levels of commitment? | ## Different tiers representing different levels of commitment? | ||
# How do we incentivize joining? | # How do we incentivize joining? | ||
Line 15: | Line 17: | ||
### Expanding the scope of service of GNI as a way to incentivize small companies? | ### Expanding the scope of service of GNI as a way to incentivize small companies? | ||
### Subpoena resistance clinic? | ### Subpoena resistance clinic? | ||
# How should GNI work? | |||
## an organization where only members can participate and benefit, or a forum where companies can share practice about HR protection? | |||
# How should the complaint process work? | |||
## Accessibility | |||
== Publicity / Branding == | == Publicity / Branding == | ||
Line 54: | Line 60: | ||
Is there a way that GNI could play a role in helping organizations determine the validity of subpoenas and to determine whether compliance with a given subpoenas is supported by GNI principles? | Is there a way that GNI could play a role in helping organizations determine the validity of subpoenas and to determine whether compliance with a given subpoenas is supported by GNI principles? | ||
Could be a pool of lawyers/students that can review subpoenas, such as a clinic, or could be the preparation of a toolkit to make subpoena analysis easier for companies with few resources. | |||
== Branding == | == Branding == | ||
Line 65: | Line 73: | ||
** Brochure? | ** Brochure? | ||
** Video? | ** Video? | ||
* building up community? | |||
* resources to use: chilling effects, herdict, etc. |
Latest revision as of 23:40, 19 January 2010
- Remember, GNI is about government privacy, not consumer privacy.
- GNI is about free expression, privacy, responsible company decision making.
Problems
Membership
- Who should be in the GNI?
- Why do companies have to join GNI when they can just follow principles and not bind themselves and make themselves a target?
- Do we need different GNIs?
- One for hardware, for software, service providers? or different policies/implementation guidance?
- Different tiers representing different levels of commitment?
- How do we incentivize joining?
- What are the benefits of joining GNI?
- Expanding the scope of service of GNI as a way to incentivize small companies?
- Subpoena resistance clinic?
- What are the benefits of joining GNI?
- How should GNI work?
- an organization where only members can participate and benefit, or a forum where companies can share practice about HR protection?
- How should the complaint process work?
- Accessibility
Publicity / Branding
We need a logo! Let's get some logos for our presentation.
What should GNI be doing
1. Subpoena resistance? Is this a problem people are really facing?
- Is this more a problem for companies that are not part of GNI? This a way to incentivize small companies to join?
- What do small companies care about privacy? Maybe they do
- A chart with some basic explanation of how ECPA works http://www.cybertelecom.org/security/ecpanotes.htm#sub
- Recognize that don't always need to fight subpoena. There are legit requests even in repressive regimes.
- Can we do something with the Google Italy case?
- But a lot of these cases will be in places that don't speak English.
- Europe harder to share litigation costs because many don't have case law system.
- Subpoena resistance clinic too broad. We need to think "All these subpoenas out there against companies. Is there some way that GNI can help?"
Google.cn annoucment
Is it a failure that Google didn't go to the GNI with their decision to make the China announcement or during their investigation?
Alternatives to GNI
- Maybe GNI is a nice try but not working? In that case, how do we solve the problems of privacy and free expression internationally?
- More general international privacy rules?
Potential Solutions to these problems
Subpoena Resistance
Is there a way that GNI could play a role in helping organizations determine the validity of subpoenas and to determine whether compliance with a given subpoenas is supported by GNI principles?
Could be a pool of lawyers/students that can review subpoenas, such as a clinic, or could be the preparation of a toolkit to make subpoena analysis easier for companies with few resources.
Branding
- New Logo?
- Would this be like a the GNI "stamp of approval" that we talked about in class
- Could this logo appear on privacy pages of participating companies to build the GNI brand?
- New name?
- "Global Network Initiative" seems very bland, generic and easy to forget
- Promotional material
- Brochure?
- Video?
- building up community?
- resources to use: chilling effects, herdict, etc.