Syllabus: Difference between revisions

From The Internet: Issues at the Frontier (course wiki)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(52 intermediate revisions by 12 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
== The Future of Copyright and Entertainment ==
In the order per the schedule on the first day of seminar (the schedule lives [[Scheduling|here]]):
[[The Future of Copyright and Entertainment]]
 
Topic owners: Joe, Miriam
 
== Old Laws/New Media ==
 
[[Old Laws/New Media]]
 
== The Internet and Publication ==
[[The Internet and Publication]]


== Free and Open Source Software ==
== Free and Open Source Software ==
'''Presenters:  [[dulles]]''','''[[User:Ayelet|Ayelet]]'''
[[Free and Open Source Software]]
 
* How can a dispersed, multilingual collection of coders working for free assemble something as complicated as a web browser, let alone an entire operating system? Open-source projects are famously free-wheeling, but different organizational models and tools have sprung up to solve these obstacles.
 
What are the forces that drive hackers to contribute to open source projects? What, if anything, can we learn from applying theories of [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gift_economy gift economies] to open source projects? Should we read Lewis Hyde's [http://southerncrossreview.org/4/schwartz.html The Gift]? (n.b. i may be motivated by my own desire to read the book -- [[dulles]])
 
* Eric Raymond/OSI ?
* PJ/Groklaw
* Strategies and indemnities (e.g. SCO v. IBM)
* Questioning the foundations of the free software movement (i.e. the "four freedoms")[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_software#cite_ref-bull6_3-0] -- how much does access to the source code really matter anymore?  Are there alternative theories (e.g. "generativity") that better capture the values at stake? Affero License? (Eben Moglen?)
* The organization/groups/cooperation questions: how do free software projects organize and govern themselves, and what broader lessons might be learned from it?  (e.g. debian, IETF)
 
(This marks my initial claim to the topic, though I would be overjoyed to work with others - [[dulles]])
 
== All Together Now For Great Justice Dot Org ==
'''Presenters:'''  '''[[User:Hoellra|Rainer]]''' + [[User:Elanaberkowitz|'''Elana''']] + '''[[User:Mchua|Mchua]]'''
 
=== Precis ===
 
How to effectively design an online drive/event/project to get participation in your cause
 
Examples:
* Pledgebank
* Facebook Causes
* www.zoosa.org
* [http://citizenbase.org/approach Citizenbase]
 
=== Guest wish list ===
* Prof. Yochai Benkler
* Tom Steinberg
* Sean Parker and Joe Green, founders of Project Agape, the start-up that created Facebook Causes
* Joe Rospars, New Media Director, Obama for America (Elana)
* Ken Banks, FrontlineSMS (Elana)
* Sebastian Benthall, [http://topp.openplans.org/ TOPP]
* Joshua Gay, FSF
* Kathy Paur, [http://actblue.com ActBlue]
 
=== Readings ===
 
We have three types of readings for this session:
 
'''Historical''' resources that come directly from our guests and their experiences.
 
* Guests will be asked to email the class beforehand with a short version of the kinds of things they'd say in a speech to the class, so people know who they'd want to ask for advice during the workshop portion. (Rationale: The time we're together should be spent interacting, there's always plenty of time outside of class for reading.)
* Guests will also be asked to send the class a link to their favorite resource/article on their project, or something that has informed their own work on their project.
 
'''Techniques and tools''' resources, mainly business books that focus on corporate use of the social web, online communities and marketing, etc. This will be pages and chapters from books like this (used as examples, not a final list):
 
* [http://www.amazon.com/Marketing-Social-Web-Customer-Communities/dp/0470124172 Marketing to the Social Web: How Digital Customer Communities Build Your Business]
* [http://www.amazon.com/Groundswell-Winning-Transformed-Social-Technologies/dp/1422125009 Groundswell: Winning in a World Transformed by Social Technologies]
* [http://www.amazon.com/Smart-Start-Ups-Entrepreneurs-Corporations-Communities/dp/0470107421 Smart Start-Ups: How Entrepreneurs and Corporations Can Profit by Starting Online Communities]
 
'''Theory''' on activism, focusing on cyberactivism. This will consist mainly of scholarly books and papers like the following (used as examples, not a final list):
 
* (Paper) ''Technologies of Protest: Insurgent Social Movements and the First Amendment in the Era of the Internet,'' by the law professor Seth Kreimer. It has some pretty interesting bits -- and some funny moments  -- like refrences to John McCain's staff using digital activism in 2001 during his campaign around campaign finance reform. Elana has the PDF.
* (Selection from) ''A Review of Cyberactivism: Online Activism in Theory and Practice,'' edited by Martha McCaughey and Michael D. Ayers.
* [http://www.opendemocracy.net/article/globalisation/philanthropy_on_the_commons Philanthropy on the Commons]
* [http://www.opendemocracy.net/media-copyrightlaw/benkler_3487.jsp Mining the wealth of networks with Yochai Benkler]
* [http://www.comnetwork.org/resources/brotherton_new_media_091608.pdf Foundations and New Media]
* [http://www.netsquared.org Netsquared]
* [http://www.benkler.org/Benkler_Wealth_Of_Networks.pdf Benkler: The Wealth of Networks]
 
=== Concrete question(s) of the week ===
 
* What makes online campaigning successful? What makes online fundraising successful? What makes online activism/mobilization successful? What makes online collaboration for good causes successful?
* What actually spurs people up the ladder of engagement or into offline activism and waht does not? Which online structures, tools, networks get people how high up the ladder? Which one's should you use for which "height"? What are their individual costs?
* Is there a generalizable model here? If yes, has this model different success factors from the business world?
* What are cutting-edge examples of successful campaigning/fundraising/mobilization/collaboration? How do they harness different channels and media (www, email, SMS, etc.)?
 
=== Anything else material towards planning your topic ===
 
==== Session design ====
 
Our current idea for session design is structured as a workshop (and discussion afterwards). Each participant will spend the week working on a cause that they are personally interested in, applying the techniques from readings and class to their own project. Key components of this week:
 
* 2-3 '''readings''' will be sent out beforehand, selected from the above.
* A '''questionnaire''' will be sent out beforehand to all class participants so they can frame the most important aspects of their cause. (For instance: What are the aims of your cause? What technologies do you prefer to use while working on activism for your cause, and why? How many people do you want to mobilize? How deep should their involvement be?) Participants will use the questionnaire to write a very rough draft of a non-profit online participation project for their cause.
* The '''role of our guest experts''' will be to come in as workshop aides; it will be interesting to hear from them what they thinks the most important rules for success are. They'll get to give a short (<10min) intro speech.
* The session will kick off with a '''workshop''' where the students will work on their project. It should be an online project designed to raise and deepen involvement and/or awareness for their cause. For instance, they might contribute to the planning of a conference, create an email-blast marketing campaign, host a party that is heavily advertised online, create or spread viral media, compile statistics on online membership for their cause, etc.
* We will follow that with a '''debriefing''' to discuss how things went and the theories and best practices that apply.
 
==== Old discussion ====
 
Of course there are a lot of custom-built tools for mobilizing people online to get things done in the real world. On the other hand, what about more general tools? We've all been invited, via Facebook, to join groups and attend events (the Obama campaign certainly made good use of this); is there a generalizable model here?
 
Facebook groups dedicated to particular causes remind me of the online petitions that began circulating widely via email about ten years ago:  their effectiveness in accomplishing real world change--and even their visibility to individuals capable of affecting the desired changes--are dubious.  Is the real purpose of these movements simply to make participants ''feel'' like they are being active and involved?  What percentage of those who signed email petitions in the 1990s were aware that their signatures were unverifiable and that the widely-distributed emails were unlikely to be collated and submitted to an official authority?  What expectations do participants in facebook group causes have for their involvement and its consequences?  The facebook group causes are certainly more centralized and visible than the old email petitions, and they provide a better tool for identifying and communicating with supporters in order to mobilize them in an organized fashion.  How often is such mobilization attempted, and with what degree of success?  As a tool of online activism, is facebook a step forward from chain emails, is it a step in a different direction, or does it just serve the same old functions but in newer packaging?  --[[User:Gwen|Gwen]] 08:26, 29 November 2008 (EST)
 
Maybe we can invite some of the leaders of the various social networking sites or Jascha Franklin-Hodge, who was an architect of the Obama campaign's use of social technology.


Might also be worth considering SMS applications that interface with the internet in this context especially since cell phones will presumably be the nexus of tech activism in the developing world. See FrontlineSMS or Ushahidi, a web crisis mapping project that let any user with a cell phone text in reports of violence in post-election Kenya as a way to geographically report real-time citizen reporting. (ELANA)
'''Topic Owners:  [[User:dulles|dulles]]''','''[[User:Ayelet|Ayelet]]'''


== The Internet and Societal Inequity ==
== The Internet and Societal Inequity ==
'''Presenters:'''  '''[[User:Megerman|Mark]]''', '''[[User:G|Graham]]'''
[[The Internet and Societal Inequity]]


=== Socio-technical Gap ===
'''Topic Owners:'''  '''[[User:Megerman|Mark]]''', '''[[User:G|Graham]]'''


Problems encountered in the act of discoursing itself are sometimes addressed via social means, technological means, or both. It has been suggested that technological tools should support social processes, but there is an adaptation of each realm to the other - how does this back-and-forth take place in the design of a successful technology-enabled discussion?
== Old Laws/New Media ==


Which inequalities are created or strengthened due the increasing reliance on technology and the differences in the ability to access the Internet(e.g. global and socio-economic differences)? Does the net actually re-distribute and decentralize power and influence, or does it also reinforce the existing political and economic hierarchies? In short - is the Internet really a good thing for everybody?
[[Old Laws/New Media]]


*A solutions-focused question here might be: what tools might encourage a more egalitarian internet, both nationally and internationally? How can online applications be designed to encourage social equality? (Berkman Fellow [http://eszter.com Eszter Hargittai] has worked on some related questions, focusing on research about how people actually use the internet.) --[[User:G|G]] 12:12, 28 November 2008 (EST)
'''Topic Owners: [[User:DebbieRosenbaum|Debbie Rosenbaum]], [[User:MSanchez|Matt Sanchez]]'''


=== One Laptop Per Child ===
== All Together Now For Great Justice Dot Org ==
[[All Together Now For Great Justice Dot Org]]


Happy to help this group with info as I can. [[User:Mchua|Mchua]]
'''Topic Owners:'''  '''[[User:Hoellra|Rainer]]''' + [[User:Elanaberkowitz|'''Elana''']] + '''[[User:Mchua|Mchua]]'''


=== Environmental Concerns ===
== The Future of News ==
[[The Future of News]]


To what extent is the hardware upon which the Internet exists damaging the environment?  Where does old tech go when it dies?  What distributive impact does the "recycling" of old tech have.  Was the Internet build with principles of physical sustainbility in mind?  Is it too late to change?  How do individual companies, like Google, view their own practices?  Does the cost of a server internalize the cost of disposal?  Why has it been cheaper to just keep throwing on new machines?  What of the electricity necessary to run these machines?  What does it say about society that we are so willing to pollute our own communities to create a second life?  Has technological innovation and advancement dislocated the true impact of non-zero cost transactions?  --[[User:Megerman|Megerman]] 19:36, 29 November 2008 (EST)
Topic owners: [[User:Drood]], [[User:jf]]


== Prediction Markets ==
== The Future of Copyright and Entertainment ==
'''Presenters:'''  '''[[User:Mwansley|Matthew]]''', '''[[User:EST|Elisabeth]]'''
[[The Future of Copyright and Entertainment]]
 
Some more helpful material:
 
* A primer on the [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID1134563_code183716.pdf?abstractid=1134563&mirid=1 legal status] of prediction markets.
* The CTFC wants to know if it should [http://www.cftc.gov/lawandregulation/federalregister/proposedrules/2008/e8-9981.html regulate] them.
* If they can be regulated, could they be [http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_6716/is_4_27/ai_n29450615/pg_1?tag=artBody;col1 taxed] as well?
* Our very own Prof. Sunstein gives his comments on prediction markets and [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Delivery.cfm/SSRN_ID621128_code249436.pdf?abstractid=604641&mirid=1 group deliberation].
 
 
Intrade, etc.
 
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TradeSports Tradesports] announced last week that it will [http://www.tradesports.com/ cease operations] at the end of this month.  Does fallout from the current economic crisis include regulatory changes that spell doom for online prediction markets?  Or is something else going on here? --[[User:Gwen|Gwen]] 11:05, 26 November 2008 (EST)
 
Could prediction markets transform how we govern ourselves?  Robin Hanson proposes [http://hanson.gmu.edu/futarchy.pdf Futarchy].  The idea in brief:
 
"Democracies often fail to aggregate information, while speculative markets excel at this task. We consider a new form of governance, wherein voters would say what we want, but speculators would say how to get it. Elected representatives would oversee the after-the-fact measurement of national welfare, while market speculators would say which policies they expect to raise national welfare. Those who recommend policies that regressions suggest will raise GDP should be willing to endorse similar market advice."
 
'''Some general and tentative questions'''
 
* To what extent should the government be engaged in the regulation of prediction markets; should it and how might it change current structures to be more accommodating?
 
* To what extent should government be involved in administering or using prediction markets (e.g., a la Hanson's suggestions)?
 
* For ethical or other reasons, should we be skeptical about using prediction markets for purposes such as predicting [http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/29/terror.market/index.html terrorist attacks] and the like? What about for predicting regular crime (see [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1118931 this proposal])?
 
* More generally, if we think prediction markets are a useful tool, and yet it seems clear that they generate a considerable amount of unease, can we think about why and how policymakers might respond? Can design of the markets (reducing inaccuracy, or reducing concerns about rewarding misbehavior that might crop up if we have terrorism or crime futures) solve these problems or are some more fundamental? 
 
'''Some tentative guest ideas'''
 
* Michael Abramowicz
* Justin Wolfers
* Bo Cowgill, Hal Varian: Google prediction markets
* Robin Hanson
 
'''Possible Readings'''
 
* academic literature on prediction markets, either [http://bpp.wharton.upenn.edu/jwolfers/Papers/Predictionmarkets.pdf generally] or focusing on [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1118931 particular] [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=928896 applications]


* relevant chapters from Professor Sunstein's Infotopia
''Topic owners:'' ''[[User:Jfishman|Joe]], [[User:Miriam|Miriam]]''


* Michael Abramowicz's book [http://www.amazon.com/Predictocracy-Market-Mechanisms-Private-Decision/dp/0300115997 Predictocracy]
== The Google Book Search Settlement ==
[[The Google Book Search Settlement]]


'''Other ideas'''
'''Topic Owners:  [[User:Gwen|Gwen]], [[User:Lbaker|Lee]], [[User:Cooper|Jon]]'''
 
One obvious thought is to see whether the class can play around with using prediction markets, though more thought needed on what we'd want to predict.  Incentives for accurate predictions like t-shirts?
 
Will Harvard give us some small amount of money to invest for the semester?  We could have an auction to determine whose investment ideas we use.  The incentives would work so that you would only bid more to control the investment if you actually thought your investment idea would generate more net return to you (minus what you spent on the auction), despite it being divided up among the class.


== Anonymity and privacy ==
== Anonymity and privacy ==
'''[[User:Danray|Dan Ray]]''', '''[[User:CKennedy|Conor]]''', '''[[User:Jgruensp|Joshua]]'''
[[Anonymity and privacy]]


=== Title ===
'''Topic Owners: [[User:Danray|Dan Ray]]''', '''[[User:CKennedy|Conor]]''', '''[[User:Jgruensp|Joshua]]'''


OpenId and Internet Governance
== Internet + Industry + Investing ==


=== Precis ===
Topic owners: Andrew Klaber and DAL
[[Internet, Industry, and Investing]]


* Internet Regulation (as it relates specifically to online safety and security)
== Internet Governance and Regulation ==
* Privacy and anonymity as they relate to structures of control on the Internet
[[Internet Governance and Regulation]]


=== Guest wish list (if any) ===
'''Topic owners: [[User:Bepa|Vera]]''', '''[[User: AMehra|Arjun]]'''
* As an academic, you couldn't do better than Daniel Solove. If we do hone in on a very specific topic, though, we could go for someone with more specialized experience. [[User:Danray|Dan Ray]] 22:39, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
* Although government is subject to all sorts of special legal provisos that the private sector doesn't have to manage, the privacy counsel at DHS, [http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/structure/bio_1166549785058.shtm Hugo Teufel], is pretty [http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/privacy/privacy_pia_einstein2.pdf on top of his game].  If we're looking for practitioners, [http://www.arnoldporter.com/attorneys.cfm?action=view&id=380 Ron Lee] of Arnold & Porter does work with private industry.
* If we do OpenID, options for guests might include [http://www.crunchbase.com/person/bill-washburn Bill Washburn] of the OpenID Foundation and [http://blog.unto.net/ DeWitt Clinton] of Google.
* Also, since Passport has foundered, Facebook Connect looks like the hot new thing on the proprietary side.  Whoever runs that for Facebook would be a natural invite as well. (see Dan's links below (?))
* And I still think the potential for the mobile phone to become the heretofore mythical convergence device and thus to become a necessary adjunct to personal identity is worth talking over.


Perhaps a bloggingheads.tv-style video conference call between someone from an electronic privacy nonprofit and a representative from Microsoft or Facebook?
== Prediction Markets ==
 
[[Prediction Markets]]
=== Readings ===
[http://works.bepress.com/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1019&context=james_grimmelmann James Grimmelmann, Facebook and The Social Dyanmics of Privacy]
 
[http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=998565 Solove, Daniel J. "'I've Got Nothing to Hide' and Other Misunderstandings of Privacy"]
 
=== Links ===
http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/125/how-to-fix-the-web.html
 
http://developers.facebook.com/connect.php
 
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebook_connect_vs_open_id.php
 
http://www.readwriteweb.com/archives/facebook_connect_readies.php
 
http://chrissaad.wordpress.com/2008/12/01/facebook-connect-aka-hailstorm-20/
 
http://wiki.openid.net/Lobbying
 
http://planet.openid.net/
 
 
=== Concrete question(s) of the week ===
 
=== Anything else material towards planning your topic ===
 
 
* Facebook + google people?
* another way to look at it is as a matter of cybercrime and such - new surveillence methods (also relevant in regards to child pornography, for example). i wander if these are too different topics or not. '''[[User:Ayelet|Ayelet]]'''
* I'd like to see a segment on what "privacy" actually means in law and in culture. This would probably attach well to any other, more applied segment.  [[User:Danray|Dan Ray]] 16:38, 3 December 2008 (EST)
*Creating a series of Privacy Certification Marks
 
== The Future of News ==
 
'''Presenters:''' ''Dharmishta Rood, Jon Fildes''
 
The traditional media industry is in turmoil. Circulation of newspapers is [http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/28/business/media/28circ.html?_r=1 falling]. Staff are being laid off, costs are being cut and foreign bureaus are being shut. Audiences are fragmenting, advertising spending is plummeting and the valuations of companies is [http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/21/business/media/21times.html?ref=business dropping]. TV and radio are experiencing similar problems. Some [http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/30/opinion/30dowd.html?hp papers] are even outsourcing local news reporting to India!
 
Most of these changes have been blamed on the arrival of the web, which has changed how information is produced and consumed. Now, anyone can be a news gatherer, publisher and distributor. The balance of power has changed.
 
Yet at the same time, the web offers these organisations a huge opportunity. Already, groups such as [http://spot.us/ spot.us] and [http://www.propublica.org/ Pro Publica] are experimenting with new business models. Others, such as the Christian Science Monitor, [http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/1029/p25s01-usgn.html have ditched] the old way of doing things and have gone entirely online. Many are using the web to reach out to audiences and connect with them in new ways.
 
But, are they doing enough? Will experiments like this be enough to save news organisations? Does it matter if they disappear? Should governments intervene to save them in the same way as they have decided to prop up the ailing car manufacturing industry? Is this an appropriate intervention? Should it be left to market forces? What values are at stake beyond what the markets appear to be able to sustain? Ultimately, what is the future for “old media”?
 
Possible contributors:
 
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Gillmor Dan Gilmour]
*[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeff_Jarvis Jeff Jarvis]
* someone from a major paper: NYT, LA Times, Washington Post etc?
* someone from the [http://civic.mit.edu/ MIT Center for Future Civic Media]?
 
Possible readings:
* Columbia Journalism Review article: [http://www.cjr.org/feature/overload_1.php Overload!]- Journalism’s battle for relevance in an age of too much information
* The [http://www.ap.org/newmodel.pdf AP report (PDF)] mentioned in Overload!
 
The Communication Initiative is an organization in this domain with a compelling problem that they'd like advice on solving, and they're very enthusiastic and willing to work with the class. They're focused on the use and support of communication for economic and social development (http://www.comminit.com) with a large and varied network (over 70,000 total) of members all over the world. Their question: given the challenges the face (enumerated more in the details section), how do we guide and engage our network more through our interactive online processes instead of through email?" More information available at [[The Communication Initiative]] (they wrote up a problem statement for us!) - is this something people would be interested in taking on? I would be... [[User:Mchua|Mchua]] 21:21, 30 November 2008 (EST)
 
== Internet/network Security ==
 
'''[[User:Jgruensp|Jgruensp]]''' (fun topics, all: we could invite [http://www.csis.org/component/option,com_csis_progj/task,view/id,1117/ the CSIS commission] which has been grappling with all these issues and is desperate for legal guidance)
 
=== Internet Dependency (What if someone somehow takes down the net?) ===
 
'''[[User:Danray|Dan Ray]] (maybe)'''
 
We have come to rely on the Internet for almost every aspect of our lives.  If the Internet somehow suddenly went "down" (through either a cyberattack or physical attack on key backbone pieces of infrastructure), the result would likely be calamity, as well as hordes of people who wouldn't know what to do with themselves.  Can we even imagine what the world would look like the morning after such an attack if it was successful?  Are we wrong to rely so heavily on a single tool whose detailed technical inner workings so few people truly understand?  Are we setting ourselves up to be ruined when someone compromises this tool?  What about the tradeoffs between keeping the Net free+open vs. regulation to ensure that it retains its functional integrity in the face of attack? 
 
We can invite Dan Kaminsky, who recently discovered a flaw in the inner-workings of the Net that could have caused some serious damage.  See, e.g., http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/09/technology/09flaw.html?hp
(or we could invite will smith, who defeated the aliens in independence day with the help of cyber-attack).
 
* I vote Will Smith.  Unless everyone wants to get into the desirability of a DNS nonce of sufficient bitlength, in which case... no, still Will Smith.  That guy's an elliptic curve cryptography fiend.  However, if we do want to talk about design issues in the internet, and the failure of the marketplace to handle externalities created by poor software design, leading to the perpetual crisis of bugginess, we could do worse than to invite [http://cr.yp.to/djb.html Daniel Bernstein].  Plus, as an added bonus, he saw the issues that gave rise to the Kaminsky bug coming down the pike [http://cr.yp.to/djbdns.html a long] [http://cr.yp.to/djbdns/forgery.html time ago]. --[[User:Jgruensp|Jgruensp]]
 
=== Internet as International Conflict Zone ===
 
'''[[User:Danray|Dan Ray]] (maybe)'''
 
In light of the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyberattacks_on_Estonia_2007 recent events in Estonia], have we finally reached the long-predicted era of cyberwarfare?  Is cyber-espionage a counterintelligence problem or something more?  ([http://www.nationaljournal.com/njmagazine/cs_20080531_6948.php This article from the National Journal] talks bluntly about perceived threats, although is perhaps a little too willing to attribute causation of certain events to Chinese actors on dubious evidence)
 
=== Internet as an Extension of National Infrastructure ===
 
'''[[User:Danray|Dan Ray]] (maybe)'''
 
It is easy to define the borders of the nation in realspace (ports, airports, land crossings), and the tradeoffs between private propertyholders' rights and national security interests (making those tradeoffs? Not always so easy).  But what are the national borders in cyberspace?  Given the dangers described in the two topics above, what kind of role, if any, should national government play in monitoring and regulating major backbone communications links?  What about the networks of semi-public industries such as utilities?  Private corporations that store government secrets?  Financial systems?  Other types of privately owned networks?
 
--[[User:Jgruensp|Jgruensp]] 23:54, 30 November 2008 (EST)
 
== Internet Governance & Regulation ==
 
Presenters: '''[[User:Bepa|Vera]]''', '''[[User: AMehra|Arjun]]'''
 
Much like open-source software, the Internet can be considered a collection of servers, pipes, and users spread all over the world. How does it keep working? One easy answer is that the United States (through actors public and private) just sort of gets its way. This isn't really a satisfying answer descriptively or normatively, though. With the rest of the world contributing more and more to the Internet as a whole, is it time for a change?
 
Guests: Susan Crawford?
 
Some questions:
:What are the options for internet governance? An ad-hoc system, or something more formalized? What should the regulations cover - everything or only the vital areas, such as cybercrime and technical standards? Should it be local or international in scope? --[[User:AMehra|AMehra]] 19:18, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 
=== International Regulation ===
*The UN's [http://www.itu.int/wsis/index.html World Summit On the Information Society] has come up with the [http://www.intgovforum.org/cms/index.php/aboutigf Internet Governance Forum] to help tackle some of these issues - is this a good idea?
 
:Possible reading: [http://publius.cc/2008/12/02/internet-governance-under-the-un-part-1/ The Path Towards Centralization of Internet Governance Under the UN] - a series of three essays recently published on the Berkman Center's Publius Project.
 
:Possible speakers: staff members of the IGF? --[[User:AMehra|AMehra]] 18:52, 6 December 2008 (EST)
 
=== Local/national Regulation ===
*Efforts by the FCC - in conjunction with and separate from the UN efforts.
 
:Possible speakers: Kevin Martin --[[User:AMehra|AMehra]] 19:18, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 
=== Rights of Minors ===


Minors have long been recognized to not have free speech rights that are co-extensive with adults. But with the Internet, how do we define those rights?  And what, if any, regulation should the government enact to protect minors on the Internet, while also respecting their rights?
'''Topic Owners:''' '''[[User:Mwansley|Matthew]]''', '''[[User:EST|Elisabeth]]'''


There are two traditional categories where minors' free speech rights have been restricted.  The first is with respect to pornography, the second with respect to the school environment.  These two areas raise different concerns.
== The Tools Team ==
[[The Tools Team]]


== Internet + Environment + Venture Capital ==
'''Topic Owners:''' [[User:Jharrow|Jason]] + [[User:Mahmadian.jd11|Michelle]]
[[Internet + Environment + Venture Capital]]

Latest revision as of 16:46, 1 June 2009

In the order per the schedule on the first day of seminar (the schedule lives here):

Free and Open Source Software

Free and Open Source Software

Topic Owners: dulles,Ayelet

The Internet and Societal Inequity

The Internet and Societal Inequity

Topic Owners: Mark, Graham

Old Laws/New Media

Old Laws/New Media

Topic Owners: Debbie Rosenbaum, Matt Sanchez

All Together Now For Great Justice Dot Org

All Together Now For Great Justice Dot Org

Topic Owners: Rainer + Elana + Mchua

The Future of News

The Future of News

Topic owners: User:Drood, User:jf

The Future of Copyright and Entertainment

The Future of Copyright and Entertainment

Topic owners: Joe, Miriam

The Google Book Search Settlement

The Google Book Search Settlement

Topic Owners: Gwen, Lee, Jon

Anonymity and privacy

Anonymity and privacy

Topic Owners: Dan Ray, Conor, Joshua

Internet + Industry + Investing

Topic owners: Andrew Klaber and DAL Internet, Industry, and Investing

Internet Governance and Regulation

Internet Governance and Regulation

Topic owners: Vera, Arjun

Prediction Markets

Prediction Markets

Topic Owners: Matthew, Elisabeth

The Tools Team

The Tools Team

Topic Owners: Jason + Michelle

Retrieved from "http://cyber.harvard.edu/iif/?title=Syllabus&oldid=3307"