Re: [projectvrm] Battle of the Online Forms

[Mark Lizar < >]

Hi All, 

It was just pointed out to me that "> doesnt actually give people access to the group. If you are interested in joining or checking it out here is a link that will get you to the group. 

https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups#!forum/opennotice

Best Regards, 

Mark 

On 14 Jan 2013, at 13:44, Mark Lizar < "> > wrote:

Hi All, 

We have set up a work group called Open Notice which focuses on this particular problem which we presented at the recent W3C - Do Not Track and beyond conference. 

The Open Notice effort was a call to participation last year for companies and organisations that are working in solving this problem now and we now have a sizable list of companies and academics that have joined and we are working to launch the website, provide a newsletter, and create a survey for ways in which we can collaborate to address these types of problems. 

Open Notice specifically refers to the principle of openness and notice refers to TOSA, Privacy Policies and the like, which are required to be as open as possible so that standard approaches to policy transparency and negotiating terms can be developed.  Calling for basic standards so that companies working to address these problems can work together to help develop this ecosystem. 

Here is a link to the paper -Open Notice: A Call For Collaboration.  One thing is clear, that a concerted approach is needed. One person, one company, or even one country can't do it alone.  The current consent and policy infrastructure is very costly and current thinking is moving towards  the economic analysis of how  an upgrade to this global internet policy infrastructure will not only save alot of money but open huge markets in personalisation etc. 

If you are interested in getting involved or even cross posting between VRM and Open Notice please join the "> . 

Best Regards, 

Mark Lizar

Open Notice Coordinator 

On 14 Jan 2013, at 13:24, "Savage, Christopher" < "> > wrote:

From: John Harrison | PIB-d [mailto:john.harrison@pib-d.net] 
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2013 4:00 AM
To: Savage, Christopher
Cc: 'ProjectVRM list'
Subject: RE: Battle of the Online Forms

 

>>I like Chris’s idea about reversing the burden of contract acceptance. But is there not a one-to-many / one-to-one problem here ? Given that a corporation deals with thousands of individuals, it is simply impractical for it to negotiate different terms in each case: the logic of numbers forces it to define standard terms and conditions, which are then imposed on customers.  The remedy is for the customers to club together into a group large enough to require / expect bespoke contracts from a corporation. Which takes us back to consumer rights / advocacy groups (such as the Consumers’ Association / “Which” here in the UK) and recent experiments in collaborative purchasing.<<

 

What I actually envision (see another recent post) is not imposing thousands or millions of different sets of terms and conditions on corporations.  What I envision is developing two or three integrated versions of “standard” individual-respecting terms and conditions, with the individual selecting which of the standard sets they choose to impose as a condition of accepting web pages from enterprises on-line.

 

>>As so often, it all comes back to the values of the people who design the underlying infrastructure. John Naughton maintains  - in ‘A brief history of the future’ - that the internet and the web succeeded because the academics who designed them believed that openness / distribution / account portability and the like were all important. What we need is infrastructure that permits and supports collaborative purchasing, working on the side of the consumer. But I preach to the converted . . . . . for which apologies.<<

 

No apologies needed.  <g>  I envision my little idea here as a first step to giving individuals a collective voice (go figure, that one) in developing that infrastructure.  Right now they have none.

 

Chris S.