ID-Legal Conf Plan Outline

Outline as of Jan 08

Kaliya Hamlin and Lucy Lynch are meeting in Eugene Oregon - January 8, 2009

Outline so far

Initial meeting of 20-40 people in DC area.

Identifying specific people in the legal/governance/policy side to reach out to (will be writing e-mails to some of them today)

Identity Community members from various communities of activity that we know will be interested, InfoCards, VRM, DP

Overall Thematic - Rights and Responsibilities: A Gap Analysis around Frameworks for Identity in the Digital Age

• of individuals (personhood and persona)
• of 3rd party provider (including the legal ramifications of filling this role)
• technology to be supportive of different policies (US-EU legal framework differences)
• tech over to be neutral around policy and have it work with it

Event Length: 2 days + social event in evening before. Ending 2nd day by 3pm to get home to west coast.

Timing: Before IIW

Location: DC

Size:20-40 people

Long Term Goal:Build a community that can successful address the challenges as identity technologies evolve and policy and regulation and case law begin to interact with it.

Beyond this Event:Looking to a larger meeting after IIW - potentially coinciding with Fall 2009 (IIW9)

For discussion this afternoon.

• Format - some open space with a longer time to look into the future re: collaboration - addressing issues.
• Barriers to Entry - "position paper perhaps"
• Invitation to conference.
• What should the pre-reading be?
• How to frame invite legal centers (berkman, stanford - work on at least an outline).
• Legal background for technologists
• Technology background for the legal folks

Draft Event Description

There is a lack of cross pollination between the legal community and technical community innovating digital identity systems.

• Laws are not in sync with technology; this is creating friction
• Technology when first released is not in synch with law; this puts pressure both on the technology and on the law, and both evolve
• New Laws are coming out which create uncertainty in the technology markets; this can delay important advances in identity and privacy technology.

We need to create a space for collaboration in order to understand the answers to questions like these:

• What does the law really think 'an identity' is (this may differ depending on context: e.g. Homeland Security/travel vs financial vs criminal)
• What do technologists mean when they use language describing identity; what technology are they building to support this understanding.

"THE LAW" needs to needs to evolve; Daniel Solove's thesis is that the law needs to carefully evolve to handle notions of reputations and identity in the online world.

Individuals and Businesses have a joint interest in an identity system that allocates risk and rewards in a socially optimal way.

An example where this kind of early collaboration would have been helpful is the PKI this can be written into a better paragraph Technologists take things at face value

• previous wave of badness (post PKC) digital signature ( wouldn't it be cool if we could use them instead of paper ones)
• never bothered to ask what a 'signature' was from the point of view of the law - shape of the ink on the paper - performance of the act - intention to commit oneself to the contract

In the end Techies and Lawyers must make this whole environment that normal people can live in - they have not been talking to each other re: the problems let alone working better together to help regular people.

Potential Recommended Pre-Reading

Article (link), where published, who wrote it - who recommended it. sentence about why.

WHO

• Governmental entitles (fed, state, local, courts) & politicians
  • DHS (Homeland Security) - some good folks
  • Lawyers and staff for decision makers and the law (in congress, governors and state level), Barak and MaCain staff
  • Commerce Committee
  • NSA (Stewart Baker)
  • Law Enforcement
  • NCCUSL (Nat'l Conf Commission on Unified State Laws)
  • NCSL (Nat'l Conf State Legislators)
  • ALEC (Amer Legis Exchange Council)

• Business and Corporate interests
  • MySpace, Facebook
  • Google, Yahoo, etc.
  • Intel

• Universities, professors who have published papers, and law clinics
  • Solove
  • Susan Crawford
  • Michael Froomkin - U Florida
  • Beth Novak
  • Holly Tolle and Ray (?)

• Consumer interest groups
  • Consumer's Union
  • National Consumer Law Center
  • Privacy Coalition people
  • EPIC

• Health/Medical Sector
  • Healthcare (e.g. payers, providers, patients)
  • Bio-Pharma Research (e.g. institutions, enterprise, gov funding/regulatory)
  • Pharma Products (e.g. enterprise, consumers, gov regulatory)

• Professional associations
  • State and National Bar Assocs
    • CyberLaw Committees of Bar Associations - and chairs
  • ACM
  • IEEE
  • Private Investigator Lobbying groups

• Related interests
  • 22y olds - interesting Big learning curve
  • Direct Marketing Assn.
  • US Chamber of Commerce

• International Interests
  • Prime Project? (part of 7th framework, ITU)
  • Cisco & Joe Aledef (also International)
  • International Chamber of Commerce

• RELEVANT Conferences
  • IIW
  • CFP
  • (others from call?)

Eventually is Quick - in terms of going internationally

International Businesses are already that way.

• Entities from economic side are already dealing with it.

By Proxy - UN folks from different initiatives, those thinking about the entire world - surrogate.

Institutional Co-Conveners?

• MIT Media Lab - called for a dialogue about id bill of rights
• Careful of Gov. conveners - restrictions
• Common scaffolding - survey type thing - set of protocols. Blind men examining the elephant - handiness
  • Different Languages coming together
  • Framework for them to invite a variety - more useful
• Berkman
• UN?
• OECD - many initiatives going on

--- Logistical Details http://www.freeconference.com Login - ID-Legal PW:privacyonline