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