RE: [gnso-dow123] Intel privacy initiative
- To: <gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [gnso-dow123] Intel privacy initiative
- From: "Marilyn Cade" <marilynscade@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 12 Nov 2006 04:56:29 -0500
I appreciate having this forwarded as of 'general interest'. I see some
rationale for using the TF in a limited and appropriate manner for sharing
matters that are of general interest, if they are directly applicable to the
ToR of a TF, or are useful background that is clearly applicable.
I'm not fully clear on the applicability to the TF ToR, but after all as a
TF, we are responsible for undertaking informed dialogue and examination.
Thus, I am happy to understand the applicability of this particular industry
announcement. However, since we need, as a TF to work within the ToR we have
been given, we may not actually be able to branch out too much. Although if
the TF sees considerable other materials that they have not examined,
including this announcement by Intel about their work in open source
licensing in 'location aware technology', this could be noted in the TF
report to Council. Individuals who have a perspective that something is
applicable could provide a paragraph to the staff to describe the
applicability, thus if the TF doesn't see the direct relationship to the
ToR, they can still have their individual/or constituency interest in things
like the attached noted in the report.
However, in the event that this is a special instance and should merit a
renewed very quick study by the TF, in order to help me rationalize to my
constituency the addition of studying something like this within the TF
itself, can you help further on what the rationale would be to propose
studying this in particular? And whether there is perhaps a longer list of
useful technology announcements or projects that should be compiled, if they
can be shown as directly relevant to inform the considerations of Council on
the WHOIS policy issues?
BC Representative to the WHOIS TF
From: owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-gnso-dow123@xxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of David W. Maher
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 7:19 PM
Subject: [gnso-dow123] Intel privacy initiative
As a matter of general interest to this Task
Force, I am forwarding a message sent by Dave
Farber to his IP list a couple of days ago.The general subject is that
"Intel is pleased to
announce an open-source-style license aimed at
preserving information privacy."
Please note especially the statement by Intel
that "We collectively became concerned about
potential misuses of location-aware technology,
particularly in cases of vulnerable people like battered spouses."
WHOIS is, of course, "location-aware technology",
and I suggest that this initiative by Intel be
studied carefully by our Task Force.
>From: David Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
>Subject: [IP] Intel privacy license - suggested post for IP
>Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2006 08:28:54 -0500
>From: Miller1, John S
>Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2006 1:18 PM
>To: 'David Farber'
>Cc: Hoffman, David Legal
>Subject: Intel privacy license - suggested post for IP
>I am attaching below (and as a word document) information regarding
>an open-source-style license aimed at preserving information privacy
>that Intel has been working on with a group of privacy law experts.
>David Hoffman discussed this concept with you when you were in Santa
>Clara back in September, and you were receptive to posting
>information regarding the privacy license on your IP list at the time
>- would you still be willing to do so? It would really be great if
>we were able to solicit feedback on this concept from the readers of
>your IP. Per your suggestion, we have requested that your readers
>reply with comments to the IP list - would you be willing to forward
>to us any comments you receive that you deem not worthy of
>publication to the IP?
>Although I think the suggested post is fairly self-explanatory, I'd
>be happy to answer any additional questions you might have regarding
>the privacy license concept, or to address any issues you might have
>concerning the post itself. For your information, all of the
>individuals mentioned in the text have expressly authorized that
>their names be used for this purpose.
>Thank You and Best Regards,
>John S. Miller, Esq. | Privacy and Security Policy Manager
>Corporate Technology Group | Technical Policy and Standards
>Intel Corporation | JF2-96 | 2111 NE 25th Ave | Hillsboro, OR 97124
>direct: 503 712 5082 | mobile: 646 345 8716 | fax: 503 264 1578
>Intel is pleased to announce an open-source-style license aimed at
>preserving information privacy. Intel has been working on this
>license language with a group of privacy law experts, in connection
>with Intel's release of a location-aware software platform. Our
>collective vision is for the privacy-protective terms of the license
>to be eventually adopted by the open-source community, structured as
>an addendum to open-source license(s).
>The concept of adapting the open source licensing model to encourage
>social norms protective of end user privacy grew out of conversations
>among a group of researchers, academics, and lawyers. The group
>includes academics at several universities, including UC Berkeley and
>the University of Washington, several prominent lawyers and Intel
>Corporation, including: Deirdre K. Mulligan, a Clinical Professor of
>Law at Boalt Hall School of Law, Director of the Samuelson Law,
>Technology and Public Policy Clinic, and a Director of the Berkeley
>Center for Law and Technology; Pamela Samuelson, the Richard M.
>Sherman Distinguished Professor of Law at Boalt Hall, and a Director
>of the Berkeley Center for Law and Technology; Elliot Maxwell, a
>Fellow of the Communications Program at Johns Hopkins University and
>a Distinguished Research Fellow of the eBusiness Research Center of
>Pennsylvania State University; Becky Burr, a partner at the law firm
>of Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale & Dorr; and Paul M. Schwartz, a
>Professor of Law at University of California, Berkeley School of Law
>(Boalt Hall). Working together, we have devised an innovative
>approach to protecting social norms around privacy as location-aware
>This group came together soon after Intel's
>development of a location- aware computing
>technology. We collectively became concerned about
>potential misuses of location-aware technology, particularly in cases
>of vulnerable people like battered spouses. Intel's goal was to
>release this technology in open source, but wanted to discuss the
>possibilities of adapting the open-source licensing model to
>encourage social norms protective of end user privacy.
>In discussions that took place over the past year and a half, the
>group devised the idea of adding an addendum to an open-source
>license. This addendum, as currently drafted, discloses to the end
>user what information is being collected and how long the information
>will be kept, and requires that the developer incorporate opt-out
>capability into the software systems based on the licensed code.
>Further, the addendum is designed to be adaptable to different
>technology areas, e.g. location-aware computing, medical device
>software, etc. But we do expect that it will undergo various
>iterations as we work to continuously improve the terms of the addendum.
>Currently Intel has drafted a software license by attaching the terms
>of the privacy addendum to the text of the Eclipse Public License.
>Intel is releasing software it calls POLS (Privacy Observant Location
>System) under this license. Because we would prefer to release our
>software under an "approved" open-source license, we are currently
>initiating discussions with the Open Source Initiative to encourage
>the adoption of the Privacy Amendment as an acceptable amendment for
>use in conjunction with OSI's approved open source licenses (as
>To that end, the group plans to work with OSI and the open source
>community to further refine the privacy addendum, and to ultimately
>get to a point where the privacy addendum can serve as an "OSI
>approved" addendum to be added to OSI-approved open source licenses
>for technology implicating end-user privacy concerns, and made
>available to the open source community at large. We believe this is
>an innovative approach to addressing privacy issues. We believe that
>a bottoms-up effort to encourage the development of privacy-sensitive
>social norms is necessary and in fact critical for both privacy and
>public adoption of the technology. We post this information here,
>with the hope that others will see value in this approach, and pursue
>similar methods for providing privacy protection for users of
>More information is available at: http://
>privacyaddendum.seattle.intel-research.net/. Please reply to this
>list with comments.
>You are subscribed as dmaher@xxxxxxx
>To manage your subscription, go to
>Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/