143 Matching Annotations
  1. Dec 2020
    1. This would make a really good addition to the Resource section of the Blockchain topic page. Can I help with a summary, or will you upload, Arvin?

      ||ArvinKamberi|| ||Jovan|| ||AndrijanaG||

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

  2. Nov 2020
    1. Nice to know it has passed. But in the world I'm living in, I think this should 'during' ||AndrijanaG||

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

    1. USA and China

      Did you see this conversation between someone from US Dept of State, and someone from China's (presumably) Ministry of Info & Tech? To my knowledge, there hasn't been a similar session at any previous IGFs where US and China openly and publicly bashed each other. Or? ||Jovan|| ||VladaR|| ||AndrijanaG||

    2. Ministry of Information Industry and Technolog

      Of which country? Please tell me it's China ||AndrijanaG||

    3. Global Initiative on Data Security (GIDS) i

      Do you have any more info? ||VladaR|| ||AndrijanaG||

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

    1. How is data transformed into knowledge and what are some of the basic principles of knowledge management?

      One of your fave topics ||Jovan||

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

  3. Oct 2020
    1. o balance the need to tackle illegal content and activity online with that of protecting users rights and freedoms, while supporting innovation in Europe.

      Reading between the lines: to balance the need to tackle any illegal content we come across (vs the illegal content we're informed about, as is currently the law), without being exposed to liability over infringements to freedom of speech, as is the case in the US (New York Post and all that s*). In order for you to support innovation, you need to make sure we are not exposed to the same BS situations

    2. t is framed more as a matter of the freedom of speech of the service provider than as a tool to protect them from liability for illegal content

      This is the difference between the US and the EU's approach, according to Big Tech. And they're right.

    3. under Section 230(c) of the Communi-cations Decency Act

      Ha! Ha! Ha! Ok, we give up. Here goes the reference to Section 230. Happy?

    4. it is not entirely clear if these measures confer ‘actual knowledge’ on the service provider1. The possibility that a service provider might be consid-ered to have ‘actual knowledge’ due to the introduction of go

      PRECISELY. Here's the crux of the problem. This creates a legal uncertainty for platforms, esp with the new DSA which will put a spotlight on the behaviour of social platforms

    5. a safeguard for service providers,

      But add a safeguard. Call it whatever you like. In this paper, we've called it 'necessary safeguard', or the EU equivalent of the US' Good Samaritan principle. We haven't mentioned Section 230, but that's what we also mean: the DSA's equivalent of Section 230

    6. he current liability regime and the prohibition on general monitoring

      Notice-and-takedown stays. Prohibition of filters stays.

    7. want to do more to voluntarily and proactively remove illegal content from their services, and society wants the same

      Reading between the lines: We are sick and tired of hearing governments complain that we don't do enough. Do you want us to go beyond notice-and-takedown? Give us the necessary safeguards from liability that we may face due to content removal

    8. y a governance structure.

      Reading between the lines: We agree to oversight by a dedicated body. Better than being hauled to court.

    9. US ‘Good Samaritan’ principle but should be distinct in its basis in EU law and respect of European values and fundamental rights. This should be balanced with minimum information levels in notices and a human review of removal appeals, an

      Reading between the lines: We do have similar limited liability rules. They're called Section 230. But, Trump wants to kill Section 230. So does Biden. And in Europe, you're moving very fast. So, let's get Europe settled, by introducing a 230-like clause into DSA. (Choice of words in their article is amazing)

    10. a European-centric principle, based on EU law, and subject to European oversight

      Reading between the lines: Since the EU is moving fast with DSA, we want updated limited liability rules (which we consider 'necessary safeguards') ASAP. It would take long to have global rules, and we're not sure that's even possible. So, EC, push these into DSA ahead of 2 December, please

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

    1. The Framework would acknowledge that the service provider is best placed to determine how to adapt their systems quick-ly, incorporate the necessary safeguards for both users and service providers and meet their obligation of proportional re-sponsibility.

      What companies are saying:

      We have two problems:

      1. The first relates to 'harmful' content. Illegal content is not an issue by itself, as the law offers a legal basis act. If it's illegal, it will be removed. Rather, the issue is, how do you define 'harmful-but-not-illegal'? This should not be left to companies to decide, as is now the case with companies setting terms of use and having to update them often.
      2. Especially in the EU, laws vary so much on content which is illegal vs 'harmful-but-not-illegal'. Example: blasphemy.

      For the EU and the upcoming DSA, this is how to solve it:

      • The DSA should first/for now tackle content which is already defined as (i) illegal (ii) across the EU. The DSA would acknowledge that companies are best placed to determine how to incorporate the "necessary safeguards" (point of contention, as MEPs do not want ex-ante filters) and how to meet their obligation of "proportional responsibility" (ex, Google being 20% at fault, while the author is 80% at fault).
      • Then, policymakers should then consider aspects related on 'harmful-but-not-illegal', taking into account the issues which service providers have so far faced, and the methods which service providers already have in place.
      • Until then, companies will continue to develop "best practices to tackle harmful content" + having a strong procedure for appeals.
    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

    1. Taking inspiration from yesterday's call... coincidentally, Google has launched new tools for reporters, altogether called Journalist Studio. Not sure if our developers are aware? ||Jovan||

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

    1. because enforcers in other countries have been held back by American timidity

      Have they?! Has the EU been timid? I don't think so. Unless he's referring to some other place...

    2. Chicago School

      This is so deeply embedded in how US jurists look at antitrust, that it is one of the major obstacles to reforming antitrust law

    3. Senate Commerce Committee subpoena’d the CEOs of Google, Facebook, and Twitter, with a unanimous vote, and the press barely noticed

      indeed!

    4. This pro-monopoly conventional wisdom is impossible to remember because it’s so embarrassing

      NOW it's embarrassing. But back then, the laissez-faire approach was also a way for US tech to grow, and to win the global tech race.

    5. We the people changed our minds

      Changed our minds about what? A bit too simplistic. We changed our minds, as companies grew bigger and more powerful, threatening even governments

    6. follow-on enforcement action at the agencies,

      This is supposed to be the next step... DOJ filing a case against Google

    7. imposing a presumptive ban on future acquisitions by large platforms, imposing a presumption that vertical mergers by large platforms are unlawful

      Would it be a blanket ban? Acquisition of small companies is one thing (some start-ups are created with the aim of being sold off to a Big Tech company if they are successful); acquisition of large undertakings (ex Google and Fitbit) is quite another. [Re google/fitbit, we're following separately]

    8. mergers can go through and when they can’t

      The rules are there. Making clearer rules, perhaps? Reviewing when authorities should not give the final nod?

    9. Cicilline suggests writing statutes to overrule a host of Supreme Court precedents that have unreasonably crippled antitrust laws on things like pricing below cost or abusing one’s dominant position as a platform

      He makes a good point, and with strong bipartisan support and agreement, this is not a farfetched proposition

    10. (1) a legislative break-up and restructuring of big tech platforms to restore competition online (2) a strengthening of laws against monopolies and mergers, (3) institutional reforms to fix and fund the Federal Trade Commission and DOJ Antitrust Division, and (4) restoring the ability of ordinary citizens to take monopolists to court on their own.

      This summarises the report's recommendations. On 1, this is probably the best route. On 2, weak enforcement makes the law useless, no matter how strong it is. On 3, first they are criticised, then they are sugarcoated with the promise of funds. What DOJ needs is to get on with it, ie, what AG Barr is pushing for. On 4, is there a Max Schrems equivalent in the US? Doubt it.

    11. whether they simply treat lawbreaking as a cost of business

      This is part of the problem of being too big (or too rich). Fines and penalties are often insignificant. It's why the EU does not hesitate to impose hefty fines

    12. attacks the way that these corporations finance think tanks and academics

      The fact that the Congressman describes how the Big Tech have been financing think tanks and shaping policy does not make the document more political...

    13. Federal Trade Commission and Antitrust Division for refusing to enforce monopolization laws and failing to stop mergers, even when they had evidence that such mergers were anti-competitive

      Ouch indeed. Basically, the Congressman is attacking the FTC, and the Justice Department - the same department which is about to launch an antitrust case against Google ("this week or next week")

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

  4. Sep 2020
    1. The filing is the latest volley in a legal battle that has lasted almost a decade. In 2011, Max Schrems, an Austrian lawyer, began filing privacy complaints with the Irish data protection commissioner, which regulates Facebook in the EU, about the social network’s practices.Those complaints gathered momentum two years later, when the Guardian revealed the NSA’s Prism program, a vast surveillance operation involving direct access to the systems of Google, Facebook, Apple and other US internet companies. Schrems filed a further privacy complaint, which was eventually referred to the European court of justice.That court found in 2015 that, because of the existence of Prism, the “Safe Harbour” agreement, which allowed US companies to transfer the data of EU citizens back home, was invalid.The EU then attempted a second legal agreement for the data transfers, a so-called privacy shield; that too was invalidated in July this year, with the court again ruling that the US does not limit surveillance of EU citizens.In September, the Irish data protection commissioner began the process of enforcing that ruling. The commissioner issued a preliminary order compelling the social network to suspend data transfers overseas.In response, Nick Clegg, the company’s head of global affairs and communications, published a blogpost that argued that “international data transfers underpin the global economy and support many of the services that are fundamental to our daily lives”.

      A good summary of the legal battle around data transfers of EU citizens' data to US and other third countries

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

    1. The EU executive seeks to adopt a position before the end of 2020, and before doing so, would also require a positive opinion on the UK’s data protection standards from the European Data Protection Board (EDPB), as well as a green light from EU member states.

      After Brexit, UK may adopt different rules for international data flows. For EU data to be transferred to the UK, there needs to be an adequacy decision.

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

    1. Premium Features

      Another example of non-clickable icons. Seems to be the trend. Let me know your verdict, and I'll ask creative/tech to update. ||Jovan||

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

    1. Virtual Events For Corporations

      You prefer clickable sections like this? ||Jovan||

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

    1. Diigo at a glance

      Here's another example of icons/tabs to show what the company offers. Tabs are not clickable, and they don't give the impression that you need to click them ||Jovan||

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

  5. Aug 2020
    1. My mom, Jackie, had me when she was a 17-year-old high school student in Albuquerque, New Mexico

      The personal story

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

    1. exclusivity agreement is an agreement in which a firm requires its customers to buy exclusively from it

      Non-price dimension #4: exclusivity agreements - where a company obliges users to buy exclusively from it - WHEN the aim is for a dominant company to diminish or stop competing companies from entering or growing in the market. Although this is US law, the 3 anti-trust complaints filed by the European Commission against Apple (the App Store cases) in June 2020 are examples of this.

    2. Collusion is sometimes the easiest type of anticompetitive conduct to identify, especially per se offenses like price-fixing, bid-rigging, and market allocations

      Non-price dimension #3: collusion, which includes behaviour like price-fixing, bid-rigging, and market allocations

    3. coordinated conduct that creates or enhances market power

      Non-price dimension #2: coordinated conduct that increases market power. Yahoo and Google agreed to coordinate their ad strategy, but were stopped by the DoJ.

    4. Consider, for example, a product that never reaches the market or is withdrawn from the market due to an unlawful acquisition.  The antitrust laws should protect the competition that would be lost in that scenario as well

      Non-price dimension #1: lost competition due to unlawful acquisition. Facebook is currently accused of the "copy, acquire, kill" strategy to eliminate competition

    5. competition has price and non-price dimensions.

      Anti-competitive behaviour has price and non-price dimensions. Price dimensions are clear

    6. we already have in our possession the tools we need to enforce the antitrust laws in cases involving digital technologies.  U.S. antitrust law is flexible enough to be applied to markets old and new

      Does the US need new or updated antitrust law? Assistant AG says NO

    7. The company defended its practices and its “integrated” structure by arguing that it offered the public superior price, performance, and innovation

      AT&T's defence in the 1974 antitrust case. Its claim that it offered the public superior price, performance, and innovation, did not fly.

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

    1. Cicilline laid out common patterns across the four companies

      This is the Judiciary Committee's main strategy in this hearing: to find common strategy that justifies updating current competition rules

    2. our economy and our democracy

      Nuances: Our economy = Dem's concerns Our democracy = Rep's concerns

    3. House Judiciary Committee

      Who is conducting investigations? July's USA hearings were before the House Judiciary Committee

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

    1. Wednesday’s hearing ends the Judiciary Committee’s probe into Big Tech, it’s only the beginning of future regulatory or legislative action. What the executives say during the hearing could provide evidence for a new antitrust probe from law enforcement or provide the foundation for bills aimed at regulating the industry from Congress

      Judiciary Committee's work is done. What antitrust campaigners are hoping for is either a new investigation, or bills from Congress

    2. to show how anti-competitive behavior is an industry-wide pattern

      US context: Democrat lawyers want to show that this is an industry-wide problem. The law cannot be changed for one company, but there is more leverage if it can be shown that every Big Tech company is involved in anti-competitive behaviour

    3. While Democrats push the antitrust case, Republicans have their own set of concerns and may try to veer Wednesday’s conversation toward content moderation

      US context: Democrats concerned about antitrust. Republicans about content moderation

    4. Facebook’s history of troublesome acquisitions, including Instagram, that have largely avoided regulatory scrutiny

      Issue with Facebook: acquisitions such as Instagram, which have largely avoided scrutiny

    5. Google will likely be asked to address its dominance as a search engine

      Issue with Google: dominant search engine

    6. Apple is facing active antitrust inquiries in both the US and EU over its app store policies, particularly the flat 30 percent cut the company collects for fees paid through the store. Last month, Cicilline told The Verge that the fees Apple charges equate to “highway robbery.

      Issue with Apple (US & EU investigations): sellers have to pay 30% of their fees to the iStore, which amounts to daylight robbery

    7. But in April, The Wall Street Journal reported that Amazon employees used independent seller data to guide the development of Amazon’s own products. According to the Journal, employees allegedly analyzed the sales and profit margins of products like a car trunk organizer sold by a third-party seller before launching its own competing product. After the report was published, the House Judiciary Committee called on Bezos to testify in light of the story. It’s a good bet that Bezos will be asked about the Journal piece specifically and be forced to explain what the company is doing

      A second problem is that CEOs have been telling half-truths. Who is right?

    8. dominance of a small number of digital platforms and the adequacy of existing antitrust laws and enforcement

      Explained even better. The key issue is the Big Tech's dominance, and the adequacy of existing antitrust laws and enforcement

    9. how the executives’ respective companies have avoided liability under current antitrust laws because those competition rules were never crafted with the tech industry’s behaviors in mind

      This is the key issue. Current US competition rules are not adequate to tackle the Big Tech's behaviour

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

    1. House subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial, and Administrative Law, which is a subset of the broader House Judiciary Committee.

      Who is conducting investigations? July's US hearing is before the House subcommittee on Antitrust, Commercial, and Admin Law (falling under the House Judiciary Committee)

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

    1. But unless we’re very careful, AI systems won’t see that - they’ll just learn about the world as it is, with all its unfairness and inequality, not the world as we want it to be. And they’ll dedicate their intelligence to reproducing the past, not to creating a brighter future

      Principle of garbage in, garbage out. Inequalities and all.

    2. For instance, the BigMedilytics project – which is funded by the EU – has used AI to improve the treatment of some of the 15 million Europeans who live with heart failure

      AI for health

    3. The world’s data centres already account for as much carbon as flying does. And since the importance of data will only grow, we need to be willing to take decisive action, to deal with its effects on our climate and our environment.

      Data centres' carbon emissions as high as air travel

    4. Agricultural machinery can use AI to cut the use of pesticides, so farmers can produce more, with less effect on the environment

      Digital technology and agriculture

    5. digital technology can help us become the world’s first climate-neutral continent by 2050. Smart electricity grids can help to smooth the transition to renewable energy, by allowing us to adjust the electricity we use to what we produce, not the other way round

      Digital technology and climate

    6. we’ll soon find that our governments are stripped of the resources that fund the services we all rely on. And we’ll see digital businesses push aside their offline rivals, not by offering a better service, but just because they don’t pay tax

      Why should companies pay tax? Because tax funds the services we rely on, and because companies which don't pay tax will push aside their offline rivals (< latter is slippery argument)

    7. digitisation must never be an excuse for companies to turn their backs on those workers, and deny them the security and the decent conditions they deserve. So we need to make sure that companies can’t escape their obligations to their staff, just by putting a platform between employers and workers

      Clearly against sharing economy platforms which seek to classify their workers as independent contractors

    8. divide, in the way that some tech companies seem to expect an exemption from the duties that bind our society together – paying tax, for example, or respecting workers’ rights.

      Another type of divide: between companies who know what their responsibilities are, and those who want to be exempted from 'duties that bind our society together', ex paying tax, respecting workers' rights... ||Jovan||

  6. Jun 2020
    1. to attract the storage and processing of data from other countries and regions

      Which countries and regions is it aiming for? Africa? (Not Asia, not USA, not Russia...)

    2. free and safe flow of data should be ensured with third countries, subject to exceptions and restrictions for public security, public order and other legitimate public policy objectives of the European Union, in line with international obligations. This would allow the EU to have an open but assertive international data approach based on its values and strategic interests

      Legalese. And again: the EU will have 'an open but assertive international data approach based on its values and strategic interests'

    3. European companies operating in some third countries are increasingly faced with unjustified barriers and digital restrictions

      Is this directed at China?

    4. open, but assertive approach to international data flows, based on European values

      Open but assertive, based on European values.

      Dear USA, the data of EU citizens will now be in Europe. Or so we hope. We may allow the flow of data your way, but you will have to respect our laws, including GDPR. We will put our put down once we have our common spaces in place. Yours, the EU

    5. Common European data spaces in strategic sectors and domains of public interest

      Pillar 4: The 9 + 1 common data spaces

    6. Competences: Empowering individuals, investing in skills and in SMEs

      Pillar 3: Public awareness + improvements to the right to data portability (either updating GDPR s.20, or via new Data Act 2021)

    7. Enablers: Investments in data and strengthening Europe’s capabilities and infrastructures for hosting, processing and using data, interoperability

      Pillar 2: Investment for a High Impact Project on European data spaces and federated cloud infrastructures. Essentially, to create the infrastructure so that data stays/is hosted in Europe

    8. A cross-sectoral governance framework for data access and use

      Pillar 1: Data governance:

      • It will develop a framework for the 9 + 1 common data spaces, by end 2020
      • It will adopt an Implementing act on high-value sets (HVD), by Q1 2021
      • Develop a Data Act 2021 for cross-sectoral data-sharing (ex B2G) Plus, potential ex ante legislation on platforms & data; and jurisdictional measures to protect EU companies from being subject to jurisdictional claims from other countries
    9. APPENDIX to the Communication ‘A European strategy for data’

      The 9 + 1 common data spaces

    10. Artificial Intelligence

      AI is mentioned so many times. No wonder the Data Strategy was published alongside the AI white paper

    11. such as data protection rules

      ie, US Cloud Act could be seen as not as strict as GDPR. CHECK

    12. Data governance

      Not much is said here

    13. single European data space – a genuine single market for data, open to data from across the world – where personal as well as non-personal data, including sensitive business data, are secure and businesses also have easy access to an almost infinite amount of high-quality industrial data

      Concept of European data space (a genuine single market for data, open to data from across the world). Data in, but not data out. That is, data of European citizens kept within EU, rather than continuing to seep through EU's space towards USA.

    14. digital diplomacy

      What does digital diplomacy mean here?

    15. In the US, the organisation of the data space is left to the private sector, with considerable concentration effects. China has a combination of government surveillance with a strong control of Big Tech companies over massive amounts of data without sufficient safeguards for individuals. In order to release Europe’s potential we have to find our European way, balancing the flow and wide use of data, while preserving high privacy, security, safety and ethical standards.

      EU is positioning itself as a more balanced approach to the USA (private sector-led) and China (government-led)

    16. At the same time, the current environmental footprint of the ICT sector is estimated to be between 5 to 9% of the world’s total electricity use and more than 2% of all emissions, a large part of which is due to data centres, cloud services and connectivity. The EU’s digital strategy ‘Shaping Europe’s digital future’ proposes green transformation measures for the ICT sector.

      Relevant for digital & environment

    17. Data will also fuel the wide implementation of transformative practices such as the use of digital twins in manufacturing.

      Concept of digital twins. Used in manufacturing

    18. Data is the lifeblood of economic development

      New analogy

    19. data strategy is presented at the same time as the Commission’s Communication on “Shaping Europe’s digital future” and a White Paper on artificial intelligenc

      The three documents launched in February 2020

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

    1. As tax revenues from other sectors plummet and digital giant’s own revenues and power soar, these companies have an obligation to contribute back to society.

      Jovan made this argument two years ago in predictions

    2. For example, in Europe

      Good example of a company's (Amazon) tax situation in Europe

    3. Fair Tax Mark

      Mostly related to UK landscape. No wider influence

    4. And it is time that their companies pay their share of recovery.

      We know that. Not a question of if, but how

    5. When even a country the size of France is forced to backtrack,

      Old update - ignore link. France, UK, Italy and Spain have proposed a first-phase approach now

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

    1. Attempting to rush such difficult negotiations is a distraction from far more important matters

      COVID-19 is precisely why some countries are rushing. Thehy need a financial injection

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

    1. While Agustin Reyna of the European Consumer Organisation, BEUC, said that this was an impossible distinction to make, Facebook’s Director of Social and Economic Policy, EU Affairs, Phillip Malloch, said the lines between personal and non-personal data should be straightforward to draw

      They speak at approx 1:26:00 at https://www.pscp.tv/w/1YqGoRqNnjvKv

      Facebook's Malloch did not really substantiate. He referred to FB's Data Transfer project on data portability to show that FB is making the portability of personal data possible. Re data strategy, the GDPR's definition of personal data is more or less fine.

      Reyna from BEUC said in practice, many datasets include both personal and non-personal data, so it is very difficult to distinguish. The European Commission's approach to mixed data within a dataset is to treat the whole set as personal data, with full application of the GDPR.

      Also he says: The industry often says that consent is the main basis that they have to follow re GDPR. In reality, the private sector also needs to look at the principles underlying the GDPR (ex privacy by design & default, etc) as these are what define the scope under which data can be collected and processed.

      ||Jovan||

    2. Data Governance Act will be presented after the summer

      On the radar for autumn, and for our mid-year predictions ||Jovan||

    3. non-personal data (which the EU wants to liberalise) and personal data (ring-fenced by high data protection laws) can be distinguished from one another.

      Data taxonomy: the two broad categories of data ||Jovan||

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

    1. Automated Lane Keeping Systems (ALKS) will come into force in January 2021. The measures were adopted by the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations

      When referring to digital Geneva, here is a most recent example from UNECE's work on standardisation on autonomous vehicles ||MarcoLotti|| ||Jovan||

    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

    1. Absent a multilateral solution, more countries will take unilateral measures and those that have them already may no longer continue to hold them back. This, in turn, would trigger tax disputes and, inevitably, heightened trade tensions

      Risks from failure to reach common agreement:

      1. Unilateral measures, esp. by hard-struck countries
      2. Tax disputes
      3. Trade tensions
    Created with Sketch. Visit annotations in context

    Created with Sketch. Tags

    Created with Sketch. Annotators

    Created with Sketch. URL

    1. wasn’t a concession to Washington

      Ha! Of course it is

    2. automated digital services companies

      It will be ironic if the USA resumes negotiations on this limited phased approach, after they've been arguing they want digital taxation to tackle digitalisation in the broadest possible sense (ie to include companies affected by digitalisation even if strictly speaking they do not offer digital services like GAFA). It would actually confirm how their arguments were meant to delay negotiations