Date

Mar 10, 2014

Attendees

Discussion Item 1

Do companies have to respond to query within jurisdictional context, and how about cross-jurisdictionally?
Dazaah Greenwood (MIT) highlight trade association as a venue to channel the consent receipt request through. Leads to points: What companies need to respond to and why? Legal necessities for companies.
Let's let them (companies and trade associations) highlight what issues they have with the consent receip request
John highlights specific context of California that gives us reason to leverage our request there
Mary is bringing up value of jurisdictional case law and re-enforces the standard reason why there is incentive for us
Innis: Need to point to something concrete within jurisdiction to ensure company compliance
Mark: Pull in regional and international standards as well as jurisdictional law
Innis: If we are challenged, we need a more concrete rebuttal to offer companies seeking to reject jurisdiction (we need an actual case rather than airing privacy rights en masse); we need the basis as a decision
Mark: Let's map the UK version onto the US/California version and see where we can build and differentiate on the two

Discussion Item 2: Individual Use of Consent Receipt

Mary: Re wide use, the "consent receipt" is now in the public domain and within 'ownership' of the ON group so IP contributors can engage it publicly but there is no individual exclusive claim for profit; companies success for reasons beyond the technology we are developing; from the view of the user, it is beneficial to have a ubiquitous product that becomes a standard
Mark: There is a difficult challenge in deciding what IP goes in and what goes out, but it widely marketable and Valentino is highlighting that
Mary: Need to go over Kantara Agreement to highlight any issues and obligations, specific call next week or Thursday (integrating it into wider call, holding it in widest forum);
- Tuesday next week

Discussion Item 3: UK Consent Receipt

Mark: Re creating a UK consent receipt, we need to agree on plan/purpose to understand what our path is and target research and development of local jurisdictions (benefit from Kantara process); Inclined to adapt our existing model; Issues with UK version come from potentially forking our efforts
Innis: Let Iain do the work as this will prevent Mark from becoming focus divided and develop the map
Mark: How about we use the UK before Ireland as the next phase of the development so that everyone wins
Innis: Potential for pan-European development no matter what country we start in
Mark: Multiple laws in each jurisdiction, cross-jurisdictionally, and their compliance to regional laws (i.e. ECD, EC Data Directive)
Innis: There is a legal minefield in navigating new jurisdictions so multiple contributors is great
Mark: Develop approach that is more method oriented, which will come through with tests and experience

Discussion Item 4: NSTIC Application / Funding Oppertunities

Mary: NSTIC application has been accepted for submission; attachment has been re-submitted to them to make this possible... We're in!
Mary: Because the US fails to provide privacy rights, we have space to contribute to develop regulatory persuasion and to companies, building beyond Do-Not-Track
Mary: There is the Knight Foundation that we need to tackle by 18 March 2014, max. $1million
Mark: There are also major EU and EC funding opportunities that will require as much or more work as NSTIC so we need to be strategic in our development
Mark: We need to finalise 5 page summary of Consent Receipt project
Mark: Send list to John re EU and EC funding opportunities
Mark: linking options with HiiL, Southampton, and German Commissioner's office
Mark: Colette will look into what is feasible in limited timeframe for EC funding
Innis: WIll get list of different funding sources and share with Mark, sort time/money from Common Terms and Par
Mark: We need to figure out feasible workload, coordination between all parties will be big burden as well as coordinating application; need for resources for this coordination side of things

Action Items:

Time	Item	Who	Notes