Mobilizing Industry
From A2K Wiki
Contents
|
Panelists
Speakers
- Brad Biddle - Senior Attorney, Intel Corporation
- Andrew McLaughlin - Head, Global Public Policy and Government Affairs, Google Inc.
- Nagla Rizk - Associate Professor and Chair, Economics Department, American University in Cairo
- Pam Samuelson - Professor, School of Information and Boalt Hall School of Law and Co-Director, Berkeley Center for Law and Technology, University of California, Berkeley
- Jule Sigall - Senior Attorney, Legal & Corporate Affairs, Microsoft Corp.
- Brent Woodworth - Worldwide Segment Manager, Crisis Response Team, IBM Corp.
Moderator
- Colin Maclay - Managing Director, Berkman Center for Internet & Society
A2K2 Conference Organizer
- Katherine McDaniel - Knight Fellow, Information Society Project, Yale Law School
Panel Description
What role does the private sector play in fostering access to knowledge (A2K) initiatives? What role can it play? What role should it play?
The private sector has undeniably invested in certain aspects of knowledge development. Technology companies have donated equipment, created technical training programs, and helped develop the infrastructure necessary to grow and sustain access to knowledge. Mobile service companies have increased access to telephony and the internet. While other companies within the private sector have invested in more traditional methods of knowledge development, taking the forms of grants of physical infrastructure, direct foreign investment, or partnerships with technology transfer provisions.
And yet, despite the private sector’s investments, the government sector and non-profit sectors often work merely in parallel, as opposed to in partnership to achieve A2K goals. This lack of coordination may derive from pragmatic factors or theoretical disagreements. This panel seeks to address how the private sector and civil society and can work more closely as the A2K movement develops.
- Why do private stakeholders invest in A2K projects? What are the economic incentives behind the investment? What are the limits of these economics incentives? Where might these incentives openly conflict with goals of governmental and activists agents in the A2K movement?
- What are the practical limits of private sector investment as seen by those within the sector and those outside of it? Should private sector investment play a smaller role in A2K development than its potential allows? Should it play a larger or smaller role than it currently does?
- Undoubtedly there are occasions when public-private partnerships either fail to develop, or worse, develop and then fail, even though the economic incentives of the private sector agent align with the goals the public-or non-profit agents. Why does this happen? Is it due to lack of communication? Or are the differences that arise fundamental and not merely a matter of semantics. If the former, how can communication channels be opened. If the latter, is the problem insurmountable?
- Can organizations that disagree over some aspects of A2K development nevertheless work together on projects that promote goals that both organizations embrace? In addition, if so, how can such partnerships are fostered?
- Can we form a community of individuals and organizations committed to A2K given the diversity of motivations of various parties? Or is /community/ unrealistic? Should we aim instead for temporary alliances?
Speaker Presentation Slides
Brad Biddle (Intel Corporation) slides. .ppt format. High level discussion points only; not intended as a stand-alone presentation.
Remote Questions for the Panelists
Notes
Colin Maclay
Panel moderator, Colin Maclay (Managing Director of the Berkman Center) described how, in his travels around Latin America and India, he asked industry people who they felt could do the most to address the ICT and development space. Each industry would identify itself as the one which could make a difference. They believed they could do something to make a difference.
Nagla Rizk
Nagla Rizk, Associate Professor and Chair, Economics Department in the American University in Cairo
Nagla discussed the connection between open source software, music, knowledge, and human development in Egypt. What do software and music have in common? They are the knowledge capital; they are the output of human minds; they are digitizable; they are subject to economies of scale; they lend themselves to piracy; they are goods that are granular; and are subject to peer production.
Nagla described her study of OSS in Egypt. Egypt, with a wealth of human capital and fifty percent of the country under the age of twenty, is at the center of cultural creation in the Middle East. Nagla’s research has indicated that the role of copyright in Egyptian music is marginal. Mobilizing the industry to do what? In Egypt, what are we trying to do? How can we achieve wider access? The software industry had involvement in educational programs but the small players, those involved in commons production such as underground music producers also must be involved. What can the government do? Middle management of the government should be involved
Jule Sigall
Jule Sigall Senior Attorney in Microsoft's Legal & Corporate Affairs department
In thinking about this panel, Jule asked himself the questions “mobilizing industry to do what?” and what is A2K? Sitting down with colleagues at Microsoft, he discussed the issue as how to connect people so they can access the stores of knowledge around the world? Yesterday I heard a lot of legal and intellectual property questions. Jule added some questions to the overall A2K discussion. Is there a role for proprietary systems in A2K and what is this role? Can copyrights and patents be part of the solution?
Brad Biddle
Brad Biddle, Senior Attorney for Intel Brad focused on the experience Intel has had with the WIPO Broadcast Treaty as a partnership between industry and civil society. The term “mobilizing a movement” is alien rhetoric for industry in the context of corporate goals to maximize shareholder investment. However, corporations can have a sophisticated understanding of their self interest and these interests can align well with A2K goals. Intel is investing great amounts in introducing digital technology to the next billion people in the world. Intel does this for economic objectives of increasing brand, etc.
Regarding the WIPO Broadcast Treaty, civil society has been ahead of industry. Consensus developed around key issues. This is an example of effective industry-civil society cooperation. Some challenges include overcoming mistrust. Some organizations can’t or won’t work with the “other side.” Another challenge is that it’s difficult to do more than just informal, ad hoc cooperation.
What’s next to explore? The issue of copyright limitations and exceptions. Useful areas to explore include open access publishing, standards, patent quality, and privacy.
Brent Woodworth
Brent Woodworth, head of IBM’s Crisis Response Team Access to knowledge can help save lives. Breaking down the stovepipes or silos of knowledge is critical. Brent focused on disaster relief. His team has responded to international crises. His team has gained experienced about what has worked and what has not worked. He used the 1999 earthquake in Turkey as an example. Other examples include the tsunami in Indonesia. There was a tremendous challenge of coordination, logistics, and communication. Katrina is another example of a disaster to which the IBM team responded. Communication and information are critical in trying to make decisions. You must break down the stove pipes and find a way for individual interests to interoperate. Barriers to achieving communications include proprietary systems and standards. Brent described SAHANA, an open source relief management system. It is an example of sectors coming together to save lives. There are economic benefits of risk management and mitigation. The bottom line is that cooperation is key.
Andrew McLaughlin
Andrew McLaughlin, Head, Global Public Policy and Government Affairs, Google Inc. Those whose power is threatened by zero cost production and distribution will, as they always have, turn to the law as a mechanism for calcifying the power they have always had. Andrew has been involved in dealing with Google Earth challenged, YouTube blocked, copyright lawsuits, etc. in various countries. It is critically important to build on the fact that so many people are being restricted by those using the rhetoric of property rights to sustain advantages. Access to knowledge really is political in that it seeks to correct imbalances. It seeks to restore the role of the individual. The goal is to restore balance. It would be a mistake for social movements to depend on corporations but, the good news, is that the economic self-interests of corporations align with movement goals. Be wary but be opportunistic. There are great opportunities to build alliances. The A2K movement should look to corporations for business models. One of the big challenges in getting developing world knowledge available is, how will it be funded. Business models of access to knowledge are interesting, such as advertising models. Andrew also described how the patent system is out of balance.
Pam Samuelson
One of the first battles Pam encountered was the scope of copyright protection for software. In the early stages of the software copyright wars, alliances built up with firms like Sun Microsystems. Interoperability was in their interest and they aligned with academic communities on this issue. Large amounts of money were lined up against this movement toward interoperability. A second war Pam was involved in was the digital copyright wars of the 1980s. Discussed the DMCA. There’s a great role for strategic alliances in these fights.
Question and Answer
How can we break down walls? Jule. One of the things learned over the years in the software industry, is that it always has had an interesting relationship with the law. We have worked closely with Creative Commons. In our view, intellectual property only works if it works for everyone. Intellectual property is supposed to protect but also promote the dissemination of knowledge. What kind of mix can be developed for new communities of information creation?
Brad. Corporations are profit-driven, but strategic alliances are possible. The opportunity to explore now is whether there is a larger A2K agenda we can sign on to. The issue is not just “opposing IP” but finding ways to encourage innovation.
Question. Jule asked whether there can be a role for proprietary systems in A2K. Brent, in describing his team’s crisis response activities, gave examples of the life and death implications of proprietary systems. Would some of the other panelists discuss where they stand on this conflict between those wanting, economically, to preserve proprietary technologies versus the need for greater openness and interoperability to achieve A2K goals such as affective government disaster response services.
Notes B
Nagla Rizk
(missed)
Jule Sigall, Microsoft
Unlimited Potential program aims to give more tech to poor people. See the presentation posted on the wiki.
"A2K" is a branding term, possibly more narrowly focused at legal and policy questions than on a social movement. The focus of A2K affects how you engage and mobilize industry.
Microsoft wants to know, is there a role for proprietary systems? If so, what precisely is the scope of that role? Can patents and copyrights be part of the solution? The IPR regime is shaped by companies like Microsoft, but there is also grassroots support for IPRs. Even the UDHR aims to protect IPRs.
Nagla and Ronaldo are right. There are many thriving businesses oblivious to IPRs. So we need to know, what is motivating those individuals? What forms of excludability are present in these communities, and how do they relate to the ability of individuals to recoup investment on their work?
Brad Biddle, Intel
"Mobilizing a social movement" vs. "strategic alignment of interests"
"Mobiilizing a movement": alien rhetoric for industry, even if individuals are supportive.
The ultimate corporate goal: maximize shareholder investment.
But: corporations can have a sophisticated understanding of their self-interst, and these interests can align well with A2K goals.
Example: Intel World Ahead Program. Intel has a profit-motivated reason for doing this. Helps brand, expands market, helps us hire good people.
WIPO Broadcast Treaty
Civil society groups ahead of industry. We heard about it from EFF, particularly Gwen Hinze.
Developed consensus around key issues:
- No demonstrated need for treaty
- Scope too broad
- Home and personal networks
- Intermediary liability
- Exclusion of Internet
Best approach was "don't ask don't tell" on issues we didn't agree with.
Effective industry-civil society cooperation. We had a suprising effect on the treaty, which seemed like a done deal.
Some challenges:
- Overcoming mistrust
- Some organizations can't or won't work with "the other side."
- Difficult to do more than just informal, ad hoc cooperation.
(Slide with groups involved: industry, civil society, lbirary, creative commons)
What next?
(Brad's personal views)
Low hanging fruit: copyright limitations and exceptions.
Useful areas to explore:
- Open access publishing
- Standards
- Patent quality
- Privacy
- "National interest" limitations on global R&D
- Others?
Brent Woodworth, IBM Crisis Response Team
We grow up in a silo, stovepipe culture. People don't share.
The crisis response team responds to international emergencies. Earthquakes, genocide, volcanos, acts of war, tsunamis, mudslides.
(Photos illustrating what is at stake in this movement.)
Keys to success: cooperation, communications, information management. If you can't call for help, you can't get help. Information can be as important as food, water, or shelter in a disaster. We have to break down the silos.
This seems obvious, but it's been hard to implement b/c governments implemented proprietary systems.
Developed SAHANA (find it on the web, sahana.lk), an open source relief management system. Collaboration b/t many firms. Implemented in Pakistan, Philippines, Ecuador, states of NY, CA. Sharing of info b/c public and private sector.
This system worked b/c we had a common goal: share lives.
Used non-binding memoranda of understanding (b/t public and private) to get people to work together.
(See wiki for more.)
Andrew McClaughlin, Google
Internet is finally realizing the democratic potential. Tools are starting to catch up.
Those whose power is threatened will turn to law to calcify and harden privileges they've always had.
To answer Jules, A2K really is a political movement to correct imbalances, restore the role of the individual in copyright/patent/trademark/trade secrets.
It would be a big mistake for any social movement to depend on corporations as part of the vanguard. It's not going to happen. But many businesses now have naked self interest in the goals of the movement. See Web 2.0.
Civil society plays a key role in helping corporations to understand their self interest. We work with EFF and Gwen a lot.
The A2K movement should look to businesses to provide business models to replace ad hoc efforts at getting developing country info online. e.g., advertising now funding a signficant amount of information flows on the internet. Take advantage of the advertising systems offered by Google, Yahoo, etc., to monetize A2K. Don't be too ideological about advertising.
Patent system is out of wack, and we are devoting a lot of attention to it.
Property rights model for trademark outside the US is non-existent. Merits attention.
Fair use is poorly instantiated in most systems.
Pam Samuelson, Boalt Hall
Lessons learned from IP wars over last 20 years: e.g., Look and feel.
Software copyright wars
I was naive that the right ideas would win out. Would organize profs to write amicus briefs.
So in the later stages of the software copyright laws, we made alliances with businesses, like Sun. The businesses liked it b/c they didn't look nakedly self interested.
At the beginning all the big money was lined up against us. Seemed inevitable that whatever IBM wanted was going to happen.
Digital copyright wars
WIPO internet treaties. We got everyone who cared about the issues and focused them on how parts of the white paper would hurt their business. The WIPO treaties turned out pretty well.
But when came back for the DMCA the alliances weren't as strong. Once ISPs got safe harbors, and others got their carve outs, they stepped out of the fight. So the public interest got screwed.
Reverse notice of takedown regime -- give notice to someone who locks up material with TPM so I can make fair use.
Copyright Term Extension Act -- Made entertainment industry think that they could get whatever they want from Congress. We should've put other (e.g., IT) industry players on notice that this would happen. We did this with the broadcast flag.
Database treaty, US legislation, UCITA
In database context we mobilized scientific community very well. Also mobilized people who depend on information flows, e.g., Charles Schwab, fantasy sports leagues, internet companies.
Disney was great on UCITA even though at the same time they were not good on copyright extension. But it wasn't industry that was responsible for death of UCITA, it was state AGs and withdrawal of ALI.
Think of long-term and strategic partnerships separately. They aren't necessarily the same thing.
Q & A
What have we learned?
JS - We want to help users tag content as creative commons. But we need to see how we can bring cooperative sharing communities into the copyright fold so we don't have copyright wars.
BB - Is there a larger A2K agenda we could sign on to? It needs to be a positive agenda, perhaps framed around innovation. Opposing IP is a non-starter for business.
AM - This is not about opposing IP, but about correcting rhetoric to establish a balance.
Will the collaboration lead to a positive change in Egypt?
NR: Is there a tension b/t top-down directives of established businnesses, and directives of businesses built on cooperation from the ground up? An ad-supported model is relevant and already being done.
Is this the start of a long-term partnership?
PS: Some issues are closer to mission of corporations. e.g., broadcast treaty. Others are further away. e.g., access to medicines, traditional knowledge, agriculture.
Are you guys working on bilateral agrements?
AM: (missed) We haven't been paying much attention. This became apparent in the Australia FTA. US government in the wake of this has said it just never heard another point of view. Lobbying on the agreements is just now starting. We can't reopen Korea and Malaysia, which have just gone before Congress. But so far it seems that the negotiating agencies want to replicate US copyright -- they are not opposed to replicating fair use too.
How do coalitions form across so many different policy domains without personal animus?
JS: If businesses have divisions on both sides of issues they are less likely to take the issues personally.
PS: Must be deeply civil. Once become repeat players personal dimension drops out.
What is the role of proprietary technology?
We should have more small- and medium-sized businesses represented.
