Data Portability User Bill of Rights

The following is provided in response to a request from the Data Portability EULA/TOS task force. The intent is to provide the basis for conversation related to identifying and quantifying the specific elements that might make up a user’s DP “Bill of Rights.”


[There is a great related discussion entitled “A Bill of Rights for Users of the Social Web” originated by Joseph Smarr, Robert Scoble, and Michael Arrington; and signed by more than two dozen leading individuals]

More specifically, to me, when I go to a web site I should have a reasonable expectation as to what I can and cannot do with the data that I bring, create, or reference within the site. And, I should also have reasonable understanding as to what the site owners can and cannot due with this collection of data related to me.

On the on hand, it doesn’t really matter what those boundaries are – provided they are disclosed up front and upheld throughout my relationship with the site. In this manner, I can make an informed decision as to whether or not I choose to continue. On the other hand, there must be disclosure, transparency, and accountability for this to work.

Ideally, I would go to a web site and there would prominently sit a Data Portability badge that identified the points of compliance in these areas that I am most concerned about. Display of the badge would provide the disclosure and transparency that I seek allowing me to make an informed decision. Likewise, display of the badge would also demonstrate accountability since the TOS identifying allowable usage of the badge would require compliance.

Further, the badge would not likely simply state compliance or non-compliance, rather “degrees” of participation. In a well structured user bill of rights, it is not likely that every site I choose to participate in will fully support every core tenant of Data Portability. I should be able to quickly identify which of the core elements that most interest me relevant to the site are in fact supported by the site.

Some of the key elements in this matter are directly related to privacy, usage, and control. From this we can then extrapolate a series of compliance statements that hopefully begin to take the shape of a user’s “bill of rights.” Specifically:

Key concepts:
- Data I bring, I have the right to take away
- Data I create, I have the right to share
- I have the right to choose who can and cannot access my data
- I have the right to access my data internally and externally

Specific questions:
- User personal data is private (y/n)
- Private data is secured (y/n)
- Personal data is fully removed upon request (y/n)
- Personal data is not sold or reused without permission (y/n)
- User data is accessible outside of the website (y/n)
- User data is available using industry standard formats (which ones)

Fringe thoughts:
- Public posts can be retracted (y/n)
- Public posts can be anonymous (y/n)


There is certainly more thought required in this area, both from me and others. Love to get everyone else’s opinions on the matter.

Facebook does about-face, shows true colors – and we like the aura!?

Having previously put its foot down regarding the proprietary nature of its instant messaging (see: Facebook bullies IM-provider Meebo), Facebook has demonstrated its desire to open its world to the masses by now embracing Meebo and their support of instant messaging via Facebook Connect.

Jason Kincaid of TechCrunch points out that this has been a contentious relationship with anyone’s bet as to the outcome. Yet here we are barely 30 days after a public smack down and Facebook is touting the very company they were previously dissing. So, what’s really going one here?

Meebo tried to provide a valued service that real-world customers craved. Facebook pointed out that such effort violated its terms of service and wielded the big hand of the giant (meaning, if we don’t provide it – you can’t). Meebo said, “yes --- but can’t we all just get along?” And then…clarity set in. Facebook affirmed that they were in fact the giant, but realized that the giant is not necessarily the enemy of the populous; and that life shared was life to be enjoyed – by ALL.

More importantly, the giant has revealed that it can dance to popular music and stay in step with the desire of the masses. This is an important precedent (one that Microsoft and Yahoo should pay more attention too), and one that we can only hope is an indication of things to come. Data portability is the enabler that allows these things to happen, and acceptance of such need is the vehicle that drives evolution, revolution, and enlightenment of the giant.

To me, Facebook has always been that elusive idea that always avoided the mainstream, that was happy living in the fringes of my vision, and that survived by not intruding on my day to day. But, particularly recently, Facebook has elevated itself to a position of leadership – of showing the way that, while not perfect, nevertheless demonstrates movement in the right direction. To quote Herbert, “The Sleeper has Awoken” -- and we all do really wish that it is everything we hope it can be!

But is this really enough, or is it just baby-steps in disguise of innovation? Opening up to another service is one thing, but embracing open standards and providing integration leadership is another thing altogether. This announcement lacks the embracement of existing and open methodologies in favor of proprietary solutions provided at the direction and discretion of the giant.

Even so, is this a step in the right direction? Absolutely. Is it enough? Not a chance. On the one hand users should smack Facebook for ignoring the entrenched standards that form the pillars of openness, on the other, they should applaud them (and encourage them) for finally moving in the right direction. But we should ALL remind Facebook that this is a work in progress and to not stray from the path. We encourage the effort and look forward to the next steps on the path to enlightenment – and ready the whip for deviation.

Facebook’s Move to “Openness” Setting de facto Standard?

Yesterday, Facebook took a further step in opening its network by introducing enhancements and new features to its developer APIs. Facebook’s new APIs make it easier for applications to update user statuses, links, and upload videos from outside of Facebook. This effort will likely generate a flurry of activity in the developer community as new applications are created and existing ones enhanced to take advantage of these new capabilities.

[Add to this the earlier announcement of Facebook’s support of OpenID and things are definitely starting to get interesting]

But beyond the power and convenience of integration and data portability from external sources, the real story lies just below the surface. Facebook is striving to become the ultimate repository for all of your social-media information and this is another step along that path. Their platform is becoming a global data-store and their APIs are empowering developers and users with standardized methods of interaction.

On the one hand there is very little about this that is open. Facebook controls the data, its access, and its availability. Facebook defines the integration, they determine the protocols, and the APIs, and even who can and cannot use any of this. This “openness” is all under the oversight, control, direction, and whim of the giant.

Yet, when you think about it, Facebook has made huge strides in extending its world beyond the looming walls of their garden. And, while I don’t think this was their original intent, they have nevertheless listened to their user base and observed the opportunity the market presents.

Some may call it baby steps, others an attempt at world domination. But the winner today is the user (and yes, it’s pretty good for Facebook too!); and the benefits continue to evolve. Along the way, these initiatives will provide new and innovative methods for interaction with users and data that may lead to de facto standards for data portability. Will that actually happen? That depends on Facebook’s “real” position on openness, the user’s tolerance and acceptance of that position, and the response from the other great giant seeking dominance in the global data-store market – Google.

Chris Messina just pointed out an awesome blog post regarding microformats in 2009 (thanks Chris!) -- this has EVERYTHING to do with Data Portability, your rights, and the web. Check out the post from Ben Ward in the UK and see for yourself!

xWinLib and Scrapplet announce enhanced drag and drop for Safari users

RadWebTech today released advanced drag and drop functionality for Safari users on the xWinLib and Scrapplet platforms -- no plug-ins required. Safari users now join IE, Firefox, and Mozilla users with the easiest and most powerful drag and drop capabilties on the web. Drag images, text, widgets, gadgets, music, video, websites, and more.

Twitter Hacked, Reactively Eyes Solutions, Tweets on the Edge of Data Portability

The recent meltdown of Twitter security raises important issues related to Data Portability, most notably issues of security, integrity, and responsibility, that are relevant to all users. It also serves to demonstrate the need for prioritization by data stores.

Had Twitter simply said, “we will take your data and do whatever we want with it – including giving your login credentials to whomever we want” then no one would have had a problem. Of course they would probably have a lot less users.

But that is not what they said – and that is not the expectation that users had. In fact, in addition to the specific “terms of service” agreement that everyone accepts when they become Twitter users, there is an implied relationship that is created that defines the expectations of both sides. One of those is the reasonable expectation that your login information (including password) would be private and protected.

Now, obviously this is a dynamic world and there are lots of bad guys out there. And it will never be perfect. But there are straight forward solutions to many of these issues – especially in this day and age -- provided their implementations rate the necessary priority in the eyes of the Twitters (and other data stores) of the world.

To Twitters credit, their response has been quick -- and still in process. But more folks need to be proactive, not simply reactive.

Elias Bizannes, a fellow DataPortability board member, talked about this at length over at the official Data Portability blog, as did DP board member Christian Scholz here.

OAuth by itself is not the answer – but it is an important part of the solution. Ultimately the solution involves technologies such as OAuth and OpenID, but it also requires a mindset, commitment, and acceptance of responsibility in proactively keeping the rights of users always in the forefront. This is a main tenant of Data Portability and is an issue likely to dominate the headlines for some time to come – one way or the other. Companies will increasing be called out – or praised --- on this issue depending on their policies and priorities.

Most likely to change the world: DataPortability!

It's in the news everywhere: Facebook Connect-this and Google Friends-that...and all the implications for users and their data that it means. Data Portability IS changing the world. So, please take a second and register your vote for Data Portability at the Crunchies: