<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><?xml-stylesheet title="XSL_formatting" type="text/xsl" href="rss_style.xsl" ?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<channel>
        <title>ZDNet Blogs</title>
        <link>http://blogs.zdnet.com</link>
        <description>ZDNet Blogs Focus: Identity</description>
<item>
<title>Care to spend your holiday weekend policing directory listings?</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Howell/?p=231</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 02 Jul 2008 11:57:43 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Denise Howell</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Howell/?p=231</guid>
<description><![CDATA[I'm not a fan in general of sites that create a listing or profile for you, hoping you'll eventually claim and/or correct it.  This tactic, neither user-centric nor user-driven, is insidious for at least three reasons: inaccuracies proliferate, privacy is frequently jeopardized, and users are required to invest considerable time and supply yet more personal data in an effort to remedy 1 and 2. David Lazarus gives examples of these sorts of problems in his Los Angeles Times piece today, Social networking site divulges child's personal information.  He tells of a mom who looked up her Reunion.com listing just to see what it might say, and learned it included her toddler son's name and their family's home town:  things she would ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Social networks:  what goes out, what goes in</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Howell/?p=161</link>
<pubDate>Thu, 02 Aug 2007 04:28:17 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Denise Howell</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Howell/?p=161</guid>
<description><![CDATA["Social Networking 3.0" was on the agenda this afternoon at the AlwaysOn Stanford Summit.  This one was a "must watch" for me, as will be Dan Farber's later today on "The Democratization of Media."  You can follow along with the conference's live Webcast here.    Moderator Charlene Li, senior analyst for Forrester Research, was joined by Travis Katz, senior vice president and general manager of MySpace International; Dustin Moskovitz, co-founder of Facebook; Rich Rosenblatt, CEO of Demand Media and former MySpace executive; Gina Bianchini, CEO of Ning; and Karl Jacob, CEO of Wallop.  Dan blogged the panel on Between the Lines, and, as he says, most of the discussion focused the future of social networks.  I was most ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Chris Pirillo is socialsquatted; does the law care?</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Howell/?p=156</link>
<pubDate>Sat, 28 Jul 2007 09:04:56 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Denise Howell</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Howell/?p=156</guid>
<description><![CDATA[Chris Pirillo is on Pownce at pownce.com/chrispirillo, and has 69 friends.  Or wait, that's not Chris.  I can scarcely catalog the related legal considerations, which include:    Can Chris stop someone from using his name and likeness without his consent?  Possibly, under right of publicity laws, but the ones I'm most familiar with preclude unauthorized commercial uses, and the jurisdictional variations are a nightmare.    Can't Chris sue for defamation if someone is falsifying things he supposedly said and did?  Perhaps, but parody is a First Amendment defense to defamation.      Is this parody?  No one here has identified themselves as the "fake" Chris Pirillo.  Under trademark law apparently, "A parody must convey two simultaneous--and contradictory messages; that ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>Section 230 immunity for case-based identity/reputation systems?</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Howell/?p=130</link>
<pubDate>Sun, 10 Jun 2007 12:23:26 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Denise Howell</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Howell/?p=130</guid>
<description><![CDATA[As an example of someone who thinks he owns his reputation data, here's lawyer John Henry Browne, threatening to sue new lawyer rating service Avvo over a rating he says is unjustifiably low.  That link comes via Joe Andrieu on the Project VRM list, who earlier this week had these musings about reputation as case-based identity:  Perhaps considering reputation as case-based identity, we can start to outline the components required for such case-based systems to work:        * transaction data (potentially including opinions of others)      * algorithmic evaluation      * refutation process    These may not be the definitive requirements for a reputation system, but they seem to be present in the working systems I ... ]]>
</description></item>
<item>
<title>If reputation is money in the bank, who owns the PIN?</title>
<link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Howell/?p=129</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 06 Jun 2007 10:17:59 -0700</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Denise Howell</dc:creator>
<guid>http://blogs.zdnet.com/Howell/?p=129</guid>
<description><![CDATA[As evidenced by the many lawsuits against Google concerning PageRank or other search result (read reputational) slippage, the notion that you own your digital reputation &mdash; even if it is at bottom a collaborative work that begins with your actions, but thereafter depends on the reactions of others &mdash; has legs.  Michael O'Connor Clarke wrote an interesting post along these lines at Uninstalled called Web 3.0 and Personal Reputation Management:     I'm still not quite sure where I'm going with this, but I feel the need for some secure, personal repository that would hold all of my connections and "whuffie" together. I want to keep my whuffie in my wallet - but not in a Microsoft Passport/Hailstorm kind of way. ... ]]>
</description></item>
</channel>
</rss>
