STEERING CANDIDATE: NICHOLAS R. GIVOTOVSKY

[Elias Bizannes]

The following was received as the official nomination of Nicholas R.
Govotovsky.

---

Dear DataPortability people and interested others;

I hereby volunteer to serve on the Steering Committee, yet I make no
claim to greater qualification than that of other prospective
candidates, each of whom is well qualified and equipped.

Instead, I would offer my support to the DataPortability project in
this way because I believe the following:

The value of what lies on the Net, of what and of who is accessible
through it, and how, makes it far too valuable a resource to ignore,
treat as a given, assume to be entirely self-organizing or otherwise
take for granted.

The digital environment is far too important a context to be
considered in exclusively technical or commercial terms given its
immense, far-reaching human effect.

The way in which digital identity and dataportability and the rights
established around them are defined and upheld will play a critical
role, for good or ill, in the future not just of the Internet, but in
the lives of its populace both on and off the web.

Why is this so?

If you want to participate in the commercial, professional,
social, creative and civic life of the coming decades, you must be
very well wired to do so.

To do so safely, completely and conveniently without compromise
should be regarded as something less like an unreachable individual
goal or set of preferences, and more like a right, a right which in
turn entails obligations of the providers of software, services and
systems that together comprise the fabric, or the platform on which we
ride or rest.

As we make our hurried migration away from our various devices and
discreet services toward a digitally enabled life online and off, we
unleash issues of identity, access and representation that have as
much to do with ethics, policy and politics as they do with
technology.

Our relationship to software, services and systems are both
functional, and contractual, and (if “code is law”), they have become
consequential in ways that have yet to be internalized or fully
addressed by either the users or the providers of systems and
services.

You will not be alerted to this fact while using the various quid-
pro-quo offerings that make sharing your photos, your feelings and
your friends so easy and fun.

No individual company has a sufficient interest in ensuring your
overall “digital safety” to be inclined or equipped to do so.

Instead, they tend to have a very keen and understandable interest
in avoiding liability, and in making as much of a claim on your
attention, your data and your loyalty as possible in the support of
business plans in which you yourself are the most valuable commodity.

The prospect of “owning the consumer” and the certainty of “lock-
in” are two primary requirements of attention monetization-based
business strategies in search of funding.

Yet this reality largely ignores the fact that we’re not just
“users’ or “consumers” of digital products and services, but instead,
citizens of a digital environment that contains not only software and
services, but ourselves, our relationships and our many and varied
assets and interests.

Without us to animate it, the whole structure is just the humming
of 0s and 1s.

As such, rather than being content to be consumers, users and
subscribers, we should aspire to and work to attain the rights of real
stakeholders, and we should be prepared to undertake both the
responsibilities and rewards of actual citizens.

Like all rights worth upholding and defending, digital rights of
the kind that should apply to the mass of users upon whose data,
attention, interests and interactions the overall function of the web
rests, won’t be granted or ensured without concerted and sustained
effort.

But there is (as of yet) no empowered and recognized source of
expertise and authority committed to the rights of digital citizens
that can affect changes in policy and practice to the extent necessary
to adequately represent our individual and collective current and
future rights and interests.

Instead, and therefore, what I believe is needed is a catalyst for
both individual and collective action that can be used to apply the
leverage necessary to negotiate a better “digital deal” all around,
even in the face of conflicting commercial interests, ambiguous
policy, evolving technology and competition.

I think DataPortability has the clear potential and even the
obligation to perform that vital function.

If it’s felt that such views and goals are compatible with the
purposes and direction of the DataPortability project as a whole, I’d
be pleased and honored to bring that perspective to the collaborative
work of the Steering Committee.

My perspective is that of independent consultant, analyst and inventor
with a career-long commitment to the transformative potential of
digital technology and interactive media. My experience is in the
world of standards, media and technology and includes but is not
limited to digital identity and digital rights. I actively engage in
collaboration, dialog and debate both inside and outside the
DataPortability environment and am knowledgeable of activities
underway in behavioral targeting, interactive advertising and the
copyright industries which are directly relevant to the issues of
dataportability, privacy and identity rights in my view.

Yet the primary claim I make to possible appropriateness of my
participation is based on my commitment to the assertion and
protection of the rights of digital citizenship, including those that
pertain the rights of portability of digital data.

If that perspective is considered of direct benefit at this time, I
would happily contribute my efforts.

If not, I encourage the existing candidates and the DataPortability
project as a whole in its ongoing activities, and look forward to
continuing to work with you all in other capacities.

Best -

Nicholas R. Givotovsky