data days 2014 - nina dierks

Dirks & Diercks Rechtsanwälte

The Schizophrenic Handling of Data in our Days

Berlin

Dirks & Diercks Rechtsanwälte

Once upon a time there had been two kinds of data clouds….

2

#DP (Data Preservation) #NSA #PRISM #TEMPORA

#BND

#amazon #Facebook, #Google #apple & Co

“It is disgusting! I don‘t want to be spyed neither by my nor any other

state! There is an right of anonymity ! Let‘s demonstrate!“

Outside the filterbubble: “It‘s for free. That‘s fantastic! I don‘t worry that they know which kind of

music or sneakers I like.“

…about everyones got an opinion.

or

“Aye. You can‘t do anything about it anyway. And well, I behave. So shall

the spy“

Within the filterbubble: “I know it is not for free. I know I pay

with my data. So what. It doesn‘t hurt”.

„We will all die! We need to by our stuff in real shops and we need to talk to real

people! (in the wood so no one can spy us.)“

or

Vorführender

Präsentationsnotizen

Die Schizophrenie der digitalen Welt möchte ich gerne an drei Beispielen erläutern. VDS, Facebook, und PRISM. Drei Beispiele, die jedes für sich Potential für einen #Aufschrei haben.

Dirks & Diercks Rechtsanwälte 3

It‘s not that easy.


We like to forget.


We do not want to know.

We want to believe. - that it is secure. - that it is abolutely good if a mobile is totally secure even for intelligence corps. - that we do not have to think about all the apps we are using and which are tracing us

down.

- that the iphone6 still permanently collects geo-location data. - that there might be a good reason to break a security code for the police or

prosecution if they can wave with a judgement of a court?


We do not want to know.

What if,

you, your mother, your brother, your wife – one of your beloved ones

is attacked and threatened by an unkown guy out of cyberspace?

Would you like to catch him or her?


Today there is no real chance to take action against cyber crimes like identity thefts or „cyber bullying“ (harrassments, violation of privacy), because:

1. Police and Prosecution are insuffiecient prepared for these cases. Staff does not realise the dimension of these cases („What did you say? Identity theft on facebook? Aha.“ -Mumbling to himself „Who cares? And what the hack shall that be?“.) Furthermore, it is often difficult to subsume the action under existing criminal codes. #dissmissofaction

2. Civil Courts: Only a very, very vague chance to win a claim for the right to information.

3. But even if Prosecution would proceed or a Civil Court would give you the right to information and if you got an IP-Adress:

There is no data preservation at all in Germany anymore. There is no data. No connection from an IP-Adress to a real name.

No matter if a judge says „In this very special case you are allowed to get this data“

It is easy to be against data preservation.


It is complicated.

But we still do not want to know.


• Google owns a world wide banking license. • Google has since 2005 a patent named „Dynamic Pricing“ • „Dynamic Pricing“ evaluates individual prices for each customer of an online

shop.

• The price is related to the individual background of the customer, to his special data historie (google enquiries, shopping behaviour in android stores etc.)

We still do not want to know.

Scary? http://www.google.com/patents/US20050149458

http://www.google.com/patents/US20050149458


It is very complicated.


• Shall there really be no possibility to stopp several kinds of cyber crime? (Maybe there is a need for a kind of „small data preservation“ as the Bundesverfassungsgericht suggested?)

• Is there really no way to stop the obviously disproportional

tracing by intelligence corps? (But what would be „proportional“? Who defines it? And who controls it?)

• Shall algorithms determine our lives? (Who‘s in controll?!) • Is there a need for a controlling instution regarding algorithms?

(Who should that be?)

It is very complicated .


But it is not enough to be „against“ (#whatsoever).

Easy answers never helped to find solutions for complex questions.

„Big Data“ (whatever you imagine here exactly) is not about to come. It is there. And it is used and will be used.

It is very complicated .

We need a debate. A real open minded and differentiating debate.


We need a debate.


We need a debate.

To claim „Anonymity – that‘s what we are fighting for!“ combinded with „Yeah,

the new iPhone6s!!!“ and „Is there a new version of whatsapp?!“ in one breath

does not mean to lead a differentiating debate, it is just kind of schizophrenic –

at least contradictorily.

….at least as long as we do not really know.


„It shall be our aim to proceed the digital cross-linking of our society under humane conditions without flushing down the essential merits of enlightment on a toilet in Langley. Sascha Lobo, „Daten, die das Leben kosten“, FAZ v. 01.04.2014, http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/sascha-lobo-digitale-daten-gefaehrden-leben-und-freiheit-12874992.html?printPagedArticle=true

Please, think and debate. Debate and think. Your seat is comfortable right know. And it is easy to do nothing or to shout out loud to be „against“. But we need to create new rules for new times. We need to think further. We need to spread the word. Otherwise there will be no solution for the definetely upcoming problems in our real but digital lifes.

We need to debate.

…or somewhere else, maybe in the Silicon Valley.

http://www.faz.net/aktuell/feuilleton/sascha-lobo-digitale-daten-gefaehrden-leben-und-freiheit-12874992.html?printPagedArticle=true




















Thx!

Rechtsanwältin Nina Diercks M.Litt., University of Aberdeen Lokstedter Steindamm 61a 22529 Hamburg T: + 49 (0)40 85 40 74 44 F: + 49 (0)40 85 40 74 45 M: + 49 (0) 170 555 55 88 [email protected] http://www.dirksunddiercks.de

http://socialmediarecht.wordpress.com http.//www.facebook.com/socialmediarecht

http://www.twitter.com/SocialmediaR_HH http://gplus.to/socialmediarecht

data days 2014 - nina dierks

Data & Analytics