Do suggest sites to add.
Dash over to mobilecf.feedhenry.com and give it a spin.
The original paper published by Sean Sherlock is here.
A Microsoft Word version is here.
A poor but serviceable HTML version is here.
The website is at http://www.djei.ie/science/ipr/crc_statement.htm
The email address for feedback is : email@example.com
Send feedback by post to:
Department of Jobs
Enterprise and Innovation
Minister of State Sean Sherlock has recently published “A Copyright and Innovation White Paper” its a big read at 182 pages and I have only skimmed it. At the same time he then tweeted:
The IIA in turn posted a statement on their website which outlined my key concerns with using an “Industry body” to collate feedback for an issue that will have widespread societal impact. Specifically:
This will allow the IIA to collate the views of its members and enable us to comprehensively represent their concerns and ideas to Government and input into this important legislation.
So its first priority is to collate the views of its members, which is right and proper. The IIA is a society of its members that as far as I know does not purport to represent the views of those segments of the industry who are not members.
The IIA then goes on to say:
Non-members are welcome to submit their comments using this survey tool. However, comments by non-members will be passed un-collated and un-filtered to the department as it would not be in the best interests of our members to use IIA resources in working for non-members. I believe this methodology strikes the right balance of being inclusive and facilitative whilst prioritising our member’s needs as we are charged to do. Allowing the widest stakeholder feedback is quite simply in the spirit of the community. Stakeholders are not limited to using this tool but it is open to everyone.
They are upfront about this, the IIA is about its members.
So where is the forum for feedback for non-members of the IIA? I don’t want my feedback refracted through a third party organisation. Nor do I want to be treated as a second class citizen because I have no business being a member of the IIA. Stakeholders are not limited to this tool, but where are the other tools?
What priority is the minister likely to place on IIA feedback vs feedback from other sources? No one can tell at this point. But we can infer from his behaviour on the SOPA Ireland issue that feedback and decisions how to proceed are likely to be made behind closed doors.
Can I suggest that a more open forum for Feedback would be for the minister to set up a Facebook page to which anyone can post public commentary, an email address to which private commentary can be posted and his own survey (again trivial to setup on a site like PollDaddy).
All this feedback should be published “in the raw” including back-channel input from various industry bodies who use “other channels” to reach the minister. Lets shed a little sunlight on the process.
I would be happy to do this work for no charge in order to facilitate an open feedback process.
Sign the petition now.
Please have a look at the following posts and take action at Stop SOPA Ireland.
- TJ McIntyre’s FAQ on Ireland’s SOPA
- The Business Post’s article on it
- Michele Neylon’s rallying call
- Karl Monaghan has written about how it sucks
EI is doling out another pot of money to the South East. Now I am a big fan of EI. I think they are the best agency of their type in the world, bar none. But this regional development plan is a dissipation of scare resources. It also makes no sense for startup policy in Ireland.
Here’s how it plays out. Money is ring fenced for the South East. Now instead of competing against all the startups in Ireland the South East is competing against itself. If you expect to win a grant based on your ability to export and you can’t beat out the local competition in Ireland, how in the wide world of sports are you going to compete on a global stage?
It would make much more sense to widen the global pot for Ireland and make the South East stand up and be counted.
I know for fact that they have the talent to do so.
I read Fred Wilson‘s post on Explicit vs Implicit Groups tonight. It struck me that the right model for Google Plus (and any group based social network) is the concept of “aged groups”. So I can toss anyone into a group but over time a lack of interaction or engagement “ages” them out of the group. So groups remain small and focussed on the active members. The asynchronous nature of Google+ groups is ideally suited to this model and could be an option for users to set on their accounts.
With aged groups I’d be much more likely to allow Google+ to parse my address book and add members based on groups I already have setup or even suggest groups based on email conversations I’ve had in the past.
The key issue is for the groups to reflect the dynamic nature of relationships. I work in a company and then I leave, guess what? most of those relationships die within a year or so. I don’t want those (now) strangers still shot through my Facebook and Google+ account.
I wrote a post about HTML5 over on the company blog this week.