In our last call (now a month past), we discussed this use case a bit, and Tim has sent me some scenarios so that we dig into it a bit more deeply in this week's call; see below.
The "parent-child resource management use case has three life stages (little Johnny is too young to use digital resources; old enough to use them but too young to consent; and finally old enough to consent and thus kick his legal guardian out of being in the resource owner/Resource Rights Administrator role). The RUFADAA use case is "life stage 4", if you will...
It would be cool if we could get enough understanding/consensus on the call to be able to construct clean slide diagrams for all this (like we have for little Johnny and Alice now).
Oh, and if anyone knows of any similar laws in other jurisdictions, that would be great too.
3 Scenarios:
1) User (Alice) creates a disclosure permission plan (for future event of death or mental incapacity)
2) User (Alice) creates a Trust and makes an inter vivos (i.e. during Alice's lifetime) transfer of digital assets to the Trust for administration by Trustee (as, in effect, a successor User); Alice may or may not create a disclosure permission plan
3) User (Alice) does not create a disclosure permission plan for digital assets; fiduciaries create the disclosure permission plan after their appointment
Scenario 1
User = Data Subject
Custodian = Resource Server Operator
Designated Recipient = AS
Fiduciary = Resource Owner (or administrator)
Scenario 2
User = Data Subject or
Successor User (Trustee) = Resource Owner (or administrator)
Designated Recipient = AS
Custodian = Resource Server Operator
Scenario 3
User (Fiduciary) = Resource Owner
Designated Recipient = AS
Custodian = Resource Server Operator
Keep in mind that RUFADAA desines "User" as the person that creates the account with the Custodian