If I may offer an initial thought on messaging. The title is great (with reference to “human”) but the text focuses on machines. I would suggest that descriptions of UMA emphasize that it represents a way to keep the human person in the center of controlling personal data exchange (while of course leveraging software tools). And all of the UMA agents (what tech folks call ‘delegations’) have either a natural or legal person in the mix who will bear full legal responsibility. Machines, systems, software-controls without responsible persons are authoritarian. Instead, from a legal perspective, UMA enables the authoritative. So, authoritative v. authoritarian. If UMA b
Tim
Sent from my iPhone
Hi Adrian — I’ve left just Justin on here for the moment (since he’s on the UMA WG), and added Tim (as our Legal Editor). Your writeup is interesting. Would you be willing to send it to the UMA WG for comment before final publication?
My only comment for now is that I’m unclear on the first delegation and which spec/relationship it refers to. It would be great to be able to point to the specific one(s) we mean in our spaghetti diagram.
Eve Maler (sent from my iPad) | cell +1 425 345 6756
I've been asked to explain, in non-technical language, what the UMA standard is and why it's essential to many of the the conversations related to privacy that I'm involved in.
TIA,
Adrian
--
Adrian Gropper MD
PROTECT YOUR FUTURE - RESTORE Health Privacy!
HELP us fight for the right to control personal health data.