Salve a tutti,
 
segnalo quest'interessante intervista rilasciata dal Garante privacy su Medialaws sul nuovo framework regolamentare in materia proposto dalla Commissione
http://www.medialaws.eu/intervista-al-prof-pizzetti-presidente-dell%E2%80%99autorita-garante-per-la-protezione-dei-dati-personali-sulla-nuova-disciplina-%E2%80%9Cprivacy%E2%80%9D-proposta-dalla-commissione-2/
Da: nexa-bounces@server-nexa.polito.it
A: nexa@server-nexa.polito.it
Cc:
Data: Sun, 05 Feb 2012 17:24:24 +0100
Oggetto: nexa Digest, Vol 34, Issue 7

> Send nexa mailing list submissions to
> nexa@server-nexa.polito.it
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> nexa-request@server-nexa.polito.it
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> nexa-owner@server-nexa.polito.it
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of nexa digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Facebook Is Using You (bernardo parrella)
> 2. The Death of the Cyberfl?neur (bernardo parrella)
> 3. Call for Papers for the 2012 ISHTIP workshop
> (aura.bertoni@unibocconi.it)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:06:15 -0800
> From: bernardo parrella
> Subject: [nexa] Facebook Is Using You
> To: nexa@server-nexa.polito.it
> Message-ID: <4F2EB707.2020002@gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/05/opinion/sunday/facebook-is-using-you.html?src=me&ref=general
>
> Facebook makes money by selling ad space to companies that want to reach
> us. Advertisers choose key words or details --- like relationship
> status, location, activities, favorite books and employment --- and then
> Facebook runs the ads for the targeted subset of its 845 million users .....
>
> Ads that pop up on your screen might seem useful, or at worst, a
> nuisance. But they are much more than that. The bits and bytes about
> your life can easily be used against you. Whether you can obtain a job,
> credit or insurance can be based on your digital doppelg?nger --- and
> you may never know why you've been turned down. ....
>
> full article:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/05/opinion/sunday/facebook-is-using-you.html?src=me&ref=general
>
> (by Lori Andrews, author of "I Know Who You Are and I Saw What You Did:
> Social Networks and the Death of Privacy.")
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2012 09:22:11 -0800
> From: bernardo parrella
> Subject: [nexa] The Death of the Cyberfl?neur
> To: nexa@server-nexa.polito.it
> Message-ID: <4F2EBAC3.80405@gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed"
>
>
> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/05/opinion/sunday/the-death-of-the-cyberflaneur.html?hp=&pagewanted=all
>
> (by Evgeny Morozov)
>
> Transcending its original playful identity, [the Internet] is no longer
> a place for strolling --- it's a place for getting things done. Hardly
> anyone "surfs" the Web anymore. The popularity of the "app paradigm,"
> whereby dedicated mobile and tablet applications help us accomplish what
> we want without ever opening the browser or visiting the rest of the
> Internet, has made cyberfl?nerie less likely. That so much of today's
> online activity revolves around shopping --- for virtual presents, for
> virtual pets, for virtual presents for virtual pets --- hasn't helped
> either. Strolling through Groupon isn't as much fun as strolling through
> an arcade, online or off.
>
> THE tempo of today's Web is different as well. A decade ago, a concept
> like the "real-time Web," in which our every tweet and status update is
> instantaneously indexed, updated and responded to, was unthinkable.
> Today, it's Silicon Valley's favorite buzzword. ....
>
> In a way, we have all become such sandwich board men, walking the
> cyber-streets of Facebook with invisible advertisements hanging off our
> online selves. The only difference is that the digital nature of
> information has allowed us to merrily consume songs, films and books
> even as we advertise them, obliviously.
>
> full article:
> http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/05/opinion/sunday/the-death-of-the-cyberflaneur.html?hp=&pagewanted=all
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 10:11:54 +0100 (CET)
> From: aura.bertoni@unibocconi.it
> Subject: [nexa] Call for Papers for the 2012 ISHTIP workshop
> To: nexa
> Message-ID:
> <1958907821.8414541328173914393.JavaMail.root@parmenide.unibocconi.it>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
> Buongiorno a tutti,
>
> inoltro questo call for papers di possibile interesse per gli iscritti alla lista NEXA.
>
> Aura
>
>
> ***********************
>
> *Call for Papers
>
> Intellectual Property as Cultural Technology
>
> *Fourth Annual Workshop of the*International Society for the History and
> Theory of Intellectual Property (ISHTIP)
>
> *London School of Economics
> 25-26 June 2012
>
> Intellectual property rights are generally supposed to function as means
> of stimulating and diffusing cultural production. This instrumentalist
> understanding of how intellectual property works as a cultural
> technology has survived for more than two centuries; it has been
> amplified and refined by a long tradition of economic analysis and
> economic history, and it has now been retrenched as the basic premise of
> contemporary debates about public domains, digital commons, and the
> expansion of corporate semiotic power. How plausible or illuminating is
> this pervasive representation of the agency of intellectual property rights?
>
> There are some familiar ways of testing this representation. Lawyers and
> economists ask whether patent laws work as they should in the domains
> of, for example, software or biomedical innovation, they speculate as to
> the reasons why creativity in the fashion industry seems to flourish in
> a 'negative space' (a domain unframed by copyright law), and they ask
> how formal intellectual property rights work with 'social norms'. But
> these lines of inquiry still reduce culture to what can be rendered in
> terms of scarcity, efficiency, and instrumentality.
>
> The theme of this workshop seeks to elicit alternative approaches to the
> cultural implications of intellectual property and cultural property
> laws. A rubric that turns on the terms 'culture' and 'technology' can
> only be open-ended, but the following questions might be taken as a
> rough starting point for reflection:
> (1) How might we understand the implication of different forms of
> intellectual or cultural property in economic, political, aesthetic, or
> scientific cultures? How might we schematize the 'functions' or
> 'effects' of intellectual property law in terms other than those of
> instrumentality, efficiency, or repressive power?
> (2) Do intellectual property regimes themselves have specific cultures?
> Here, ethnographic, historical, or sociological analyses might reveal
> the specific practices, techniques and media that condition the
> existence and effects of intellectual property forms.
> (3) Might we understand intellectual property as a mode of cultural
> creativity in its own right? Intellectual property law has evolved a
> complex set of fictions, semantic artifacts, themes, and figures that
> have an existence in broader cultural life, not just as agents of
> encouragement or constraint, but as conceptual resources that have
> shaped the discursive fields of various social cultures. Somewhat more
> abstractly, regimes of intellectual property have turned the improbable
> notion of 'intangible property', or of 'intangible things', into common
> currency. So, instead of seeing legal forms as secondary ratifications
> of cultural figures, might we instead explore intellectual property
> law's own cultural intelligence and authorship?
>
> We invite contributions from established and doctoral scholars working
> in the broad field of the humanities and the social sciences, including
> anthropology, economic history, history of science, media studies,
> literary theory, science studies, and critical theory, as well as legal
> history and legal theory.
>
> Papers selected for presentation at the workshop will be circulated in
> advance to registered participants. A maximum length of 9,000 words is
> recommended. Abstracts of proposed papers (together with a brief author
> bio) should be submitted by*1 March 2012*.
>
> *Important dates
> *Submission of proposal (abstract and bio):*1 March 2012
> *Notification of acceptance:*31 March 2012
> *Submission of paper:*1 June 2012
> *Workshop:*25-26 June 2012
>
> Contacts
> *For information and program updates visit the ISHTIP website at:
> _http://www.ishtip.org
> _Please also visit the 2012 LSE workshop website at:
> _http://www.lse.ac.uk/collections/law/IPconference.htm
>
> _Abstracts and author bios can be submitted to any of the following for
> circulation among the Program Committee:
>
> Alain Pottage -- r.a.pottage@lse.ac.uk
> Tatiana Flessas -- t.flessas@lse.ac.uk
> Dev Gangjee -- d.gangjee@lse.ac.uk
>
>
>
> Aura Bertoni
> Bocconi University
> Department of Law
> Via Roentgen 1
> 20136 Milan
> Italy
> +39 02 5836 5581
> -------------- next part --------------
> A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
> Name: LSE-ISHTIP CfP.doc
> Type: application/x-ole-storage
> Size: 1474048 bytes
> Desc: not available
> URL:
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> nexa mailing list
> nexa@server-nexa.polito.it
> https://server-nexa.polito.it/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nexa
>
>
> End of nexa Digest, Vol 34, Issue 7
> ***********************************