One sensitive topic in the “user generated content”
world is “due process” by service providers when deactivating accounts after
complaints, perceived TOS violations, or perhaps automated spam detection
procedures. Because of the huge numbers
of users and content items, appeals and due process procedures themselves are
very automated and proprietary, and sometimes things can fall through the cracks.
The Center for Democracy and Technology has a position
paper on the issue, authors Erica Newland, Caroline Nolan, Cynthia Wong, and
Jillian York, bridge link to PDF here.
The paper suggests, for example, that when other
visitors report abuse, they should have to cite specific policy reasons. Another is to provide a vehicle for data
export or liberation.
The existence of due process can be an important
issue for users who may want to package their content for business deals with
other media outlets.
Electronic Frontier Foundation has an article
yesterday by Jillian C. York, arguing specifically that Twitter needs to have an
appeals process. The specific incident
has to do with the deactivation of the account of Guy Adams for publishing an
email address of an NBC executive, when it had been available for over a year. The Deeplinks story is here.
No comments:
Post a Comment