Speaker 1: Welcome to the deep dive. Today, we're tackling a really
Speaker 1: interesting challenge. How do we actually build the cutting edge
Speaker 1: tech that's powering modern retail, you know, things like RFID tracking,
Speaker 1: automated software agents, but do it in a way that's
Speaker 1: well legal by design.
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's the core idea our guide. Here is the
Speaker 2: book Legal Programming, Designing Legally Compliant RFID and Software Agent
Speaker 2: Architectures for Retail Processes and Beyond.
Speaker 1: By Brian Subirana and Malcolm Bain. It's part of this
Speaker 1: bigger series, the Integrated Series and Information.
Speaker 2: System exactly in this book, it really sits at the
Speaker 2: heart of a crucial discussion, how do we bring legal thinking,
Speaker 2: you know, right into the initial design phase.
Speaker 1: Instead of building something and then uh oh, trying to
Speaker 1: figure out if it breaks the law.
Speaker 2: Later, precisely baking in compliance from the get go, which
Speaker 2: is becoming so important as we see more automation like
Speaker 2: RFID and inventory maybe even autonomous shopping agents down the line. Yeah.
Speaker 1: Absolutely, And the scope here is pretty wide, isn't. The
Speaker 1: book covers contracts, intellectual property, consumer protection, privacy.
Speaker 2: All seen through this lens of new retail tech.
Speaker 1: Right, and they use this neat framing device thinking about
Speaker 1: society through its retail. Like looking at Passa San Marco
Speaker 1: ages ago told you about Venice. Today they say, our
Speaker 1: store trolleyview gives us similar insights into our well increasingly
Speaker 1: digital and automated world.
Speaker 2: And that store trolleyview really highlights something fundamental. These simple
Speaker 2: acts browsing, buying, they're wrapped up in this complex web
Speaker 2: of legal and social.
Speaker 1: Rules which technology is now kind of shaking up.
Speaker 2: Exactly. It forces us to rethink how those rules apply
Speaker 2: when things get more automated.
Speaker 1: Okay, so our mission for this deep dive really get
Speaker 1: to grips with the specific legal risks and maybe some
Speaker 1: solutions when we mix online retail, RFID and especially these
Speaker 1: software agents handling transactions.
Speaker 2: And the book points out this core tension right away,
Speaker 2: which is that a lot of online stuff happening now
Speaker 2: might already be legally well questionable, and moving towards agents
Speaker 2: and RFID environments that could seriously amplify the risks.
Speaker 1: Because these agent systems they promise efficiency, Yeah, but they're
Speaker 1: operating under laws made for people talking to people essentially, right, That's.
Speaker 2: The fundamental challenge bridging the gap between this fast, autonomous
Speaker 2: tech and this sort of deliberate, consent based world of law.
Speaker 1: And that's where this process view comes in. The idea
Speaker 1: is focusing on the processes themselves might help align tech
Speaker 1: with law.
Speaker 2: That's the proposal. So maybe we start with contracts. What
Speaker 2: does the book say about how they're formed legally, especially
Speaker 2: online where things feel so frictionless. Okay, contracts, well, traditionally
Speaker 2: you need an offer, acceptance and clear consent, simple enough
Speaker 2: on paper. What but how those are interpreted that can
Speaker 2: vary quite a bit legally jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Even clicking
Speaker 2: I agree online?
Speaker 1: Yeah, what about that?
Speaker 2: In one place that might seal the deal acceptance. Elsewhere
Speaker 2: it might just be you making an offer that the
Speaker 2: website still needs to formally accept. It's not always clear cut, and.
Speaker 1: The book flags a lot of potential issues with online
Speaker 1: contracts right, things like terms you can't negotiate.
Speaker 2: Unilateral terms yeah, or product descriptions missing key details, hidden costs,
Speaker 2: popping up late.
Speaker 1: And maybe no solid record of what was actually agreed exactly.
Speaker 2: The EU e Commerce Directive tries to tackle some of this,
Speaker 2: but it's still a complex landscape.
Speaker 1: And then we layer on more tech. You mentioned IPv six.
Speaker 2: Right, the next Internet protocol. The key thing there is
Speaker 2: it can assign unique digital IDs to pretty much every device,
Speaker 2: which means tracking, potentially very fine grain tracking. Now there
Speaker 2: are privacy extensions being discussed, but that underlying ability for
Speaker 2: embedded ID, big privacy implications could change how we think
Speaker 2: about online consent.
Speaker 1: And then there's RFID, this Internet of things where items
Speaker 1: have unique IDs can be tracked, trigger actions.
Speaker 2: Super efficient for retail inventory management.
Speaker 1: All that, but as the book points out, huge privacy
Speaker 1: worries too. Imagine every single thing you own broadcasting its
Speaker 1: location or history.
Speaker 2: And all this feeds into the legal uncertainty because the Internet, well,
Speaker 2: it doesn't care about.
Speaker 1: Borders, different countries, different rules. Privacy is a big example.
Speaker 2: Definitely, the US is moving towards more legislation, but it's
Speaker 2: still different from say EU's GDPR approach, which came after
Speaker 2: the book, but shows the trend. Navigating these differences is tough.
Speaker 1: So the EU tried this regulation at origin thing, the.
Speaker 2: E commerce directive. Yeah, basically you follow the rules where
Speaker 2: you're based. Yeah, but even that gets complicated, especially with
Speaker 2: things like VAT It's.
Speaker 1: Wild how deep the legal rabbit holes go. Like domain names.
Speaker 1: The book mentions dot com domains in Virginia.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the fact that legal action against the domain itself
Speaker 2: can happen in Virginia because the root server is there.
Speaker 2: It means jurisdiction could potentially land there no matter where
Speaker 2: the owner is.
Speaker 1: Yeah, okay.
Speaker 2: It really just highlights that the law for e commerce
Speaker 2: is still, you know, evol It feels a bit like
Speaker 2: a patchwork sometimes compared to traditional commerce.
Speaker 1: Law, and that uncertainty fuels consumer worries about fraud, data breaches.
Speaker 2: Leads people to maybe prefer buying within their own country
Speaker 2: where they feel the legal ground is firmer. Though things
Speaker 2: like BBB Online are trying to help with cross border disputes.
Speaker 1: So amidst all this, the book maps out how e
Speaker 1: commerce models evolved from EDI.
Speaker 2: Electronic data interchange, yeah, very structured, then electronic marketplaces and
Speaker 2: now these complex transaction streams with loads of intermediaries.
Speaker 1: And it makes a distinction between controlled B to B
Speaker 1: platforms versus open B two C website.
Speaker 2: Right hierarchical versus market based. They need different trust mechanisms.
Speaker 2: B to B often has pre agreed rules, B two
Speaker 2: C needs more on the fly trust building.
Speaker 1: And the book suggests the way these platforms are built
Speaker 1: contributes to legal issues like the build first, ask later mindset.
Speaker 2: That and the sheer speed of web development prioritizing features
Speaker 2: over compliance, plus business models relying heavily on data collection.
Speaker 2: It can all push legal compliance down the priority list.
Speaker 1: And the standard non negotiable terms don't help legally either.
Speaker 2: Definitely not So now let's bring in software agents. Okay.
Speaker 2: The book makes a key distinction at technical agent software
Speaker 2: acting independently versus legal agency, which is about authority to
Speaker 2: act for someone else.
Speaker 1: Different things but related.
Speaker 2: The parallels are useful. Yeah, and it mentions formal models
Speaker 2: like BDI, beliefs, desires, intentions, trying to map out agent thinking,
Speaker 2: which is important when you ask who's responsible later?
Speaker 1: Right. Understanding the logic helps assign accountability, and the book
Speaker 1: shows agents could do a lot in e commerce, filtering data, personal.
Speaker 2: Assistance, negotiating deals, managing risk. It's a long list, and.
Speaker 1: It connects closed agent platforms to those hierarchical models and
Speaker 1: open platforms to the market based ones. Makes sense.
Speaker 2: Currently agents are mostly helpers right search engines, shopping assistants
Speaker 2: still under user control.
Speaker 1: But the book sees more intelligent agents coming ones that
Speaker 1: can initiate deals on their own learn.
Speaker 2: Yeah, think automated warehouse restocking or an agent doing your
Speaker 2: weekly grocery shop autonomously.
Speaker 1: And RFID amplifies this because physical items feed data directly
Speaker 1: to these agents exactly.
Speaker 2: It creates a much more dynamic, potentially autonomous system. The
Speaker 2: book paints this picture with agents for contracts, data management,
Speaker 2: user profiling, monitoring, even consumer protection.
Speaker 1: Very automated future sounds convenient, but the book flags the downsides.
Speaker 1: Agents might help with compliance sometimes, but.
Speaker 2: They also create new legal headaches, big ones. Can an
Speaker 2: agent have legal personality? How do we get valid consent
Speaker 2: for contracts or data use via an agent? What about
Speaker 2: IP rights when agents use online content?
Speaker 1: So many questions, contract formation, liability, privacy, IPR identification, who's
Speaker 1: responsible for what the agent says? Monitoring mistakes? Jurisdiction too.
Speaker 2: It's a long list, and legal systems are starting to notice.
Speaker 2: The book mentions definitions of electronic agent appearing in laws
Speaker 2: like UADA in the US and unsentral.
Speaker 1: Models focusing on that automated action without human review.
Speaker 2: Bit yeah, the law trying to catch up. To make
Speaker 2: this concrete, The book uses a research scenario.
Speaker 1: Right, the augmented shopping experience.
Speaker 2: Using phones, smart cards, in store screens for personalized stuff,
Speaker 2: parking directions, smart shopping lists, dietary reminders, product locations, special offers, really.
Speaker 1: Bringing mobile commerce commerce into the physical store. It mentions
Speaker 1: the tech making this feasible gprs, Bluetooth, Wi Fi, powerful phones, and.
Speaker 2: It connects to ubiquitous computing tech fading into the background,
Speaker 2: embedded everywhere, like the EUS disappearing computer initiative envisioned.
Speaker 1: And they give practical examples of things going wrong, like
Speaker 1: your shopping bot buying way too much stuff.
Speaker 2: Or getting a location based offer you didn't really ask for. Right, then,
Speaker 2: who's responsible? Did you really? Consent raises immedia legal questions.
Speaker 1: And it's not just the shopper and store involved. There
Speaker 1: are advisors, service providers, data repositories, logistics advertisers, the regulator,
Speaker 1: lots of actors, each with.
Speaker 2: Different relationships and responsibilities. It's a complex ecosystem.
Speaker 1: So to analyze it, the book introduces four agent types
Speaker 1: A store advertising, B, store selling, C customer buying agent,
Speaker 1: and D shopping assistant.
Speaker 2: Right, each with different functions, different legal angles.
Speaker 1: And the core legal areas to examine our contracts again,
Speaker 1: automated formation, intent, consent signatures.
Speaker 2: Intellectual property access, copyright, trademarks, databases, consumer protection ads, offers,
Speaker 2: delivery info, and privacy collecting, storing processing data.
Speaker 1: These are the big pillars impacted by adding agents and
Speaker 1: RFID building on existing Internet law, and the.
Speaker 2: Focus is really on the additional issues these new technologies raise.
Speaker 2: It distinguishes between observer agents just gathering.
Speaker 1: Info and actor agents that actually do things acquire rights.
Speaker 1: They cause more legal friction.
Speaker 2: Right, The book's approach is to apply existing laws to
Speaker 2: these agent process ssss, then try to generalize find higher
Speaker 2: level rules or meta models, mostly using the EU framework
Speaker 2: with some US comparisons, but acknowledging national laws needs specifics.
Speaker 1: Okay, back to contract basics consent, offer acceptance, meeting of minds,
Speaker 1: free will, intention to be bound.
Speaker 2: And the booknotes potential issues like mistake or bad faith,
Speaker 2: plus slight differences between common law and civil law views.
Speaker 1: On intent and the need for written evidence varies, but
Speaker 1: it's usually best for proof.
Speaker 2: Then you have key EU directives e signatures on legal standing,
Speaker 2: distance selling for consumer protection in remote deals, and the
Speaker 2: e Commerce Directive being absorbed into national laws. Plus specific
Speaker 2: e commerce laws elsewhere like u ada ZIN in the.
Speaker 1: US, all setting the stage for how agents fit in.
Speaker 1: What are the practical legal issues for agent contracts procedures?
Speaker 2: How does an agent know it's a real offer? Evidence,
Speaker 2: meeting and writing requirements? Digitally terms? How are they incorporated
Speaker 2: understood by the user via the agent? How does an
Speaker 2: agent provide a binding digital one and consumer rights info?
Speaker 2: Transparency consent through an autumn time?
Speaker 1: And can the agent itself have legal personality own things
Speaker 1: be liable?
Speaker 2: The book leans towards no, not under current law. So
Speaker 2: the challenges attribution linking the agent's actions back to a person.
Speaker 1: Or entity, which brings in legal agency concepts, express authority,
Speaker 1: a parent authority ratification.
Speaker 2: Exactly could these frameworks apply? The book suggests programming an
Speaker 2: agent's identity might even help establish a parent authority.
Speaker 1: What about risk if the agent messes up due to
Speaker 1: bad programming or unexpected learning.
Speaker 2: Keeping records of initial settings and user intent seems crucial
Speaker 2: for figuring out liability and consumer protection. Laws allowing cancelation
Speaker 2: of distance contracts might give consumer agent users.
Speaker 1: An edge digital signatures via agents. It comes back to attribution,
Speaker 1: linking it to the private keyhole.
Speaker 2: Yes, and Article six of the EUE Signatures Directive stresses
Speaker 2: the signatory needing control.
Speaker 1: Can an agent really be under the user's soul control,
Speaker 1: especially if it stores passwords or it's a modal agent
Speaker 1: replicating itself?
Speaker 2: Big questions? Maybe the agent has to check back with
Speaker 2: the user for sensitive data. The book also notes the
Speaker 2: tech security requirements for secure signature.
Speaker 1: Devices and do certification authorities usually require users to keep
Speaker 1: keys secret, not record them.
Speaker 2: Typically yes in their policies. The book also cites Unciti
Speaker 2: Troll's model law on e commerce, defining the originator and
Speaker 2: when a message is deemed theirs focusing on authority.
Speaker 1: And the unctral draft model Law on e contracts directly
Speaker 1: tackles automated systems.
Speaker 2: It does as does UETA in the US, which attributes
Speaker 2: agent acts to the initiator even without knowledge, but it
Speaker 2: handles human error differently from machine error. U SATA also
Speaker 2: recognizes agent contracts with a reasonableness test for consent, but
Speaker 2: it wasn't widely adopted.
Speaker 1: Any technical fixes mentioned for validating automated contract.
Speaker 2: Briefly touches on policy expressions for security, especially for intelligent
Speaker 2: and mobile agents.
Speaker 1: Okay Let's switch gears to intellectual property rights IPR.
Speaker 2: Right, copyright, trademarks, database rights. How do they apply to agents?
Speaker 1: So copyright basics protects original works fixed in a tangible
Speaker 1: medium literary, artistic, etc.
Speaker 2: Digital content counts, even RAM storage can be fixed enough.
Speaker 2: Protection is territorial, but tentees help extend it. Computer programs
Speaker 2: are usually literary works, but it's the expression, not the
Speaker 2: underlying idea or algorithm that's protected. Though look and feel
Speaker 2: sometimes gets protection, especially.
Speaker 1: In the US, and database rights in the EU. That's different.
Speaker 2: Yeah, two tiers copyright if the structure is an original creation,
Speaker 2: and this separate suey generous right if there's substantial investment.
Speaker 2: Protecting against extracting big chunks applies even to web pages
Speaker 2: computer generated lists.
Speaker 1: The book has a table Table three two showing IPR
Speaker 1: issues for agency's processes searching, accessing databases, storing presenting info.
Speaker 1: Accessing online databases seems key.
Speaker 2: That's often the frux. This section details those compliance problems,
Speaker 2: looks at exemptions and touches on protecting agent created results.
Speaker 2: A big concern is agents infringing by displaying copyrighted text
Speaker 2: or images from websites.
Speaker 1: What about just linking to content.
Speaker 2: Even temporary links made by agents could be infringements, and
Speaker 2: things like framing or inlining content from other sites are
Speaker 2: particularly problematic, potentially reproduction, derivative works, unfair competition. There's case
Speaker 2: law on this, and.
Speaker 1: Could agents create derivative works by combining info from multiple
Speaker 1: sites like product comparisons with images?
Speaker 2: Potentially? Yes, Then the question is liability who's responsible. In
Speaker 2: the US, direct infringement usually needs knowledge intent. The DMCA
Speaker 2: offers safe harbors for service providers under certain conditions.
Speaker 1: And the EU e Commerce Directive has similar exemptions for
Speaker 1: conduits caching, hosting.
Speaker 2: Yes, if they lack knowledge act fast on takedown notices,
Speaker 2: but it's maybe harder to claim if the agent is
Speaker 2: actively modifying or extracting data, not just passing it through.
Speaker 1: Are there any copyright exemptions that might help agents?
Speaker 2: The EU Copyright Directive exempts temporary incidental reproductions if they're
Speaker 2: essential to a tech process and have no economic value themselves.
Speaker 2: Article five point one.
Speaker 1: Could that cover agent caching of.
Speaker 2: Ads, for example, Possibly, but it depends if the caching
Speaker 2: is truly transient or more permanent. Other exemptions like private
Speaker 2: use education probably don't apply much here.
Speaker 1: What about the e Commerce Directive's rules on no general
Speaker 1: monitoring obligation and the notice and takedown for hosts could.
Speaker 2: Be relevant if an agent service provider stores data collected
Speaker 2: by agents like agent D relying on implied consent from
Speaker 2: websites is tough, especially for commercial.
Speaker 1: Bots and protecting the agent's own output less.
Speaker 2: Focus here, but important Overall. Digital content like web pages
Speaker 2: can get IPR in various ways artistic work, database rights, etc.
Speaker 1: So moving to solutions for IPR compliance, it's a big
Speaker 1: debate generally right copyright term open source drms.
Speaker 2: Digital rights management systems. Yeah, the book mentions first generation
Speaker 2: tech protections like robots, dot txt files, website owners signaling
Speaker 2: preferences to bots, but they're just netiquete, not legally binding.
Speaker 1: Could we see standardized dialogues agents negotiating access with website drms?
Speaker 2: Potentially? Maybe not common now for general web data, but
Speaker 2: could be. But there's a worry drms might be too blunt,
Speaker 2: ignore fair use, create issues for users whose agents infringe
Speaker 2: without them knowing. Current drms often lack flexibility.
Speaker 1: So a key problem is agent autonomy versus license restrictions.
Speaker 1: Agents might not understand copyright notices like humans do.
Speaker 2: Exactly. And again, liability attribution is tricky. Who's the user
Speaker 2: or custodian store shopper who has control could be joint
Speaker 2: liability and exemptions might have played differently depending on who
Speaker 2: runs the.
Speaker 1: Agent, and identifying the agent is hard to makes it
Speaker 1: tough for rights holders breeds, mistrust.
Speaker 2: Right dynamic ips asian platforms. Identification isn't easy unless it's
Speaker 2: built in which raises privacy flags. Content owners might block
Speaker 2: unknown agents or demand trusted ID systems, eas trust frameworks,
Speaker 2: maybe agent certification.
Speaker 1: Content owners struggle to know when infringement happened, who did it.
Speaker 1: Current weblogs and IPv four aren't always enough. Legal certainty
Speaker 1: might have to wait for case. Law needs interoperability, release control,
Speaker 1: persistence for these agents.
Speaker 2: Which brings us back to designing systems differently. Higher level
Speaker 2: models integrating legal issues into architecture and process models right
Speaker 2: from the start embed compliance.
Speaker 1: If legal rules can be modeled with standard languages, you
Speaker 1: apply that model to the business process model to get
Speaker 1: a compliant architecture.
Speaker 2: That's the idea. Where law allows negotiation like access consent,
Speaker 2: maybe standardized protocols, where it mandates procedures like specific consent forms,
Speaker 2: build those in as constraints.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's tackle consumer protection now, all right.
Speaker 2: The book outlines the EU framework, lots of harmonization, but
Speaker 2: still national laws implementing directives. The analysis looks at risks
Speaker 2: for retailers and consumers from agents in the research scenario.
Speaker 1: It starts with some history EC Treaty Art. One hundred
Speaker 1: and fifty three initiatives leading to the Unfair Commercial Practices Directive,
Speaker 1: then key directives distant selling e commerce. Unfair Commercial Practices and.
Speaker 2: Specific articles in the e Commerce Directive are crucial. General
Speaker 2: info requirements Art five Rules on Commercial Communications ADS basically
Speaker 2: contracting info and those intermediary liability exceptions No.
Speaker 1: Art Five means all service providers, including retailers using agents
Speaker 1: need to provide clear details name, address, contact, VAT, pricing.
Speaker 2: Yes, easily and permanently accessible. The book also mentions self
Speaker 2: regulatory codes in some places and other laws like tort
Speaker 2: law or trade description laws. Though the focus is consumer
Speaker 2: protection directly hit.
Speaker 1: By agents, and it acknowledges that consumer reluctance about e
Speaker 1: commerce is still a thing. Lack of confidence.
Speaker 2: Yeah, studies show it. A legal framework helps, but agents
Speaker 2: add specific worries sum are technical fixes. Data protection clear info.
Speaker 2: Others are gray areas. The scope here is agents interacting
Speaker 2: between consumers and merchion stores providers, not the supply chain
Speaker 2: or the goods themselves.
Speaker 1: Table four to two maps issues in the pre contractual
Speaker 1: info ads and contractual feeses. So pre contractual if stores
Speaker 1: contact consumers via agents, what are the info obligations? Are
Speaker 1: these information society services? Do distant selling rules apply? What
Speaker 1: about consent for cold calls via agent?
Speaker 2: Good questions? Does Article ten of distance selling apply to
Speaker 2: SMS or agent messages? Are they emails or equivalent? Individual communications?
Speaker 1: And the big one directives say provide info to the consumer?
Speaker 1: Is the agent the consumer?
Speaker 2: That's a major issue. Transparency is key risk the consumer
Speaker 2: doesn't get the info if the agent doesn't relay it properly.
Speaker 2: Courts might need to interpret this for agents.
Speaker 1: Pre contractual phase has two sides, reliable product service info
Speaker 1: and rules on advertise commercial communication like agent A sending
Speaker 1: offers when you approach a store.
Speaker 2: Section right, and commercial communications cover ads other promotions. Agents
Speaker 2: A and B might send unsolicited messages triggered by RFID
Speaker 2: regulated by e commerce directive. Maybe distance contracts directive too.
Speaker 2: If it's like automated calling needs consent.
Speaker 1: Contractual phase. Agents B and C offering goods via mobile
Speaker 1: devices need the general info from e commerce directive plus
Speaker 1: extra details before contract conclusion from distance selling Art.
Speaker 2: Ten. And if the sale isn't an individual communication, you
Speaker 2: still need to inform about contract steps, codes of conduct,
Speaker 2: error correction, et cetera. Maybe argue personalized agent messages are
Speaker 2: equivalent to emails. Crucially, contract terms must be accessible, storable,
Speaker 2: reproducible by the consumer. RT ten point three often unmet.
Speaker 2: Now might need extra agent layers.
Speaker 1: Post contractual obligations, liability for performance, transaction recording, merchant disclaimers,
Speaker 1: applicable law, jurisdiction. Merchants are bound by valid agent contracts
Speaker 1: like current online sales software. Performance doesn't change that, but
Speaker 1: should be clear to the consumer.
Speaker 2: The book also looks beyond EU directors to national laws,
Speaker 2: often based on fair trading principles, mentions, varying protection levels,
Speaker 2: and the EC's Green Paper aiming to boost confidence. But
Speaker 2: self regulatory codes have limits due to legal diversity and
Speaker 2: enforceability questions.
Speaker 1: What about commercial and technical solutions, Trust seals.
Speaker 2: Like BBB web Trader, the audit companies against criteria website info, ordering, privacy,
Speaker 2: payments disputes important but maybe not infallible, especially on privacy
Speaker 2: in the US. Insurance is another option.
Speaker 1: Technical proposals, cryptography labels, smart agents, tokens, biometrics, water marks, yeah.
Speaker 2: Things like SSL set tee for payments, visa a smart
Speaker 2: card reader. Those set adoption was.
Speaker 1: Limited regulatory developments. The EC Green Paper from two thousand
Speaker 1: and one aimed for more harmonization cooperation, suggested self regulation
Speaker 1: within legislation, proposed a framework directive on fear trading right.
Speaker 2: Those specific laws might still be needed. Debate was harmonization
Speaker 2: versus core principles mentioned to sales Promotion regulation proposal. Then
Speaker 2: the two thousand and three Unfair Business Practices Directive proposal
Speaker 2: banning pyramid selling undisclosed paid media had a general test
Speaker 2: for unfairness, define misleading and aggressive practices. Table four to
Speaker 2: three summarizes issues for agent.
Speaker 1: B okay onto the Big One, privacy, fundamental right, increasing
Speaker 1: concerns with tech making data collection easier, especially in e commerce, and.
Speaker 2: Very relevant to the research scenario with RFID and agents
Speaker 2: handling personal data. Book gives historical context OECD Guidelines nineteen
Speaker 2: eighty Council of Europe Treaty one to eight nineteen eighty
Speaker 2: one influencing EU law.
Speaker 1: Then the key principles of the nineteen ninety five EU
Speaker 1: Data Directive purpose limitation, data quality, proportionality, lawful basis, consent, contract,
Speaker 1: legal need, legitimate interest, transparency, no sense of data processing
Speaker 1: generally security plus.
Speaker 2: Data subject rights, access, rectification, objection amisrator direct marketing, no
Speaker 2: automated decisions with significant effect and some exemptions. Also the
Speaker 2: international angle need for adequate protection for data transfers outside
Speaker 2: EU mentioned safe harbor specific approved countries provides a summary
Speaker 2: rules for the research scenario.
Speaker 1: And privacy is fundamental to advanced e commerce. Right so
Speaker 1: much relies on personal data, the focus shifts to specific
Speaker 1: risks from agent processing Beyond general eBusiness stuff Ubiquitous computing
Speaker 1: means wider, more intense data collection is possible.
Speaker 2: General risks get amplified, unauthorized collection, processing, transfer profiling, lack
Speaker 2: of transparency, bad security. Not the tech itself, but the
Speaker 2: applications and delegation is key. You trust the agent. As
Speaker 2: agents get more data, they hold more sensitive info that
Speaker 2: can be revealed accidentally due to their autonomy.
Speaker 1: Specific agent risks listed are collecting too much data lack
Speaker 1: of user transparency, control, potential profiling, discrimination, security holes, sharing
Speaker 1: data without consent, blurring roles of data, controller processor invading
Speaker 1: user autonomy via unsolicited actions. Multi agent systems add more complexity.
Speaker 2: Summarized as two risk types one accidental non malicious misuse errors,
Speaker 2: bad security, unexpected behavior, two malicious usage insiders selling data,
Speaker 2: external attacks.
Speaker 1: Do agents actually hold personal data? If not? Less legal
Speaker 1: risks likely yes.
Speaker 2: Especially delivery, financial habit data in profiles defines personal data
Speaker 2: info on identify identifiable natural persons.
Speaker 1: Agents aren't data subjects must be natural person, but agent
Speaker 1: parameters code could be personal data about the user if linked.
Speaker 1: Shopping agents likely store profiles.
Speaker 2: Privacy and distributed computing focuses on control who controls agent
Speaker 2: data processing location. Agents are means for processing, but determining
Speaker 2: the controller is hard. In distributed agent.
Speaker 1: Systems, agent autonomy learning challenge. Traditional consent models based on
Speaker 1: initial notification. Agents should maybe inform users of processing keep records.
Speaker 1: Controllers might want to distance themselves from autonomous agent acts.
Speaker 2: Various proposals for online in privacy policies often long hard
Speaker 2: for agents. No guarantee of respect seals trusting bb bone
Speaker 2: line set codes of conduct, industry codes, FEEDMA, DMA, trusted
Speaker 2: third parties, infomediaries, Passport Liberty Alliance, technical solutions, crypto anonymity
Speaker 2: tools p THREEP.
Speaker 1: P THREEP Platform for Privacy Preferences aims to inform users
Speaker 1: via machine readable policies automated handshake, but.
Speaker 2: Criticized doesn't enforce compliance. P THREEP compliance doesn't guarantee EU
Speaker 2: rule adherence, costly, hard to create accurate policies versus one
Speaker 2: point zero maybe two simple Later versions aim higher. Mentions
Speaker 2: related work on preference negotiations, DAN, semantic.
Speaker 1: Web and IPv six again, embedded digital ID via MC
Speaker 1: address potential for tracking despite privacy enhancement.
Speaker 2: Work Yes concludes privacy is fundamental for agents in the
Speaker 2: research scenario due to automation profiles, data mining needs proactive privacy,
Speaker 2: governance for compliance and user trust design agents with privacy
Speaker 2: and mind from the start.
Speaker 1: Okay, let's wrap up with the conclusions. The book starts
Speaker 1: by saying the current way e commerce apps are built
Speaker 1: often leads to illegality.
Speaker 2: Yeah, because law struggles to keep pace with tech. Legislation
Speaker 2: targets existing interactions, finds it hard to anticipate new ones.
Speaker 2: Sites delays defining directing activities for Brussels regulation debates on
Speaker 2: information society services.
Speaker 1: E reluctance on national contract law leaves ambiguity Online tech
Speaker 1: moves faster than law to apps seen with privacy directive updates,
Speaker 1: ipeer software patent debates. Agents now challenge even recent frameworks
Speaker 1: like e signatures, data controller roles. Agent IPR leads.
Speaker 2: To retrofitting building tech first. Worrying about law later results
Speaker 2: in illegal or partially illegal systems due to mismatch book
Speaker 2: revisits tech solutions for trust compliance crypto labels, smart cards, tokens, biometrics.
Speaker 1: Watermarks, specific legal process requirements, ISSP identification, e commerce directive
Speaker 1: ART five name, address, contact, etc. Agent providers should comply
Speaker 1: for confidence invoicing. New VAT directive allows e invoices, maybe
Speaker 1: needing digital signatures. National variations exist.
Speaker 2: Advocates shifting from low level code to higher level models
Speaker 2: for e commerce systems better reflex workflows, easier to integrate
Speaker 2: constraints business and legal argues.
Speaker 1: Business rules and legal rules are similar. Both restrict process freedom.
Speaker 1: Same modeling methods can create consumptual models for legal principles,
Speaker 1: privacy contract IPR codifying law structurally.
Speaker 2: Proposes standardized model affirm processes allows a generic legal architecture
Speaker 2: model for online activities. Apply this legal model to legalize
Speaker 2: the business process model automating that leads to more compliant
Speaker 2: transactions via agents.
Speaker 1: Examples of applying this process.
Speaker 2: View agent negotiation mentioned suite deal project using rules rule
Speaker 2: mel DEMA plus oil to model contract life cycle exceptions.
Speaker 2: Trust and reputation vital between agency users and agent agent
Speaker 2: need reliability, security honesty essential for open e commerce, overcoming
Speaker 2: resistance to delegation processes for trust authorization, certification, access controls,
Speaker 2: security poble reputation mechanisms need to model rights, obligations, permissions, prohibitions,
Speaker 2: non fulfillment actions, Reputation systems track trust levels so stable.
Speaker 1: Agent e commerce needs common language ontology, norms, rules, technical
Speaker 1: and legal standardization happening at language intology level, but pre
Speaker 1: modeling at normative legal level. Need common loss protocols for
Speaker 1: agent interaction or negotiation rules. P three P is a
Speaker 1: partial non agent example but limited legally, though it shows
Speaker 1: interaction models that could embed rules.
Speaker 2: The ultimate conclusion a process oriented approach integrating legal stress
Speaker 2: at design time. Legally, engineering the code is needed for
Speaker 2: greater legal certainty and automated contracting reduced risk in Europe
Speaker 2: acknowledges some conceptual risks around purely agent deals consent need
Speaker 2: judicial legislative clarification, put agents in tech frameworks that already
Speaker 2: include a legal dimension. Cites web service frameworks like UDDI, rosette,
Speaker 2: net ebXML having pre defined process ontologies, and envisions interoperable
Speaker 2: agents offering services via contract referencing shared legal ontologies xml
Speaker 2: RDF bound by embedded regulation, learning from legal updates.
Speaker 1: It's clear from our deep dive today that designing legally
Speaker 1: sound systems in this fast moving digital world, especially with
Speaker 1: autonomous agents emerging, is It's complex but absolutely vital.
Speaker 2: M HM and as our look at legal programming showed,
Speaker 2: taking that proactive approach weaving legal thinking right into the design,
Speaker 2: it's not just about avoiding trouble.
Speaker 1: No, it's about building the trust needed for these technologies
Speaker 1: to really take off.
Speaker 2: Exactly understanding this process view the need for legal programming,
Speaker 2: it gives you a valuable framework for navigating this intersection
Speaker 2: of law and tech.
Speaker 1: So the ongoing conversation between legal folks and tech folks
Speaker 1: developing solutions that bridge that gap between law and innovation.
Speaker 2: It's going to crucial and absolutely crucial for ensuring a
Speaker 2: future of digital commerce that's not just innovative, but fundamentally trustworthy.