 D overly everybody, my name's Nick Gowing from BBC World News, and thank you very much indeed for making it here for nine o'clock. As you can see some people obviously haven't made it yet, but they will come in. But we feel we need to keep going because otherwise we will overrun into the next sessions and you've been good enough to get here on time. Let me just tell you that I was in Tokyo on Friday, some of you may have seen it on BBC World News over the weekend, we did a big debate at the IMF world meeting. Does not worry about it now but we had an earthquake in the middle of the recording of the debate so I feel we're safe here in Dubai but it was a moment of 10 seconds of uncertainty when everything began to shake and maybe we'll make it shake this morning but in a different way so thank you very much indeed. This is what's built as a big conversation and the aim is to keep pushing back and forward on the boundaries and the new uncertainties ymddai ei greu ei ystyried, ac yn ymdweud y llaw o'r ffordd hynny, ac yn ymdyn nhw'r iawn, ymdyn nhw'r iawn. Yn rhaid i ddweud, mae oedd eich cyfnod o'r iawn, ac mae'n ffordd hynny'n ymdyn nhw'r iawn. Second, mae'r gaelio'r cyfeirio ymdyn nhw ymdaer, yn ymddangos cyfeirio'r cyfeirio'r cyfeirio, Mae'r ddaeth y modell bydd yma yn ychwanegu, yn ymgyrch, yn feddwl, yn ysgolion ac yn ymgyrch, yn y ddechrau sy'ngyrch gyda'n mynd a'r Rhubinddon. Mae'r ddaeth y prysgafu, ar gyffredinol, yr arddyngod. Mae'r ddoedd o'r chael o'r cyfreennu a'r ddweud o'r dddiweddol yn yr ysgolion yma. Mae'r ddaeth yma o'r ddweud o'r cyfleid ddim yn gwneud y cwmhwyl i'i gilydd yma, I can see one way or the other have got iPhones, iPads, Samsung's, tablets, whatever. Maybe you're communicating with your office, catching up with your emails, but I'd like you to feel that using those addresses up there, whether it's Twitter, email or text, you could contribute an idea or three to me, which I can then keep putting to the panel rather than saying 10 minutes from the end, who's got any questions. It works fantastically well, but don't leave it until 10 o'clock because that makes it much more difficult for me. So those addresses will stay up there, and we will... Rich over there is curating and harvesting them as they come in, and what it means is I can put them efficiently to the panellists as we go along, and it can generate a sense from you that your ideas, as you sit there thinking I'm frustrated by this, you can contribute that as well to the discussion. Now, who do we have on the panel? Klaus Lessinger, who's from the Novartis Foundation for Sustainable Development, Professor of Sociology at the University of Basel, where he teaches business ethics, corporate social responsibility, as well as human rights and business. Andy Hale, for 10 years the main regulator in Singapore. But designing and being very interested in the issue of major policy frameworks in telecoms, in technology, and the postal sectors, and direct hand responsibility on overseeing the regulator's role in a highly recognised and respected Asian economy like Singapore. But how are things changing? And finally, Ali Jazeeri, who's head of innovation and technology transfer, the section there of the World Intellectual Property Organization. I've told them no speeches, but they know the three areas that we want to cover, and I've told them not to be polite and always ask me if they can speak. So do see this. It is a big conversation. Maybe it could be a little bigger because there are quite some empty seats, but do feel that you are part of this as well. Imagine we're down in the well of the floor and we were sipping coffee together. See it in that spirit if you can. And for those of you just joining, those three addresses up there. And I've already got some messages and ideas and thoughts that have come through. I've got seven already about the areas that we're going to look at. But let me pick up, first of all, with the framing of the realities that are faced by the IT business, particularly old-fashioned versus new-fashioned. Klaus, pick up on that and then Andy and Ali as well and we'll move forward on the other areas shortly. Well, one thing that is obviously bothering me is that we seem to live with new big problems, people reading my mail, people monitoring what I buy, where I go. People are collecting data on me, are analysing it, are selling it to people who are selling products and I get spams according to what has been analysed. I find that not the right way. I find that not something I want. I have not been asked that somebody is doing that. Forget about selling it. I find that this is something we ought to talk about because it can also be used in a political way, not only in a commercial way, and then we would be in a world that I wouldn't want to live in. Andy, privacy. If I could add to that, I have to share, Nick, with you a story that happened to me last week and it was stunning. It really is basically what you had said, Klaus. I opened up my browser. A pop-up ad came up and it was for an investment firm and it says, if your portfolio is such and such, the stunning part is they were within 3% of the value of my portfolio and I was worried that tomorrow would I see the same ad and said, by the way, if you had not clicked this, we would have saved you X amount of money because your portfolio went down. So the intrusion, if you will, without, as you say, without my permission into something that I would consider highly personal is something that we should be quite alarmed about and this is not a singular event. It's not something that concerns me as much as the mere fact that I have not been asked. I have not granted anybody permission to delve into that but I was traveling to Dubai through a major Asian hub airport. I wanted to buy some water, excuse me, I wanted to buy a candy bar and a magazine. I didn't realize that this particular vendor was two separate vendors. I could buy the magazine but if I wanted to buy the candy bar I had to show my not only boarding pass but my passport. I did not understand that. I don't understand why I have to share my personal information, birth date, passport number, where I've traveled to with a concessionaire in an airport that I don't trust and I think we'll get into that. The issue of trust is important. Did you buy the candy bar? I didn't because you didn't want to hand over your passport. I was willing to hand over my boarding pass but not my passport. Ali, your view from intellectual property on this issue of privacy and already I'm getting quite a lot of points being raised on this. Yes, I believe that they're in the same... Microphone please. I believe that they're in the same time opportunities as well as challenges. The opportunities are the fact that you have ubiquitous connectivity where you have this hyper connectivity that people have with smartphones, laptops, tablets, gaming devices and so on and you can be connected wherever you are at any point in time. In the same time it is true that it is a big challenge in the sense that today we are becoming more and more the chauffeurs of these mobile gadgets that we're carrying with us. The vice president of Intel at the time about a few years ago had said that David Tannenhaus had said that indeed it's becoming a risk that we're becoming less and less needed for data input because the mobile gadgets that we're carrying will do all the jobs that need to be done. In the same time over the recent years we've seen the evolution of the iPhones for example and the iPhones have become so powerful that in a way it's becoming a threat today. In fact Ken Gabriel, the director of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency DARPA in the United States had said that these powerful devices, the iPhones have had so many new options added to them that they're becoming threats and they're becoming threats to potential terrorists around the world that could be using these gadgets to do their bad deeds. Right and of course for now we know that if you download something from iTunes you don't own it, you only rent it for your life. You can't pass it on to your kids which is an interesting discovery. Let me give you some of the questions that are already on the minds of those in the audience. Let me pick up some of them. Once information is on the web it's impossible to delete it. Do you have a right to delete or not? Of course you must have a right to delete. I mean in what society are we living in? Can you do it? This I don't know. I just know that if I have a 14 year old son or girl out of that situation and out of contact they are putting something on Facebook or I don't know on any other social media and 15 years later that might be an issue that prevents her or him being hired by a company. How do you guarantee it's deleted if you want to delete it? How can you guarantee, how can you know that it has been deleted? The problem is I cannot know. The problem is and that's the distrust that is developing. There has been at least in the newspapers there has been stories that Google was collecting data and was promising to delete it and did not. So whom am I trusting if it is a private commercial company that might have an incentive not to delete it while I have a personal interest to have it deleted. Andy and Ali on that issue of deleting. I strongly support that. A good friend of mine wrote a book that was titled Delete and the construct of the book was you should have that right. The problem really getting to the next question is the fact that you can't because with the cost and the global virability of the communications networks around the world I can very quickly make a copy. I can make an exact copy of what you just put on that. I think though it's a more complex issue than just saying I don't like that information that I have on Facebook. I'd like to delete it. I'll give you the context of the complexity without going into the complexity. If I've had a parking ticket 25 years ago and it still is residual in the internet if you will I quite frankly think I have a right to get rid of that. That should not linger forever. On the other hand suppose I have a criminal record. Certain people should be allowed to see that but under the context of who should be allowed to see the fact that I have a record. So in one case if I'm a criminal and I shouldn't be able to go into some database as I expunge that record because quite frankly society would be hurt. So there's this societal balance that we're having to draw from. In one case information gets old and in another case it is. Now I think a more relevant question could be how about if I have a picture taken of me and through face recognition technology somebody identifies it's me. Now how about if that picture happened to be taken in a bar and somebody then draws a conclusion about my personal habits because of the association of me in that bar. If I could share with you just a single statistic which I thought was stunning. This was a story that was written in the New York Times this past March I believe that a research study of executive recruiters said 70% of them said that they burned down candidates as a direct result of an online search have denied candidates the opportunity. Rightly or wrongly that's a stunning number that 70% is saying that I have gone online looked at somebody, found Andy here in a bar he's got a beer in his hand therefore possibly he's got a drinking problem. Don't want him. So that is a difficult problem I think that we have to deal with without that balance between what can be deleted what can be expunged more importantly what rights do I have. Of course it's about behaviour as well and we can all take a view that not posting stuff on Facebook is a good way forward because actually then it's not in the public space so you have to make a decision about whether you want to enter that space. Ali again picking up on we've got a lot of questions so let's keep the answers reasonably tight delete or not how do you guarantee it? Now it's becoming of course an intellectual property issue what happens with your pictures your photographs that you have put on Facebook and one day you decide that you don't want to belong to Facebook anymore and you sign off you try to delete all your photographs but the question is and it turns out to be the case nowadays is that these photographs that you have uploaded on Facebook or a site similar to Facebook are the ownership of Facebook itself so it's becoming now an issue and you have to really look closely at the contracts when you look and you enter into these platforms and see the finer detail about what is going to happen with this intellectual property that you upload into these platforms another example is you talked earlier on about these photographs that might be caught of you in a bar for example also Street View from Google has also a big issue where people are being photographed in certain areas where they are walking or driving by and Street View was invented at Google Zurich Centre and in fact what they have gone through now because of all of these intellectual property issues as well as these concern issues of people being photographed where they are There was also the unencrypted data they were pulling down off Wi-Fi so now they have gone through blurring every single face on Street View maps that are being photographed so you can imagine the cost of blurring every single person but let me keep pressing you how do you guarantee that if they say they are going to delete it or erase it, that it will have been deleted or erased is it possible to get to that point Klaus? I don't know technically it should be possible the question is who has the right to say yes or no and I want to have that right and not delegate it to somebody else Do you believe that's achievable? I think so Andy It is, the technology is being considered right now today but it's not and that is actually to wrap if you will, certain information about yourself suppose I put my birth certificate on the internet I would wrap that information in such a way that if it was ever shared with anybody else they would also get the wrapper with it and the wrapper would have certain conditions with which you can in fact look at that now Klaus makes a decision and he asks me we'd like you Andy to delete your birth certificate no longer needed on the internet quite frankly what would happen to all the people that had been shared with, they could delete it too but the fundamental problem I think digital world, I'm not even talking about the internet I'm talking about the digital world that we've been seeing over the last 15 to 20, 25 years is the fact that we can make perfect copies and share them around the world so we ask Facebook to erase such it's not, there's no guarantee that I may have downloaded that on my PC I don't know that Ali has asked for it to be erased it's still on my PC two years later I'd send it back to the internet but you see in the pharmaceutical industry if you buy a drug you get a 10 page package leaflet that tells you the warnings and the indication of the side effects you won't get that if you go on Facebook or on any of those social media so you buy a package basically you buy risks that you are not aware of and then you are stuck with it and people say well you shouldn't have gone there and that's intruding my bubble and that's affecting my sovereignty that's the problem I have with it already and if you've arrived late there's three addresses up there if you'd like to contribute what I want to do is get a lot of ideas into the mix here it's a great way of harvesting them let me give you three or four other ideas but you've come up already the internet world believes you have a right to be anonymous online telcos expect to know about your every movement how can these worlds be reconciled and should identity management be controlled by the individual or by a third party Andy I can address from personal experience the second question which is really the role of a telco in this environment and I'll share with you a story 2000, the year 2000 I was the architect of the framework the competition framework in Singapore and one of the provisions I was most concerned about was that the incumbent telecom operator had an enormous amount of information and they shouldn't, from a competition point of view be able to use that to sell you other things so when the competition law there's a plank, cannot use accept to provision the service that you've asked for quick end to the story it's the very first time we had to use that provision it was in a criminal event and nothing to do with competition somebody had gone in looked at customer information and stolen it and so it was a criminal activity that we in fact wound up using the competition side I personally believe the telco knows and I think this has been shared far, far, far more information about you than you can even imagine they know your travel habits they know who you're talking to more importantly they know how long you're talking to them they can identify who you're talking to and then the question becomes can you keep that within the province of providing you a service not to have them turn around and monetize it and sell it to somebody else who will sell you securities or sell you toothpaste or whatever Andy, let me press you that you were involved as regulator in Singapore and Singapore has a certain attitude to free information or non free information and the media and so on what kind of constraint was there on privacy which was embedded in the licenses which you talk about the telcos having that information where there's an expectation from governments that they will get that information too Good question So what's the answer? The licensing privileges if you will that I had towards our licensee was that the government had the right to get access to that information and that right was a lot broader than one might suspect Unconditional Without court order it's not like many European countries where you would need to go to the court to actually get access to certain information the government had certain rights to actually get access to that information Did they exercise that frequently? That I don't know Is there any log of that kind of thing? It was actually done I used to call it the black box it was done elsewhere within the government I was the economic regulator and my job was the health of the market so if something was happening with the infrastructure the switches and the data that was going that was held Human history shows that if there is a right to have access that the access is taken I could always assume that Where does this leave intellectual property the right of me to retain the right to whatever is known about me? I think an issue about who you are and in fact at the recent summit in Guadalajara it's an ITU summit looking at satellite images and looking at sensitive sites that people want to protect in the United States you have a lot of sensitive sites that are blurred because of national security issues but in other parts of the world some sensitive sites are not blurred so in this ITU summit in Guadalajara in Mexico there was a big discussion about the right to protect certain information that are yours and that you don't want to disclose or you don't want people to... What was the outcome of that? There's a right to it but how do you then exercise it? It was a great success in fact it was a recommendations that were put forward to pressure the satellite imagery database to blur certain parts of facilities that certain countries prefer not to disclose to all the world. Klaus let me pick up on another point here is the loss of privacy acceptable for the increase in security given your work on ethics and that whole area we now know that criminals or alleged criminals in any case are tracked often by their use of mobile phones some of them are dumb enough to use their mobile phones not realizing how they're going to be tracked but where is the boundary now between security and privacy? Very difficult. Can it be defined at all? I don't know that's contextual after 9-11 the world has changed in the United States the homeland security is saying that certain things are necessary that 10 years earlier would have been perceived to be totally impossible so you know maybe there is not a general rule maybe there is a contextuality that has been looked at but you see as a private citizen I have an allergy against somebody looking, reading my mail and I think I have a right to have that allergy and if somebody tells me that for security reasons that I can't make a judgement upon they have to have rights then I'm getting alert and I want more transparency and I want to be asked and I want communication on that rather than decision behind my back and upon my head. Sorry, just jump in one second. One of the things I've learned I've had the opportunity to work around the world is that there are cultural differences in almost every economy and I think one of the things I took away from Asia is there is a very different paradigm of the relationship of the individual to what I'll call the institution versus the West which would actually put the individual more than likely first in the institution second or the organization or the enterprise and I've actually done a fair amount of reading in terms of the Asian paradigm that someone might say that the institution the government, whatever it happens to be does have that right and I will give up my individual rights if we look at China and Southeast Asia and places like that. I'm not disputing that I am aware that in a confusion culture the community is more important than the individual but then I'm not living in a confusion culture be it there as it might it's their right to organise their life around that it's my right to organise my life in Germany or in Switzerland where I live the basic issue is that people are getting used to certain institutional conditions and live with it and keep it normal and here we have the problem that some four or five big brothers behind everybody's back are kind of deciding things that I want to have a word in instead of being decided upon. Klaus, so you come from Switzerland and of course there's been a significant change in culture on banking security and banking anonymity have you noticed a significant change on the ethics and the culture of the status of private information in Switzerland recently? We are in the middle of a very important change it has to do with what's your property on the data with regard of how much money do you have on the bank how much money do you earn on the bank and is that something you should voluntarily tell the financial authorities or should the financial authorities have a right to get an access to that. In Germany the financial authorities can have a look at your bank account in Switzerland that's only possible if and when there is suspicion that there are criminal acts that is a question of How would you see it shaping up that argument at the moment particularly after the due diligence and the banking scandals and who's not paying tax whether in Switzerland or Lichtenstein? Well it's part of a more general trend wherever there are bad abuses of a system or bad press passing of good banners the system as a whole is likely to change and that doesn't make sense to me I mean if 2% or 3% or 5% of the people are cheating on their taxes and 95% are doing an honest job why should one change the system because of the 5% that's a very general issue but let me go one step further you see if you talk about the banks and if you talk about the changed atmosphere a lot of what's happening to the Swiss banks and other banks worldwide the discussion has started in the 1990s there were critical questions on a lot of things that were ignored then by the banks there were with regard to the pharmaceutical industry in the 70s and 80s there are a lot of questions that were kind of refuted in the sense of we know what we are doing why are you asking and these retrospectively were early warning signs of an uneasiness of a diffuse uneasiness that later on led to a public discussion and to regulatory changes that could have been prevented or modified if one would have taken up the early signs discuss about it create transparency and explain the complexity that one is working with a lot of thoughts from you which is great on privacy so what I'm going to do is keep funneling them to you and then we'll move on to innovation and the other areas we plan to do but let me just read three or four of those that have come up an SMS here by the way if you've arrived late there are three addresses up there you can help contribute to the discussion by pushing it forward with what's on your mind as you listen an SMS here who can control the web Google or a Saddam Hussein and will it be the same do you feel that focused marketing based on our previous choices could begin to restrict our ability to discover totally new things but these are the two ones I'd like to focus on stop moaning about invasion of privacy the service is free and you're not forced to use it like Google and also no one reads the small print of contracts over who controls the data isn't this just a case of unethical treatment by companies Ali yes indeed I think that in the same time these are all challenges but maybe to build a bridge on to the follow on conversation on innovation there's immense number of opportunities about the information that is present on the web for example LinkedIn gives information on people around the world and the expertise that they have around the world so today especially in the area of innovation it doesn't matter what you know what matters today is to know who knows how and this is why the Sun Microsystems Joyce Law that used to say no matter who you are you will never be able to hire the smartest people from around the world and this is true because of the way innovation is moving today innovation is moving more and more towards open innovation or network innovation and thanks to this information that's present on the web you can literally create a team by finding the perfect person for a particular project and essentially have a team that's built from people around the world that are contributing positively to your project so in a sense I think this is quite a huge opportunity especially in the area of innovation but let me press you on no one reads the small print of contracts I've just logged into the IBIS next door and you don't bother to read the long thing you say I agree you don't know what you're signing away because you want to get online is this really a serious challenge Andy it's an interesting point because there was a wonderful case that came out of the California Supreme Court which addresses specifically the law of unequal bargaining power when Nick checked into this hotel he was at a disadvantage he had to go to that hotel nor did he have the time to read a long agreement but the wonderful thing about this decision it was I think it was about two years ago and coincidentally it was a telco it was a mobile operator it was a California mobile mobile operator that actually had a very very long contract and the consumer won in that case actually said because of the unequal bargaining position and did that have any impact on telcos I didn't see any after that contracts didn't get clearer or shorter as a direct result which is really a pity because you would hope a court decision especially a major court decision would have changed behavior a bit if I could just add one other point to Nick your first point that came in as a question which is can you control the internet unfortunately who can control the web Google or a Saddam Hussein and will it be the same sad part about it is the internet wasn't ever developed that way 30 40 years ago it was developed in the periphery if you will it wasn't the traditional we tend to think of it as a traditional communication vehicle of me communicating with Ali what's not we are all at the edge if you will can you control the edge of course not the problem is there are many many networks at the edge that you could never get a site on if I bring back Singapore into the mix I always thought this was a bit novel and I knew from a policy point of view why this was done Singapore blocked 100 websites when was that this is probably about 15 years and they are still blocked you cannot get to 100 only 100 now but it would be what you might suspect in this you probably have a smile on it is www.playboy.com or penthouse.whatever the oddity of doing something like that is you will never ever block access if somebody wants to get access to a contraband website in Singapore it's technically quite easy to do you just use a proxy and you get to wherever you want to get to same is true with China China also does blocking at certain parts of their network but when you realistically look at how the internet works and this I hope gets back to that question who controls the internet quite frankly sadly no one does or we all do and although that's a very ambiguous answer to it it's just the way the internet is designed it's very very difficult to say I want to be able to shut you off from being able to get that information but you see that in a way that's the ambiguity we have to live with anyhow I mean nobody in the room would probably worry if we would block all the pornographic websites you know get away with it nobody needs that but maybe they would be different thing if we say Amnesty International or Greenpeace I don't know what so we will have to live with that and at the end it's also the personal responsibility of people to use something or not but the point that you made earlier is that it is a free service if you use Google and then if you buy using this free service you can't get off a rwg suck of things whether you like it or not you don't have to use Google and this I take issue at this view on the one hand yes of course I do not have to use Google if I do not want to be confronted with other things on the other hand if I were Google I would carefully listen to what's the criticism that's coming I would kind of look what are my stakeholders what are my customers interested in where do they see a problem and how can I anticipate the criticism like this because Google had a very successful story in the past years you know in the next 10 years also for Google the game is changing and if you want a sustainable success and if you want to be looked upon as a part of the solution and not of the part of the problem you ought to take criticism serious you ought to listen and to learn and you ought to adapt and not say you know it's your choice to use it or not Right we've got 25 minutes to run because we're going to run to 10.15 and we've got two other areas we're going to talk about about the new structures and new models and the old models and also price but what I'd like to do is just do a quick round robin because what I'd like to do we've got a lot of contributions here on privacy and it's more efficient than asking you to ask it with a microphone let me just give you some of them now so you can respond to any of them here's Amy Taha a Canadian lawyer don't we have to start by defining the difference between personal data protection and privacy from someone no name many countries like China and Iran impose censorship on their citizens access to sites that are perceived as a threat to society or security does a government ever have a right to impose censorship on citizens let me just keep going which is an email who should finally decide which data should be stored and which data should be deleted should there be a free trade for data so that no matter who decides in the cloud the same regulations are applied and I've got a couple more if I can get up there in time older people are concerned about privacy but young people are not are they being naive or do we have to accept that the world has changed we've had about 20 interventions already on privacy anything you'd like to pick out on that before we move on quick on the demographics that's something we did study carefully in developing the privacy policy you mean old versus young yes the mix of and time again I was approached by a young person and said you're just out of date you're old, you don't understand we don't care quite frankly we don't care I go back to my earlier point of profiling which said that if I lost a job and denied a credit because somebody profiled my interests that I might have had on Facebook against borrowing habits and patterns of people with like interests all of a sudden I start losing some of the benefits that society offers I think quite frankly the young will change their mind I think they will recognize that and to quote a wonderful quote it was a CEO of Sun Microsystems before the US Congress and he said if you think you have privacy or data protection forget it and he said this to a congressional panel and it was so true but this was in 1996 so a long time ago the people that were designing these systems knew quite well that there are mechanisms that are available in technology to even track if you had mentioned earlier somebody said why not just not use it turn it off well you still don't have that control to the extent you have a mobile phone I think you have mentioned that and Nick you mentioned that too walking around we know somebody knows what you're doing somebody knows where you are and if you're visiting your secret girlfriend's apartment somebody knows that and that is frightening but who knows it who knows it is your girlfriend's apartment well they can associate seriously Andy who knows what you're doing when you go to a certain location well only you know it that's the point and I think this is the thing that bothers me the most and I think Klaus hit on this is the fact that people make interpretations they make a guess they said there's an address we know this apartment is filled with single women and now I've made an assumption about this person which is dangerous it may not be true at all Indeed like Ken Gabriel from DARPA had said the iPhones today are becoming so powerful in fact the GPS technology you can find out exactly where you are at any given time again I think there are also opportunities with having this GPS coordinates especially for example here in Dubai and we are in Dubai today it's a technology that's used for example from meeting somebody you give them the GPS coordinates and then just you follow your iPhone and then you can find a particular person Ali keep focused on the privacy issues can you on who has the right to know that who has the right to know that information which you're saying is a benefit yes ok so in the same time if there are conflict about this information for example you have a certain you come up with an idea of a given product for example and then somebody on the internet creates a domain name with a particular product that you've come out with now in fact the world intellectual property organization has a conflict resolution or domain name resolution for a particular name that you would like to have that somebody else has on the internet so in that case it's a very useful tool within 60 days and I believe only $3,000 you can retain that name that somebody else has already registered for a particular name that or trademark that you would like to use for your particular product ok thank you because we're going to run out of time we've got 20 minutes to run but a lot of other issues to raise the point is we have to live with a certain ambivalence anyhow that can be used to good can be used for the bad purse business as well and we discussed there are certain data that the state is likely to have be it financial, if you are a criminal be it for that one but there are certain data that are private and they are private means private and means it's me and I should have a right to determine or at least I should be informed what's happening with that and you know we should not take for granted well it's complex and it's difficult and I have my data and I have my rights and I can visit any apartment and I can play check there instead of doing some what other people's fantasy might arise about the fact that I have to worry about tells me something is wrong in this area so let's create transparency let's talk about it, let's get the best brains together and let's find an optimal solution with it so we all can live the fact that ambivalence will not be removed but if you have a right to your own data then I have a right to exercise it and I do not want to mind anybody else's business let's move on we've got 20 minutes to run and we want to talk about innovation and pricing and also the new models emerging particularly with the OIP and over the top and what else is happening in the market now Ali your view the particularly contribution that you wanted to make particularly on IPR today we're living in a world where we are seeing changing paradigms of innovation in the same time changing centers of balance of innovation where centers of balance are shifting eastward towards Asia and the changing paradigms of innovation are quite obvious in the 19th century innovation used to be the work of individuals you had people like in the beginning of the 20th century people like Edison working in their in their labs and finding solutions to particular problems in the late 20th century you started having innovation as being the work of large teams you had the works of Lucent, IBM Dupont you had extremely large mega teams that were forming with a lot of funds that needed to be invested for to run these teams in the beginning of the 21st century innovation is becoming more the work of networks so it's becoming a networked innovation and particularly in the context of the international economic and financial crisis networked innovation is becoming a real opportunity today innovation is the way out of the crisis often times and in fact today especially thanks to open innovation which can be literally defined as the osmosis or reverse osmosis of knowledge across the interface between an organization and its environment osmosis of knowledge which means flow of knowledge that you have flow of knowledge from individual organization to outside and also inward flow from outside to inside and what are the opportunity in here is that in the sense if the organization that's across the street from you is having a particular product that you could insert within your product line why reinvent the wheel why have an entire mega team doing research on this particular product when you can just license in that particular product from your neighbor across the street in the same time if you have certain products within your organization within your company that is not central to the company's business strategy why not license out this particular product so I think today we're coming to a point where innovation has real opportunities especially for setting up what we call the global innovation grid in a way the global innovation grid is a grid where you can put together teams as I said before where you could select and cherry pick the particular person that can give you the right answer for your particular problem and in fact open innovation market places around the world are doing exactly that Innocentive and other organizations are opening innovation market places or e-bays of innovation where you have seekers and solvers of technology in fact Innocentive has 50% of their solvers that come from three countries Russia, India China and this is because of the high skills high problem solving skills from these countries Ali let me just jump in at that point and just push you a bit further all three of you Clos and Andy particularly on the issue of who keeps control of innovation in other words there are a lot of predators out there in the market who are prepared to copy and move forward and capitalize how do you keep control on that particularly from the gaffer who've innovated like crazy often at the expense of stability and other concerns for policy I'm just trying to work out how you create a new kind of regulatory landscape if at all or is that all over Well again there are resemblances to the pharmaceutical industry on the one hand you need a patent to protect your intellectual property because that gives you the revenue that keeps you innovating we have a patent restricts access of people to that knowledge and the question for me is not patent yes or no the question for me is from a co-responsibility point of view what is a responsible use of a patent where is the limit of what is my short term financial interest with regard to where is the desirable social impact on a broader base and they are we go into differential pricing there we go into innovative models there we go into partnering into sharing and you know there might be a particular there might be a specificity for a particular industries but the basic issue can never be should we protect intellectual property or not because we would kind of curb innovation and that's not desirable in itself Andy sorry Ali do you want to come back Ali come back Yeah just maybe one sentence that intellectual property indeed in the past well IP itself in the past was considered as intellectual property and now today more and more IP is becoming more and more like intellectual partnering or intellectual partnership so in a way IP is becoming the way to exchange the currency that can be used to exchange certain ideas and certain technologies with partnering does everyone retain their rights to be able to capitalize it on it and monetize it and secure their rights in the medium to long term or not does partnership mean that now IP well it turns out that it's becoming more and more a big issue today because more and more people talk with each other more and more people engage with each other so now it's becoming a question of how much intellectual property or how much can you share with a particular partner that you would like to engage in you have foreground IP background IP it's becoming an issue today about who is how much information can you share before you engage with a particular person in fact there was a a survey that was conducted recently by OACD that looked at what is the highest risk for open innovation today and it surveyed 300 top world executives around the world and it turns out the number one highest risk 67% of the respondents said the highest risk for open innovation today is IP theft and indeed I think today we need tools and the world intellectual property organisation is developing guides and tools specifically to strategically manage open innovation networks let me pick up Andy before you give me your thoughts three contributions from the floor here firstly an SMS does the dominance of companies like Apple and Microsoft suppress information if a company like Apple can be allowed to bully its competitors when they bring competing products to consumers then innovation will only be driven by a single vision secondly a text here for artists musicians filmmakers digital transfer has almost destroyed traditional models how can we ensure sustainability for them and thirdly traditionally patents have been used to inspire and drive innovation today companies are harvesting patent portfolios and using them as weapons against their competitors is this a use of IPR can I take the first one because it was something for a long time this was the Apple control if you will of a market it was something that was very important to me and backing up a second it was a good job in Singapore was just to maintain the health of a market it happened to be the communications market but it was the health and the vibrancy of that particular market and one of the things that we prohibited by license from all operators in our market was to lock the phone to the service and I felt very strongly about the fact that they were two totally separate markets one is a service provision market another is a handset market and I think in the last five six years we've seen that the handset market is very very different than what it was back in 2005 or 2004 just in terms of the capabilities we're not carrying phones anymore we're carrying cameras and we're carrying recorders but just happened to have a phone in it the economic benefit to the market is that you're treating the service more as a commodity I probably got more pushback on that policy decision from the service providers because if I can borrow a wonderful term from a policy officer that used to work for me and she once said it is renting market power so Apple comes into the market strong, good product but why should I be forced to take a particular service I've paid for that phone I should be able to use that phone with any service provider I want it's true the fact that if I have this service from this service provider I should be able to choose any phone I want one of the things that I wanted to add to both Ali and Klaus' comment Klaus had mentioned the pharmaceutical industry one of the paradigms that we went through in the telecom space and some of you may remember it back in the early to mid 90s was the concept of the wall garden this was actually taking intellectual property saying if you want my content you must get it from me so it was the concept of I create this wall garden and it worked reasonably well and the model that always comes to my mind is an outfit called AOL in the United States but we also would happen to AOL the wall garden will only live just so long I know that wasn't Klaus' point because he was more talking about the protection of my intellectual property so he went through a patent mechanism but as a competition authority if you will I tend to look at a patent as being the granting rights of a monopoly I grant you monopoly rights for X amount of years which is the length of your patent so as a competition person responsible for the health of the market I would probably not want that I don't want to have wall gardens Okay Andy I'm going to have time is beating us but there's a lot of other stuff I want to try and get through just picking up Klaus on any of those points that I made on IPR that have come through because I can offer you a couple of others Where did innovation happen over the past 50 years it happened where you had intellectual property protected Well there's one question here on SMS how does open source fit with innovation I don't know there are that's also an ambivalence my experience has been open source that might open new ways that might open alternative ways of solving a problem but the maintenance of that channel is not necessarily guaranteed because there is no commercial interest in doing things like this Ali let me come back to you because there's an email here picking up on the point you were making from Tom Levine from Alan and Overie here in Dubai If Ali Giseria's view that inventions and innovation are becoming the product of networks rather than the individual inventors how does this undermine the framework for legal protection of intellectual property that the WIPO is based on If there's no inventor and therefore no owner how will it get economic reward That's a very good question in fact especially in the context of open innovation marketplaces where you have a particular invention that you have developed and you're a problem solver and you propose this as the problem of particular challenge that was posted in this open innovation marketplace now what happens with your intellectual property in fact it turns out in these open innovation marketplaces that if you had a particular piece of intellectual property and that was patented for example then you can transfer the rights of this patent to this open innovation marketplace and the company will pay you a small amount for that particular solution that you've brought in the other hand if you did not protect this particular solution that you're proposing in the open innovation marketplace then you're also transferring the rights to this solution in both cases what happens is that you're transferring the solution of a problem on this open innovation marketplace and receiving an award that can range between five and ten thousand dollars now the big question is is this five or ten thousand dollars that a particular person, a problem solver receives for a particular solution the right amount that he should be receiving for the solution that he has proposed and it turns out that a lot of times if you had a patent and you had licensed the patent to that particular company that needed that solution you probably would have had a much higher amount for that particular solution I've got four minutes to run to the issue which we hope to get to but we've had such a rich discussion with an enormous number of contributions about the days of the telco being over welcome to the world of GAFA quickly, particularly Clouse your experience from the pharmaceutical business about how those who have successful models are not savvy and smart and sensitive enough about how vulnerable they suddenly become well I think if you read the press on GAFA then the writing at the world they are definite, there is an uneasiness there is a lack of trust there is something that is rising and I have the feeling that the GAFA's, these big companies they have been so successful as complacency, as ecotism, as arrogance who are they to criticise us and the message from the pharmaceutical business the message is, these are early warning signs talk to your stakeholders take this criticism serious try to solve the problem inclusively with these people rather than send the lawyers and hope that you can win the battle Andy I think it's, and I said this in the beginning of the session here, I think it's absolutely vital to build trust trust between who and who actually it's between the consumer and whoever their provider happens to be and in my mind it's always how they're accessing whatever this, it could be a telecom company so the trust has to be if I'm going to participate with one of the GAFA organisations do I have the trust in my provider to share that information and then we'll get passed on and be used properly but what do you put, how do you describe the dilemma all of us expected to be there the telco to be providing us with a circuit like that yet we want to use it as cheaply as possible so who is the trust between the telco to provide a service at the cheapest possible rate and then you say use Skype or whatever and you're paying almost nothing for the use of this who's the trust deal with the trust in my mind has always been with access provider which is the telco and the fact that I am not going to be manipulated in some fashion I'm not going to be denied access you mentioned Skype I'm not going to be denied access to Skype if I am in a hotel and I'm using the telco to get to Skype the hotel doesn't interfere or the telco doesn't interfere with my right to get to any device I want to get to I think it's terribly important and it's a policy concept of any device or to be able to get to any other device or any other site anywhere Klaus do you believe behaviourally after what the pharmaceutical business went through which you know so well do you think behaviourally the big telcos understand the enormity of what they face around 10 years but maybe 10 months no I have the feeling there is still too much complacency there is too much it worked in the past but shouldn't it work in the future there is a lack of opening up and the ability to look at themselves from an outside perspective and that has always been leading to more problems and not to less problems Ali I believe that we should look more and more closely about what is happening especially in the developing world in the developing world there are immense number of new technologies that are being used that in our developed world quote in quote have not even conceived just give you a couple examples in Kenya for example in Africa the MPSA mobile payment approach through just an SMS messaging system or the Ushahidi experience which is an extremely powerful experience using your mobile phone and to using a mapping a way to track a crisis for example if you have an earthquake or you have a mob a kind of crisis through this SMS messaging system the Ushahidi can really track where a particular crisis is located on a given map geographically in a particular situation OK Ali thank you I can see people are beginning to think it's time to move to the next session let me offer you there's one great comment here on email I don't have a Facebook account it's come from someone in the room, no name I don't have a Facebook account however my friends have posted pictures while another emailed my Gmail account asking how the installation was going now I'm receiving ads on construction material isn't this an invasion of my privacy and finally what number am I looking for number 11 yeah what do you most fear and what do you most hope for our future in the cyber world that's from a regulator in Vanuatu quickly 10 seconds Andy I think my biggest fear is that there's still innovation in the telecom space I think it's one that is it's under a lot of threat right now I've always been concerned that the major telco telcos around the world some come from the same model that think the old I get everything still works and unfortunately the sharing model has become more of the order of the day thank you Klaus I think the huge potential of this industry could be curved by trust by distrust developing by uneasiness development by forcing upon regulation that might prevent more good than it is preventing home Ali final word can you see trust as being something which can survive or distrust I believe that there's one keyword learning to behave and nowadays learning to behave is a key characteristic about identifying a particular partner so in a way in the culture the society that we live in the hyper connected society if we don't behave then immediately we're on the sidelines Ali, Andy and Klaus thank you very much indeed I hope you felt it's been a rich discussion we had about 30 interventions from the floor which certainly is probably about 10 times more than we would have otherwise with microphones and so on I hope you felt it's been worth it but thank you very much for entering the spirit of having a big conversation and maybe we can have a conversation which lasts a little bit longer next time because actually there was a very rich series of veins which you were generating from the floor as well so thank you very much indeed and thank you for being patient as I've let it run over thanks