 Good morning and thank you very much for this opportunity. In my presentation today I will address the question of data ownership from a legal perspective and I let some of the difficulties we have in applying the legal concept of ownership to data. And this is the outline of my presentation. I will start an introduction looking at why data ownership is an emerging issue in relation to data collection and use. Then I will explain what ownership means from a legal point of view. And I will then explore the application of the legal concept of ownership to data and what kind of challenges we might arise from that. There is currently a law reform project in England and Wales concerning digital assets and there have been a lot of interesting discussions in the concept in the scope of that law reform project in relation to information data and the concept of ownership in that context. And I will try to draw upon these discussions in my presentation as well and I will conclude by looking at what might be the way forward for data ownership. So data has crucial importance in environmental sustainability. The United Nations considers data as key in the progress of achieving sustainable development goals by 2030 because data can guide efforts in identifying where the needs are and help users to develop solutions and take timely actions. And in order to tackle environmental challenges, the UNDRA commands that we need well-developed tools in place to ensure data gathering in the first place and increase the amount and quality of data. And we are in a position to do that, to do the technological progress and vast volumes of data can be generated today by sensors, by the use of AI digital humans and so on. And this brings up the fashion of rights and duties in relation to data collection, including its usage and sharing, data sharing and in a way, we think that if we can identify the owner of data in a given case, these questions might seem to be easier to answer for us because recognition of data ownership could also provide legal title and property rights over data. However, when we speak of data, ownership may not be a straightforward concept or a suitable legal concept to use. First might be a useful thing to illustrate that by an example from the US concerning farmers and agriculture technology providers, which I came across in an OCD publication when we were doing the horizon scanning in the network. So accessing and using agricultural data has become very important for farmers' success and some of the big agriculture technology providers already potential in this and they start to integrate sensors with their equipment and they were able to generate a large volume of data by data and this data have economic value as well. Since it was an important source for certain companies, building biotech crop insurance and as well as traders as well and the agricultural data was controlled by agriculture technology providers and this raised concerns in relation to potential harms to farmers including financial expression. So various discussions took place in the US including the question of who owns agricultural data and if the farmers, it does the farmers data so they should be able to use it, they should be able to control over it and when data is used by others for financial gain, farmers should be able to gain benefit from that as well and these discussions in the US eventually led up to drawing up some principles in relation to farm data in the US. So one might think that recognition of date, recognition of ownership over data is important but from a legal perspective it's not as straight forward as we think. So property and ownership are defined and understood, categorized very differently among the different jurisdictions. So this is an area of law, property law differs significantly among jurisdictions. So ownership means the exclusive right to use, process and dispose of property and property is defined as anything that can be owned and in terms of categories of property, English law has real property which is basically land and personal property, any other thing than that. So there is also further division in English law between things in possession. So these are the things with physical existence, they can be processed such as a car or things in action and these are legal rights or claims enforced by actions such as that and that's it, that's the two categories we have under English law and law recognizes ownership over these assets and provides legal regimes for sharing benefits of them through different forms. So I can run to my part to you while doing that I can keep the ownership, legal ownership of my farm while we are in the possession of my farm and I can assign that to a third party which is a different form of sharing and I will come back to that there is a lovely form in relation to digital things. So where does data sit in this categorization? In many jurisdictions, notion of data ownership does not exist in law so in legal terms we don't have such notion and instead of data ownership law concerns rights and duties that arise in relation to data and there are different reasons why this is the case. So information as a thing do not attract proper tracks under English law and in many other jurisdictions as well because it is not right holders. So what does that mean? If I give you my book, you have my book and I don't have it anymore. If I give you a piece of information you have that information and I have it as well so we both have that information. So in legal terms information that's not something that can be bought. When information is structured for example through an electronic database, in turn information may give rise to IP rights or when information is recorded on a piece of device then you might have property rights for the device but not the information itself and there's already a legal framework in place to protect information via confidentiality, IP data protection and so on. And the situation is similar with data as well. So the law does not grant a special status to data and the idea of owning data is very different than owning other things. Another difficulty we have in relation to the idea of conferring ownership, legal ownership to data is that there are multiple people involved in data cycle at some stage. So they take on different roles in this data cycle in generating data or creating it, using it, complying it, selecting it, structuring and so on. Because of the special or because of the role they take on in this process they may each claim data ownership, legal ownership. So data cycle is based on interaction involving or between multiple people and it might not be always easy to determine who should be the owner of data in question, who has the greatest right to it. I would like to mention very briefly about the recent war reform project from England and Wales, one digital assets. So this has been conducted by the Law Commission of England and Wales and very recently completed. So the Commission published their recommendations to mix AOL to the government reforming English law on points. And the motive behind this project was actual digital assets, actually crypto assets like mixed coin. But the scope of the project got bigger and they concerned as a number of different types of digital assets, digital files, digital records, email accounts, domain names, carbon emission trading schemes, as well as crypto assets. And the Commission said that some digital assets are neither things in possession or nor things in action. So they don't fit in the traditional categories of properties and they recommend legislation confirming that they should be still able to be subject to property rights and under certain conditions. And the reason I wanted to mention that is that actually shows us how law is, how much law is challenged by the technology and these are the concepts that law have for centuries and now they all need to change to respond to the questions of digitalization. So what did we know so far about data ownership? From a legal perspective, the concept of ownership is not easily applied to data. There are also arguments that no one should own data and data should be kept open instead of being subject to property rights. Then what the question becomes is that is ownership actually a useful concept for data? Legal frameworks in place are already very complex, not necessarily easy to understand or implement in this area, we get more and more regulation, legislation to respond to digitalization. So would it be a useful thing to add another piece of legal framework bringing in a concept which may not be useful to bring them to this already complex picture? So if we are trying to achieve here, if it is providing a better protection to data or privacy and so on, could this be achieved by alternative ways than comparing ownership to data to someone over data? For example, placing more focus on the concept of control rather than ownership or data rights and if we move away from the discussion of ownership, this may also open up more possibilities for alternative data sharing models like data trusts. Of course, I have talked about law but there are ethical considerations as well. I think Ron mentioned it yesterday in his opening speech, such as the rights of indigenous people in relation to data about their communities, peoples' land and resources. As a last sentence, I would like to say that these are very new discussions and questions for law. So if we consider the GDPR, it entered into force in one interview or two and so we are very much at the start of a conversation rather than yet. Thanks very much, Floris. Time for a few questions. I've got one. Is it that aspect of confirming that about data before the whole sentence? Is that actually going to make a difference to anything in the immediate future, that confirmation that data is the third type? Yes, I think that's important. They obviously have the motive to give recognition to crypto assets in English law but I think we should see how things will develop in that. I think it's a very big substantial reward to recognize digital things or digital objects as a third category in law. And then as Tim has asked about AI derived data from a body of it, pre-existing training data, how does that complicate ownership of the derived data? Yeah, I think that's another question we have in relation to how the AI generating data, all sorts of questions related to AI generating data, if it can be on Google or the rights and duties it creates, and there is a current consultation in the UK in relation to AI regulation, so I guess there will be more regulation on that aspect as well. And then Richard asks about, quite often, as institutes, we talk about owning data as an institute, is that just legal? Is it just a license? Yes, the rights you have over data but in legal terms, it's not ownership for all of the law firms. But as a bit, Richard. Thanks very much.