Gamifying collective intelligence for the common good

The rise of the mobile internet enables the creation of applications that provide new and easier ways for people to organise themselves, raise issues, take action and interact with their city. At the same time, society faces new problems that can only be solved when citizens work together. Nevertheless, a lack of motivation or knowledge often prevents many citizens from regularly contributing to the common good. In this position paper, we present DoGood – a mobile app – as a socio-technological system that aims at supporting the collective intelligence of citizens in their pursuit of civic engagement and civic collaboratories. Our study asks to what extent gamification can motivate users to “do good” deeds. The DoGood app uses gamified elements to encourage citizens to submit and promote their civic activities as well as to join the activities of others. Gamification is sometimes criticised for simply adding a limited number of game elements, such as leaderboards, on top of an existing experience with the hope of increasing motivation. However, in the case of the DoGood app, the process of game design was an integral part of the development, and the gamified elements target the user’s intrinsic motivations instead of providing them with an external reward. In this paper, we present design elements of the app and discuss their potential to support collective intelligence for the common good.

Submission to Senate Standing Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs on the Copyright Amendment (Online Infringement) Bill 2015

We argue that safeguards are necessary to ensure human rights are adequately protected. All systems of blocking access to online content necessarily raise difficult and problematic issues of infringement of freedom of speech and access to information. Given the importance of access to information across the breadth of modern life, great care must be taken to ensure that any measures designed to protect copyright by blocking access to online locations are proportionate. Any measures to block access to online content must be carefully tailored to avoid serious and disproportionate impact on human rights. This means first that the measures must be effective and adapted to achieve a legitimate purpose. The experience of foreign jurisdictions suggests that this legislation is unlikely to be effective. Unless and until there is clear evidence that the proposed scheme is likely to increase effective returns to Australian creators, this legislation should not be introduced. Second, the principle of proportionality requires ensuring that the proposed legislation does not unnecessarily burden legitimate speech or access to information. As currently worded, the draft legislation may result in online locations being blocked even though they would, if operated in Australia, not contravene Australian law. This is unacceptable, and if introduced, the law should be drafted so that it is clearly limited only to foreign locations where there is clear and compelling evidence that the location would authorise copyright infringement if it were in Australia. Third, proportionality requires that measures are reasonable and strike an appropriate balance between competing interests. This draft legislation provides few safeguards for the public interest or the interests of private actors who would access legitimate information. New safeguards should be introduced to ensure that the public interest is well represented at both the stage of the primary application and at any applications to rescind or vary injunctions. We recommend that: The legislation not be introduced unless and until there is compelling evidence that it will have a real and significant positive impact on the effective incomes of Australian creators. The ‘facilitates an infringement’ test in s 115A(1)(b) should be replaced with ‘authorises infringement’. The ‘primary purpose’ test in s 115A(1)(c) should be replaced with: “the online location has no substantial non-infringing uses”. An explicit role for public interest groups as amici curiae should be introduced. Costs of successful applications should be borne by applicants. Injunctions should be valid only for renewable two year terms. Section 115A(5) should be clarified, and cl (b) and (c) be removed. The effectiveness of the scheme should be evaluated in two years.

Creative interoperability: A new concept to guide, understand and evaluate innovation by cross-sector collaboration

Creative digital media are increasingly utilized by companies in all industries. Here cases studies of creative media innovations in manufacturing, mining and education were facilitated and evaluated. The cases dealt respectively with designs in manufacturing, visualizing mining data, and developing tools for adult literacy. The difficulties of merging creative media teams into these different contexts were noted and the idea of creative interoperability was developed. Creative interoperability explains how creative teams can connect with other disciplines to bring about innovations.

Regulating ride-sharing in the peer economy

The rise of the peer economy poses complex new regulatory challenges for policy-makers. The peer economy, typified by services like Uber and AirBnB, promises substantial productivity gains through the more efficient use of existing resources and a marked reduction in regulatory overheads. These services are rapidly disrupting existing established markets, but the regulatory trade-offs they present are difficult to evaluate. In this paper, we examine the peer economy through the context of ride-sharing and the ongoing struggle over regulatory legitimacy between the taxi industry and new entrants Uber and Lyft. We first sketch the outlines of ride-sharing as a complex regulatory problem, showing how questions of efficiency are necessarily bound up in questions about levels of service, controls over pricing, and different approaches to setting, upholding, and enforcing standards. We outline the need for data-driven policy to understand the way that algorithmic systems work and what effects these might have in the medium to long term on measures of service quality, safety, labour relations, and equality. Finally, we discuss how the competition for legitimacy is not primarily being fought on utilitarian grounds, but is instead carried out within the context of a heated ideological battle between different conceptions of the role of the state and private firms as regulators. We ultimately argue that the key to understanding these regulatory challenges is to develop better conceptual models of the governance of complex systems by private actors and the available methods the state has of influencing their actions. These struggles are not, as is often thought, struggles between regulated and unregulated systems. The key to understanding these regulatory challenges is to better understand the important regulatory work carried out by powerful, centralised private firms – both the incumbents of existing markets and the disruptive network operators in the peer-economy.

From News Blogs to News on Twitter: Gatewatching and Collaborative News Curation

This chapter, explores the role of the second tier of independent news blogs as it developed in the years following the Seattle WTO protests in 1999, and outlines the practice of gatewatching as a key element of news bloggers’ activities. We critique perceptions of the news blogosphere as an echo chamber or filter bubble whose discussions about current events are detached from journalistic coverage, and demonstrate instead the close interconnections between independent news bloggers and professional journalists in the wider media ecology. Finally, we sketch the gradual transition and broadening of gatewatching practices in the news blogosphere towards the collaborative curation of news sharing in contemporary social media spaces, and outline the further research questions which emerge from such transformations of the flows of news and discussion.

The responsibility of intermediaries: Emerging IP protection schemes, from Content ID, to three-strikes and follow-the-money

The only effective and scalable way to regulate the actions of people on the internet is through online intermediaries. These are the institutions that facilitate communication: internet service providers, search engines, content hosts, and social networks. Governments, private firms, and civil society organisations are increasingly seeking to influence these intermediaries to take more responsibility to prevent or respond to IP infringements. Around the world, intermediaries are increasingly subject to a variety of obligations to help enforce IP rights, ranging from informal social and governmental pressure, to industry codes and private negotiated agreements, to formal legislative schemes. This paper provides an overview of this emerging shift in regulatory approaches, away from legal liability and towards increased responsibilities for intermediaries. This shift straddles two different potential futures: an optimistic set of more effective, more efficient mechanisms for regulating user behaviour, and a dystopian vision of rule by algorithm and private power, without the legitimising influence of the rule of law.

Regulating ride-sharing in the peer economy

The rise of the peer economy poses complex new regulatory challenges for policy-makers. The peer economy, typified by services like Uber and AirBnB, promises substantial productivity gains through the more efficient use of existing resources and a marked reduction in regulatory overheads. These services are rapidly disrupting existing established markets, but the regulatory trade-offs they present are difficult to evaluate. In this paper, we examine the peer economy through the context of ride-sharing and the ongoing struggle over regulatory legitimacy between the taxi industry and new entrants Uber and Lyft. We first sketch the outlines of ride-sharing as a complex regulatory problem, showing how questions of efficiency are necessarily bound up in questions about levels of service, controls over pricing, and different approaches to setting, upholding, and enforcing standards. We outline the need for data-driven policy to understand the way that algorithmic systems work and what effects these might have in the medium to long term on measures of service quality, safety, labour relations, and equality. Finally, we discuss how the competition for legitimacy is not primarily being fought on utilitarian grounds, but is instead carried out within the context of a heated ideological battle between different conceptions of the role of the state and private firms as regulators. We ultimately argue that the key to understanding these regulatory challenges is to develop better conceptual models of the governance of complex systems by private actors and the available methods the state has of influencing their actions. These struggles are not, as is often thought, struggles between regulated and unregulated systems. The key to understanding these regulatory challenges is to better understand the important regulatory work carried out by powerful, centralised private firms – both the incumbents of existing markets and the disruptive network operators in the peer-economy.

Claiming the moral high ground in the copyright wars

Copyright was once one of the more obscure areas of law. It applied primarily to resolve disputes between rival publishers, and there was a time, not too long ago, when ordinary people gave it no thought. Copyright disputes were like subatomic particles: everyone knew that they existed, but nobody had ever seen one. In the digital age, however, copyright has become a heated, passionate, bloody battleground. The 'copyright wars' now pitch readers against authors, pirates against publishers, and content owners against communications providers. Everyone has heard a movie producer decry the rampant infringement of streaming sites, or a music executive suggest that BitTorrent is the end of civilisation as we know it. But everyone infringes copyright on an almost constant basis - streaming amateur videos with a soundtrack that isn't quite licensed, filesharing mp3s, copying LOLcat pictures from Facebook, posting pictures on Pinterest without permission, and so on - and most know full well they're in breach of the law.

Smart Cities, Social Capital, and Citizens at Play: A Critique and a Way Forward

Digital transformations are not contained within the digital domain but are increasingly spilling over into the physical world. In this chapter, we analyse some of the transformations undergoing in cities today towards becoming smart cities. We offer a critique of smart cities and a way forward, divided into three parts: First, we explore the concept of Smart Citizens in terms of both localities, the move towards a hyperlocal network and also the citizen’s role in the creation and use of data. We use the ‘Smart London’ plan drawn up by the Mayor of London, as a way to illustrate our discussion. Second, we turn to the civic innovations enabled by digital transformations and their potential impact on citizens and citizenship. Specifically, we are interested in the notion of social capital as an alternative form of in-kind currency and its function as an indicator of value, in order to ask, can digital transformations give rise to ‘civic capital,’ and how can such a concept help, for instance, a local government invite more representative residents and community champions to participate in community engagement for better urban planning. Third, we introduce a hybrid, location-based game under development by design agency Preliminal Games in London, UK. This illustrative case critiques and highlights the current challenges to establishing a new economic model that bridges the digital / physical divide. The game provides a vehicle for us to explore how established principles and strategies in game design such as immersive storytelling and goal setting, can be employed to encourage players to think of the interconnections of their hybrid digital / physical environments in new ways.

Is being #instagay different from an #lgbttakeover? A cross-platform investigation of sexual and gender identity performances

This paper introduces research in progress that examines how queer women perform sexual identity across social media platforms. Applying a lens of queer theory and Actor Network Theory, it discusses women’s embodied self-representations as taking on forms that both conform to and elaborate upon the selfie genre of digital representation. Acknowledging similarities and differences across platforms, specifically between Instagram and Vine, a novel walkthrough method is introduced to identify platform characteristics that shape identity performances. This method provides insights into the role of platforms in identity performances, which can be combined with analysis of user-generated content and interviews to better understand digital media’s constraints and affordances for queer representation.

Facebook and Google have a moral duty to stop online abuse

It’s the stuff of nightmares: your intimate images are leaked and posted online by somebody you thought you could trust. But in Australia, victims often have no real legal remedy for this kind of abuse. This is the key problem of regulating the internet. Often, speech we might consider abusive or offensive isn’t actually illegal. And even when the law technically prohibits something, enforcing it directly against offenders can be difficult. It is a slow and expensive process, and where the offender or the content is overseas, there is virtually nothing victims can do. Ultimately, punishing intermediaries for content posted by third parties isn’t helpful. But we do need to have a meaningful conversation about how we want our shared online spaces to feel. The providers of these spaces have a moral, if not legal, obligation to facilitate this conversation.

The Down Under book and film remind us our copyright law’s still unfair for artists

Australian copyright law is broken, and the Australian Government isn’t moving quickly to fix it. Borrowing, quoting, and homage are fundamental to the creative process. This is how people are inspired to create. Under Australian law, though, most borrowing is copyright infringement, unless it is licensed or falls within particular, narrow categories. This year marks five years since the very real consequences of Australia’s restrictive copyright law for Australian artists were made clear in the controversial litigation over Men at Work’s 1981 hit Down Under. The band lost a court case in 2010 that found that the song’s iconic flute riff copied some of the 1934 children’s song Kookaburra Sits in the Old Gumtree. A new book and documentary tell us more about the story behind the anthem – and the court case. The book, Down Under by Trevor Conomy, and the documentary, You Better Take Cover by Harry Hayes, bring renewed interest and new perspectives on the tragic story.

Blurred Lines may be the biggest music copyright case of 2015

The year is still young, but this week a judgement was handed down in what may well be the biggest music case of 2015. Marvin Gaye’s children have won a copyright law suit against Robin Thicke (no stranger to controversy) and Pharrell Williams for the song Blurred Lines. The 2013 hit was found to have infringed Gaye’s musical copyright in Got To Give It Up. A jury in the US awarded damages of nearly US$7.4 million – nearly half of the song’s US$16.6 million takings to date.

We don’t want your must-see TV: Transatlantic television and the failed “Coupling” format

NBC's failed attempt to remake the BBC's Coupling generated a significant amount of press coverage in summer 2003. At the core of the debate was a struggle to reconcile an increasingly integrated transatlantic television market with traditional assumptions about culture and its authentic connection to space and place. The interest in the remake not only created a space where certain national differences were played out and performed but also facilitated an equally compelling transatlantic dialogue about creative ownership, appropriation, and a network's responsibility to its audiences. In doing so, the media attention highlighted how television formats are best understood not as innocuous commodities of international trade but as potential sites of articulation, contestation, and community in an increasingly transnational television environment.