Abstract The book describes the Internet, and how Internet governance prevents it fragmenting into a ‘Splinternet’. Four opposing ideologies about how data flows around the network have become prominent because they are (a) implemented by technical standards, and (b) backed by influential geopolitical entities. Each of these specifies an ‘Internet’, described in relation to its implementation by a specific geopolitical entity. The four Internets of the title are: the Silicon Valley Open Internet, developed by pioneers of the Internet in the 1960s, based on principles of openness and efficient dataflow; the Brussels Bourgeois Internet, exemplified by the European Union, with a focus on human rights and legal administration; the DC Commercial Internet, exemplified by the Washington establishment and its focus on property rights and market solutions; and the Beijing Paternal Internet, exemplified by the Chinese government’s control of Internet content. These Internets have to coexist if the Internet as a whole is to remain connected. The book also considers the weaponization of the hacking ethic as the Moscow Spoiler model, exemplified by Russia’s campaigns of misinformation at scale; this is not a vision of the Internet, but is parasitic on the others. Each of these ideologies is illustrated by a specific policy question. Potential future directions of Internet development are considered, including the policy directions that India might take, and the development of technologies such as artificial intelligence, smart cities, the Internet of Things, and social machines. A conclusion speculates on potential future Internets that may emerge alongside those described.

This paper considers the shape that a “right to be forgotten” is taking in the online world, in the aftermath of the Google Spain decision, in which the Court of Justice of the European Union found (against Google) that European data subjects had the right to request that search engines de-index webpages that feature in searches on their names. The judgment, and Google’s response, raises a series of questions that are addressed in this paper. In particular, the judgment affects the nature of the balance between free speech and privacy on the Internet. Google’s presentation of its search as a neutral reflection of the state of the Web (and for that reason, a valuable resource for Web users) was found wanting by the court, and indeed Google itself has often adjusted its PageRank algorithm to improve its output by excluding, for example, spam, link farms and child pornography. Such methods cannot be transparent, since they would then be gamed by the spammers, and so Google has to present as a corporate “black box.” Yet it is a big step to devolve issues of privacy and freedom to an opaque process — even if it is accepted that a private sector actor can legitimately make decisions in this area. The final section of the paper considers whether individuals might manage their personal data with flexible architectures that could act as points of contact for those wishing to use the data. In such a technological ecosystem, many issues could be addressed within a system that respected the autonomy of the data subject in providing limited abilities to control self-presentation. However, this remains a thought experiment at this stage — such technologies, though technologically feasible, are not yet the subject of great demand or takeup from consumers, while the state of current regulation means that business models favour sidelining data subjects from decisions made about the use of their data.

Citebase is a new citation-ranked search and impact discovery service that measures citations of scholarly research papers which are openly accessible on the Web, i.e. papers that are assessable continuously online. Other services, such as ResearchIndex, have emerged in recent years to offer citation indexing of Web research papers. In the first detailed user evaluation of an open access Web citation indexing service, Citebase has been evaluated by nearly 200 users from different backgrounds. The paper details the procedures used in the evaluation, and analyses the results of this study, which took place between June and October 2002. It was found that within the scope of its primary components, the search interface and services available from its rich bibliographic records, Citebase can be used simply and reliably for the purpose intended, and that it compares favourably with other bibliographic services. It is shown tasks can be accomplished efficiently with Citebase regardless of the background of the user. More data need to be collected and the process refined before it is as reliable for measuring citation impact of indexed papers. Better explanations and guidance are required for first-time users. Coverage is seen as a limiting factor, even though Citebase indexes over 200,000 papers from arXiv. Non-physicists were frustrated at the lack of papers from other sciences. The principle of citation searching of open access archives has thus been demonstrated and need not be restricted to current users. Since the evaluation, Citebase has become a featured service of the ArXiv physics eprint archives.

Open data involves a paradigm shift in the way organisations manage their information and data: moving from a default of charities keeping data resources locked up in underused internal systems, to building a shared ‘Web of Data’. The emergence of the open data movement has supported powerful new models of creativity, innovation and public engagement. Although most of the recent stories of progress and success in the open data field come from government and research where open data is more established, this report sets out to explain the ways in which open data is increasingly coming to play a role in the charitable sector. Existing open government data can be used by charities to add value to their work, to target services better, to improve advocacy and fundraising, and to support knowledge sharing and collaboration between different charities and agencies. Crowdsourcing of open data also offers a new way for charities to gather intelligence, and a wide range of freely available online tools can support charities to analyse open data resources. Realising the potential of open data will require charities to meet a number of technical and organisational challenges. Indeed many charities will need to address key issues relating to open data, whether they choose to pursue benefits from open data or not (as regulatory, funding and performance indication is published online by researchers, by government and by others in the sector). This report reviews open data as it relates to the charitable sector, drawing on long experience of developing open data in research and government, as well as early work exploring open data with charities and third-sector organisations. It defines open data, describes the background context of a knowledge economy, and outlines key opportunities and challenges of open data in the charity sector. On the basis of this overview and analysis of the field, the report sets out in more detail a number of options for the further development of open data practices in the charitable sector, via five recommendations derived from the analysis.