On 12-05-2024 7:00 p.m., Nicola Fabiano wrote:
So, in my opinion, should be useful to debate whether lobbying the
EU during the DMA discussion could have been a good point for the
XFS to achieve its goals. The same goes for the implementation of
DMA in the real world e.g. as part of the protocol (interoperability
XEP). These are only two examples of what could have been done and
what XSF could do in the future.
XSF representatives participated in some of the Commission's
initiatives, but I don't think they were able to lobby.
Recalling what I wrote in my previous email, lobbying is only possible
once you have decided on a program because when you are dealing with
institutions and private actors, you have to make explicit what the
program of the organization you represent is.
The DMA is not the only aspect; many others exist, especially in Europe.
Lobbying in Europe is legal but needs registration in an ad hoc
register, but this does not mean that this is the decisive element.
I'm far from an expert on lobbying and even less so with lobbying on EU
institutions, but what I've observed is that most lobbies take the shape
of a think-tank or a knowledge platform (sometimes even with EU funding
for specific projects). I expect it would be the most effective to form
a coalition with some organisations and make a specific push. The
standard for DMA chat interoperability would be a logical (first?)
target. A report, for example outlining such a standard, would then be a
logical first step. From there lobbying the EC (and possibly the
European Parliament) would be next. If there are organisations with
access to EU institutions in the coalition, then it would help vastly.
Winfried
--
vanishing in a puff of logic
+31.6.23303960
xmpp:[email protected]
