[1910.10096] Formalizing Privacy Laws for License Generation and Data Repository Decision Automation

Abstract:  In this paper, we summarize work-in-progress on expert system support to automate some data deposit and release decisions within a data repository, and to generate custom license agreements for those data transfers. Our approach formalizes via a logic programming language the privacy-relevant aspects of laws, regulations, and best practices, supported by legal analysis documented in legal memoranda. This formalization enables automated reasoning about the conditions under which a repository can transfer data, through interrogation of users, and the application of formal rules to the facts obtained from users. The proposed system takes the specific conditions for a given data release and produces a custom data use agreement that accurately captures the relevant restrictions on data use. This enables appropriate decisions and accurate licenses, while removing the bottleneck of lawyer effort per data transfer. The operation of the system aims to be transparent, in the sense that administrators, lawyers, institutional review boards, and other interested parties can evaluate the legal reasoning and interpretation embodied in the formalization, and the specific rationale for a decision to accept or release a particular dataset.

 

Universities ignore growing concern over Sci-Hub cyber risk

“According to The Washington Post, Elbakyan, nicknamed the Robin Hood of science, is currently under investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice for suspected criminal acts and espionage.

Elbakyan denies any wrongdoing, but scholarly publishers such as Elsevier have used news of her investigation to call on academic institutions to block access to Sci-Hub — not because the site is illegal, but because it poses a security threat. Several large publishers, including Elsevier, have successfully sued Sci-Hub for mass copyright infringement in recent years. The Sci-Hub repository contains more than 80 million research articles, including a large proportion of Elsevier’s catalog….

PSI, a company based in Britain that offers tools and services to protect scholarly copyright, maintains a list of web addresses associated with Sci-Hub, which institutions can download and use to block access to the site on campus.

Andrew Pitts, CEO and co-founder of PSI, said that so far, few U.S. institutions have downloaded the block list. Pitts, who has been writing about Sci-Hub’s links to Russian military intelligence for several years, said he struggled to understand why universities are not taking more immediate steps to protect their networks. “This is a matter of urgency,” he said….”

Universities ignore growing concern over Sci-Hub cyber risk

“According to The Washington Post, Elbakyan, nicknamed the Robin Hood of science, is currently under investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice for suspected criminal acts and espionage.

Elbakyan denies any wrongdoing, but scholarly publishers such as Elsevier have used news of her investigation to call on academic institutions to block access to Sci-Hub — not because the site is illegal, but because it poses a security threat. Several large publishers, including Elsevier, have successfully sued Sci-Hub for mass copyright infringement in recent years. The Sci-Hub repository contains more than 80 million research articles, including a large proportion of Elsevier’s catalog….

PSI, a company based in Britain that offers tools and services to protect scholarly copyright, maintains a list of web addresses associated with Sci-Hub, which institutions can download and use to block access to the site on campus.

Andrew Pitts, CEO and co-founder of PSI, said that so far, few U.S. institutions have downloaded the block list. Pitts, who has been writing about Sci-Hub’s links to Russian military intelligence for several years, said he struggled to understand why universities are not taking more immediate steps to protect their networks. “This is a matter of urgency,” he said….”

3D Printing and the Murky Ethics of Replicating Bones

“TEN YEARS AGO, it wasn’t possible for most people to use 3D technology to print authentic copies of human bones. Today, using a 3D printer and digital scans of actual bones, it is possible to create unlimited numbers of replica bones — each curve and break and tiny imperfection intact — relatively inexpensively. The technology is increasingly allowing researchers to build repositories of bone data, which they can use to improve medical procedures, map how humans have evolved, and even help show a courtroom how someone died.

But the proliferation of faux bones also poses an ethical dilemma — and one that, prior to the advent of accessible 3D printing, was mostly limited to museum collections containing skeletons of dubious provenance. Laws governing how real human remains of any kind may be obtained and used for research, after all — as well as whether individuals can buy and sell such remains —  are already uneven worldwide. Add to that the new ability to traffic in digital data representing these remains, and the ethical minefield becomes infinitely more fraught. “When someone downloads these skulls and reconstructs them,” says Ericka L’Abbé, a forensic anthropologist at the University of Pretoria in South Africa, “it becomes their data, their property.”…”

CARL Releases Report on Institutional Repository Statistics Tracking – Canadian Association of Research Libraries

“The Canadian Association of Research Libraries (CARL) is pleased to announce the publication of the first report in a series by its Open Repositories Working Group (ORWG) – this first report focuses on approaches to institutional repository (IR) statistics tracking.

Institutional Repository Statistics: Reliable, Consistent Approaches for Canada was written by Will Roy (Queen’s University), Brian Cameron (Ryerson University), and Tim Ribaric (Brock University), on behalf of the CARL ORWG’s Task Group for Standards for IR Usage Data.

This task group undertook an information-gathering exercise to better understand both the existing practices of Canadian repositories and the emerging tools and processes available for repositories to track and monitor usage more effectively. This report also presents recommendations on how to collectively achieve reliable and comparable statistics across all Canadian repositories….”

CARL Releases Report on Institutional Repository Statistics Tracking – Canadian Association of Research Libraries

“The Canadian Association of Research Libraries (CARL) is pleased to announce the publication of the first report in a series by its Open Repositories Working Group (ORWG) – this first report focuses on approaches to institutional repository (IR) statistics tracking.

Institutional Repository Statistics: Reliable, Consistent Approaches for Canada was written by Will Roy (Queen’s University), Brian Cameron (Ryerson University), and Tim Ribaric (Brock University), on behalf of the CARL ORWG’s Task Group for Standards for IR Usage Data.

This task group undertook an information-gathering exercise to better understand both the existing practices of Canadian repositories and the emerging tools and processes available for repositories to track and monitor usage more effectively. This report also presents recommendations on how to collectively achieve reliable and comparable statistics across all Canadian repositories….”

Ethics in medical education digital scholarship: AMEE Guide No. 134: Medical Teacher: Vol 0, No 0

Abstract:  Ethics has long been a concern in medicine, education and scholarship. In the digital age, new complexities have arisen, and many medical education researchers are unprepared for the pitfalls ahead, often negotiating these in the absence of guidelines, and unaware of the many tools that can be used to assist them. This Guide takes the medical education scholar through a journey in which issues of ethics are discussed in all stages of digital scholarship: research preparation, research subject monitoring and data gathering, securing one’s data (and balancing security against accessibility), anonymising textual and non-textual data, third party identifiability in digital data, writing one’s own work (including plagiarism and paper mills), copyright (including issues of Creative Commons and royalty-free), accessing inaccessible reference material, ethically citing electronic material, and manuscript submission (including issues of selecting journals, open access and data sharing). The Guide ends with a brief look to the future. This Guide aims to be a useful tool to alert the readers to some of the most important ethical issues that need to be considered, and some practical solutions to ethical problems faced, when engaging in medical education digital scholarship.

 

Ethics in medical education digital scholarship: AMEE Guide No. 134: Medical Teacher: Vol 0, No 0

Abstract:  Ethics has long been a concern in medicine, education and scholarship. In the digital age, new complexities have arisen, and many medical education researchers are unprepared for the pitfalls ahead, often negotiating these in the absence of guidelines, and unaware of the many tools that can be used to assist them. This Guide takes the medical education scholar through a journey in which issues of ethics are discussed in all stages of digital scholarship: research preparation, research subject monitoring and data gathering, securing one’s data (and balancing security against accessibility), anonymising textual and non-textual data, third party identifiability in digital data, writing one’s own work (including plagiarism and paper mills), copyright (including issues of Creative Commons and royalty-free), accessing inaccessible reference material, ethically citing electronic material, and manuscript submission (including issues of selecting journals, open access and data sharing). The Guide ends with a brief look to the future. This Guide aims to be a useful tool to alert the readers to some of the most important ethical issues that need to be considered, and some practical solutions to ethical problems faced, when engaging in medical education digital scholarship.

 

Why are Librarians Concerned about GetFTR?  – The Scholarly Kitchen

“Twitter was abuzz this past week with the announcement of Get Full Text Research (GetFTR) at the STM association meeting in London. GetFTR attempts to reduce friction between discovery and access through a new kind of linking data service, and Roger Schonfeld’s same day analysis here in The Scholarly Kitchen provided some information from a publisher perspective. 

Developed by a group of five of the largest publishers, and built on top of RA21’s Seamless Access service, GetFTR was very effectively kept under wraps until the formal announcement — so much so that the staff of NISO, a lead partner in Seamless Access, was completely unaware of the project. 

GetFTR offers clear benefits for publishers and researchers. A direct link to a copy with known access entitlements is very useful. But, it seems some were taken aback by the less than warm welcome the announcement received from the library community.

Today, I wish to articulate why many librarians are concerned about GetFTR. …

GetFTR builds on the foundation of Seamless Access, an initiative that troubles the library community. The predecessor project, RA21, raised many concerns related to control over and privacy of user data and the future of publisher support for proxy and IP based authentication, access pathways that are valued and broadly implemented in academic libraries. The follow-on organization to the RA21 project, Seamless Access, seems to be unable to find a library organization partner to join the leadership team in spite of making a number of overtures, and the group has chosen to move forward with implementation without that engagement. By connecting itself to Seamless Access, GetFTR is “inheriting” a number of the library critiques of Seamless Access….”