Information policy is a broad set of terms that incorporates a wide range of specific issues. As librarians we act as providers of information, who maneuver within and sometimes around many different information policies. The issues at the crux of information policy, center on a basic freedom to access information in all shapes and sizes, regardless of content “More generally, we can with safety say that freedom of information (FOI) issues are at the core of information policy” (Duff, 2004). Within this broad concept, regulations and definitions have been assigned, which results in information policies. Information policy deals with specific issues generated from FOI. Alistair Duff’s 2004 article entitled The Past, Present, and Future of Information Policy states this normative list of information policy issues:
1. Freedom of Information
2. Privacy
3. Data Protection and Security
4. Official Secrets
5. Libraries and Archives
6. Scientific, Technical, and Medical (STM) Documentation
7. Economics and Government Publications
8. Copyright and Intellectual Infrastructure
9. National Informative Infrastructure
10. International Information Flows
These issues make up the core issues at the heart of most information policies. While, libraries have their own category, many of the other issues directly affect the library world. All of the issues on Duff’s list are important issues in information policy, but two of these issues directly affect libraries: privacy and copyright. With the widespread use of digital resources and the Internet, the issues of privacy and copyright have entered a new era of information policies.
Privacy Policies and Issues:
“Privacy is essential to the exercise of free speech, free thought, and free association. Lack of privacy and confidentiality chills users’ choices, thereby suppressing access to ideas” (ALA, 2005). Privacy is an information policy that has a constant, on-going discourse. The website Privacy Rights Clearinghouse list nineteen current issues surrounding the idea of privacy. A reoccurring theme in many of these nineteen issues is the idea that freedom to information is essential, but so is an individual’s right to privacy. Finding a balance between the two is key. One of the main issues surrounding privacy policy involves the issue of personally identifiable information. It includes information such as name, address, email, and IP addresses that can be collected by government officials, advertisers, and financial institutions (Cochran, 2007). This type of information is identified through cookies passed between computers and also from login and password identification systems.
Helpful Resources
Privacy Rights Clearinghouse and Current Privacy Issues
ALA and Privacy
Copyright in the Digital Era
For many years the rules about copyright and fair use were clear. The explosion of technology, the growth of the Internet, and mass digitization has added unprecedented elements to copyright law. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is one attempt to deal with a growing debate over digital copyright issues. This act was passed in 1998 and it “Prohibits the ‘circumvention’ of any effective ‘technological protection measure’ (e.g., a password or form of encryption) used by a copyright holder to restrict access to its material” (ALA, 2008). This complicated statements basically means that going around a copyright holders authentication system, regardless of purpose, is illegal. While this act effected fair use policies, it did not make any provision to these polices and the information user’s privileges and rights (ALA, 2008). This idea impacts the fair use component of copyright law. For example if a book was purchased and past on to a friend to read is a fair and common practice under copyright law, but “In the digital world of the DMCA, you may need a password to open that book, and there may even be technology-imposed limitations on who can use that password. You may not be able to access your friend's e-book, even if he or she legally bought the copy and voluntarily lent it to you” (Amen, Keogh, Wolff, 2002). This act can have far ranging effects with the licensing agreements between libraries and vendors and fair use policies.
Helpful Resources:
The UCLA Online Institute for Cyberspace Law and Policy: Digital Millennium Copyright Act
ALA and DMCA
This is a very interesting article from the New York Times that describes an incident where a Russian programmer visited the US to present at conference and ended up in jail for copyright infringement.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9806E0D9123DF933A05754C0A9679C8B63
Disscussion Questions:
1. Take a look at Duff’s list of ten information policy issues. Do you see any other issues that directly effect libraries and patrons?
2. Should what people access and their search records be available for others to view, and in some instances be used against them? What if the material viewed is an indicator of criminal activity?
3. Using this link to view the current issues listed by the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, do you see any issues that directly impact library and information policies?
4. Do you believe that copyright laws face new challenges in today’s digital environments?
Works Cited
Amen, K., Keogh, T., & Wolff, N. (2002, May). Digital copyright: A tale of domestic discord, presented in three acts. Computers in libraries, 5, 22-27.
American Library Association. (2005, May 2). Privacy tool kit. Retrieved March 19, 2008, from
http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/iftoolkits/toolkitsprivacy/privacy.htm
American Library Association. (2008). DMCA: The digital millennium copyright act. Retrieved March 19, 2008, from
http://www.ala.org/ala/washoff/woissues/copyrightb/federallegislation/dmca/dmcadigitalmillenium.cfm#intro
Cochran, S. (2007, June). The right of privacy: Access to personal information. In Wex. Retrieved March 19, 2008, from Legal Information Institute at Cornell Law School Web
site: http://straylight.law.cornell.edu/wex/index.php/Privacy
Duff, A. S. (2004, March). The past, present, and future of information policy.
Information, communication & society, 7(1), 69-87.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
37 comments:
I don't feel that what people access or search for should be available for others to view. It would be an invasion of privacy if it were viewed and used against them.
I don't see how any material viewed could be an indicator of criminal activity because borrowing a library book on a particular subject does not indicate the patron would be committing a crime. It would be jumping (or leaping) to a conclusion that would hurt the patron.
Luckily, The Library Privacy Act of Michigan (Act 455 of 1982) states, "unless ordered by a court after giving the affected library notice of the request and an opportunity to be heard on the request, a library or an employee or agent of a library shall not release or disclose a library record or portion of a library record to a person without the written consent of the person liable for payment for or return of the materials identified in that library record" (Michigan Legislature). This section of the act shows that the government must have a court order, and therefore, just cause to access a library record.
Jessica Kay-Oosterhouse
Michigan Legislature. Retrieved March 22, 2008 from State of Michigan: http://www.legislature.mi.gov/(S(dlmcfv450kfxh4vkrjxrpxrz))/mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectName=mcl-397-603
#1. Yes, access to government publications affect our library patrons, and this connects with the Freedom of Information Act. We, as citizens, expect an open government and the publishing of the government's documents provides us with a form of check and balance to make sure that officials are not getting away with something they shouldn't.
#2. I find myself pulled between believing in total privacy, yet knowing that the total right to privacy can be a double edged sword. If gathering this information is used by intelligence to stop terrorism or criminal activity, I am all for it. However, in the following instance, the gathering of data can be harmful to the innocent who have the right to search for answers to their questions without the fear of that information being published. As reported in "The Cult of the Amateur" by Andrew Keen, "...AOL leaked the search data of 658,000 people...Twenty-three million of the AOL users' most private thoughts...were spilled on the Internet to the world without their knowledge or permission" (Keen, 2007, p. 166-7). After reading this, I was appalled. How dare any company hosting a search engine make public the searches done, just on the premise that they own the searches like property. If this is what normal, law-abiding citizens have to look forward to in this age of technology and questionable privacy rights, I say "no thanks!"
I forgot to cite the book used for the quote:
Keen, A. (2007). The Cult of the Amateur. New York: Doubleday.
4. Do you believe that copyright laws face new challenges in today’s digital environments?
My understanding of copyright law and ‘fair use’ is that the “rules”—as laid out in the law itself and as interpreted by the courts—have never been exactly “clear.” Each case needs to be decided on its own merits on a case by case basis. This is part of the reason why, notwithstanding some general guidelines often provided to librarians and others aimed at helping one comply with copyright law, this law continues to present many challenges. I would agree that digital media provide yet another dimension to copyright issues.
University libraries are among those trying to successfully ‘read the tea leaves’ with respect to ‘fair use.’ I received the following information on a listserv I subscribe to. I was heartened to read the legal decisions detailed here with respect to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). I think that sometimes there is a tendency to even go beyond what might be seemingly required by copyright law—just to be on the safe side—so the full value of ‘fair use’ is not utilized. This excellent article reveals, among other things, how important it is to read beyond the laws themselves and to follow the legal cases that demonstrate how the law is actually being interpreted by the courts. This is from the Association of Research Libraries website.
“EDUCATIONAL FAIR USE TODAY
Jonathan Band
jband@policybandwidth.com
Abstract: Three recent appellate decisions concerning fair use should give educators and
librarians greater confidence and guidance for asserting this important privilege. In all
three decisions, the courts permitted extensive copying and display in the commercial
context because the uses involved repurposing and recontextualization. The reasoning of
these opinions could have far-reaching implications in the educational environment.”
http://www.arl.org/bm~doc/educationalfairusetoday.pdf
Also, there are many excellent gateway websites that provide information on copyright law. Here is another, from Michigan State University libraries. http://www.lib.msu.edu/harris23/law/subject.htm#copyright
2. Should what people access and their search records be available for others to view, and in some instances be used against them? What if the material viewed is an indicator of criminal activity?
I do not believe that ordinary patrons should have the right to access another patrons library records. What someone checks out of the library is their own business. I understand the laws within the USA PATRIOT ACT that entitle law enforcement the right to sequester the records of potential terrorist. But at what point is it necessary to pull this type of information without violating the rights of what could be an innocent victim. I fell that it is a person freedom to read books on any topic they find interesting. How can the government legitimately take information from a library that discloses a persons’ hobby of reading about terrorism and use it against them. Libraries only keep this information for their records to see who has what book. I think the government should understand that this information in not kept with the intention of supplying them with information on potential terrorist. If law enforcement wants to monitor who is checking out what book then they need to come up with their own monitoring devices.
As many of us have stated before, there are many people that may be interested in books on making bombs or guns; or read them for a class assignment. That does not mean that they have the intentions of taking the information and using it to do harm to others.
4. Do you believe that copyright laws face new challenges in today’s digital environments?
Due to the increasing changes in technology I believe that there are major challenges when it comes to copyright laws. Librarians are trained to know that they should only make one copy of a document, which should be given directly to the patron who requested it. Once the patron receives it the library has no control of what they do with it. But the changes in today’s digital environments affect copyright laws outside of the library as well. With many documents being available over the Internet, patrons can copy and reprint documents 100 times over and usually get away with it.
Changes in the digital environment have affected many areas such as teaching. In 2001 Congress developed the Technology, Education and Copyright Harmonization Act of 2001 (TEACH Act) to serve as a compromise between the Copyright Office, educators and rightsholders. During the late 1990’s and 2001 more teachers were holding distance learning classes. As time progressed it was decided that restrictions needed to be put in place that would limit who the teachers could send or allow access to the information that was supplied via the Internet. One of the major restrictions was that the student had to be enrolled in the course to gain access to the information.
The Digital Learning Challenge
Jessica,
I was glad to see that The Library Privacy Act of Michigan forces law enforcement to have just cause to access a library record. That was a major concern that I had. I was hoping that the police could pull these records just on a hunch or bad tip.
I honestly can not see how a persons library record could help build a case against a potential criminal. But maybe I'm basing the little knowledge I have on the subject from TV shows where criminals normally buy the books and not check them out from the library. :-)
I agree Kimberly. It is nice to know that there must be a reason for the government to look at an individual's library record. I also have trouble understanding how a case could be built around borrowed books, although I suppose if they have other evidence, a library record may corroborate it.
I read the NY Times article that you linked to. It was very interesting, the Russian man did not actually violate what I would think of as copyright but only had software that if used illegally could potentially violate copyright. If that is legal under the DMCA then the Digital Millenium Copyright Act will have a chilling effect on innovation. I suppose it is good for the legal profession as software programmers and inventors will have to have legal counsel to work and create new ideas.
I don't think there is any good reason for records to be available for others to view. The only indicator of criminal activity is the activity itself. Assuming what I read, or search for or reference is an indication of my intent to commit a crime using those materials is ridiculous. It is pure, unadulterated fear and loathing of that which we do not know that makes us assume those anyone who reads about bombs, make them and uses them to kill people. That fear is the true terrorist. Threats to our civil liberties, that often times come in the form of extremist information policy, are much more troubling, problematic and threatening to our future freedoms than human terrorists for foreign lands.
The Utne Reader has an interesting blog on this topic.
Additionally, I have a lot of trouble with copyright and its place in a free and open society in which information is made available to all, no exceptions. Where does this concept of copyright fit in? Should only those that can afford to pay for information become informed and educated citizens? Who are these 'copyright' police and why do they receive my money, or my library's money? Wouldn't we be in a better space in almost all sciences if collaboration, instead of competition was the norm? Doesn't copyright essentially uphold that climate of competition? The concept of charging for use seems to me a very outdated, capitalist ideal that can never be regulated adequately in our current digital environment, let alone in future years.
In response to discussion question two, I do not think that just anyone should have the right to request a person’s library records but I do think that law enforcement should have this right with proper cause, concern, and documentation. Although it is true that it should not be assumed that a person is intending to commit a crime based on what is in their library record, but what is wrong with being proactive? I am sure if a person used the library to create a “nationwide news story by committing a disaster,” the first question that the public may ask is, why did the library not notice this from all the subject material that they checked-out and tell authorities; “everyone” may or will then become a supporter of finding "justice" and the whole “stigma” about library “privacy” would change I’m sure and “everyone” would expect the government to do “something,” the same government that is always “criticized.” And I think that it is absurd to constantly think that the American government is trying to become a dictatorship when the country is supposed to be based on democracy. Nevertheless, I found a good article that discusses privacy and policies in relation to libraries, Privacies in Libraries, Howard Falk. The Electronic Library. Oxford: 2004. Vol. 22, Iss. 3; p. 281.
In regards to the copyrights issue, I think that copyrights are necessary in order to protect from the “plagiarism” of others ideas, prohibit “group think” and allow for the further development of creation and intellectual inquiry.
Libraries and Archives and Data Protection and Security, affect the library. give that every has a right to information the one place which accumulates information is the library. The library collects data and keeps for the use of all. The library also has its own way of protecting this data from vice use and this has to do with the library’s internal policies. They do so in order that information lasts through several generations and be used for research, as history(archives) plays an important part in structuring the future. However with the coming of technology I wonder how effective these protection and security measures are, though the is a struggle with possibilities of tapping individuals’ personal information. This is not stopping the mishandling of information and its sources.
People deserve their privacy; therefore their personal information should not be exposed. This could be putting the individuals’ lives in danger of their enemies. Since the is freedom to information, I do not see why when anyone searches any website their information should be made known. On the other hand this leaves in formation specialist in a dilemma as they have to view this material to know which is incriminating and which isn’t.
Moreover, copyright does face a problem in the digital environment of today because the is a limit to what a machine can do. The laws can be implemented, but will pertain to specific places. Computers to tap personal information do not exist in all organizations or libraries. So those who know where to go and they will not be bothered will still go and do the copyright if they had to. Besides technology is made by man who keeps changing it by the day. Therefore if they made machines with possibilities of checking copyright some other people somewhere will make machines that will break through the copyright barriers.
"For many years the rules about copyright and fair use were clear. The explosion of technology, the growth of the Internet, and mass digitization has added unprecedented elements to copyright law."
During my undergrad, I learned quite a bit about the copyright laws when it came to printed material, but the digital world was just beginning to become a convenience/problem. I had not heard of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) until recently and I still don’t completely understand it. It is not as clear as the copyright laws and I also find it harder to comprehend. The articles online are just like articles that are in a magazine, but in digital form, it is hard to think of it that way for many people. The Internet is a world of information and having restrictions on what can be viewed for how ever many times is quite confusing. I did find the DMCA summary which I have skimmed but will need to read further in order to fully understand. http://www.copyright.gov/legislation/dmca.pdf
Does anyone have a layman’s term explanation of the DMCA?
Do you believe that copyright laws face new challenges in today’s digital environments?
Yes, and I think your following research proves that:
“In the digital world of the DMCA, you may need a password to open that book, and there may even be technology-imposed limitations on who can use that password. You may not be able to access your friend's e-book, even if he or she legally bought the copy and voluntarily lent it to you”
It is amazing how much technology has had law makers and officials scrambling to have all of their bases covered. I bet that many do not even think twice about some of the technology we might share with a friend, let alone know that it is a violation of a law with regards to copyrights.
I have always had a problem with the fact that after so many years your copyright becomes outdated. It never seemed like a fair aspect of copyrighting to me, especially considering it is a service that is truly bought and paid for by the author.
Search records should not be available for others to view. It already bothers me greatly that Facebook banners and ads in my Gmail account suggest websites and products I might like based on my profile information and email content. For someone else to see my searches would be a gross violation of my privacy. Some may argue that if one is using a company computer on company time then their employer should be able to view what web pages an employee has accessed, but I disagree. If an employee is competent and completing their job requirements satisfactorily by the employer's standards, an employer has no reason to worry about them. If the employee performs unsatisfactorily, then the employer may tell them so and fire them; again there is no need for internet searches to be accessed. Understandably an employer may just want to make sure that an employee is not viewing pornography, but going through everyone's search records to keep this from happening is an unethical solution. An employer should deal with the viewing of X-Rated material only if an employee's performance has become problematic or if an employee feels sexually harassed.
The ONLY materials one can view that indicate criminal activity are child pornography and restricted government/company information (ex. top secret documents or SS#'s/credit card #'s accessed by a hacker). Nothing else is indicative of illegal behavior.
I agree with kelly when she said it bother her that the ads are profiles of what we search. Also I agree with Jessica when she says about people jumping to conclusion over a book that has been borrowed. I stopped and thought how many high schoolers who have a debate title or research paper on a contraversal subject could be question just because of an assignment. Young people are also curious and inquisitive and like looking up different subjects.
Research should be private. People do research to learn about something outside themselve, not necessarily with malicious intentions.
The Sunshine Laws and FOIA are a blessing to journalists. Problem is, many requests are ignored or indefinitely postponed. The Society of Professional Journalists just had a "Sunshine Week" recently.
http://www.spj.org/foi.asp
Similar to librarians, journalists strive to provide access to information for the public.
I just want to respond to some of your postings, they were all great. I also wanted to share a bit of pop culture that I found funny and reminded me that many of the issues we have been discussing make there way into our mainstream culture.
Catherine,
I totally agree that copyright laws have not always been the clearest set of laws put on the books. I do think this is rather brilliant, because it leaves some room for interpretation. I also believe that at least these laws provide us with a basic guideline for dealing with copyright issues. I think as digital formats continue to grow we are going to need another set of "guidelines."
Kim,
Your points about innocent victims suspected of terrorism are very valid. Whatever happened to innocent till proven guilty?
Tim,
I think that article demonstrates how we are moving into an era of uncharted territory when it comes the digital world.
One last bit of pop culture that I found very funny.
On a recent episode of the television show "The Simpsons," entitled "E Pluribus Wiggum" an interesting reference to the Patriot Act was made:
Lisa Simpson: ... It says in the constitution you have to be 35.
Bart Simpson: The Constitution? I'm pretty sure the Patriot Act killed it to ensure our freedoms.
Homer Simpson (in a sarcastic voice): Ohhh, the Patriot Act is so terrible, the government might find out what library books I take out. (In a regular voice) What's next finding out what operas I go to?
Goes to show that lots of people are thinking about these issues.
There has been mention several time of the use of information obtained from libraries in cases against people. From my previous experience in Criminal Justice I can whole-heartedly tell you that circumstantial evidence can go a long way. The use of library records, I believe, would fall under this category of circumstantial evidence. Depending on the lawyer and the jury’s reaction to that lawyer, circumstantial evidence can go a long, long way. I know I have read of court cases where the defendant was convicted on circumstantial evidence alone. (Though I couldn’t remember a specific one off-hand. However, the movie 12 Angry Men is based on this idea.)
Here are a couple of interesting articles. The first is on circumstantial evidence. The second is on use of the US PATRIOT ACT and the reaction of some libraries. (copy and paste them)
http://njcriminallaw.blogspot.com/2007/04/circumstantial-evidence.html
http://www.freedomforum.org/templates/document.asp?documentID=16468
2. Should what people access and their search records be available for others to view, and in some instances be used against them? What if the material viewed is an indicator of criminal activity?
I do not feel that it is ok for other people to be able to access search records. However, I am aware of instances when internet searches have been used against a defendant in court. I do think that this evidence is valuable and I do believe that if there is supporting evidence then it should be ok to use search records in a court of law. There should be evidence before records can be searched.
Library Records Post Patriot Act This link contains an interesting site that breaks down the information and procedure for search under the Patriot Act.
Like many have already stated, I do not think that library records or searches should be available to other patrons. Why would they absolutely need to know these things?
When it comes to the police or FBI, I think that they have to have just cause to look at these records. They should not be looked at just to see what a person has checked out or is currently reading. The reasons for looking at the records need to be clearly defined. Once the police has found what they need, they should not have the right to look at anything beyond what helped them out.
I do struggle with these issues personally though. What if a crime had been committed against me and library records would help to convict that person? Would I want to find out everything they had checked out? I'm not sure how I would feel in this situation.
Also, should records of any person be looked at to see if they check out certain types of books because police believe there is a connection between this and a certain type of criminal? Where do we draw the line?
1. and 3. I believe all the issues in Duff's list affects the rights of our citizens and who can access our information legally. he biggest issue I saw was with digital rights management. The First Admendment allows us to explore ideas in books, music, and movies without having to identify ourselves. The Patriot Act is in direct conflict with this law. I found a very interesting article in the San Franciso Chronicle that talks about patrons being outraged that the government can have access to the types of information that patrons have obtained. In the article, the library posted signs up stating " Records of the books that are borrowed may wind up in the hands of federal agents". Patrons are told that questions about this policy should be directed to Attorney General John Ashcroft, Department of Justice, Washington D.C. 20530.
2.Assistant Attorney General Daniel Bryant said " Americans who borrow or buy books surrender their right to privacy. A patron who turns over information to the library or bookstore assumes the risk that the entity may disclose it to another". I disagree with this. Americans should have the right to privacy when it comes to medical, financial, and personal records including the books, movies, music that we buy. I believe that our personal email or texts should be kept private as well. I do believe that work email or texts used on work owned property can be used by the company that you work for. Therefore, caution should be used in the workplace.
4. We the onslaught of the the types of programs available on the Internet such a music and movie downloads sites, it has become much more difficult to protect copyrighted material. Some individuals have the notion of "why buy the cow when you can get the milk for free." Companines have tried different efforts to shut down downloading and file sharing sites but new sites and programs continuously come up. People have become more tech savvy. That savviness has allowed people to created things legally and unforuately illegally.
Egelko, Bob and Gavra, Maria. Libraries Post Patriot Act Warnings. San Francisco Chronicle. March 10, 2003
www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?=/c/a/2003/03/10/MN14634.dtl
When it comes to viewing other people's search records, I feel that it depends on where they are while viewing. In my school, the students sign an Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) before they are allowed to use the school computers. In this, it is stated that “all activity on [school name omitted] network, can, may, and will be occasionally audited. This includes monitoring of web pages and web sites visited on an individual user basis.” Being in a school setting the only web pages students should be visiting need to be directly related to a school assignment. There is a list of approved games that students may play when finished with work, but other than that, the rules are clean cut. In this situation, I do not feel that monitoring what the students are viewing/searching is a violation of their privacy. They signed an agreement form to act appropriately and they are regularly reminded of the rules whether casually or due to past problems.
I have similar feelings when it comes to work computers. The company that pays you is supplying you with that computer and expects you to be working for them while using it. I am not saying that checking your email a couple of times a day or looking up personal information once in awhile is detrimental to your job, but I do feel that some take advantage of this privilege. I have worked with people who do the minimum amount of work each day to “meet their job description requirements” and use the rest of the time to do whatever they choose on the Internet. Even if the company does not regularly check the search history of its employees, I do not think that it is wrong to inform them that this is a possibility. Now, going ahead with it without ever letting the employee know that it is a possibility would not be fair to the employee but as long as they are aware, then I do not disagree with this action.
I am surprised that I am saying this but I think that in very extreme cases it is o.k. for law enforcement or the intelligence community to look at patron records. They would need a subpoena,etc. If it helped to get a murderer, rapist, stalker or someone like that it is o.k. I can think of very very few intstances where a library record would help. I am against access to patron information in all other circumstances. Yes I know our privacy is abused by the federal government that they mine internet traffic and cell phone conversations for keywords,etc. We are losing our privacy in so many small ways that when added up much is known about us many people.
I have to agree with Holli W. on the topic of viewing what people have looked at on the internet. When I am at work, I am NOT getting paid to surf the internet, and I honestly have no problem with my employer having access to websites I have visited. The internet has created many new ways for people to "goof off" at work, and there has to be some way for employers to monitor this. However, what I view at home or at the library, on my own time, is my own private business (at least to the extent that anything is private in cyberspace. )
I believe that law enforcement agents often seize a person's computer when they are under criminal investigation. Anyone who watches the news has seen police carrying a computer out of a suspect's house. I assume that these records are then used as evidence. For some reason, this does not bother me as much as the idea of my library records being subpeonaed. Merely investigating information at a library does not, to me, constitute intent. On the other hand, email exchanges discussing how a person carried out a criminal act constitute evidence (in my mind, at least.)
I definitely think that copyright laws face new challenges in today's digital environment- MANY new challenges. It used to be that copying an entire book was the highlight of copyright law violation. Now, you can illegally download movies off of the internet before they are even released in theaters. No wonder movie and music executives are freaking out! Yet I have friends who blithely violate copyright law left and right, acting almost as though it is a civil right to access copyrighted material for free.
I am not trying to advocate for copyright restrictions or anything, but people still need to get paid, you know?
Here is a link to the Wikipedia page for Pirate Bay:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pirate_Bay
Originally started by a Swedish ant-copyright organization, it distributes torrents that lead to unlicensed copies of copyright material. "Torrent trackers" are not illegal in Switzerland, but the site has faced legal challenges nonetheless because people around the world use it.
1. I think #3 “data protection and security” is an issue that can relate to libraries. According to the ALA code of ethics it is the duty of librarians to “protect each library user's right to privacy and confidentiality with respect to information sought or received and resources consulted, borrowed, acquired or transmitted” (http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/statementspols/codeofethics/codeethics.cfm). It’s important that our computer network be protected and secure from intrusions. That way patrons’ information, including materials checked out, address, and phone number, will be safe. Also, #1 “freedom of information” relates to libraries and the ALA code of ethics (specifically number II: “We uphold the principles of intellectual freedom and resist all efforts to censor library resources” (ibid). It is the duty of a librarian to ensure that patrons can obtain whatever information they seek and to ensure that materials/collections remain uncensored.
2. I don’t think patrons’ records should be available for anyone to view. If patrons believe that their records are open to the public then they may choose to not check out or search for material that they otherwise would (if they knew it would be done anonymously). Privacy is an essential component of intellectual freedom and of a democratic society. This privacy should remain in place even “if the material viewed is an indicator of criminal activity.” Even if a patron viewed or checked out material that was a how-to manual on committing a crime it doesn’t mean that he will commit the crime.
3. Video surveillance could be an issue. But it seems to me very unlikely that libraries would use video cameras to spy on patrons. Rather, they are probably being used to prevent crimes from occurring (e.g. kidnapping, vandalism, etc.).
4. It is vastly more difficult to protect copyrights on the internet. It is incredibly easy to make copies of copyrighted material right from your home computer. For instance, file sharing sites like Limewire basically just use the honor system- they ask you not to violate copyright laws and if you agree you can use their service. But once you download music there is nothing stopping you from burning it onto a cd (except, perhaps, your conscience). The same is true for any other type of media.
Should what people access and their search records be available for others to view, and in some instances be used against them?
As a blanket statement/general rule? Definitely not.
What if the material viewed is an indicator of criminal activity?
Law enforcement officials shouldn't leaf through patron records in attempts to find criminal activity, but it's unrealistic to think that there are never going to be circumstances in which these records wouldn't be summoned under a legitimate subpoena. I definitely think we need to have greater transparency and accountability when this happens, though.
Using this link to view the current issues listed by the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, do you see any issues that directly impact library and information policies?
Video surveillance could affect libraries because it would be easy for an understaffed institution to see them as a potential solution for security problems. A library might also end up having to fight an ordinance to put surveillance cameras in all public buildings in a municipality.
Data profiling is an issue since libraries do collect personally identifiable information about patrons, but most of the privacy policies I've seen while working on assingments for this class seem to serve their puropse well.
Do you believe that copyright laws face new challenges in today’s digital environments?
Definitely. There are the obvious challenges of enforcing copyright and preventing piracy on the internet, but I think the bigger challenge is in balancing these issues with fair use (for scholarly research/educational purposes, parody, or satire). The increasingly huge volume of intellectual property being created online and in digital form is also going to present a challenge in the future.
Sklyarov's and his team are against DMCA that have with the law's lack of fair use provisions. They have created software called the “Advanced EBook Processor” which evades the copy protection of files in Adobe's EBook format.
While DMCA was implemented to protect copyright in the digital era, there are some people who oppose this law claiming that “The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is not about banning "bootleg" copying and distribution of copyrighted movies, music, and software. That's already illegal. Companies like Disney, Mattel, and Microsoft bought DMCA from Congress because they want to ban some legitimate uses of copyrighted works that you paid for.” Written by Stanford Law School. What do you think about anti - DMCA? Do you agree?
The following is the anti-DMCA website:
http://www.anti-dmca.org/index.html
The following is the Stanford Law School website:
http://zgp.org/~dmarti/dmca/
#2. I don't believe that examining what material a person views at the library is really going to give us much of an indication if that person is a criminal. Checking out a book on weapons doesn't make me a terrorist any more than checking out a book on spaceships makes me an astronaut. Clearly, just because someone reads a book doesn't mean they are able/willing/planning to do what is described in the book. If this were the case (i.e. the reading a book will result in the reader performing a specific action), libraries probably wouldn't even have books about weapons, murder, and crime on their shelves. Perhaps we should start outlawing certain types of knowledge, or arresting people for having certain thoughts.
When discussing this topic with one of my co-workers, he said "I have nothing to hide. If I'm not doing anything wrong, why would I care if somebody finds out what books I read?" The fact is, sometimes people are wrongly accused, and the investigations that ensue can destroy them. Take for instance Richard Jewell (the man wrongly accused on the 1996 Olympic bombing). He had committed no crime, but when the media said otherwise, his whole life was turned upside down. (Imagine if he had checked out a book on bombs...)
Certainly, crime-prevention is a noble cause. However, I strongly feel that the library is no place to start a witchhunt.
Do you see any other issues that directly effect libraries and patrons?
No, I think the list really covers everything.
Should what people access and their search records be available for others to view, and in some instances be used against them? What if the material viewed is an indicator of criminal activity?
No, I don't think anyone should be able to access my private information. I understand in some instance authorities need to few patrons materials and it is for the good of everyone. But I don't want someone just looking at my records just because they can. Privacy to most people is very important.
Using this link to view the current issues listed by the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse, do you see any issues that directly impact library and information policies?
I too don't understand how someone could look different if they are taking books on some sort of crime, it could just be a report that has to be done for school.
Do you believe that copyright laws face new challenges in today’s digital environments?
With technology there will always be new challenges and it will take some time and then there will be a way to protect copyrights.
2. Should what people access and their search records be available for others to view, and in some instances be used against them? What if the material viewed is an indicator of criminal activity?
I do not agree with people being able to access what others have read. I am very happy that the circulation system at the library I work at does not keep a record of what material patrons have checked out. Despite the fact that this is violating Constitutional rights, the reasoning behind doing such a thing is absurd! Just because a person reads a book on a taboo topic does not mean they are engaging in that activity. People read books for many different reasons and just because a person checks a book out on a certain topic does not make them a criminal. People should have the freedom to anonymously read what they want too without the worry of big brother looking over their shoulder. Having access to patrons’ library records is an attempt to control what people read. If a person wants to read a book on Nazism, but fears that their record may be looked and that others may believe the ludicrous notion that you are what you read, that person will more than likely not read that book or many others.
With regard to privacy, I don't think that everyone has a right to view what individuals search. In contrast ?I do think that law officals should have these records available in the event the person commits a crime or has a history of being a dangerous perosn. Most people are probably not looking for information for maicious purposes however the law enforcement agencies need acces to protect from harmful people.
For instance if there was someone that has a history of stalking and attacking women and they have recently been seen at the library searching for women in the area, I would want the law to have the right to see what this character is doing.
The bootom line to me is if you want to search things that are questionalbe you should not be allowed to do so on public property.
4. Do you believe that copyright laws face new challenges in today’s digital environments?
What makes the internet or, the information super highway, so popular and incredibly useful is the fact that users can trade information rapidly and very easily. Music has already been effected by the internet and file sharing software, as has movies and television shows, and it will become increasingly difficult for copyright laws to police the internet if this trend continues. Furthermore, copyright laws have no sway when it comes to burning a cd to your hard drive, mainly your iTunes. So how could copyright laws prevent the user from taking music off their computer and putting it on a disk? They can't.
What needs to happen is the copyright laws should either be revised, or there needs to be a working relationship between Napster-esque programs/creators and the companies that make the product. There's no for seeable end to this problem; the internet is not going away, file sharing is not going away, and people won't stop trading information so a compromise is the only way to make all parties happy.
2. Should what people access and their search records be available for others to view, and in some instances be used against them? What if the material viewed is an indicator of criminal activity?
I don't feel like what people are accessing or searching should be seen by other people. This can be considered an invasion of privacy, however, I feel that in some cases those records should be available to see, especially in the case of criminal activity.
I found this article online about a story that has recently been in the news. This librarian was fired over turning a patron in for child pornography. Personally I stand by what this lady did. Child pornography is a serious offense and this patron could possibly be interested in children coming to the library, putting them at risk. Even though the ALA states that what patrons look at online is private, I feel that in some cases this needs to be bent. After reading the article what responses would you have regarding this situation????
http://www.lisnews.org/node/29475
ALA. Code of Ethics. Retrieved from ALA website on 27 March 2008:http://www.ala.org/ala/oif/statementspols/codeofethics/codeethics.cfm
Dana, that is one tough situation in that article. It's hard to be able to say exactly what I would do in a situation like that. As much as everyone in this class may agree or disagree on political issues concerning privacy (such as the Patriot Act), I would place a pretty safe bet that we would all be on the same page concerning child pornography - at least, I hope so! :)
I understand the supervisor's position and why he fired Ms. Biesterfeld: she disobeyed a "direct order" from her boss to tell the man to stop and flag his account for future reference. I wonder if she could have made an anonymous call outside of the workplace in order to save her job, but then I doubt the police would have taken the call quite as seriously.
There is one glaring difference that I can see in this case versus hypothetical ones where a patron may be checking out books on bombs and/or weapons, though. As mentioned by many on this post, those reference books could be used for a number of things - personal interest, a school project, etc. This man was caught "red-handed." He was witnessed blatantly committing an illegal act. This wasn't the police or other authorities using patron records to prove a case; the crime had already been committed. That is a big difference in my opinion.
In response to the last question, Do you believe that copyright laws face new challenges in today’s digital environments?
YES, I feel that this is the at the forefront of the discussion right now, with the patriot act, D.M.C.A., and digital rights management issues. I will, however, echo Holli W's question: Does anyone have a layman’s term explanation of the DMCA? ...because it seems without a law degree the titles are impenetrable. Perhaps, I just need to spend more time with the subject, but after reading the linked NYT's article, I agree when the author states, "this is bad law and bad policy." I do understand that D.M.C.A. has undoubtedly tightened the U.S. copyright grip.
Why does it seem when the issue of copyright is in question the rules become so ambiguous? Maybe I'm making it more complicated than it really is, but I agree with Catherine that the interpretation of such laws have never been clear, forcing professionals to "read the tea leaves with respect to 'fair use'. "
2. Should what people access and their search records be available for others to view, and in some instances be used against them? What if the material viewed is an indicator of criminal activity?
I find this to be a difficult question to answer. On one hand, by viewing a "person of suspision's" records, it could prevent terrible things from happening, whether it's the whole country or individuals. I think with the way the world is changing, it is sometimes important that the government can access this information, but only when necessary. On the other hand, we have all seen instances where the government abuses it's power. Sometimes, a patron's activity can be taken as suspicious but in actuality it is innocent. For example, someone might just very well be interested in how to create an explosive device, when we all know the government would look at that as being suspicious. So then, does the Patriot Act prevent some patrons from truely pursuing what it is they desire?
Post a Comment