We held a workshop on legal & ethical issues yesterday, 24 June 2008, at the British Library Conference Centre. It was led by Andrew Charlesworth, Director of the Centre for IT and Law at the University of Bristol.
There were two sessions: one in the morning with an archival and curatorial perspective, and one in the afternoon primarily for a user perspective, embracing historians, scientific publishers, genealogists and researchers generally. Everyone was asked to wear an additional hat, as a potential depositor or self-archivist.
We were very pleased with the discussion that emerged, and would like to thank very much everyone concerned, including those who are contributing via email and telephone communications.
So far participants originate from the following institutions, in addition to the British Library: Bodleian Library, CommunitySites, National Library of Wales, Nature Publishing Group, Society of Genealogists, Theatre Museum, History of Medicine at University College London, HATII of University of Glasgow, Social Sciences at University of Manchester, Media & Film at University of Sussex, Victoria & Albert Museum, and Wellcome Library.
« May 2008 | Main | July 2008 »
June 2008
25 June 2008
09 June 2008
Digital sharing and privacy
John Tuck has just got back from the RLG Programs 2008 Annual Partners Meeting in Philadelphia, USA. The meeting was held under the auspices of the Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) which is based in Dublin, Ohio, USA. He gave a presentation entitled: "Digital Lives: an AHRC-funded research project".
By way of background, "RLG Programs" is derived from the Research Libraries Group which combined with OCLC in July 2006 to form "a distinct group within the OCLC Programs and Research division". This pdf file provides some information and can be downloaded.
The latest membership report to come out of OCLC is of special interest to the privacy issue, and to the forthcoming Digital Lives workshop on legal and ethical issues. It is entitled "Sharing, Privacy and Trust in Our Networked World" and is based on a survey of the general public from six countries, including the United Kingdom, researching the social-networking behaviours and values of library users.
Another important report emerged recently from Demos, an influential think tank in the UK. The report is entitled: "UK Confidential", headed with the following quote "An open society depends on individuals rediscovering the social value of privacy...".
Finally, when I got to my desk last Monday, I was pleased to find that a copy of a book that I had purchased through 'a well known online supplier of books' had arrived. The book is "The spy in the coffee machine. The end of privacy as we know it", by Kieron O'Hara and Nigel Shadbolt. Kieron has written extensively on philosophical and political aspects of computer technology, and will be contributing to the Digital Lives research project in the coming months.
The writers come from the same stable as one of our external advisory committee members, Professor Wendy Hall: namely, the Intelligence, Agents, Multimedia (IAM) Group in the School of Electronics and Computer Science at the Univesity of Southampton. (Very many congratulations to Wendy on being appointed President of the prestigious Association for Computing Machinery, 3 June 2008, a first for anyone outside North America.)
Numerous publications have recently appeared on this topic, and will continue to do so. It takes time to digest the implications, and of course there are other kinds of technology with complex nuances for citizens to consider: stem cell research, genetic engineering, climate change, and so on. Some 'ethical policy fatigue' is conceivable, where people tire of having to think about and form considered opinions of the social implications of continually fast emerging technologies.
Whatever view one takes with regard to policy requirements, legal implications and ethical imperatives, one of the challenges facing modern society is not simply the need to find and make the right decisions but the pace at which this needs to happen if fast emerging technologies are to yield their fullest benefits. It seems inevitable that we shall have to become adept at making appropriate and collective decisions quickly and efficiently. (Of course, what will spring to mind for many people is the potential usefulness of the web itself in this context: if not Web 2.0 then Web 3.0.)
Personally, I am reasonably optimistic about technology and the future, and like others (including, I would think, most of the authors cited), I find the apparent increase in collaborative openness of people on the web very appealing and inspiring. This sounds like the weather man on the BBC Radio 4 Today programme last week who announced that there was "a hint of brightness" coming. But it will require sustained collective and individual vigilance and it is in large part because people are producing thoughtful documents such as those outlined that I am hopeful.
