Reading list

Required Reading for the Institute

Copyright

Authors Guild v. Google, Inc., 804 F. 3d 202 – Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit 2015, https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca2/13-4829/13-4829-2015-10-16.html

Rachael Samberg and Cody Hennesy, “Law and Literacy in Non-Consumptive Text Mining: Guiding Researchers Through the Landscape of Computational Text Analysis,” in Copyright Conversations: Rights Literacy in a Digital World, edited by Sara Benson (Chicago: Association of College and Research Libraries, 2019), https://escholarship.org/uc/item/55j0h74g.

Matthew Sag, “The New Legal Landscape for Text Mining and Machine Learning,” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2019, https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3331606.

Licensing

Nancy Herther, Daniel Dollar, Darby Orcutt, Alicia Wise, and Meg White, “Text and Data Mining Contracts: The Issues and Needs” (2015). Proceedings of the Charleston Library Conference. http://dx.doi.org/10.5703/1288284316233

California Digital Library 2005 Agreement with Factiva: https://cdlib.org/services-groups/collections/licensed_resources/redacted_licenses/ST_Tier2_Factiva_UCLA_2005_Redacted.pdf

California Digital Library New Model Agreement: http://ucblib.link/33L

Butler, Brandon (2018), “For text- and data-mining, fair use is powerful, but possession is still 9/10 of the law” at http://thetaper.library.virginia.edu/2018/02/28/for-text-and-data-mining-fair-use-is-powerful-but-possession-is-still-9-10-of-the-law-sparc.html

Privacy & Ethics

Suomela, Todd, et al. “Applying an Ethics of Care to Internet Research: Gamergate and Digital Humanities.” Digital Studies/Le Champ Numérique, vol. 9, no. 1, Open Library of Humanities, Feb. 2019, p. 4, doi:10.16995/dscn.302.

Jules Polonetsky et al., Benefit-Risk Analysis for Big Data Projects, Future of Privacy Forum, (Sep. 2014), https://fpf.org/wp-content/uploads/FPF_DataBenefitAnalysis_FINAL.pdf

Optional Reading

Flynn, S., Geiger, C., Quintais, J., Margoni, T., Sag, M., Guibault, L., & Carroll, M. (April 20, 2020), “Implementing User Rights for Research in the Field of Artificial Intelligence: A Call for International Action.” European Intellectual Property Review 2020, Issue 7. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3578819

Van Atteveldt, W., Althaus, S., & Wessler, H. (2020). The trouble with sharing your privates. Pursuing ethical open science and collaborative research across national jurisdictions using sensitive data. Political Communication https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1744780

 

Additional Sources

62A Am. Jur. 2d Privacy, May 2020 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Drn41BQyQSJvp_QokXb8IMhgo_R40ssm/view?usp=sharing

Agostinho, Daniela. “Archival Encounters: Rethinking Access and Care in Digital Colonial Archives.” Archival Science, vol. 19, no. 2, June 2019, pp. 141–65, doi:10.1007/s10502-019-09312-0.

American Law Institute. Restatement of the Law, Second. Torts. American Law Institute, 1965.

Andrew Garrett, et al. Native American Collections in Archives, Libraries, and Museums at the University of California, Berkeley: Working Group Report. 2019, https://vcresearch.berkeley.edu/research-policies/Native_American_Collections.

Asay, Clark D. and Sloan, Arielle and Sobczak, Dean, Is Transformative Use Eating the World? 61 Boston College Law Review 905 (2020); BYU Law Research Paper No. 19-06. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3332682.

Beebe, B. “An Empirical Study of U.S. Copyright Fair Use Opinions, 1978-2005,” 156 U. Pa. L. Rev. 549 (2008) https://www.law.upenn.edu/journals/lawreview/articles/volume156/issue3/Beebe156U.Pa.L.Rev.549(2008).pdf

Black, Michael. The World Wide Web as Complex Data Set: Expanding the Digital Humanities into the Twentieth Century and Beyond through Internet Research. International Journal of Humanities and Arts Computing 2016 10:1, 95-109

Buchanan, Elizabeth A., and Michael Zimmer. “Internet Research Ethics.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta, Winter 2018, Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, 2018. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2018/entries/ethics-internet-research/.

California Civil Code  § 3345.1. https://codes.findlaw.com/ca/civil-code/civ-sect-3345-1.html.

California Civil Code § 52.5. https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=CIV&sectionNum=52.5.

Caswell, Michelle, and Marika Cifor. “From Human Rights to Feminist Ethics: Radical Empathy in the Archives.” Archivaria, vol. 81, no. 1, Association of Canadian Archivists, 2016, pp. 23–43, https://muse.jhu.edu/article/687705/pdf.

Christen, Kimberly. “Relationships, Not Records : Digital Heritage and the Ethics of Sharing Indigenous Knowledge Online.” The Routledge Companion to Media Studies and Digital Humanities, Routledge, 2018, pp. 403–12, doi:10.4324/9781315730479-42.

DeCew, Judith. “Privacy.” The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, edited by Edward N. Zalta, Spring 2018, Metaphysics Research Lab, Stanford University, 2018. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2018/entries/privacy/.

D’Ignazio, Catherine, and Klein, Lauren.  Data Feminism.  MIT Press, 2020.

Dixon, Shane, and Linda Quirke. “What’s the Harm? The Coverage of Ethics and Harm Avoidance in Research Methods Textbooks.” Teaching Sociology, vol. 46, no. 1, SAGE Publications Inc, Jan. 2018, pp. 12–24, doi:10.1177/0092055X17711230.

Dressler, Virginia, and Cindy Kristof. The Right to Be Forgotten and Implications on Digital Collections: A Survey of ARL Member Institutions on Practice and Policy | Dressler | College & Research Libraries, doi:https://doi.org/10.5860/crl.79.7.972.

Dulong de Rosnay, Mélanie, and Andrés Guadamuz. Memory Hole or Right to Delist? Implications of the Right to Be Forgotten for Web Archiving. SSRN Scholarly Paper, Social Science Research Network, 1 June 2017,  https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3107565.

European Privacy Requests Search Removals FAQs – Transparency Report Help Center, https://support.google.com/transparencyreport/answer/7347822?hl=en.

First Archivist Circle. Protocols for Native American Archival Materials. 2007, http://www2.nau.edu/libnap-p/protocols.html.

“General Data Protection Regulation Art. 17 – Right to Erasure (‘right to Be Forgotten’).” GDPR.Eu, 14 Nov. 2018. gdpr.eu, https://gdpr.eu/article-17-right-to-be-forgotten/.

“General Data Protection Regulation Art. 89 – Safeguards and Derogations Relating to Processing for Archiving Purposes in the Public Interest, Scientific or Historical Research Purposes or Statistical Purposes.” GDPR.Eu, 14 Nov. 2018. gdpr.eu, https://gdpr.eu/article-89-processing-for-archiving-purposes-scientific-or-historical-research-purposes-or-statistical-purposes/.

Gilliland, Anne J. and Sue McKemmish. “The Role of Participatory Archives in Furthering Human Rights, Reconciliation and Recovery.” (2014). Atlanti: Review for Modern Archival Theory and Practice, vol. 24, Oct. 2014, https://escholarship.org/uc/item/346521tf.

Helen, Kara. Research Ethics in the Real World: Euro-Western and Indigenous Perspectives. Policy Press, 2018. See https://policy.bristoluniversitypress.co.uk/research-ethics-in-the-real-world.

Henttonen, Pekka. “Privacy as an Archival Problem and a Solution.” Archival Science, vol. 17, no. 3, Sept. 2017, pp. 285–303, doi:10.1007/s10502-017-9277-0.

Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore. Glossary of Key Terms Related to Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions. 2018, https://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/tk/en/wipo_grtkf_ic_37/wipo_grtkf_ic_37_inf_7.pdf.

Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, The Protection of Traditional Knowledge: Draft Articles. 2018, https://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/tk/en/wipo_grtkf_ic_38/wipo_grtkf_ic_38_4.pdf.

Lor, Peter Johan, and J. J. Britz. “An Ethical Perspective on Political-Economic Issues in the Long-Term Preservation of Digital Heritage.” Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, vol. 63, no. 11, 2012, pp. 2153–64, doi:10.1002/asi.22725.

Mathiesen, Kay. “A Defense of Native Americans’ Rights over Their Traditional Cultural Expressions.” The American Archivist, vol. 75, no. 2, Society of American Archivists, Oct. 2012, pp. 456–81, doi:10.17723/aarc.75.2.0073888331414314.

Powell, Timothy B. “The American Philosophical Society Protocols for the Treatment of Indigenous Materials.” Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, vol. 158, no. 4, Dec. 2014, pp. 411–20, https://www.amphilsoc.org/sites/default/files/2017-11/attachments/APS%20Protocols.pdf

Rainie, Stephanie Carroll, et al. Indigenous Data Sovereignty. African Minds and the International Development Research Centre (IDRC), 2019, pp. 300–19, https://researchcommons.waikato.ac.nz/handle/10289/12918.

Research Data Alliance International Indigenous Data Sovereignty Interest Group. CARE Principles for Indigenous Data Governance. The Global Indigenous Data Alliance, Sept. 2019, https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5d3799de845604000199cd24/t/5da9f4479ecab221ce848fb2/1571419335217/CARE+Principles_One+Pagers+FINAL_Oct_17_2019.pdf.

Review of Copyright Exceptions for Research – www.tinyurl.com/researchexceptions

Sag, Matthew. Predicting Fair Use (February 25, 2012). Ohio State Law Journal, Vol. 73:1 47-91 (2012) http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.176913

Suomela, Todd, et al. “Applying an Ethics of Care to Internet Research: Gamergate and Digital Humanities.” Digital Studies/Le Champ Numérique, vol. 9, no. 1, Open Library of Humanities, Feb. 2019, p. 4, doi:10.16995/dscn.302.

United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples. A/RES/61/295, 13 Sept. 2007, https://www.un.org/development/desa/indigenouspeoples/wp-content/uploads/sites/19/2018/11/UNDRIP_E_web.pdf.

Van Atteveldt, Wouter, Scott Althaus, and Hartmut Wessler. 2020. “The Trouble with Sharing Your Privates: Pursuing Ethical Open Science and Collaborative Research across National Jurisdictions Using Sensitive Data.”  Political Communication: 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1080/10584609.2020.1744780

Vitak, J., Shilton, K., & Ashktorab, Z. 2016. Beyond the Belmont Principles: Ethical Challenges, Practices, and Beliefs in the Online Data Research Community. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (CSCW ’16). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 941–953. DOI:https://doi.org/10.1145/2818048.2820078

Waldman, Ari W. Privacy Law’s False Promise, 97 WASH. U. L. REV. 0773 (2020). Available at: https://openscholarship.wustl.edu/law_lawreview/vol97/iss3/7

Wright, David, and Renée Saucier. “Madness in the Archives: Anonymity, Ethics, and Mental Health History Research.” Journal of the Canadian Historical Association / Revue de La Société Historique Du Canada, vol. 23, no. 2, The Canadian Historical Association / La Société historique du Canada, 2012, pp. 65–90, doi:https://doi.org/10.7202/1015789ar.

Zwitter, Andrej. “Big Data Ethics.” Big Data & Society, vol. 1, no. 2, SAGE Publications Ltd, July 2014, pp. 1-6. doi:10.1177/2053951714559253.

License

Icon for the CC0 (Creative Commons Zero) license

To the extent possible under law, Scott Althaus, David Bamman, Sara Benson, Brandon Butler, Beth Cate, Kyle K. Courtney, Sean Flynn, Maria Gould, Cody Hennesy, Eleanor Dickson Koehl, Thomas Padilla, Stacy Reardon, Matthew Sag, Rachael Samberg, Brianna L. Schofield, Megan Senseney, Timothy Vollmer, and Glen Worthey have waived all copyright and related or neighboring rights to Building Legal Literacies for Text Data Mining, except where otherwise noted.

Share This Book