Discover Top Posts Tagged with #privacy in libraries

Library Privacy Checklists

This set of seven checklists is intended to help libraries of all capacities take practical steps to implement the principles that are laid out in the ALA Library Privacy Guidelines. Each checklist is organized into three priority groups. Priority 1 are actions that hopefully all libraries can take to improve privacy practices. Priority 2 and Priority 3 actions may be more difficult for libraries to implement depending on their technical expertise, available resources, and organizational structure.

These checklists were created by a group of volunteers from the LITA Patron Privacy Interest Group and the ALA Intellectual Freedom Committee's Privacy Subcommittee.

Overview

Data Exchange Between Networked Devices and Services

E-book Lending and Digital Content Vendors

Library Management Systems / Integrated Library Systems

Library Websites, OPACs, and Discovery Services

Public Access Computers and Networks

Students in K-12 Schools

#libraries and privacy #privacy in the digital age #privacy in libraries #guidelines and principles

a spokesperson for the ACLU Northern California said in a statement to the San Francisco Examiner on Monday that the organization continues to oppose the technology and urged The City to reject the effort. “RFID has profound implications for civil liberties in San Francisco, including for immigrants’ rights. It’s more important than ever that San Francisco safeguard privacy, free speech, and civil liberties for all,” Nicole Ozer, technology and civil liberties policy director of the ACLU of California, said in the statement. EFF spokesperson Rebecca Jeschke told the Examiner on Monday “we do have some concerns about this proposal, but we haven’t looked at it as closely as we’d like.” Herrera said in the memo that “the use of a combination of library cards without RFID tags and library items bearing passive RFID tags (with a limited range of under one meter) offer increased circulation efficiency while ensuring patron privacy.”

SF Public Library revives plan to install microchips in books - by j_sabatini - The San Francisco Examiner

#rfid in libraries #library privacy #privacy in libraries

Library Privacy Guidelines for Library Websites, OPACs, and Discovery Services

Guidelines from ALA’s Office of Intellectual Freedom

#privacy resources #library privacy #privacy in libraries #privacy and libraries

76 % say libraries should definitely offer programs to teach patrons about protecting their privacy and security online

Libraries at the Crossroads: The public is interested in new services and thinks libraries are important to communities. Pew Research Center

#white papers and reports #Pew Research Center #libraries and privacy #privacy in libraries

Worrying that if we don’t adopt the values of Silicon Valley, people will abandon libraries and turn to other, privacy-disabled sites is a red herring. We’re not going to get Amazon’s traffic by acting more like Amazon. We’re not threatened by Google (any more than everyone is). We have the potential to speak up for privacy and engage with a concern that these businesses have told us is irrelevant. (They lied.)

Privacy for the Public | Library Babel Fish | InsideHigherEd

#future of libraries #privacy in libraries #library privacy

Privacy and Libraries

Interested in issues about libraries and privacy? Check out the new Tumblr I created for the curation of articles, videos, blog posts, slideshows etc.

Privacy in Libraries

#privacy #libraries #privacy in libraries #privacy and librarires

Four Privacy Myths

Neil M. Richards

Any discussion about privacy today inevitably confronts a series of common arguments about the futility of privacy in our digital age. "Privacy is Dead," we hear, and "people (especially young ones) don’t care about privacy." What’s more, privacy just protects bad behavior because those of us with "nothing to hide have nothing to fear." And anyway, the argument goes, new privacy laws would be bad policy since "privacy is bad for business."

There are other common claims, but these four are perhaps the most common. They are also myths, and in this essay I show why. First, privacy can’t be dead because it deals with the rules governing personal information; in an age of personal information, rules about how that information can flow will be more important than ever. Second, people (and young people) do care deeply about privacy, but they face limited choices and limited information about how to participate in the processing of their data. Third, privacy isn’t just for people with dark secrets; it’s for all of us because information is power and personal information is personal power. Finally, privacy is not always bad for business. One of the best hopes for meaningful privacy protection in the future is for businesses to compete on privacy, and there is some evidence that this is starting to happen.

My goal here is not just to be contrary. I hope instead to clear away some of the confusion surrounding the way we talk about privacy. When we do that; when we are clear about what privacy is and why it matters, we can start to talk constructively about the kinds of legal and social rules we want to govern personal information in the information age. We are experiencing an information revolution as powerful and disruptive as the industrial revolution of the nineteenth century. We need to think and talk about how to harness this revolution’s great power while minimizing as many of its costs as we can. Or we can continue to believe the myths about privacy. But if we do that; if we think about privacy as outdated or impossible, our digital revolution may have no rules at all, a result that will disempower all but the most powerful among us.

#academic articles #libraries and privacy #privacy in libraries #privacy in the digital age

Privacy is Not Dead—It's Inevitable

by Neil M. Richards

Most of all, though, we need to worry about intellectual privacy. Intellectual privacy is protection from surveillance or interference when we are engaged in the processes of generating ideas– thinking, reading, and speaking with confidantes before our ideas are ready for public consumption. Law has protected intellectual privacy in the past. But the digital revolution has raised the stakes. More and more, the acts of reading, thinking, and private communication are mediated by electronic technologies, including personal computers, smart phones, e-books, and tablets. Whether we call it surveillance or transparency, being watched has effects on behavior. When we watch the NSA or the police, they behave better. And when the police watch us, so do we, whether it is not speeding for some of us or not stealing for others.

But critically, when we are using computers to read, think, and make sense of the world and engage with ideas, there is no such thing as a bad idea or bad behavior. If our society is to remain free, we must be able to engage with any ideas, whether we agree with them or not. This is true across a range of topics, from Mein Kampf to the Vagina Monologues, and from erotica to Fox News. But constant, unrelenting, perpetual surveillance of our tastes in politics, art, literature, TV, or sex will drive our reading (and by extension our tastes) to the mainstream, the boring, and the bland. As we build our digital society, we need to ensure that we carve out and protect the intellectual privacy that political freedom requires to survive.

#articles #intellectual privacy #libraries and privacy #privacy in libraries #privacy in the digital page