From blawlor at nfais.org Wed Jun 5 15:30:22 2013 From: blawlor at nfais.org (Bonnie Lawlor) Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 15:30:22 -0400 Subject: [nfais-l] NFAIS Webinars: Taxonomies and Ontologies Message-ID: <006701ce6223$1f84d720$5e8e8560$@org> NFAIS Webinar Series: Knowledge Organization Systems and Information Discovery: From Thesauri to Taxonomies to Ontologies: Register Now for One or Both! In an era marked by an exponential growth of information, content providers face the never-ending challenge of making their content discoverable. Key to meeting that challenge are knowledge organization systems - basic tools used both by human indexers and embedded in the engines of the most effective automated indexing systems. In use for decades (e.g., Library of Congress Subject Headings), these systems gradually receded into the background of a search environment dominated by Google and other smart search engines. Now that is changing and knowledge organization systems are emerging stronger than ever! But what are they, when should they be used, and how do they differ? NFAIS will hold two 90-minute professional development webinars that are designed both as a refresher and an update on how knowledge needs to be organized for discovery and use in today's complex retrieval environments. (Register for both and receive a 10% discount!) The first, Taxonomies and Ontologies: Definitions, Differences, and Use, will take place on June 18, 2013 from 11:00am - 12:30pm EDST. The objective of this session is to provide participants with an understanding of the different types of knowledge organization systems that exist and the value that each offers. The webinar will review key aspects of knowledge organizing systems and demystify the confusing terminology used to describe them. Using examples, it will discuss how these different types of organization systems are being applied and the advantages of each The second, Moving from Taxonomies to Ontologies: What, Why, When, and How, will take place on July 17, 2013 - also from 11:00am - 12:30pm EDST. While both taxonomies and ontologies are designed to manage relationships among terms, ontologies offer support for managing the more complex relationships that are used in today's retrieval systems. This webinar will take a look at the structure of ontologies and how they are managed using ontology management software; the differences in available software, including open source software for ontology management; and when and how to migrate from a taxonomy to an ontology. If you register for both webinars, but are unable to attend on the date decided upon, you will be given a link to the recorded version to view at your convenience. If you or your staff want to learn more about the role that taxonomies and ontologies play in organizing content for maximum discovery, retrieval and use, register for the NFAIS webinar series today. The fee for a single webinar is as follows: Individuals: NFAIS members, $105; Sister Society members, $115, and non-members, $125. Groups (3 or more): NFAIS; $255; Sister Society, $275; and non-member, $295. Group registrations and are ideal for organization-wide professional development. All groups receive the link to the archived recording for viewing at any time. Registrants for the series receive a 10% discount. The registration form can be accessed at: http://nfais.org/event?eventID=524 For more information contact Jill O'Neill, NFAIS Director, Communication and Planning, 215-893-1561 (phone); 215-893-1564 (fax); mailto:jilloneill at nfais.org or go to http://www.nfais.org/. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From blawlor at nfais.org Fri Jun 7 14:18:30 2013 From: blawlor at nfais.org (Bonnie Lawlor) Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2013 14:18:30 -0400 Subject: [nfais-l] NFAIS Workshop - Digita Content Usage Message-ID: <01b801ce63ab$69dde3f0$3d99abd0$@org> NFAIS Workshop: Digital Content: Fostering Usage Through Practical Functionalities and Policies (Onsite and Virtual registrations available) Digital intake of content (books, video, etc.) is now a commonplace form of information consumption. Indeed, twenty-six percent of the U.S. population is composed of "digital omnivores," those who own a minimum of three devices (laptop, smart phone, and tablet)[1]. And today all digital "readers" - whether omnivores or occasional - have come to expect that they will be permitted to use content in practical ways that make sense for them - re-use, sharing with colleagues, annotating passages, etc. Yet expectations and reality are not always in alignment. While providing consumers with a wide range of options from which to choose, the diversity of content formats, delivery platforms, computing devices/functionalities, and publisher policies have unintentionally raised barriers to ease of use. On June 21, 2013 NFAIS will hold a workshop, Digital Content: Fostering Usage Through Practical Functionalities and Policies, from 9:30am - 4:30pm EDST in Philadelphia, PA. This workshop will open with a look at the current consumption and use of digital content and related user reading behavior. This will be followed by a session on e-book acceptance and use from the perspective of students, faculty and librarians based upon recent studies of purchase decisions and actual usage. Issues related to mobile access and delivery will addressed as will some of the new tools, such as apps and software that enable well-established tasks such as annotating, sharing and peer review to be performed more efficiently and more effectively. The final two sessions will focus on the tensions between business sustainability and content usability and will attempt to answer the following questions: What content usages are required by students, researchers, and faculty? What are the barriers that impede such usage? What are the biggest concerns for institutions and their vendors? And how might all parties think about the issues with the objective of lessening the tensions and moving forward? If you or your staff want an update on digital content usage and the current technology and policy issues that need to be addressed in order to maximize that usage and improve the user experience, register for the workshop today. Both onsite and virtual registrations are available for individuals and for groups of three or more from the same organization. Group registrations can be a mix of onsite and virtual attendees, with a small food charge added for those attending onsite. Members of Sister Societies (CENDI, ISCTI, AAUP, NISO, ASIS&T, SSP, AAP/PSP, and LYRASIS) are eligible for discounts (see registration form link at: http://nfais.org/event?eventID=525. For more information contact: Jill O'Neill, NFAIS Director, Communication and Planning, 215-893-1561 (phone); 215-893-1564 (fax); mailto:jilloneill at nfais.org or go to http://www.nfais.org/. NFAIS: Serving the Global Information Community _____ [1] State of the Media Democracy Survey: A multi-generational view of consumer technology, media, and telecom trends, Deloitte, March 2013, Deloitte, Deloitte | State of the Media Democracy Survey#&panel1-1 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From blawlor at nfais.org Thu Jun 13 08:25:28 2013 From: blawlor at nfais.org (Bonnie Lawlor) Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2013 08:25:28 -0400 Subject: [nfais-l] Workshop: Fostering the use of Content Message-ID: <006d01ce6831$17433610$45c9a230$@org> NFAIS Workshop: Digital Content: Fostering Usage through Practical Functionalities and Policies (Onsite and Virtual registrations available On June 21, 2013 NFAIS will hold a workshop that will take a look at the product/delivery functionalities and the publisher policies that are both enhancing and impeding digital content usage and the overall user experience. This workshop, Digital Content: Fostering Usage through Practical Functionalities and Policies, will be held from 9:30am - 4:30pm EDST in Philadelphia, PA and virtual attendance is an option. Why attend? The workshop will attempt to answer the following questions: What content usages are required by students, researchers, and faculty? What are the technical and legal barriers that impede such usage? What are the biggest concerns for institutions and their vendors? And how might all parties think about the issues with the objective of improving the user experience with digital content? Topics Include: . Digital Content Consumption: The Current Landscape . Trends in E-book Use and Acceptance: View from the Trenches . Fostering Use: The Mobile Environment . Fostering Use: Enabling Content Sharing, Annotation, and Review . Usability and Sustainability from a Business Perspective - publisher concerns . Moving Forward: Resolving the Tension Between Content Usability and Business Sustainability Both onsite and virtual registrations are available for individuals and for groups of three or more from the same organization. Group registrations can be a mix of onsite and virtual attendees, with a small food charge added for those attending onsite. Members of Sister Societies (CENDI, ISCTI, AAUP, NISO, ASIS&T, SSP, AAP/PSP, and LYRASIS) are eligible for discounts (see registration form link at: http://nfais.org/event?eventID=525. For more information contact: Jill O'Neill, NFAIS Director, Communication and Planning, 215-893-1561 (phone); 215-893-1564 (fax); mailto:jilloneill at nfais.org or go to http://www.nfais.org/. NFAIS: Serving the Global Information Community -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jilloneill at nfais.org Fri Jun 14 12:37:32 2013 From: jilloneill at nfais.org (jilloneill at nfais.org) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 12:37:32 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [nfais-l] NFAIS Enotes 2013, No. 1 - Discovering The Book Message-ID: <1371227852.94246875@webmail.nfais.org> NFAIS Enotes 2013, No. 1 ? Discovering the Book Written and Compiled by Jill O?Neill In April of this year, noting the sale of the social networking site Goodreads to giant bookseller, Amazon, The Atlantic ran a brief piece that contained a statistic worked up by the Codex Group, based on a 2008 population study by the National Endowment for the Arts. Specifically, the statistic was that 19% of the American population did 79% of the country?s unassigned reading (that is, reading not required by or tied to either schoolwork or profession). What was striking was that the bar for inclusion in that group was set so low -- the 19% referenced were those who had simply read twelve or more books in the previous twelve months. These prolific readers were at the pinnacle of the Codex Group triangle. (See [http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/the-simple-reason-why-goodreads-is-so-valuable-to-amazon/274548/] http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2013/04/the-simple-reason-why-goodreads-is-so-valuable-to-amazon/274548/. Another diagram in that piece showed that Americans were no longer as dependent upon browsing in bookstores or libraries to find a reading selection, but were far more apt to discover new content via online social networks and from those people whose tastes they knew and trusted. Is this significant for those working with bibliographic information, serious monographs, and other scholarly information services? It may be. Discovery has morphed somewhat in the 21st century. Fifteen years ago, I walked the aisle of an ALA exhibit hall and spied a volume on display in a publisher?s booth. The cover was fairly standard in its uniformity of design for an established book series ? black rectangle on a pine green background with the title picked out in letters of gold. The formula for creating the title was fairly standard as well; there was an attention-grabbing main title with a subtitle that gave a more realistic sense of the book?s scope. But the displayed cover, however muted, and the title of the text were the only elements to prompt an attendee?s interest in pursuing an acquisition. Such an approach suggests a hopeful reliance on serendipitous discovery by the (quite reputable) publisher. However, from a business perspective, serendipitous discovery is unreliable as a selling tactic. So, the question remains. If the potential buyer doesn?t know of a book?s existence, how can the publisher foster discovery? In this digital age, if he or she were to be lucky, the scholar?s dissertation published in book form might carry some eye-catching image, but it is by no means a given. I might be able to follow a trail of potential titles of interest generated through an online search and discover a new title that way. Somewhere there would be a web site from which I might download a digital sample onto my smartphone and links that could direct me to an online retailer for purposes of completing the sale. As a nod to the social, the site might offer some functionality for sharing the discovery of the title with my friends. Take a look at the UK start-up, Jellybooks ([http://www.jellybooks.com/] http://www.jellybooks.com). The service focuses on serendipitous discovery; the user is looking for a book, but without any awareness of a particular title or author. In their approach, the first choice offered to the visitor is whether they want fiction or non-fiction. Two additional tabs direct those interested to alternate choices of a genre. Once that question has been answered, the visual image of a cover is the primary means of attracting attention to an ebook. The other services (e-text sample, sharing to a social network, link to a retailer, etc.) essentially minimize the need for the buyer to think like a librarian or store clerk. (Publisher name and ISBN are pretty much buried.) Jellybooks focuses on the creation of a connection between the visualized concept of a book?s content and the curious mind of the buyer. It?s about as fundamental a form of discovery as we can presently achieve. Andrew Rhomberg, founder of Jellybooks, wrote publicly about his theories of discovery on the Digital Book World blog: ([http://www.digitalbookworld.com/2013/five-shades-of-book-discovery/] http://www.digitalbookworld.com/2013/five-shades-of-book-discovery/). To him, discovery breaks down to five fairly straightforward classes: (1) serendipitous discovery; (2) social discovery; (3) discovery in context or distributed discovery; (4) data-driven discovery; and (5) incentivized discovery. When I survey the landscape for Rhomberg?s classes of discovery, I note that in many instances the major book publishers serving the academic community have gotten the message. While it is true that book covers are still rather lackluster, some adoption of new technologies and thinking are fueling informal discovery. For example, Oxford University Press (OUP) has been brilliant in leveraging their blog. In terms of graphic appeal and content, the blog might be mistaken for a major digital magazine, in support of the reader discovering titles that would not otherwise surface or appear to have broad appeal. In a recent post, a staff intern wrote about how one might survive the ever-recurring nightmare of a zombie apocalypse, offering solutions found by consulting various reference works ? including various dictionaries and the Oxford Encyclopedia of Medieval Warfare and Military Technology. In 2012, OUP also ran half a dozen entries tied to the popular Downton Abbey television series. A user searching Google could turn up entries that tied published OUP historical studies to the events and cultural attitudes appearing as part of the Season Two storyline. There was less emphasis on the elite nature of the content and instead emphasis on the value of the content in satisfying the reader?s nascent curiosity. OUP was perceived as not taking itself too seriously while positioning its academic product as being accessible to the broader reading public. The Oxford Companion to Downton Abbey: [http://blog.oup.com/2012/02/oxford-downton-abbey-reading-list/] http://blog.oup.com/2012/02/oxford-downton-abbey-reading-list/ How to Survive a Zombie Apocalypse: [http://blog.oup.com/2013/05/oxford-companion-zombie-apocalypse/] http://blog.oup.com/2013/05/oxford-companion-zombie-apocalypse/ That prolific readers are interested in more than just Fifty Shades of Grey is evidenced by some on-going individual initiatives. A case in point is the WordPress-driven site War Through the Generations, a blog that came into existence because two blogger-readers were driven by curiosity to learn more about the literature of war. The blog explains that it aims ?to generate discussion and provide readers with lists of books and links to online reviews of war-related books? (see: [http://warthroughthegenerations.wordpress.com/] http://warthroughthegenerations.wordpress.com/). So far the site has offered annual thematic support for challenging readers to discover more about World War II, the Vietnam War and the American Civil War. In 2013, the focus is on the American Revolutionary War. Titles include biographies, memoirs, and histories at various levels. If you are unfamiliar with the concept of reading challenges, they?ve proven to be a popular motivational tool for individuals who want to deepen their knowledge of a topic or genre or even just increase the number of books finished in a year. Depending upon the topic or genre, some established reading challenges are nearing a decade of existence. Badges of participation may appear on individual blogs, notifying others of involvement in the challenge, of interest in the topic, creating a social tie between individuals and fostering relationships as well as associations between topically-related titles. It is such relationships and associations that fuel social and data-driven discovery. Referencing again Amazon?s purchase of Goodreads, the acquisition made sense in support of both. Goodreads? 18 million users actively post about what they are reading, fueling discovery by other readers, while Goodreads? 2011 acquisition and integration of the DiscoverReads content engine delivers a fairly robust recommendation system. While recommendation systems have a long way to go (and again, I reference The Atlantic article referenced earlier as it pertains to lackluster recommendation options), the 20 billion data points fueling Goodreads? recommendation system is far superior to Amazon?s tired ?customers who bought this also looked at this? approach (see: [http://readwrite.com/2011/09/14/goodreads_book_recommendation_engine_launched] http://readwrite.com/2011/09/14/goodreads_book_recommendation_engine_launched). While it?s primarily oriented towards trade publishing, a 2012 slideshow by Otis Chandler (CEO, Goodreads) includes some graphs on just how social networks can fuel discovery and support sales. A number of scholarly presses ? for example, Yale University Press ? take advantage of the Goodreads network (see:. [http://www.slideshare.net/GoodreadsPresentations/goodreads-pubwest-2012-how-readers-discover-books-online] http://www.slideshare.net/GoodreadsPresentations/goodreads-pubwest-2012-how-readers-discover-books-online). The data that fuels these recommendation systems can?t just be the individual?s purchasing or behavioral data. To fuel the best possibilities of discovery, publishers should be leveraging every bit of data about their book titles, enhancing and enriching it. Capturing multiple facets as to what the book is ?about? can support recommendation engines, but identified entities and associations may also be extracted and used in linked data initiatives. It?s worthwhile looking at the Goodreads acquisition as Amazon?s attempt to build and ultimately deliver the literary equivalent to Google?s Knowledge Graph, where a brief query can dynamically generate a boxed record encapsulating more information than the user originally sought. Amplifying and linking traditional front and back matter as well as making the full text searchable will broaden the context that enables the reader?s discovery of worthwhile material. At the moment, all this may be further complicated (at least for the content providers) as global user populations shift to expectations of discovery through use of their mobile phones. Anobii, a European social network for readers similar to Goodreads and Librarything, supports three mobile apps - one for Apple?s iOS and two Android versions, one under the Anobii name and the other rebranded as ?Ebooks at Sainsburys.? (While UK food distributor Sainsbury is the majority stakeholder in Anobii ([http://www.anobii.com/] http://www.anobii.com), Penguin-Pearson, HarperCollins, and Random House hold minority interests in the site.) While in our sector of the information industry, we see many content providers offering mobile options, (see science librarian Bonnie Swoger?s inventory at [http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/information-culture/2013/03/26/mobile-apps-for-searching-the-scientific-literature/] http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/information-culture/2013/03/26/mobile-apps-for-searching-the-scientific-literature/), it?s not yet clear how discovery of book titles will be fueled or supported across the widely-disparate needs of various disciplines. Scholars may want to be made aware of a book?s availability, but that awareness may not drive demand. Some book-oriented sites do support awareness over other forms of discovery, a difference in approach driven in part by the type of device assumed to be in use. Recently opened to the public is Riffle ([http://www.rifflebooks.com/] http://www.rifflebooks.com). Unlike Anobii or LibraryThing, Riffle focuses on awareness and display rather than on cataloging and social interaction. The interface is clearly designed for a tablet device, imitating the graphical appeal of Pinterest and delivering the bookstore browsing experience in the context of couch computing. There is minimal interaction via keyboard input; purely touch or single mouse click. Social exchange is held to a minimum; even when questions are posed under a specific questions tab, Riffle is less concerned with the rationale behind a readers? evaluation and recommendation of a title than it is in displaying the book?s primary online marketing asset ? the cover image. Developed by Odyl Technologies, this site claims to make use of data and insights about readers that Odyl has already gleaned through its marketing work for authors and publishers on Facebook. If you have time, you might also take a look at The Reading Room ([http://www.thereadingroom.com/] http://www.thereadingroom.com), a site created by trade publishers that is an attempt to weld serious marketing efforts to the social interactions of readers. The tagline for the site is where passionate readers find, buy, and discuss books. Once logged in, the user is presented with a three-column layout that resembles a newspaper (complete with advertising) with designated zones for book trailers, chapter downloads, and featured member reviews and conversation. The navigational bar at the top is oriented towards exposing the registered user to reviews and samples generated by content providers. The interactive portions of the site ? where users themselves contribute ? are not held front and center, but pushed either to the side or the foot of the page. Given that the targeted demographic for the site appears to be young adults, perhaps 18-30 years of age, one wonders if this will appeal to the generation that grew up posting status updates on Facebook. The interface telegraphs that the message that author branding and book product are more important than the contributions made by the community. While these are trade publishing examples, I see a problem in satisfying the expectations of rising populations in fostering discovery and usage of more esoteric titles. Academic social networks such as Academia.edu or Researchgate have no support for books other than the most basic bibliographic citation in text form, and bibliographic management sites such as Mendeley and Readcube are primarily oriented at the discovery, sharing and retention of journal literature. Content providers haven?t done much to prepare for capturing the attention of a readership that is at least as oriented towards visual tools as to text-based ones. If a monograph features no cover image and offers minimally descriptive elements in its table of contents, how likely is it that such a book will be discovered in an online environment that emphasizes color graphics and gesture control of the interface? The problem may not be significant for STEM titles, but it?s decidedly significant for texts in the social sciences and the humanities when you consider the traditional branding applied to book series or subject specific reference works. Discovery supported solely via traditional citations will simply not be effective in persuading the individual user of a book?s potential value. Publishers and readers represent a symbiotic relationship. If I as the reader find value in a book title and enthusiastically share that value with my colleagues, the publisher of that title benefits through direct sales and indirectly through referred usage. Enhancing that value through accurate metadata, related items, and aggregated collections is fairly basic stuff for the information services created by NFAIS members, but there?s clearly much work still to be done in delivering more engaging avenues and environments for discovery. 2013 NFAIS Supporters Access Innovations, Inc. Accessible Archives, Inc. American Psychological Association/PsycINFO American Theological Library Association Annual Reviews CAS CrossRef Data Conversion Laboratory, Inc. Defense Technical Information Center Getty Research Institute The H. W. Wilson Foundation Information Today, Inc. IFIS Modern Language Association OCLC Philosopher?s Information Center ProQuest RSuite CMS Scope e-Knowledge Center TEMIS, Inc. Thomson Reuters IP & Science Thomson Reuters IP Solutions Unlimited Priorities LLC ******************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jilloneill at nfais.org Fri Jun 14 12:41:29 2013 From: jilloneill at nfais.org (jilloneill at nfais.org) Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2013 12:41:29 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [nfais-l] NFAIS Enotes, 2013, No 2, Hacking, Cracking and Working Well With Others Message-ID: <1371228089.3222822@webmail.nfais.org> NFAIS Enotes, 2013, No. 2 Hacking, Cracking and Working Well With Others. Written and compiled by Jill O?Neill By now, most are familiar with the basics of the Aaron Swartz case. In July of 2011, the young man was charged with breaking into a computer-wiring closet on the campus of MIT with the added infringement of downloading something in excess of 4 million documents from the for-fee information service, JSTOR. Swartz was an ardent supporter of open access and an incredibly gifted individual in the field of computer science. He had an instrumental influence on the development of RSS as well as creating his own software, Infogami, an achievement that would subsequently make him into a millionaire at a very early age as well as granting him the status of being a Fellow at one of Harvard University?s research centers. Over the course of four months, according to press accounts, Swartz successfully downloaded approximately two-thirds of the JSTOR database before MIT and the Department of Justice finally brought a close to the infringing activities. While JSTOR declined to press charges, MIT refused (or was persuaded by federal prosecutors to refuse) to drop the case against Swartz. Swartz was indicted and was (until January 2013) under threat of imprisonment for his actions; additional contributing factors led him to commit suicide. (For a specific timeline of events, see this New York Times article, updated as of January 23, 2013: [http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/21/technology/how-mit-ensnared-a-hacker-bucking-a-freewheeling-culture.html] http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/21/technology/how-mit-ensnared-a-hacker-bucking-a-freewheeling-culture.html) Because of the caliber of students attracted to MIT ? academically gifted, technically oriented, creative minds ? the university has an extraordinarily open policy for access to their network, described by forensics and security expert Alex Stamos as ?open, unmonitored, and unrestricted?. By minimizing challenges to access, the theory is that MIT students are presented with no temptation to match or circumvent necessary institutional protections that are, of necessity, in place. Hacking antics are kept in check. It?s important to note that Aaron Swartz? access to the MIT network was accomplished through a variety of means for circumventing MIT protective measures, but not through any direct breach of those measures. He spoofed MIT?s network for the purposes of being allowed to access JSTOR and download articles, but did not exert his energies in any extensive hack inside the institution?s network. ([http://unhandled.com/2013/01/12/the-truth-about-aaron-swartzs-crime/] http://unhandled.com/2013/01/12/the-truth-about-aaron-swartzs-crime/) It is important here to differentiate between the words ?hacking? and ?cracking? as various communities define the terms differently. Both terms apply to individuals who are proficient or expert in their understanding of computer networks and systems as well as the programming and fundamental coding that are the bricks in the architecture of both. The nuance of difference lies in the ethics of how that knowledge may be applied. Hackers (within the tech community sense of the word) are interested in enhancing the efficiency of systems when they explore protected or internal networks. In that world view, hackers may be seen as a positive and potentially creative force in improving our digital environments. Many hackers claim that their activities are benign in that they seek out vulnerabilities in existing systems in order to notify and support network administrators in maintaining a desirable level of protection around sensitive electronic information. Conversely, crackers are the ?black hats? whose equally expert incursions into systems are for unmistakably illegal purposes? whether stealing, vandalizing or destruction. (See author and former MIT graduate and researcher Richard Stallman?s explanation at: [http://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html] http://stallman.org/articles/on-hacking.html. You might also read this opinion piece in the New York Times, by Professor Peter Ludlow, [http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/13/what-is-a-hacktivist/] http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/01/13/what-is-a-hacktivist/ -- although Catherine Frederick at [http://3dblogger.typepad.com/wired_state/2013/01/why-alex-stamos-is-completely-wrong-about-aaron-swartz.html] http://3dblogger.typepad.com/wired_state/2013/01/why-alex-stamos-is-completely-wrong-about-aaron-swartz.html isn?t buying any of the argument.) For many techies, what Aaron Swartz did would not be considered hacking at all, because he did not ?break into? any meaningfully protected networked environment. He signed on as a guest to MIT?s network and ran a Python automated script against the JSTOR database in order to download material at a rate which constituted a violation of institutional terms of use. He saw and exploited a technical option in achieving his end. That said, according to the definitions currently in use by the U.S. legal community, any unauthorized incursion into a computer system is considered to be a form of trespass and is therefore illegal under the auspices of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act (CFAA). The technical community views the CFAA as an out-dated and poorly crafted piece of legislation. They point to its application to cases such as Andrew ?Weev? Auernheimer as an example of how the legislation may be used inappropriately to protect careless corporate behavior. In that instance, Auernheimer discovered a public AT&T web server that held unique device serial numbers and email addresses of the owners of those devices. The server was there to enable a rapid log-on to the AT&T network for users of iPads with connectivity through the telecommunications giant. Auernheimer merely happened upon a public URL, recognized it as such and released the information to a media outlet in order to embarrass AT&T in the interests of constructing better protection of its clientele. Auernheimer didn?t ?hack? in any sense of the word that the technical community would accept, but he was convicted under the CFAA in the hope that his conviction would send a message to the hacking and security community that any similar trespass or unauthorized use of a publicly accessible web server would be grounds for conviction. Similar cases being prosecuted under the CFAA but with decidedly differing specifics are those of Barrett Brown and Matthew Keys, both of whom are currently accused of aiding the denial of service attacks by the activist group, Anonymous. The case against Lori Drew (an instance of cyberbullying on MySpace which led to a young person?s suicide) was another instance of applying the CFAA to activities unrelated to hacking. For the record, it appears that in none of these cases was financial profit a motive. Andrew ?Weev? Auernheimer: [https://www.eff.org/cases/us-v-auernheimer] https://www.eff.org/cases/us-v-auernheimer (See also: [http://www.theverge.com/2013/1/18/3888528/after-aaron-swartz-how-antiquated-computer-laws-enable-the] http://www.theverge.com/2013/1/18/3888528/after-aaron-swartz-how-antiquated-computer-laws-enable-the) Barrett Brown: [http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/21/barrett-brown-persecution-anonymous] http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2013/mar/21/barrett-brown-persecution-anonymous Matthew Keys: [http://readwrite.com/2013/03/14/reuters-social-editor-indicted-anonymous-internet-jaw-drops] http://readwrite.com/2013/03/14/reuters-social-editor-indicted-anonymous-internet-jaw-drops Lori Drew: [http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/myspace-sentencing.html/] http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/07/myspace-sentencing.html/ Actual lawyers trace problems with the legislation to what may be an overly-vague definition of authorized access. The language leaves open the possibility of abuse by owners of computers in controlling every use made of systems and networks. ([http://www.infoworld.com/t/federal-regulations/cfaa-where-the-computer-security-law-broken-216104] http://www.infoworld.com/t/federal-regulations/cfaa-where-the-computer-security-law-broken-216104 ) As noted in CNET?s article from this past March, the CFAA was intended ?to lock up, for a very long time, extremely destructive hackers who might try to disrupt the banking system or tunnel into the U.S. military's classified mainframes?. [http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57573985-38/from-wargames-to-aaron-swartz-how-u.s-anti-hacking-law-went-astray/] http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-57573985-38/from-wargames-to-aaron-swartz-how-u.s-anti-hacking-law-went-astray/ The same article also notes incremental expansion of the CFAA over the years since 1984, due to a rewording of the legislation in 1996 which extended protection to more than the ?federal interest computers? that were the original concern. At least in part, these expansions over time have been due to a heightened fear of cyber-attacks from crackers, both at home and abroad. [http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57573902-83/intelligence-chief-offers-dire-warning-on-cyberattacks/] http://news.cnet.com/8301-1009_3-57573902-83/intelligence-chief-offers-dire-warning-on-cyberattacks/. Some media coverage suggests that the Department of Justice prefers the current vagueness of the CFAA wording because it more easily enables prosecution of undesirable behaviors until such time as the social norms controlling behavior in an online environment become more fixed in the public mind. However, legal experts such as Orin S. Kerr, law professor at George Washington University, have testified before Congress of the need for reformation in the hopes of containing some of the more egregious prosecutorial abuses. (For more detail on just how, see Kerr?s written testimony at [http://www.volokh.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/KerrCFAATestimony2013.pdf] http://www.volokh.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/KerrCFAATestimony2013.pdf) You have to go to the computing security industry itself to find even the mildest commentary against the idea of CFAA reform: [http://www.scmagazine.com/the-great-divide-reforming-the-cfaa/article/288844/] http://www.scmagazine.com/the-great-divide-reforming-the-cfaa/article/288844/. But even in that context, the key quote is one from the banking lobby spokesperson who said simply, ?We would prefer that it would stay the way the law is written now.? As long as the financial industry believes that an un-amended CFAA is in its own best interest, the likelihood of change is limited. All the more reason then to focus on a particular paragraph in the court papers filed at the end of March by MIT, requesting that they be allowed to control the release of their internal documents on the handling of the Swartz matter rather than yield to the request of Aaron?s family that such documents be released publicly and immediately. MIT has promised to release the documents once its own internal investigation of the Swartz matter has been closed and identifying names of employees and other sensitive information have been redacted. (See [http://tech.mit.edu/V133/N15/swartz.html] http://tech.mit.edu/V133/N15/swartz.html) Current coverage indicates that the report on that investigation is due in June of this year. In the court filings the following paragraph appeared, ?The MIT documents ?contain candid and confidential discussions of MIT?s computer networks, including possible weak spots in and modifications to be made to the security of those systems. In light of the series of intrusions that have occurred in express retaliation for MIT?s perceived connection to Mr. Swartz?s death, MIT is concerned that the dissemination of these documents will provide a road map for future, and perhaps more serious, attacks on its networks.? The judge subsequently ruled in favor of MIT?s position. From within our own industry, technologist Eric Hellman wrote about why MIT administrators would have been so concerned about the presence of an unknown agent on their network. ?There's nothing worse than having a hidden agent on your computer or on your network. Because even if it's not going anywhere it's not allowed to go, if you don't know where it is or what it's doing, you suspect the worst. You start doubting everything, and everyone, and you can lose your sanity.? ([http://go-to-hellman.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-four-crimes-of-aaron-swartz.html] http://go-to-hellman.blogspot.com/2013/01/the-four-crimes-of-aaron-swartz.html) In an age where $45 million dollar bank heists can occur across two dozen countries and where governments routinely infiltrate the computer systems of other nations, it?s hard to claim that protection isn?t both vital as well as prudent. But it also suggests the most serious questions of the day have still not been adequately answered when it comes to the daily practices of a digital society. What constitutes authorized access? If a site is openly accessible on the Web and unsecured against intrusion, should unauthorized presence on that site be deemed trespass? If a creative mind comes up with a use for content ? one that you as a provider had never thought of ? is that by definition an unauthorized use? What limits exist on tracking user presence and user behavior? While it may seem preposterous on some levels, these are questions that provoke emotional responses. Managing the legal and financial obligations of licensed content while not criminalizing users who are frequently expert in manipulating technology in unforeseen manner is just as complex as it sounds. This is scary stuff and there are no simple answers emerging. We may organize our online behaviors through contracts and terms of use but there are always times ? as Dickens noted in Oliver Twist ? when the law is an ass. JSTOR and MIT deserve some credit for their handling of the challenges posed by the Swartz case, but it won?t be the last time the information community will have to deal with such activities. NFAIS members will want to find a way of working well with all the various constituencies that make up our networked society. 2013 NFAIS Supporters Access Innovations, Inc. Accessible Archives, Inc. American Psychological Association/PsycINFO American Theological Library Association Annual Reviews CAS CrossRef Data Conversion Laboratory, Inc. Defense Technical Information Center Getty Research Institute The H. W. Wilson Foundation Information Today, Inc. IFIS Modern Language Association OCLC Philosopher?s Information Center ProQuest RSuite CMS Scope e-Knowledge Center TEMIS, Inc. Thomson Reuters IP & Science Thomson Reuters IP Solutions Unlimited Priorities LLC ******************************** -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From blawlor at nfais.org Mon Jun 17 12:27:07 2013 From: blawlor at nfais.org (Bonnie Lawlor) Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2013 12:27:07 -0400 Subject: [nfais-l] NFAIS workshop - registration closes 6-20-13 Message-ID: <018c01ce6b77$82ef8aa0$88ce9fe0$@org> NFAIS Workshop: Digital Content: Fostering Usage through Practical Functionalities and Policies. Registration closes at noon on Thursday (Onsite and Virtual registrations available) The registration for the June 21st NFAIS Workshop, Digital Content: Fostering Usage through Practical Functionalities and Policies, will close at noon (EDST) this coming Thursday. This informative workshop will take a look at the product/delivery functionalities and the publisher policies that are both enhancing and impeding digital content usage and the overall user experience and will be held from 9:30am - 4:30pm EDST in Philadelphia, PA. Both onsite and virtual registrations are available (see agenda at: http://nfais.org/event?eventID=525). Why attend? The workshop will attempt to answer the following questions: What content usages are required by students, researchers, and faculty? What are the technical and legal barriers that impede such usage? What are the biggest concerns for institutions and their vendors? And how might all parties think about the issues with the objective of improving the user experience with digital content? Topics Include: . Digital Content Consumption: The Current Landscape . Trends in E-book Use and Acceptance: View from the Trenches . Fostering Use: The Mobile Environment . Fostering Use: Enabling Content Sharing, Annotation, and Review . Usability and Sustainability from a Business Perspective - publisher concerns . Moving Forward: Resolving the Tension Between Content Usability and Business Sustainability Both onsite and virtual registrations are available for individuals and for groups of three or more from the same organization. Group registrations can be a mix of onsite and virtual attendees, with a small food charge added for those attending onsite. Members of Sister Societies (CENDI, ISCTI, AAUP, NISO, ASIS&T, SSP, AAP/PSP, and LYRASIS) are eligible for discounts (see registration form link at: http://nfais.org/event?eventID=525. For more information contact: Jill O'Neill, NFAIS Director, Communication and Planning, 215-893-1561 (phone); 215-893-1564 (fax); mailto:jilloneill at nfais.org or go to http://www.nfais.org/. NFAIS: Serving the Global Information Community -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From blawlor at nfais.org Wed Jun 19 11:04:13 2013 From: blawlor at nfais.org (Bonnie Lawlor) Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2013 11:04:13 -0400 Subject: [nfais-l] Registratation closing tomorrow - NFAIS Wokshop Message-ID: <003001ce6cfe$42f15bd0$c8d41370$@org> Registration Closes Tomorrow for the NFAIS Workshop: Digital Content: Fostering Usage through Practical Publisher Policies and Product Functionalities (Onsite and Virtual registrations available Registration will close at 12:00pm EDST tomorrow, June 20th, for the NFAIS Workshop, Digital Content: Fostering Usage through Practical Publisher Polices and Product Functionalities. This one day event will take a look at the publisher policies and product/delivery functionalities that are both enhancing and impeding digital content usage and the overall user experience. It is scheduled to take place from 9:30am - 4:30pm EDST in Philadelphia, PA and virtual attendance is an option. Why attend? The workshop will attempt to answer the following questions: What content usages are required by students, researchers, and faculty? What are the technical and legal barriers that impede such usage? What are the biggest concerns for institutions and their vendors? And how might all parties think about the issues with the objective of improving the user experience with digital content? Topics Include: . Digital Content Consumption: The Current Landscape . Trends in E-book Use and Acceptance: View from the Trenches . Fostering Use: The Mobile Environment . Fostering Use: Enabling Content Sharing, Annotation, and Review . Usability and Sustainability from a Business Perspective - publisher concerns . Moving Forward: Resolving the Tension Between Content Usability and Business Sustainability Both onsite and virtual registrations are available for individuals and for groups of three or more from the same organization. Group registrations can be a mix of onsite and virtual attendees, with a small food charge added for those attending onsite. Members of Sister Societies (CENDI, ISCTI, AAUP, NISO, ASIS&T, SSP, AAP/PSP, and LYRASIS) are eligible for discounts (see registration form link at: http://nfais.org/event?eventID=525. For more information contact: Jill O'Neill, NFAIS Director, Communication and Planning, 215-893-1561 (phone); 215-893-1564 (fax); mailto:jilloneill at nfais.org or go to http://www.nfais.org/. NFAIS: Serving the Global Information Community -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded and charset-unspecified text was scrubbed... Name: ATT00121.txt URL: From blawlor at nfais.org Wed Jun 26 16:34:38 2013 From: blawlor at nfais.org (Bonnie Lawlor) Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2013 16:34:38 -0400 Subject: [nfais-l] NFAIS Obituary - Honorary Fellow Dennis A. Norlin Message-ID: <010401ce72ac$9450d5b0$bcf28110$@org> NFAIS MOURNS THE PASSING OF HONORARY FELLOW, DENNIS A. NORLIN It is with deep sadness that we report the recent death on June 7, 2013 of Dennis A. Norlin, a former Executive Director of the American Theological Library Association (ATLA), an NFAIS member organization. Dennis was one of founders of the NFAIS Humanities Roundtable and a long-time supporter of the Federation. He was inducted as an NFAIS Honorary Fellow in 2011. Dennis had deep roots in the Humanities and Information Communities. He was a professor of Philosophy and Religion at Purdue University and South Dakota State University (1976-1988), a pastor at St. Olaf Lutheran Church in Ft. Dodge, Iowa, and Zion Lutheran Church in Philo, Ill., Director of Pastoral Services at Trinity Regional Hospital in Ft. Dodge, Iowa, Assistant Undergraduate Librarian at the University of Illinois (1988-1993), the Director of the Devereaux Library at the South Dakota School of Mines and Technology in Rapid City, S.D., (1993-1995) and, as mentioned earlier, the Executive Director of the American Theological Library Association in Chicago, Ill. from 1995 until his retirement in 2010. Dennis earned several degrees including a BA from Augustana College (1964), a B.Divinity from Luther Seminary (1968), a PhD in Protestant Theology from The University of Iowa (1972) and a MLS from the University of Illinois (1989). His areas of scholarship included the theology of Alfred North Whitehead, Process Thought and American Church History. A memorial service for Dennis will be held at Feast of Victory Lutheran Church, Acme, on Saturday, June 29, 2013, at 7 p.m. At a future date (to be determined), ATLA will host a gathering in downtown Chicago in honor of Dennis. Some of the Norlin family members will attend as honored guests. Details will be provided. Members of the NFAIS Humanities Roundtable will dedicate their 2013 Workshop in honor of Dennis. It will be hosted by ATLA on September 30, 2013 in Chicago and will close with a toast in celebration of his life and his many contributions to the Humanities and to NFAIS. Bonnie Lawlor Executive Director National Federation of Advanced Information Services (NFAIS) 1518 Walnut Street, Suite 1004 Philadelphia, PA 19102 1-215-893-1561 Phone 1-215-893-1564 Fax blawlor at nfais.org www.nfais.org -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: