Comments and Links from June 19, 2015 virtual meeting, Legal Frameworks for Patron Privacy

Links shared by Alison Macrina in her lightning talk:

https://libraryfreedomproject.org/canary/
http://www.librarian.net/technicality/
https://canarywatch.org/
https://canarywatch.org/adobe/
https://www.adobe.com/legal/lawenforcementrequests/transparency.html
https://firstlook.org/code/project/autocanary/
https://firstlook.org/canary

WebEx Chat:

06/19/2015    13:03:02 PM    from Bobbi Newman to All Participants:
I'm here. I do have to leave the web conference a bit early today but I'll follow along on Twitter 
 
06/19/2015    13:05:01 PM    from Abigail Wickes to All Participants:
hi, my name is Abigail and I'm an analyst for one of the marketing teams at Oxford University Press. Looking forward to meeting people in SF soon.
 
06/19/2015    13:05:22 PM    from Andrew Pace to All Participants:
Hello! This is Andrew Pace, Executive Director of Management Services at OCLC
 
06/19/2015    13:05:28 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
David Greene, Civil Liberties Director , Electronic Frontier Foundation.
 
06/19/2015    13:05:40 PM    from Todd Carpenter to All Participants:
Hello Everyone, This is Todd Carpenter, I'm the Executive Director of NISO and PI on this grant project.
 
06/19/2015    13:05:53 PM    from Deborah Caldwell-Stone to All Participants:
Deborah Caldwell-Stone - deputy director, ALA Office for Intellectual Freedom
 
06/19/2015    13:05:59 PM    from Anne Campbell to All Participants:
Hi, Anne Campbell - I am the Library Automation Manager at EBSCO responsible for ILS Services and workflow integration.
 
06/19/2015    13:06:08 PM    from Kyan Chuong to Host (privately):
Hi this is Kyan. I'm a reference librarian at the National Library of Medicine
 
06/19/2015    13:06:09 PM    from Eric Hellman to All Participants:
Eric Hellman, President, Gluejar Inc. I blog at http://go-to-hellman.blogspot.com/
 
06/19/2015    13:06:10 PM    from Galen Charlton to All Participants:
Galen Charlton, Infrastructure and Added Services Manager at Equinox Software and contributor to Koha and Evergreen
 
from Mike Robinson to All Attendees:
Mike Robinson, Privacy Chair, ALA Intellectual Freedom Committee
 
06/19/2015    13:06:13 PM    from Richard Entlich to All Participants:
Good afternoon everyone. I'm Rich Entlich, and I do analysis of collections and their use at Cornell University Library.
 
06/19/2015    13:06:19 PM    from Peter Murray to All Participants:
Hello, everyone.  Peter Murray @ LYRASIS.  My current thoughts on the NISO privacy group are here:  My View of the NISO Patron Privacy Working Group | Disruptive Library Technology Jester http://dltj.org/article/views-of-niso-patron-privacy-working-group/
 
06/19/2015    13:06:20 PM    from David Lee King to All Participants:
Hi! David Lee King here. Digital Services Director at Topeka & Shawnee County Public Library and owner at davidleeking.com. FYI - I'll need to leave early today for another meeting. Busy busy busy!
 
06/19/2015    13:06:31 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
Hello. Lisa Hinchliffe, U of IL Coord of Info Lit + of Strategic Planning, member of NISO group
 
from Cliff Lynch to All Attendees:
I'm Cliff Lynch, the Director of the Coalition for Networked Information
 
from Micah Altman to All Attendees:
Hi, Micah Altman, here. Director of Research, MIT Libraries; Head/Scientist Program on Information Science; Senior Fellow, Brookings Institution... Currently conducting research in information privacy. Previously, acted as a information security officer role within Harvard.
 
from Anthony Targan to All Attendees:
Hi, this is Anthony Targan, senior corporate counsel for ProQuest.
 
06/19/2015    13:13:01 PM    from Bobbi Newman to All Participants:
Hello. Bobbi Nemwan 
Bobbi Newman is a writer, consultant, library advocate, and an international public speaker. Current PhD student. www.bobbinewman.net
 
06/19/2015    13:23:35 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
And US libraries license content from non-US providers : )
 
06/19/2015    13:29:36 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
Thanks - just wanted more than my ears ... :)
 
06/19/2015    13:38:02 PM    from Andrew Pace to All Participants:
Great overview!
 
06/19/2015    13:38:13 PM    from Bobbi Newman to All Participants:
a lot to think about! Thank you Deborah
 
06/19/2015    13:38:26 PM    from Eric Hellman to All Participants:
Does anyone think that  digital library records in California are more private than anywhere else?
 
06/19/2015    13:39:31 PM    from Mike Robinson to All Participants:
there are a lot of states that are strengthening confidentiality of student records, maybe libraries can piggy back on that movement to strengthen library confidentiality
 
06/19/2015    13:40:19 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
Any analysis of differences among the different state laws? 
 
06/19/2015    13:40:27 PM    from Mike Robinson to All Participants:
well, I would rather live in a state that has laws against murder even if it does not eliminate murders in that state
 
06/19/2015    13:40:59 PM    from Eric Hellman to All Participants:
and do terms of service absolve providers from privacy laws?
 
06/19/2015    13:41:54 PM    from Mike Robinson to All Participants:
i think it would require case law (i.e. lawsuits) in california and missouri in order to enforce compliance
 
06/19/2015    13:48:39 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
great question eric !
 
06/19/2015    13:50:58 PM    from David Lee King to All Participants:
I don't think Google analytics shows personally identifiable info ... ?
 
06/19/2015    13:51:17 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
David - all depends on how PII is defined. 
 
06/19/2015    13:54:49 PM    from Galen Charlton to All Participants:
And on details of the web application - e.g., imagine (a hopefully theoretical example of an ILS) that has account pages accessible at URLs like http://library.example.org/patron-acount/galen-charlton
 
06/19/2015    13:56:35 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
What is "library material" is another term that is tricky
 
06/19/2015    13:57:38 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
free seems covered in #1 here
 
from Laura Quilter to All Attendees:
Hi -- Laura Quilter, Information Policy Attorney & Librarian, at University of Massachusetts, Amherst.
 
06/19/2015    13:58:18 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
It would be really really great if librries would interpret theseprivacy protections as broadly as possible even if it were unclear that the law required it. Indeed, I would hope that the libraries would protect patron data and library records even in states without thesse laws.
 
06/19/2015    14:00:27 PM    from Andrew Pace to All Participants:
There is risk that libraries will paint themselves into a corner without services that provide the kind of privacy-preserved data that will allow them to modify and improve their service offerings.  The ILS is not a fully adequate customer relationship management service.  And real CRMs are not built for privacy.
 
06/19/2015    14:00:41 PM    from David Lee King to All Participants:
Wow - multi-state distance ed does get messy fast.
 
06/19/2015    14:01:07 PM    from Kyan Chuong to Host (privately):
"the effectiveness of state regulations to address reader privacy may become problematic when overrun with multiple, diverse state mandates"
 
06/19/2015    14:02:08 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
One of the main purpose of these laws is to protect libraries from compelled disclosure by law enforcement and private litigants, to give y'all some legal weight to resist such dislcosures. Libraries, through NISO, can adopt best practices that will be consistent across state borders to address the inconsistency concerns.
 
06/19/2015    14:03:01 PM    from Jason Griffey to All Panelists:
++ David, agreed
 
06/19/2015    14:04:27 PM    from Kyan Chuong to Host (privately):
"A New Approach to Digital Reader Privacy: State 
Regulations and Their Protection of Digital Book Data" by Andrew A. Proia
 
06/19/2015    14:04:59 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
To David Lee King - I'm current in grad classes ... in more than one online class, my fellow students have been in as many as 10-12 other countries.
 
06/19/2015    14:05:10 PM    from Eric Hellman to All Participants:
The library records laws seem to be focused on legal process as the primary threat to user privacy, and not at all imagining that private actors, advertisers, and data resellers might be a threat. Not to mention incompetance.
 
06/19/2015    14:08:55 PM    from Jason Griffey to All Panelists:
Good point, Cliff and Eric. Private actors are mostly controled in this space via contract law, though...which makes having good boilerplate for libraries to use, and checklists for them to use against proposed contracts, important tools. 
 
06/19/2015    14:09:28 PM    from Mike Robinson to All Participants:
i think we need a mult-prong approach to protecting privacy, including law, professional ethics, library policies, standards & best practices, digitial literacy, technical measures, etc.  Law won't solve it but it is part of the puzzle
 
06/19/2015    14:12:16 PM    from Deborah Caldwell-Stone to All Participants:
Absolutely correct, Mike.   
 
06/19/2015    14:12:21 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
Yes. Libraries need to be really aware of the privacy implications of all third party services offered. There should be a market for library services that are privacy-protective, not the other way around.  So yes, I agree that libraries should maximize patron privacy through its contracts with third party vendors. If libraries di this collectively, their market ower could push vendors in the right direction. 
 
06/19/2015    14:15:56 PM    from Deborah Caldwell-Stone to All Participants:
That was a goal of the MO librarians - have a legal ground for incorporating privacy protections into their vendor contracts.
 
06/19/2015    14:19:45 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
Re thrid-party doctrine, it is not clear, and should not be assumed, how that doctrine applies to the full range of electronic records routinely gathered by web-based services. The courts have been receptive to limiting the thrid party doctrine for "new" technologies. But there is no clear path here yet.
 
06/19/2015    14:21:37 PM    from Deborah Caldwell-Stone to All Participants:
Daniel Solove's book "Nothing to Hide: The False Tradeoff between Privacy and Security" advances a First Amendment ground for protecting readers' records from compelled disclosure
 
06/19/2015    14:21:49 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
Laura-- thanks for mentioning the Autonomy theory. Autonomy has been one of the principal free speech theories for a very long time, and the privacy and intellectual freedom concerns here are closely related to that. So I only dispute that it's a"new" justification.
 
from Michael Zimmer to All Attendees:
along with a focus on autonomy, I also advocate for a focus on human dignity (more aligned with EU/Canadian privacy frameworks)
 
from Michael Zimmer to All Attendees:
this also aligns with Nissenbaum's contextual integrity, where it is the violation of contextual norms that is more meaningful than any particular harm
 
06/19/2015    14:26:40 PM    from Peter Murray to All Participants:
Furrowed brow.  Thinking...
 
06/19/2015    14:28:00 PM    from Galen Charlton to All Participants:
A slightly inchoate thought: seclusion as a privacy component has a connection to library responsibilities re CAN-SPAM and patrons' consent to receive notifications
 
06/19/2015    14:35:14 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
There is case law in the US regarding End User Licensing Agreements and terms of Services, but it is all over the place and tends to be highly specific to the particular languauge involved.  The mere fact that a EULA or TOS requries  click-through to read it, does not make it per se unenforceable. So libraries do need 
to be able to inform patrons about any privacy-threatening services they might offer.
 
06/19/2015    14:37:38 PM    from Mike Robinson to All Participants:
in linux desktop distros there is the idea of a set of "sane defaults" in terms of configurations and applications the user recieves who can then change them to whatever.  Maybe libraries can some up with list of "sane defaults" around privacy
 
06/19/2015    14:38:27 PM    from Bobbi Newman to All Participants:
interesting that the default seems to be the belief that library users don't care about privacy because recent reports indicate that they do
 
06/19/2015    14:39:02 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
I agree with y'all.  If full privacy is the default, we can tell users the benefits of giving up some of their privacy, rather than making them reclaim it (which will seem burdensome).
 
06/19/2015    14:43:30 PM    from Mike Robinson to All Participants:
users care about privacy but are tired/fatigued/initimidated by steps required to protect their privacy
 
06/19/2015    14:44:03 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
I would hope that libraries can retain users by explaining to them the costs and benefits of the services you offer that for which they might sacrifice some privacy. We layfolsk make these choices all the time with social media, etc.  LIbraries are in a great position to help their patrons make informed choices here. 
 
06/19/2015    14:44:07 PM    from Mike Robinson to All Participants:
they are also addicted to some conviences which currently require a sacrifice of privacy
 
06/19/2015    14:46:24 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
At EFF, we educate internet users about these tradeoffs all the time and actually find people quite receptive to them and eager to learn. I really think libraries can do this too.  
 
from Laura Quilter to All Attendees:
I really like this point, Mike Robinson -- because it suggests that libraries can develop or work with services that offer the same conveniences but without the sacrifice of privacy.
 
from Laura Quilter to All Attendees:
(For instance, library search engines could be set to duckduckgo instead of google)
 
from Laura Quilter to All Attendees:
And Alison is saying it just as I was typing it!
 
06/19/2015    14:47:38 PM    from Bobbi Newman to All Participants:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/google/11681955/Asking-Google-What-happened-to-the-dinosaurs-leads-to-an-controversial-answer.html
 
06/19/2015    14:47:46 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
Ironically, some libraries are now purchasing data reports on their local communities from marketing firms - feeding a non-privacy respecting industry rather than using data we have about own community from interactions. 
 
06/19/2015    14:48:05 PM    from Bobbi Newman to All Participants:
David Greene - I agree with you. I think people will be receptive 
 
06/19/2015    14:48:06 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
+1 to Alison
 
06/19/2015    14:48:28 PM    from Alison Macrina to Host (privately):
+1 to what you just said too, David
 
06/19/2015    14:48:52 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
Anyone know a "privacy prioritizing" alternative to Google Scholar? Bc that's the product my users find value in ... 
 
06/19/2015    14:49:00 PM    from NISO HQ to All Participants:
From Alison Macrina: +1 to what you just said too, David
 
06/19/2015    14:51:01 PM    from Mike Robinson to All Participants:
i think summon, eds, ex libris when implemented correctly provide good alternative to google scholar.  however, i would not claim they are more privacy centric and they are definitely more expensive
 
06/19/2015    14:51:40 PM    from Jason Griffey to All Panelists:
FWIW, the biggest technology company in the world is currently marketing the hell out of Privacy as a differentiator to Google products...Apple is doubling down on privacy in communication as a major differentiator, and are talking about it. 
 
06/19/2015    14:52:17 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
I think you'll run into probelms if you treat these as binary choices: "Google always bad" "privacy always good". There may be excelelnt reasons to use a Google service. Libraries can just help educate patrons so they can make their own cost-benefit decision. Patrons really like learning stuff at libraries. You have a naturally receptive audience.
 
06/19/2015    14:52:39 PM    from Jason Griffey to All Panelists:
I only point that out as a possible secondary source of similar messaging
 
06/19/2015    14:52:43 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
Mike - FWIW, those discovery services have not been found = by our user population, are more expensive, and don't think they are private at all! :) 
 
06/19/2015    14:53:32 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
David - I abolutely agree. But, Allison was suggesting we suggest alternatives. I don't have a more-privacy-respecting alternative to suggest for GS. If someone did, I just wanted to know. 
 
from Laura Quilter to All Attendees:
Agreeing w/ Lisa -- Data is still held by individual companies.
 
06/19/2015    14:53:55 PM    from NISO HQ to All Participants:
From Jason Griffey: FWIW, the biggest technology company in the world is currently marketing the hell out of Privacy as a differentiator to Google products...Apple is doubling down on privacy in communication as a major differentiator, and are talking about it. 
 
06/19/2015    14:54:11 PM    from NISO HQ to All Participants:
From Jason Griffey: I only point that out as a possible secondary source of similar messaging
 
06/19/2015    14:54:59 PM    from Mike Robinson to All Participants:
lisa, agree.  at our library we have found google scholar use has tappered off over the years as we have had a summon search box on our front page.  i also find summon more comprehensive but that's a reflection of our collections
 
from Cliff Lynch to All Attendees:
It's also worth keeping in mind that from an individual's point of view, the need or desire for privacy is probably highly variable from one context to the next. 
 
06/19/2015    14:55:22 PM    from Galen Charlton to All Participants:
A thought on the question of how to present opt-in options: is anybody here in a position to conduct A/B testing of various ways of presenting the options to a newly registered patron?  More broadly, I see an opportunity for the library UX folks to help.
 
06/19/2015    14:56:00 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
Hi Lisa. I agree. Libraries can be agreat resource for suggesting alternatives. But it can be tought to keep current on them.  Alison's org does a great job of keeping track of these so I encourage y'all to go to her as a resource.  We (EFF) have some infom on our website as well - but not focused on libraries.
 
from Laura Quilter to All Attendees:
thank you deborah hurley!
 
06/19/2015    14:57:01 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
David - yes, aware of all this. So, what do we do when there isn't an alternative? Users not happy if librarians start "shaming" them for using less private systems ... : ) 
 
06/19/2015    14:57:50 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
Galen - great idea ... would also be great if could do a simultaneous implementation across multiple libraries. Shared method, etc.
 
06/19/2015    14:58:11 PM    from Peter Murray to All Participants:
YEs
 
06/19/2015    14:58:13 PM    from Bobbi Newman to All Participants:
yes!
 
06/19/2015    15:00:50 PM    from Deborah Caldwell-Stone to All Participants:
Galen -Yes.
 www.eff.org/who-has-your-back-government-data-requests-2015
06/19/2015    15:03:18 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
Lisa: You're right. Sometimes there are not great privacy options. But hopefully we can all help create amarket for better options.  Also -- no need at all to privacy shame.  It is comepltely fine for a patron to make the informed decision to sacrifice privacy. And some patroins really migth not care about their privacy in certain situations, and that's OK and (so no shame necessary). LIbraries make different judgment than their patrons about sors of things. This need be no different. (And I know you don't disagree with that).
 
06/19/2015    15:05:45 PM    from Galen Charlton to All Participants:
Which is a reason why providing the ability to selectively manage stored data is nice: I may not care if you all know that I read Das Kapital, but that I've read Isaac Asimov is right out!
 
06/19/2015    15:06:10 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
https://www.eff.org/who-has-your-back-government-data-requests-2015
 
06/19/2015    15:06:32 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
That was the link to our Who Has Your Back Report Alison just mentioned
 
06/19/2015    15:07:07 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
David - I've seen a lot of librarians engaging in privacy shaming. In fact, I've seen at least two advocate it as how we should get users to be private (which is so paternalistic and controlling ... argh). Hope we don't go there collectively!
 
06/19/2015    15:08:09 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
I think we must be especially careful to not conflate "choose to not be private" with "not caring about privacy" ... 
 
from Laura Quilter to All Attendees:
Lisa -- yes
 
06/19/2015    15:09:31 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
Lisa: agree!
 
06/19/2015    15:15:48 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
https://www.eff.org/privacybadger
 
06/19/2015    15:16:24 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere-node
 
06/19/2015    15:16:33 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
Great example of how hardware/personal devices can also add to the challenge. 
 
06/19/2015    15:17:42 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
and if your laptop camera is still uncovered https://supporters.eff.org/shop/laptop-camera-cover-set 
 
from Laura Quilter to All Attendees:
Bobbi - Socioeconomic differences & implications thereof. Relevant to public versus academic libraries, again.
 
06/19/2015    15:18:13 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
and y'all can make your owen laptop cover stickers to distribute to your patrons
 
06/19/2015    15:19:00 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
I'm thinking even more about smartphones where the interplay of settings can be so complex... 
 
06/19/2015    15:20:47 PM    from Galen Charlton to All Participants:
Lisa: good point, especially considering that smart phones may be the only computing device some of our patrons have
 
06/19/2015    15:24:18 PM    from Peter Murray to All Participants:
I think the cascade idea is a good one, too.  It is related to the "Privacy Controls Checklist" idea that I proposed.
 
06/19/2015    15:24:43 PM    from Peter Murray to All Participants:
Something along the lines of "These are the most effective things you could do.  Once you are done with these, then move onto these other thing."
 
from Laura Quilter to All Attendees:
applause to alison. 
 
06/19/2015    15:34:47 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
Working at UIUC (Salaita case) I've also been thinking a lot about how FOIA could end up accidentally breaching privacy ... 
 
from Alison Macrina to All Attendees:
I talked about the Patriot Act!
 
06/19/2015    15:35:26 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
still hearing you
 
from Laura Quilter to All Attendees:
Lisa Hinchcliffe: Many of the library privacy statutes are specifically about FOIA exemption. I think there are exemptions in most privacy statutes, but the "accidental" piece is for real. 
 
from Laura Quilter to All Attendees:
This is where a negligence standard in connection with data rights could be helpful. 
 
06/19/2015    15:37:19 PM    from Deborah Caldwell-Stone to All Participants:
Library confidentiality statutes almost always function as a specific exemption from FOIA requirements for the covered records/transactions. 
 
06/19/2015    15:38:36 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
Deborah - yes, as long as the request comes to the library. But, many times the query is to a central office for "all emails from/to xyz person on these dates" ... will that unit think to excise out emails with a librarian about a research query? 
 
06/19/2015    15:39:51 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
That's why I say "accidentally" breaching 
 
06/19/2015    15:39:57 PM    from Deborah Caldwell-Stone to All Participants:
It would speak to the need for library administration to notify & work with central offices/university counsel on the specific requirements applicable to library inquiries
 
from Laura Quilter to All Attendees:
A FOIA/records administrator should at a minimum be familiar with the applicable statutes. Not being so is, IMO, per se negligence.
 
06/19/2015    15:40:53 PM    from Deborah Caldwell-Stone to All Participants:
Or exemptions...
 
06/19/2015    15:41:01 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
Well, there are about to be 9000 pages of correspondance released here at UIUC ... will be looking through with this lens. : )
 
06/19/2015    15:41:46 PM    from Deborah Caldwell-Stone to All Participants:
Somewhere there should be some hapless associate(s) at a law firm doing doc review...
 
06/19/2015    15:43:18 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
I'm sure there are! :) 
 
06/19/2015    15:45:17 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
I have to sign off now. See you in all here (in San Francisco).
 
06/19/2015    15:45:44 PM    from Deborah Caldwell-Stone to All Participants:
David will be speaking at ALA Annual if y'all are interested ...
 
06/19/2015    15:46:17 PM    from David Greene to All Participants:
and at Alsion's conference too!
 
06/19/2015    15:49:10 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
Just so I get it in here ... the ALA Intellectual Freedom Committee is doing some work in this space too: http://connect.ala.org/node/64527
 
06/19/2015    15:49:51 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
And ANdrew Asher and I leading a related conversation at ALA - http://alaac15.ala.org/node/28724
 
06/19/2015    15:50:40 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
There is a lot at ALA this time! More than in a long time!
 
06/19/2015    15:51:02 PM    from Mike Robinson to All Participants:
this is good, multiple groups interested in privacy
 
06/19/2015    15:53:25 PM    from Galen Charlton to All Participants:
And I'll also make a shameless plug for the LITA Patron Privacy Technologies IG meeting on 6/27 http://alaac15.ala.org/node/29347
 
06/19/2015    15:55:13 PM    from Mike Robinson to All Participants:
i'll be there!
 
06/19/2015    15:55:51 PM    from Deborah Caldwell-Stone to All Participants:
I've compiled a complete list of Privacy Stuff at ALA Annual here:
 
06/19/2015    15:55:54 PM    from Deborah Caldwell-Stone to All Participants:
https://chooseprivacyweek.org/privacy-ala-annual-2015-in-san-francisco/
 
06/19/2015    15:56:48 PM    from Deborah Caldwell-Stone to All Participants:
Stuff = professional jargon
 
06/19/2015    15:57:00 PM    from Lisa Hinchliffe to All Participants:
Stuff seems very accurate!
 
from Alison Macrina to All Attendees:
this is awesome Deborah!
 
06/19/2015    15:57:07 PM    from Mike Robinson to All Participants:
thanks for list, Deborah
 
from Alison Macrina to All Attendees:
I'm speaking on privacy/security Saturday at 4:30 with Blake from LYRASIS
 
06/19/2015    15:58:40 PM    from Deborah Caldwell-Stone to All Participants:
Note that Neil Richards will be talking about intellectual privacy at the same session where David Greene is talking about surveillance http://alaac15.ala.org/node/30070
 
06/19/2015    15:59:38 PM    from Galen Charlton to All Participants:
What is this talk of early birds at ALA? I was not under the impression that anybody actually sleeps at Annual. ;)
 
from Alison Macrina to All Attendees:
here's my event too Digital Rights in Libraries – Library Freedom Project: https://libraryfreedomproject.org/digital-rights-in-libraries/