1,721,001 research outputs found
Open Access, Open Science, Open Society
No full textOpen Access’ main goal is not the subversion of publishers’ role as driving actors in an oligopolistic market characterised by reduced competition and higher prices. OA’s main function is to be found somewhere else, namely in the ability to subvert the power to control science’s governance and its future directions (Open Science), a power that is more often found within the academic institutions rather than outside. By decentralising and opening-up not just the way in which scholarship is published but also the way in which it is assessed, OA removes the barriers that helped turn science into an intellectual oligopoly even before an economic one. The goal of this paper is to demonstrate that Open Access is a key enabler of Open Science, which in turn will lead to a more Open Society. Furthermore, the paper argues that while legislative interventions play an important role in the top-down regulation of Open Access, legislators currently lack an informed and systematic vision on the role of Open Access in science and society. In this historical phase, other complementary forms of intervention (bottom-up) appear much more “informed” and effective. This paper, which intends to set the stage for future research, identifies a few pieces of the puzzle: the relationship between formal and informal norms in the field of Open Science and how these impact on intellectual property rights, the protection of personal data, the assessment of science and the technology employed for the communication of science
Security Analysis and Legal Compliance Checking for the Design of Privacy-friendly Information Systems
No full textNowadays, most of business practices involve personal data-processing of customers and employees. This is strictly regulated by legislation to protect the rights of the data subject. Enforcing regulation into enterprise information system is a non-trivial task that requires an interdisciplinary approach. This paper presents a declarative framework to support the specification of information system designs, purpose-aware access control policies, and the legal requirements derived from the European Data Protection Directive. This allows for compliance checking via a reduction to policy refinement that is supported by available automated tools. We briefly discuss the results of the compliance analysis with a prototype tool on a simple but realistic scenario about the processing of personal data to produce salary slips of employees in an Italian organization
Looking for a Feasible form of Software Protection : Copyright or Patent, is that the Question?
No full textSoftware presents important aspects of heterogeneity compared to other intellectual works governed by Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs). This paper focuses on the analysis of the two main forms of software protection (copyright and patent), providing some considerations towards the proposal of a feasible system
Open Access to Legal Scholarship and Open Archives: Towards a Better Future? = L’Open Access per la dottrina giuridica e gli Open Archives: verso un futuro migliore?
No full textThe logic of Open Access (OA) is gradually spreading in the scientific community, mainly thanks to the help of important areas of public libraries. OA basically describes a phenomenon that sees many scientific communities publishing through the Internet their results (papers, articles, books, etc.) on archives accessible to anyone (and without payment of a price). OA seems to have the possibility to become a very powerful tool for the dissemination of scientific knowledge. As part of the general phenomenon called “Transfer of Knowledge” (broader category than the more famous “Technology Transfer”), which sees universities and research centers increasingly interested in showing in the market the quality of their scientific production through various activities aimed at exploiting the foreground of their researches (IPRs, licenses, spin-off, etc.), OA plays a pivotal role: it could make transfer of knowledge - previously conveyed (under payment) by private intermerdiaries - more transparent, fluid, and accessible to anyone. Despite the initial delay, the OA movement is quickly growing in importance for legal scholarship. Nonetheless, the institutional arrangements and the technological features of OA to legal scholarship are variegated and pose a vast array of problems. OA to legal scholarship changes the form of the legal publication - e.g., we face new kinds of publications such as blog posts or Wikipedia articles - and shifts the “quality selection” function of the publication system from traditional intermediaries (publishers, learning societies, editorial boards, etc.) to new ones (e.g., search engines, social software, Open Archives, etc.) and readers. In this perspective, a prominent issue is represented by the Open Archives. Open Archives, as well as other OA tools (OA journals), increase the reputation of authors and improve the future impact of their articles. A vast literature – although referring to other subjects - shows that papers deposited in OA repositories are cited more often than those which are not. Moreover, the OA repositories enable a new form of evaluation process. On one hand, it is possible to develop innovative bibliometric indicators. On the other hand, through them you can easily trace the entire life of a scientific product: for example, the OA repositories will allow the display of all the evolution stages of an article from the presentation at a conference to its final version. Given the enormous power of the Net and the rise of these OA repositories, we are still suffering - especially within the Italian context – the low number of uploads and the lack of innovative tools fit to navigate through the OA legal materials. The governance of legal Open Archives should pay attention to the following main features: interoperability, redundancy, multilingualism, evaluation criteria and tools, policies. This kind of issues can be solved only by using an interdisciplinary law and technology approach which clarifies the various, complex aspects of the relationship between Open Archives and legal scholarship. ITALIAN ABSTRACT Da qualche anno si sta gradualmente diffondendo all’interno della comunità scientifica, grazie anche all’impegno di operatori delle biblioteche pubbliche, la logica dell’“Open Access” (OA). Questa espressione descrive un fenomeno che vede molti ricercatori pubblicare attraverso Internet i risultati della propria ricerca (saggi, articoli, libri, etc.) su archivi accessibili a chiunque (e senza il pagamento di un prezzo). L’OA è sicuramente destinato a diventare uno strumento molto potente per la diffusione della conoscenza scientifica. Come parte del più generale fenomeno chiamato “trasferimento della conoscenza”, che vede le università e i centri di ricerca sempre più interessati a dimostrare la qualità della, propria, produzione scientifica attraverso varie attività volte alla valorizzazione delle loro ricerche, l’OA gioca un ruolo fondamentale: esso potrebbe rendere il trasferimento di conoscenze – prima veicolato, a pagamento, dagli intermediari privati - più trasparente, fluido ed accessibile a tutti. Nonostante il ritardo iniziale, il movimento OA sta rapidamente acquisendo importanza per la dottrina giuridica; ciò sebbene gli assetti istituzionali e le caratteristiche tecnologiche proprie di questo nuovo fenomeno siano variegati e pongano una vasta gamma di problemi. L’OA cambia, infatti, la forma stessa delle pubblicazioni scientifiche – affiorano, così, nuovi “generi letterari” quali post sui blog o articoli di Wikipedia – e determina uno spostamento della funzione di selezione della qualità del sistema di pubblicazione che dai tradizionali intermediari (editori, società scientifiche, comitati editoriali, etc.) viene sempre più svolta da nuovi soggetti (motori di ricerca, social software, Open Archives, etc.), quando non direttamente dai lettori stessi. Gli Open Archives, così come altri strumenti di OA (riviste ad accesso aperto), aumentano la fama degli autori ed incrementano l’impatto (citazionale) futuro dei loro articoli. Una vasta letteratura dimostra che i documenti depositati in archivi OA sono citati più spesso di quelli che, invece, non lo sono. Inoltre, tali archivi permettono di porre in essere una nuova forma di processo di valutazione: da un lato, è possibile sviluppare innovativi indicatori bibliometrici; dall’altro, consentono di tracciare facilmente l’intera vita di un prodotto scientifico (ad es., un repository OA consente la visualizzazione di tutte le fasi dell’evoluzione di un articolo: dalla presentazione in una conferenza alla sua versione finale). Nonostante l’enorme importanza che l’uso della Rete sta acquisendo e l’ascesa di questi archivi aperti, stiamo, però, ancora soffrendo – soprattutto all’interno del contesto italiano – il basso numero di depositi e la mancanza di strumenti idonei a navigare attraverso i materiali giuridici distributi secondo la logica dell’OA. La governance di questi innovativi Open Archives dovrebbe essere volta all’incorporazione dei seguenti principi: interoperabilità, ridondanza, multilinguismo, utilizzo di nuovi criteri e strumenti di valutazione, adozione di nuove policy. Questo tipo di problematiche possono trovare soluzione solo tramite l’utilizzo di un approccio interdisciplinare di “diritto e tecnologia” che chiarisca i vari e complessi aspetti del rapporto tra gli “archivi aperti” ed il mondo della dottrina giuridica
Going Beyond Counting First Authors in Author Co-citation Analysis
Full text linkThe present study examines one of the fundamental aspects of author co-citation analysis (ACA) - the way co-citation
counts are defined. Co-citation counting provides the data on which all subsequent statistical analyses and mappings
are based, and we compare ACA results based on two different types of co-citation counting - the traditional type that
only counts the first one among a cited work's authors on the one hand and a non-traditional type that takes into
account the first 5 authors of a cited work on the other hand. Results indicate that the picture produced through this non-traditional author co-citation counting contains more coherent author groups and is therefore considerably clearer. However, this picture represents fewer specialties in the research field being studied than that produced through the traditional first-author co-citation counting when the same number of top-ranked authors is selected and analyzed. Reasons for these effects are discussed
Fascicolo sanitario elettronico e protezione dei dati personali
No full textL’opera è volta ad analizzare l’impatto che i nuovi strumenti di gestione dei dati sanitari stanno determinando con riferimento alla tutela dei dati personali. L’implementazione di sistemi di gestione dei dati posti in essere dalle aziende sanitarie al fine di potenziare le loro capacità di cura e prevenzione rappresenta un momento decisivo del più generale fenomeno della digitalizzazione che sta caratterizzando sempre più anche l’ambito sanitario. Questi sistemi sono infrastrutture informatiche che prendono il nome di «Fascicolo Sanitario Elettronico» (FSE). Il lavoro intende far proprio un approccio metodologico basato sull’interdisciplinarità e persegue l’obiettivo di costruire i presupposti per dialogare, oltre che con i giuristi, anche con medici, informatici, amministratori pubblici e privati, nonché con tutte le figure professionali che, in generale, sono coinvolte nello sviluppo dei nuovi sistemi di sanità elettronica. ENGLISH VERSION The work aims to analyze the impact that new tools for managing health data are determining with regard to the protection of personal data. The implementation of data management systems by health care providers in order to enhance their care and prevention abilities represents a pivotal step in the more general phenomenon of digitization which is increasingly characterizing the entire health sector. These systems are infrastructures that are called “Electronic Health Record” (EHR). Methodologically, the work intends to adopt an interdisciplinary approach and aims to build the conditions for dialogue not only with lawyers, but also with doctors, computer scientists, public and private administrators, and, in general, all the professional operators who are involved in the development of new e-health systems. La prima edizione di questo libro © Copyright 2011 by Università degli Studi di Trento, Via Belenzani 12 - 38122 Trento, è pubblicata con Creative Commons Attribuzione-Non commerciale-Non opere derivate 2.5 Italia License. Maggiori informazioni circa la licenza all’URL: <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.5/it/
D5.5 Guidelines & FAQs (GM) industries – Final version
Full text linkAs one of its main endeavours, reCreating Europe aims at engaging with its stakeholders to produce deliverables that effectively contribute to the state of the art of research and possibly build a regulatory framework towards a culturally diverse, accessible creative Europe. With a specific focus on cultural heritage institutions like galleries, libraries, archives, and museums (GLAMs), the activities of WP5 precisely address the needs of such organisations through a mixed methodology that combines theoretical research with empirical analysis, e.g., online questionnaires and semi-structured interviews, which most WP5 deliverables have or will be based on.
The present output, which comprises a descriptive analysis of the legal framework (part 2), a set of Frequently Asked Questions (part 3) and Guidelines (part 4), all focusing on digital preservation, the use of orphan works and use of out-of-commerce works, precisely follows this approach. The work builds upon preceding deliverables D5.1 Report on the existing legal framework for Galleries and Museums (GM) in EU1 and D5.2 Report on the existing legal framework for Libraries and Archives (LA) in the EU.2 Both these reports were produced based on the research carried out under T5.1 European Legal Framework for GLAM industries: from closure to openness.
The goal of this deliverable is to produce a first draft of Guidelines and FAQs to help GLAMs deal with some selected issues arising from digitisation. The draft will be circulated during the upcoming workshops organised under WP5, in which participants will be invited to discuss the FAQs and apply the guidelines to suggest (a) whether different and/or clearer rules (i.e., considering laws and policies) may facilitate the process of dealing with the identified controversial issues, and (b) whether the current legal framework is too strict to comply with, and thus possibly hindering GLAM’s mission of democratising culture.
The present deliverable also mirrors - to the extent possible - its twin deliverable D5.4 Guidelines & FAQs (LA) industries - Interim version,3 which was dedicated to Libraries and Archives, under T5.2 Implementation of legal requirements and criteria for openness.
Both D5.3 and D5.4 are designed to serve as instruments (thus their temporary nature) for further discussion with stakeholders under T5.3 Valuing and engaging in openness with GLAM, to which these deliverables are presented during the dissemination or training events agreed under the project’s Grant Agreement. The outcomes of such a process will flow into the final version of the twin Guidelines & FAQs, with the wider goal of supporting digitalisation in the framework of a rebalanced copyright law.
It is worth specifying that the present deliverable has been used as a basis to develop a set of FAQs and Guidelines. The FAQs and the Guidelines have been adjusted after gaining specific insights from cultural heritage institutions (CHIs) that had tested the interim version, with the ultimate aim to provide a final version of FAQs and Guidelines with a bottom-up methodology to be more effective and useful for the GLAM community. GLAM professionals, who are on the front line, helped to reshape and adjust the FAQs that appeared too technical or comprehensible only to an academic or other expert audience and also to further clarify the Guidelines, addressing the most contentious topics they face in their everyday activities.
Note: Please see the Word Doc upload of this report for a screen-reader-accessible version. If you experience other accessibility issues with our work, please contact [email protected]
Variations on the Author
Full text link“Variations on the Author” discusses two of Eduardo Coutinho’s recent films (Um Dia na Vida, from 2010, and Últimas Conversas, posthumously released in 2015) and their contribution to the general question of documentary authorship. The director’s filmography is characterized by a consistent yet self-effacing form of authorial self-inscription: Coutinho often features as an interviewer that rather than express opinions propels discourses; an interviewer that is good at listening. This mode of self-inscription characterizes him as an author who is not expressive but who is nonetheless markedly present on the screen. In Um Dia na Vida, however, Coutinho is completely absent form the image, while Últimas Conversas, on the contrary, includes a confessional prologue that moves the director from the margins to the center of his films. This article examines the ways in which these works stand out in the filmography of a director who offers new insights into the notion of cinematic authorship
Appropriate Similarity Measures for Author Cocitation Analysis
Full text linkWe provide a number of new insights into the methodological discussion about author cocitation analysis. We first argue that the use of the Pearson correlation for measuring the similarity between authors’ cocitation profiles is not very satisfactory. We then discuss what kind of similarity measures may be used as an alternative to the Pearson correlation. We consider three similarity measures in particular. One is the well-known cosine. The other two similarity measures have not been used before in the bibliometric literature. Finally, we show by means of an example that our findings have a high practical relevance.information science;Pearson correlation;cosine;similarity measure;author cocitation analysis
- …
