Search

In this paper, we address the complex relationship between big data and human rights. Because this is a vast terrain, we restrict our focus in two main ways. First, we concentrate on big data applications in scientific research, mostly health-related research. And, second, we concentrate on two human rights: the familiar right to privacy and the less well-known right to science. Our contention is that human rights interact in potentially complex ways with big data, not only constraining it, but also enabling it in various ways; and that such rights are dynamic in character, rather than fixed once and for all, changing in their implications over time in line with changes in the context we inhabit, and also as they interact among themselves in jointly responding to the opportunities and risks thrown up by a changing world. Understanding this dynamic interaction of human rights is crucial for formulating an ethic tailored to the realities-the new capabilities and risks-of the rapidly evolving digital environment.This article is part of the themed issue 'The ethical impact of data science'., (© 2016 The Author(s).)

The meaning of privacy has been much disputed throughout its history in response to wave after wave of new technological capabilities and social configurations. The current round of disputes over privacy fuelled by data science has been a cause of despair for many commentators and a death knell for privacy itself for others. We argue that privacy's disputes are neither an accidental feature of the concept nor a lamentable condition of its applicability. Privacy is essentially contested. Because it is, privacy is transformable according to changing technological and social conditions. To make productive use of privacy's essential contestability, we argue for a new approach to privacy research and practical design, focused on the development of conceptual analytics that facilitate dissecting privacy's multiple uses across multiple contexts.This article is part of the themed issue 'The ethical impact of data science'., (© 2016 The Author(s).)

We discuss the governing forces for analytics, especially concerning citizens' behaviours and their transactions, that depend on which of three spheres of operation an institution is in (corporate, public sector/government and academic). We argue that aspirations and missions also differ by sphere even as digital spaces have drawn these spheres ever closer together. We propose that citizens' expectations and implicit permissions for any exploitation of their data require the perception of a fair balance of benefits, which should be transparent (accessible to citizens) and justifiable. We point out that within the corporate sphere most analytics does not concern identity, targeted marketing nor any direct interference with individual citizens; but instead it supports strategic decision-making, where the data are effectively anonymous. With the three spheres we discuss the nature of models deployed in analytics, including 'black-box' modelling uncheckable by a human mind, and the need to track the provenance and workings or models. We also examine the recent evolution of personal data, where some behaviours, or tokens, identifying individuals (unique and yet non-random) are partially and jointly owned by other individuals that are themselves connected. We consider the ability of heavily and lightly regulated sectors to increase access or to stifle innovation. We also call for clear and inclusive definitions of 'data science and analytics', avoiding the narrow claims of those in technical sub-sectors or sub-themes. Finally, we examine some examples of unethical and abusive practices. We argue for an ethical responsibility to be placed upon professional data scientists to avoid abuses in the future.This article is part of the themed issue 'The ethical impact of data science'., (© 2016 The Author(s).)

The life sciences present a politically and ethically sensitive area of technology development. NBIC convergence-the convergence of nanotechnology, biotechnology, and information and cognitive technology-presents an increased interaction between the biological and physical sciences. As a result the bio-debate is no longer dominated by biotechnology, but driven by NBIC convergence. NBIC convergence enables two bioengineering megatrends: "biology becoming technology" and "technology becoming biology." The notion of living technologies captures the latter megatrend. Accordingly, living technology presents a politically and ethically sensitive area. This implies that governments sooner or later are faced with the challenge of both promoting and regulating the development of living technology. This article describes four current political models to deal with innovation promotion and risk regulation. Based on two specific developments in the field of living technologies-(psycho)physiological computing and synthetic biology-we reflect on appropriate governance strategies for living technologies. We conclude that recent pleas for anticipatory and deliberative governance tend to neglect the need for anticipatory regulation as a key factor in guiding the development of the life sciences from a societal perspective. In particular, when it is expected that a certain living technology will radically challenge current regulatory systems, one should opt for just such a more active biopolitical approach.

Statutory law and court cases currently leave fair use of copyrighted material poorly defined and fail to provide effective guidance for the use of others' work. Copyright legislation is undergoing significant change, accelerated by the evolution of computing and communication technologies. This paper reviews copyright issues, fair use guidelines, and applicable laws and statutes to help administrators and educators understand and comply with copyright regulations. The paper describes principles of copyright and ownership, the rights of copyright holders, and the conditions under which copyrighted material can be used by others. Recently introduced legislation, such as the 1998 Digital Millennium Copyright Act, may significantly affect how educators can use copyrighted material in the future. The integration of computer and communication technology into education raises a number of intellectual property issues for dental schools. This paper provides some general guidelines regarding copyright issues in academic environments.