[IAEP] Sugar network / School Network

[Dave Crossland]

Hi

On 17 May 2016 at 14:10, Chris Leonard <cjlhomeaddress at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 12:52 PM, Dave Crossland <dave at lab6.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi
> >
> > Thanks for the lengthy explanation :) I think I understand your position
> > better now :)
> >
> > On 17 May 2016 at 12:14, Chris Leonard <cjlhomeaddress at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> any form of human subjects research
> >
> >
> > Is https://activities.sugarlabs.org/en-US/statistics/ "human subjects
> > research"?
>
> In the legal sense, it is whatever a court of competent jurisdiction
> determines it to be.


;)


> In general, our basic web-stats do not appear to
> have the characteristics one typically associates with human subjects
> research,


Right! :)


> some characteristics, like aggregation, anonymization, etc.
> are in fact steps taken to deliberately place certain research
> activities outside of the scope of human subjects protections (like
> requirements for institutional review board approval, etc.).
>

Yep :)


> If you start drilling down to collecting IP numbers (say for
> geo-location) and other bits of data that *might* be mapped (alone or

in combination with any other information sitting around) to the
> identifiable user level, you are getting into much deeper water.
>

I agree we should avoid anything that can identify individual users, and
not collect any specific IP addresses.


> Even if you can figure out a way to accomplish your goals in
> compliance with the law,


hehe :) I said I want to understand which activities are used, in which
languages, and in which countries.

What Sugar Labs® has been doing for many years at
https://activities.sugarlabs.org/en-US/statistics/ is suitable for
understanding this.

What Sugar Labs® has been doing for, I guess, a year or so, at
http://network.sugarlabs.org/stats-viewer/ is also suitable.

I haven't suggested doing anything we are not already doing.

Why do you think I have? :)

you should also ask yourself 'How would this
> look from the point of view of the fairly stringent privacy
> expectations held by the people that Sugar Labs aligns itself in the
> world of FOSS".  While generally not a matter of legal consequence, we
> do operate in an ecosystem where we are very dependent of people and
> organizations who take a dim view of anything that could be construed
> as "snooping", and that should probably be taken into account.


While there are plenty of kooks in the wider FLOSS community - just look at
the systemd conniptions - I think anonymous usage instrumentation for
measuring progress and impact is pretty basic UX development practice, and
there are now countless examples of how to do instrumentation in accordance
with typical software freedom activist values; Firefox was just mentioned
in this thread as one.

A great example of instrumentation done at an advanced level is 'ingimp,' a
Canadian postgraduate UX research project that instrumented GIMP.
https://www.google.com/search?q=ingimp The presentation at the Libre
Graphics Meeting 2007 was great - slides,
https://people.xiph.org/~giles/2007/lgm/LGM_20070505-3-Michael_Terry.pdf -
video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0wTpHP_rmS8 - and the section of the
video on privacy is excellent.

If you don't make time to check the video, the beef is that they made
perfectly clear to users what they were getting into, using graphic design
to really make it clean, and making it clear how to opt-out.

>> One should never read the CFR and
> >> make a determination that it "does not apply to me" without consulting
> >> with a lawyer.  That way lies madness as well as potential fines and
> >> imprisonment.
> >
> >
> > Has anyone involved with Sugar Labs consulted with any lawyers on any
> legal
> > topics?
> >
> > As a Sugar Labs Member, how do I consult with a lawyer?
>
> ... You seem to be proposing a personal activity, not one undertaken
> collectively by the corporate Sugar Labs entity, ...


I'm sorry if I gave that impression; I am talking about the corporate Sugar
Labs entity, absolutely: and about what Sugar Labs® has been doing for
years already.

I don't have any personal activities planned for Sugar software
development, because I can't write code very well and don't enjoy it.

If we improve our usage instrumentation - which I think we should, although
I don't have any concrete proposals about how - then I would expect to do
something similar to Firefox or ingimp or whatever, and to

Our fiscal sponsorship agreement with the SFC provides for some
> specific cases where the SFC might provide legal assistance, but I'm
> not really sure if this is one of them. You could ask the SLOB to

communicate on your behalf with the SFC to see if this is an area
> where they can provide any advice.
>

It seems Adam is meant to be the single point of contact between
Conservancy and Sugar Labs, SLOBs or Members.

If we improve our usage instrumentation, I guess he'll have to ask them to
review such features.

-- 
Cheers
Dave
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20160517/d48060eb/attachment.html>