Internet Scholars, Has anyone published anything recently that reproduces an illustration or photograph of twitter conversations or a facebook group? Did you get permission directly from the mothership? This may sound elementary, but if you have recently solved this puzzle could you please reach out to me off list? Many thanks, lauri. _________________________________________ Lauri Goldkind, PhD ~ Visiting Research Fellow ~ UN University Computing + Society Editor in Chief, Journal of Technology in Human Services Associate Professor, Graduate School of Social Service, Fordham http://www.laurigoldkind.net/ The future is always beginning now. Strand, M. 1934 - 2014
A screenshot of public speech from an online forum for the sake of scholarly analysis is pretty definitive fair use. I have found it useful in the past to show my publishers the Code of Best Practices put together by Pat Aufderheide and Peter Jaszi: http://cmsimpact.org/code/code-best-practices-fair-use-scholarly-research-co... — Aram Sinnreich (http://aram.sinnreich.com) Associate Professor American University (http://www.american.edu/soc/) School of Communication (http://www.american.edu/soc/) Author (http://j.mp/sinnreich) | Musician (https://dubistry.bandcamp.com/)
On Wednesday, Nov 01, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Lauri Goldkind <goldkind@fordham.edu (mailto:goldkind@fordham.edu)> wrote: Internet Scholars,
Has anyone published anything recently that reproduces an illustration or photograph of twitter conversations or a facebook group?
Did you get permission directly from the mothership? This may sound elementary, but if you have recently solved this puzzle could you please reach out to me off list?
Many thanks, lauri.
_________________________________________ Lauri Goldkind, PhD ~ Visiting Research Fellow ~ UN University Computing + Society Editor in Chief, Journal of Technology in Human Services Associate Professor, Graduate School of Social Service, Fordham https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.laurigoldkind.net_&d...
The future is always beginning now. Strand, M. 1934 - 2014 _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__aoir.org&d=DwICAg&c=U0G0... Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__listserv.aoir.org_listin...
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.aoir.org_&d=DwICAg&c...
Given that we don't know what is in the screenshot (and also given that it being public is largely irrelevant) it may not be wise to offer advice on what is or is not "definitive" fair use. Additionally, according to her web page, it appears that Lauri is located in Macau, so advice on fair use may be itself irrelevant. Fair use is one possibility that she can discuss with her publisher, assuming her publisher is located in the U.S. (or Israel) and doesn't service international markets. Or, it may be simpler to get permission to reproduce the material. Cheers, DLB -- Dan L. Burk Chancellor's Professor of Law University of California, Irvine ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2017-18 Fulbright Cybersecurity Scholar On 2017-11-01 06:48, Aram Sinnreich wrote:
A screenshot of public speech from an online forum for the sake of scholarly analysis is pretty definitive fair use. I have found it useful in the past to show my publishers the Code of Best Practices put together by Pat Aufderheide and Peter Jaszi:
http://cmsimpact.org/code/code-best-practices-fair-use-scholarly-research-co...
-- Aram Sinnreich (http://aram.sinnreich.com)
Associate Professor American University (http://www.american.edu/soc/) School of Communication (http://www.american.edu/soc/)
Author (http://j.mp/sinnreich) | Musician (https://dubistry.bandcamp.com/)
On Wednesday, Nov 01, 2017 at 5:53 AM, Lauri Goldkind <goldkind@fordham.edu (mailto:goldkind@fordham.edu)> wrote: Internet Scholars,
Has anyone published anything recently that reproduces an illustration or photograph of twitter conversations or a facebook group?
Did you get permission directly from the mothership? This may sound elementary, but if you have recently solved this puzzle could you please reach out to me off list?
Many thanks, lauri.
_________________________________________ Lauri Goldkind, PhD ~ Visiting Research Fellow ~ UN University Computing + Society Editor in Chief, Journal of Technology in Human Services Associate Professor, Graduate School of Social Service, Fordham https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.laurigoldkind.net_&d...
The future is always beginning now. Strand, M. 1934 - 2014 _______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__aoir.org&d=DwICAg&c=U0G0... Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__listserv.aoir.org_listin...
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.aoir.org_&d=DwICAg&c...
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
For copyright questions do not forget to check the Terms of Use of the service. One of the reasons that Twitter is popular for a wide range of research, including commercial use, is that it is very open. Facebook is more difficult. Twitter: https://twitter.com/en/tos: article 3 under Your Rights: By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through the Services, you grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute such Content in any and all media or distribution methods (now known or later developed). This license authorizes us to make your Content available to the rest of the world and to let others do the same. You agree that this license includes the right for Twitter to provide, promote, and improve the Services and to make Content submitted to or through the Services available to other companies, organizations or individuals for the syndication, broadcast, distribution, promotion or publication of such Content on other media and services, subject to our terms and conditions for such Content use. Such additional uses by Twitter, or other companies, organizations or individuals, may be made with no compensation paid to you with respect to the Content that you submit, post, transmit or otherwise make available through the Services. Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms article 2. *Sharing Your Content and Information* **You own all of the content and information you post on Facebook, and you can control how it is shared through your privacy <https://www.facebook.com/settings/?tab=privacy> and application settings <https://www.facebook.com/settings/?tab=applications>. In addition: 1. For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos (IP content), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy <https://www.facebook.com/settings/?tab=privacy> and application settings <https://www.facebook.com/settings/?tab=applications>: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (IP License). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it. 4. When you publish content or information using the Public setting, it means that you are allowing everyone, including people off of Facebook, to access and use that information, and to associate it with you (i.e., your name and profile picture). article 5. *Protecting Other People's Rights* 7. If you collect information from users, you will: obtain their consent, make it clear you (and not Facebook) are the one collecting their information, and post a privacy policy explaining what information you collect and how you will use it. In other words, who tweets has given already the permission to further use the content. At Facebook it depends on the person's settings, but the Public setting implies also such permission. This concerns copyright. Keep in mind that privacy and data protection is a different set of rules, which are quite different in the US, the EU and elsewhere. And Facebook is explicit in the need to obtain consent. This does not substitute privacy law, but shapes what reasonable expectations of users are. Twitter does not make a statement about this (at first glance, so check all documents). This makes that you can defend a position (in the US legal context) that the use of Twitter is public speech and therefore reasonable expectations of privacy do not counter the use of tweets by others. EU data protection is more strict and requires for every use a clear legitimation (which can be consent) and purpose. Best, Hans Lammerant researcher Law, Science, Technology and Society (LSTS) - Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB) On 03-11-17 20:19, Dan L. Burk wrote:
Given that we don't know what is in the screenshot (and also given that it being public is largely irrelevant) it may not be wise to offer advice on what is or is not "definitive" fair use.
Additionally, according to her web page, it appears that Lauri is located in Macau, so advice on fair use may be itself irrelevant.
Fair use is one possibility that she can discuss with her publisher, assuming her publisher is located in the U.S. (or Israel) and doesn't service international markets.
Or, it may be simpler to get permission to reproduce the material.
Cheers, DLB
Good points, especially the reminder about data privacy. I might disagree with Hans just a bit on what the ToS terms do or allow. Copyright involves multiple exclusive rights. For example, the Twitter language below covers most or all of the exclusive rights of a copyright holder with regard to Twitter, but only specifically covers the "making available" or right of communication to the public, which in the U.S. would be the right of distribution or of transmission, with regard to subscribers. So with regard to subscribers, the language does not necessarily grant permissions for rights such as the right of adaptation. So I don't think you can safely say that someone who tweets material has given permission to further "use" the content; the terms allow Twitter and its formal licensees to do pretty much anything with the content, and allow others to re-transmit the content (e.g., retweet) but many uses (like incorporation into a book) will not be explicitly covered by the language below. Licenses for some such third party uses might be implied from the fact of the public posting, but then you have to start relying on what the court thinks is a reasonable inference from the circumstances. Also, the ToS may or may not be enforceable in some jurisdictions where a claim may be brought -- for example, some exclusive rights in copyright and related rights cannot be contractually waived in some European countries, ToS or no ToS. All of this provides endless material for final examinations in my classes. Life is good. Cheers, DLB -- Dan L. Burk Chancellor's Professor of Law University of California, Irvine ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2017-18 Fulbright Cybersecurity Scholar On 2017-11-04 02:19, Hans Lammerant wrote:
For copyright questions do not forget to check the Terms of Use of the service. One of the reasons that Twitter is popular for a wide range of research, including commercial use, is that it is very open. Facebook is more difficult.
Twitter: https://twitter.com/en/tos: article 3 under Your Rights:
By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through the Services, you grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute such Content in any and all media or distribution methods (now known or later developed). This license authorizes us to make your Content available to the rest of the world and to let others do the same. You agree that this license includes the right for Twitter to provide, promote, and improve the Services and to make Content submitted to or through the Services available to other companies, organizations or individuals for the syndication, broadcast, distribution, promotion or publication of such Content on other media and services, subject to our terms and conditions for such Content use. Such additional uses by Twitter, or other companies, organizations or individuals, may be made with no compensation paid to you with respect to the Content that you submit, post, transmit or otherwise make available through the Services.
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms
article 2. *Sharing Your Content and Information*
**You own all of the content and information you post on Facebook, and you can control how it is shared through your privacy <https://www.facebook.com/settings/?tab=privacy> and application settings <https://www.facebook.com/settings/?tab=applications>. In addition:
1. For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos (IP content), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy <https://www.facebook.com/settings/?tab=privacy> and application settings <https://www.facebook.com/settings/?tab=applications>: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (IP License). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it. 4. When you publish content or information using the Public setting, it means that you are allowing everyone, including people off of Facebook, to access and use that information, and to associate it with you (i.e., your name and profile picture).
article 5. *Protecting Other People's Rights*
7. If you collect information from users, you will: obtain their consent, make it clear you (and not Facebook) are the one collecting their information, and post a privacy policy explaining what information you collect and how you will use it.
In other words, who tweets has given already the permission to further use the content. At Facebook it depends on the person's settings, but the Public setting implies also such permission. This concerns copyright.
Keep in mind that privacy and data protection is a different set of rules, which are quite different in the US, the EU and elsewhere. And Facebook is explicit in the need to obtain consent. This does not substitute privacy law, but shapes what reasonable expectations of users are. Twitter does not make a statement about this (at first glance, so check all documents). This makes that you can defend a position (in the US legal context) that the use of Twitter is public speech and therefore reasonable expectations of privacy do not counter the use of tweets by others. EU data protection is more strict and requires for every use a clear legitimation (which can be consent) and purpose.
Best,
Hans Lammerant
researcher Law, Science, Technology and Society (LSTS) - Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB)
On 03-11-17 20:19, Dan L. Burk wrote:
Given that we don't know what is in the screenshot (and also given that it being public is largely irrelevant) it may not be wise to offer advice on what is or is not "definitive" fair use.
Additionally, according to her web page, it appears that Lauri is located in Macau, so advice on fair use may be itself irrelevant.
Fair use is one possibility that she can discuss with her publisher, assuming her publisher is located in the U.S. (or Israel) and doesn't service international markets.
Or, it may be simpler to get permission to reproduce the material.
Cheers, DLB
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
As a Journalist and an academic researcher I would like to add the following remarks: a) We as Journalists, always ask permission from the owner of the account to publish his/her footage. What I mean is that you don't have the right to reproduce the material(image, video, graphics, etc, especially when you're monetizing from this use. b) Twitter has a policy for fair use which means if there is a dispute, courts will decide. https://support.twitter.com/articles/20171959 c) In my opinion, the same rules apply to all social media. Hope it's helpful Best Andreas Παραθέτοντας από "Dan L. Burk" <dburk@uci.edu>:
Good points, especially the reminder about data privacy.
I might disagree with Hans just a bit on what the ToS terms do or allow. Copyright involves multiple exclusive rights. For example, the Twitter language below covers most or all of the exclusive rights of a copyright holder with regard to Twitter, but only specifically covers the "making available" or right of communication to the public, which in the U.S. would be the right of distribution or of transmission, with regard to subscribers. So with regard to subscribers, the language does not necessarily grant permissions for rights such as the right of adaptation. So I don't think you can safely say that someone who tweets material has given permission to further "use" the content; the terms allow Twitter and its formal licensees to do pretty much anything with the content, and allow others to re-transmit the content (e.g., retweet) but many uses (like incorporation into a book) will not be explicitly covered by the language below.
Licenses for some such third party uses might be implied from the fact of the public posting, but then you have to start relying on what the court thinks is a reasonable inference from the circumstances.
Also, the ToS may or may not be enforceable in some jurisdictions where a claim may be brought -- for example, some exclusive rights in copyright and related rights cannot be contractually waived in some European countries, ToS or no ToS.
All of this provides endless material for final examinations in my classes. Life is good.
Cheers, DLB
--
Dan L. Burk Chancellor's Professor of Law University of California, Irvine ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2017-18 Fulbright Cybersecurity Scholar
On 2017-11-04 02:19, Hans Lammerant wrote:
For copyright questions do not forget to check the Terms of Use of the service. One of the reasons that Twitter is popular for a wide range of research, including commercial use, is that it is very open. Facebook is more difficult.
Twitter: https://twitter.com/en/tos: article 3 under Your Rights:
By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through the Services, you grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute such Content in any and all media or distribution methods (now known or later developed). This license authorizes us to make your Content available to the rest of the world and to let others do the same. You agree that this license includes the right for Twitter to provide, promote, and improve the Services and to make Content submitted to or through the Services available to other companies, organizations or individuals for the syndication, broadcast, distribution, promotion or publication of such Content on other media and services, subject to our terms and conditions for such Content use. Such additional uses by Twitter, or other companies, organizations or individuals, may be made with no compensation paid to you with respect to the Content that you submit, post, transmit or otherwise make available through the Services.
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms
article 2. *Sharing Your Content and Information*
**You own all of the content and information you post on Facebook, and you can control how it is shared through your privacy <https://www.facebook.com/settings/?tab=privacy> and application settings <https://www.facebook.com/settings/?tab=applications>. In addition:
1. For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos (IP content), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy <https://www.facebook.com/settings/?tab=privacy> and application settings <https://www.facebook.com/settings/?tab=applications>: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (IP License). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it. 4. When you publish content or information using the Public setting, it means that you are allowing everyone, including people off of Facebook, to access and use that information, and to associate it with you (i.e., your name and profile picture).
article 5. *Protecting Other People's Rights*
7. If you collect information from users, you will: obtain their consent, make it clear you (and not Facebook) are the one collecting their information, and post a privacy policy explaining what information you collect and how you will use it.
In other words, who tweets has given already the permission to further use the content. At Facebook it depends on the person's settings, but the Public setting implies also such permission. This concerns copyright.
Keep in mind that privacy and data protection is a different set of rules, which are quite different in the US, the EU and elsewhere. And Facebook is explicit in the need to obtain consent. This does not substitute privacy law, but shapes what reasonable expectations of users are. Twitter does not make a statement about this (at first glance, so check all documents). This makes that you can defend a position (in the US legal context) that the use of Twitter is public speech and therefore reasonable expectations of privacy do not counter the use of tweets by others. EU data protection is more strict and requires for every use a clear legitimation (which can be consent) and purpose.
Best,
Hans Lammerant
researcher Law, Science, Technology and Society (LSTS) - Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB)
On 03-11-17 20:19, Dan L. Burk wrote:
Given that we don't know what is in the screenshot (and also given that it being public is largely irrelevant) it may not be wise to offer advice on what is or is not "definitive" fair use.
Additionally, according to her web page, it appears that Lauri is located in Macau, so advice on fair use may be itself irrelevant.
Fair use is one possibility that she can discuss with her publisher, assuming her publisher is located in the U.S. (or Israel) and doesn't service international markets.
Or, it may be simpler to get permission to reproduce the material.
Cheers, DLB
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
BUT the most important is that the holder of the Rights is the creator and not the one who posts it . Παραθέτοντας από "Andreas M. Panagopoulos" <ampanago@jour.auth.gr>:
As a Journalist and an academic researcher I would like to add the following remarks: a) We as Journalists, always ask permission from the owner of the account to publish his/her footage. What I mean is that you don't have the right to reproduce the material(image, video, graphics, etc, especially when you're monetizing from this use. b) Twitter has a policy for fair use which means if there is a dispute, courts will decide. https://support.twitter.com/articles/20171959 c) In my opinion, the same rules apply to all social media. Hope it's helpful Best Andreas
Παραθέτοντας από "Dan L. Burk" <dburk@uci.edu>:
Good points, especially the reminder about data privacy.
I might disagree with Hans just a bit on what the ToS terms do or allow. Copyright involves multiple exclusive rights. For example, the Twitter language below covers most or all of the exclusive rights of a copyright holder with regard to Twitter, but only specifically covers the "making available" or right of communication to the public, which in the U.S. would be the right of distribution or of transmission, with regard to subscribers. So with regard to subscribers, the language does not necessarily grant permissions for rights such as the right of adaptation. So I don't think you can safely say that someone who tweets material has given permission to further "use" the content; the terms allow Twitter and its formal licensees to do pretty much anything with the content, and allow others to re-transmit the content (e.g., retweet) but many uses (like incorporation into a book) will not be explicitly covered by the language below.
Licenses for some such third party uses might be implied from the fact of the public posting, but then you have to start relying on what the court thinks is a reasonable inference from the circumstances.
Also, the ToS may or may not be enforceable in some jurisdictions where a claim may be brought -- for example, some exclusive rights in copyright and related rights cannot be contractually waived in some European countries, ToS or no ToS.
All of this provides endless material for final examinations in my classes. Life is good.
Cheers, DLB
--
Dan L. Burk Chancellor's Professor of Law University of California, Irvine ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 2017-18 Fulbright Cybersecurity Scholar
On 2017-11-04 02:19, Hans Lammerant wrote:
For copyright questions do not forget to check the Terms of Use of the service. One of the reasons that Twitter is popular for a wide range of research, including commercial use, is that it is very open. Facebook is more difficult.
Twitter: https://twitter.com/en/tos: article 3 under Your Rights:
By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through the Services, you grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute such Content in any and all media or distribution methods (now known or later developed). This license authorizes us to make your Content available to the rest of the world and to let others do the same. You agree that this license includes the right for Twitter to provide, promote, and improve the Services and to make Content submitted to or through the Services available to other companies, organizations or individuals for the syndication, broadcast, distribution, promotion or publication of such Content on other media and services, subject to our terms and conditions for such Content use. Such additional uses by Twitter, or other companies, organizations or individuals, may be made with no compensation paid to you with respect to the Content that you submit, post, transmit or otherwise make available through the Services.
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms
article 2. *Sharing Your Content and Information*
**You own all of the content and information you post on Facebook, and you can control how it is shared through your privacy <https://www.facebook.com/settings/?tab=privacy> and application settings <https://www.facebook.com/settings/?tab=applications>. In addition:
1. For content that is covered by intellectual property rights, like photos and videos (IP content), you specifically give us the following permission, subject to your privacy <https://www.facebook.com/settings/?tab=privacy> and application settings <https://www.facebook.com/settings/?tab=applications>: you grant us a non-exclusive, transferable, sub-licensable, royalty-free, worldwide license to use any IP content that you post on or in connection with Facebook (IP License). This IP License ends when you delete your IP content or your account unless your content has been shared with others, and they have not deleted it. 4. When you publish content or information using the Public setting, it means that you are allowing everyone, including people off of Facebook, to access and use that information, and to associate it with you (i.e., your name and profile picture).
article 5. *Protecting Other People's Rights*
7. If you collect information from users, you will: obtain their consent, make it clear you (and not Facebook) are the one collecting their information, and post a privacy policy explaining what information you collect and how you will use it.
In other words, who tweets has given already the permission to further use the content. At Facebook it depends on the person's settings, but the Public setting implies also such permission. This concerns copyright.
Keep in mind that privacy and data protection is a different set of rules, which are quite different in the US, the EU and elsewhere. And Facebook is explicit in the need to obtain consent. This does not substitute privacy law, but shapes what reasonable expectations of users are. Twitter does not make a statement about this (at first glance, so check all documents). This makes that you can defend a position (in the US legal context) that the use of Twitter is public speech and therefore reasonable expectations of privacy do not counter the use of tweets by others. EU data protection is more strict and requires for every use a clear legitimation (which can be consent) and purpose.
Best,
Hans Lammerant
researcher Law, Science, Technology and Society (LSTS) - Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB)
On 03-11-17 20:19, Dan L. Burk wrote:
Given that we don't know what is in the screenshot (and also given that it being public is largely irrelevant) it may not be wise to offer advice on what is or is not "definitive" fair use.
Additionally, according to her web page, it appears that Lauri is located in Macau, so advice on fair use may be itself irrelevant.
Fair use is one possibility that she can discuss with her publisher, assuming her publisher is located in the U.S. (or Israel) and doesn't service international markets.
Or, it may be simpler to get permission to reproduce the material.
Cheers, DLB
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
_______________________________________________ The Air-L@listserv.aoir.org mailing list is provided by the Association of Internet Researchers http://aoir.org Subscribe, change options or unsubscribe at: http://listserv.aoir.org/listinfo.cgi/air-l-aoir.org
Join the Association of Internet Researchers: http://www.aoir.org/
participants (5)
-
Andreas M. Panagopoulos -
Aram Sinnreich -
Dan L. Burk -
Hans Lammerant -
Lauri Goldkind