Re: Privacy policy question

[Guy Almes <galmes () TAMU EDU>]

David,
  I'm a deep respecter of academic freedom and its relevance in similar 
matters.
  But there are several reasons why the safeguards below make sense for 
students and staff also.  For example:
<> fundamental integrity of people's privacy: it should not be presumed 
that all data on university IT stuff is public (the 4th amendment comes 
in somewhere here);
<> staff deal with students, so various FERPA issues arise; and
<> while some aspects of academic freedom relate to the customs/rules 
surrounding tenured and tenure-track faculty, many aspects of academic 
freedom relate to students and staff also.
  Thus, while academic freedom does not grant the "same rights and 
privileges" to all, academic freedom does grant rights and privileges to 
all members of the community.
  Regards,
        -- Guy

On 6/1/12 11:00 AM, David R. Millar wrote:
> I accept that faculty need assurances of academic freedom.  It's less
> clear to me that staff need the same rights and privileges.
>
> David Millar
> Consultant
> Massachusetts Institute of Technology
> twitter.com/@SecurityTrot
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On 6/1/12 11:53 AM, "Shamblin, Quinn"<qrs () BU EDU>  wrote:
>
> > I have noticed ever since I started working in higher-ed years ago, that
> > this sort of skewing is extremely common.
> >
> > Quinn R Shamblin
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > ----------------------
> > Executive Director of Information Security, Boston University
> > CISM, CISSP, GCFA, PMP  -  O 617-358-6310  M 617-999-7523
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: The EDUCAUSE Security Constituent Group Listserv
> > [mailto:SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU] On Behalf Of Valdis Kletnieks
> > Sent: Friday, June 01, 2012 11:18 AM
> > To: SECURITY () LISTSERV EDUCAUSE EDU
> > Subject: Re: [SECURITY] Privacy policy question
> >
> > On Fri, 01 Jun 2012 10:50:21 -0400, "John K. Lerchey" said:
> >
> > > "Whenever possible and legally permissible, notification must be given
> > > to the faculty member whose data are subject to subpoena, search
> > > warrant, or order of court prior to compliance therewith, and,
> > > whenever possible and legally permissible, sufficient time must be
> > > allowed, before intrusion, to allow the faculty member to file a motion
> > > to quash. "
> >
> > Faculty members get time to file a motion to quash, but staff and
> > students don't?
> > Are you able to share the reasoning there, or is it internal
> > sausage-making that we don't want to know about?