title: Cybersecurity, moral panics and the law of confidential information

authors: Kingsbury, Anna

abstract: This paper is about the trend to criminalisation of the protection of confidential information, and its justifications. In New Zealand as elsewhere, fears of foreign hackers and of breaches of national cybersecurity have been used to create a form of moral panic, justifying the extension of electronic surveillance by national security services. These same fears have also been used to justify the extension of the criminal law to the protection of confidential information and trade secrets. In the United States and in New Zealand, criminal offences have been creating prohibiting the taking of trade secrets, along with criminal offences relating to computer misuse. However, United States cases have involved United States employees, and in New Zealand these provisions have not led to prosecutions of foreign hackers, and such prosecutions would raise practical difficulties in any event. Employees and ex-employees appear to be much more likely defendants.
This paper discusses selected recent cases of theft of information by employees in knowledge-based industries in the United States, focusing particularly on cases involving scientists. New Zealand has as yet had few cases, but the paper discusses a recent case raising similar issues in a New Zealand context. The paper argues that the availability of the criminal law in these cases creates excessive risks for individual employees and more broadly for employee mobility and the sharing of information, particularly in the science-based industries.

text: Cybersecurity, moral panics and the law of confidential information This paper is about the trend to criminalisation of the protection of confidential information, and its justifications. In New Zealand as elsewhere, fears of foreign hackers and of breaches of national cybersecurity have been used to create a form of moral panic, justifying the extension of electronic surveillance by national security services. These same fears have also been used to justify the extension of the criminal law to the protection of confidential information and trade secrets. In the United States and in New Zealand, criminal offences have been creating prohibiting the taking of trade secrets, along with criminal offences relating to computer misuse. However, United States cases have involved United States employees, and in New Zealand these provisions have not led to prosecutions of foreign hackers, and such prosecutions would raise practical difficulties in any event. Employees and ex-employees appear to be much more likely defendants.
This paper discusses selected recent cases of theft of information by employees in knowledge-based industries in the United States, focusing particularly on cases involving scientists. New Zealand has as yet had few cases, but the paper discusses a recent case raising similar issues in a New Zealand context. The paper argues that the availability of the criminal law in these cases creates excessive risks for individual employees and more broadly for employee mobility and the sharing of information, particularly in the science-based industries.

year: 2015

title: Developing a core outcome set for future infertility research: an international consensus development study

authors: Duffy, J.M.N.

subjects: Consensus development study

abstract: STUDY QUESTION: Can a core outcome set to standardize outcome selection, collection and reporting across future infertility research be developed? 
SUMMARY ANSWER: A minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, has been developed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews evaluating potential treatments for infertility. 
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Complex issues, including a failure to consider the perspectives of people with fertility problems when selecting outcomes, variations in outcome definitions and the selective reporting of outcomes on the basis of statistical analysis, make the results of infertility research difficult to interpret. 
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A three-round Delphi survey (372 participants from 41 countries) and consensus development workshop (30 participants from 27 countries). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Healthcare professionals, researchers and people with fertility problems were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus science methods. 
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The core outcome set consists of: viable intrauterine pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound (accounting for singleton, twin and higher multiple pregnancy); pregnancy loss (accounting for ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, stillbirth and termination of pregnancy); live birth; gestational age at delivery; birthweight; neonatal mortality; and major congenital anomaly. Time to pregnancy leading to live birth should be reported when applicable. 
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We used consensus development methods which have inherent limitations, including the representativeness of the participant sample, Delphi survey attrition and an arbitrary consensus threshold. 
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Embedding the core outcome set within RCTs and systematic reviews should ensure the comprehensive selection, collection and reporting of core outcomes. Research funding bodies, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) statement, and over 80 specialty journals, including the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group, Fertility and Sterility and Human Reproduction, have committed to implementing this core outcome set. 
STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This research was funded by the Catalyst Fund, Royal Society of New Zealand, Auckland Medical Research Fund and Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust. The funder had no role in the design and conduct of the study, the collection, management, analysis or interpretation of data, or manuscript preparation. B.W.J.M. is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548). S.B. was supported by University of Auckland Foundation Seelye Travelling Fellowship. S.B. reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and an editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility group. J.L.H.E. reports being the Editor Emeritus of Human Reproduction. J.M.L.K. reports research sponsorship from Ferring and Theramex. R.S.L. reports consultancy fees from Abbvie, Bayer, Ferring, Fractyl, Insud Pharma and Kindex and research sponsorship from Guerbet and Hass Avocado Board. B.W.J.M. reports consultancy fees from Guerbet, iGenomix, Merck, Merck KGaA and ObsEva. C.N. reports being the Co Editor-in-Chief of Fertility and Sterility and Section Editor of the Journal of Urology, research sponsorship from Ferring, and retains a financial interest in NexHand. A.S. reports consultancy fees from Guerbet. E.H.Y.N. reports research sponsorship from Merck. N.L.V. reports consultancy and conference fees from Ferring, Merck and Merck Sharp and Dohme. The remaining authors declare no competing interests in relation to the work presented. All authors have completed the disclosure form. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative: 1023.

text: Developing a core outcome set for future infertility research: an international consensus development study STUDY QUESTION: Can a core outcome set to standardize outcome selection, collection and reporting across future infertility research be developed? 
SUMMARY ANSWER: A minimum data set, known as a core outcome set, has been developed for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and systematic reviews evaluating potential treatments for infertility. 
WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Complex issues, including a failure to consider the perspectives of people with fertility problems when selecting outcomes, variations in outcome definitions and the selective reporting of outcomes on the basis of statistical analysis, make the results of infertility research difficult to interpret. 
STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A three-round Delphi survey (372 participants from 41 countries) and consensus development workshop (30 participants from 27 countries). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Healthcare professionals, researchers and people with fertility problems were brought together in an open and transparent process using formal consensus science methods. 
MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The core outcome set consists of: viable intrauterine pregnancy confirmed by ultrasound (accounting for singleton, twin and higher multiple pregnancy); pregnancy loss (accounting for ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, stillbirth and termination of pregnancy); live birth; gestational age at delivery; birthweight; neonatal mortality; and major congenital anomaly. Time to pregnancy leading to live birth should be reported when applicable. 
LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: We used consensus development methods which have inherent limitations, including the representativeness of the participant sample, Delphi survey attrition and an arbitrary consensus threshold. 
WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Embedding the core outcome set within RCTs and systematic reviews should ensure the comprehensive selection, collection and reporting of core outcomes. Research funding bodies, the Standard Protocol Items: Recommendations for Interventional Trials (SPIRIT) statement, and over 80 specialty journals, including the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group, Fertility and Sterility and Human Reproduction, have committed to implementing this core outcome set. 
STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This research was funded by the Catalyst Fund, Royal Society of New Zealand, Auckland Medical Research Fund and Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust. The funder had no role in the design and conduct of the study, the collection, management, analysis or interpretation of data, or manuscript preparation. B.W.J.M. is supported by a National Health and Medical Research Council Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548). S.B. was supported by University of Auckland Foundation Seelye Travelling Fellowship. S.B. reports being the Editor-in-Chief of Human Reproduction Open and an editor of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility group. J.L.H.E. reports being the Editor Emeritus of Human Reproduction. J.M.L.K. reports research sponsorship from Ferring and Theramex. R.S.L. reports consultancy fees from Abbvie, Bayer, Ferring, Fractyl, Insud Pharma and Kindex and research sponsorship from Guerbet and Hass Avocado Board. B.W.J.M. reports consultancy fees from Guerbet, iGenomix, Merck, Merck KGaA and ObsEva. C.N. reports being the Co Editor-in-Chief of Fertility and Sterility and Section Editor of the Journal of Urology, research sponsorship from Ferring, and retains a financial interest in NexHand. A.S. reports consultancy fees from Guerbet. E.H.Y.N. reports research sponsorship from Merck. N.L.V. reports consultancy and conference fees from Ferring, Merck and Merck Sharp and Dohme. The remaining authors declare no competing interests in relation to the work presented. All authors have completed the disclosure form. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials Initiative: 1023.

year: 2020

title: “If it don’t talk, it's not whakapapa data”: Conceptualising whakapapa data in a digital age

authors: Pēpi Tarapa‐Dewes, Ella

subjects: data protection

abstract: In Te Ao Māori, whakapapa is a sacred framework that connects all aspects of existence. Whakapapa is highly sensitive information and a taonga that requires active protection. But what can be considered whakapapa data in a digital age where data linkage is ubiquitous and the boundaries between personal and collective information are increasingly blurred? We explore this question through a case study with Ngāti Tiipa, a hapū that is actively engaged in its own data sovereignty research. Reflexive thematic analysis of whānau kōrero identified three types of whakapapa data, each denoting a specific kind of connection: 1) between relatives, both living and deceased; 2) between people and places of cultural significance; and 3) between people and the spiritual realm. Whānau concepts of whakapapa data tend to be context‐specific, suggesting that it is more useful to think of whakapapa data as dynamic and relational rather than a fixed, inherent attribute.

text: “If it don’t talk, it's not whakapapa data”: Conceptualising whakapapa data in a digital age In Te Ao Māori, whakapapa is a sacred framework that connects all aspects of existence. Whakapapa is highly sensitive information and a taonga that requires active protection. But what can be considered whakapapa data in a digital age where data linkage is ubiquitous and the boundaries between personal and collective information are increasingly blurred? We explore this question through a case study with Ngāti Tiipa, a hapū that is actively engaged in its own data sovereignty research. Reflexive thematic analysis of whānau kōrero identified three types of whakapapa data, each denoting a specific kind of connection: 1) between relatives, both living and deceased; 2) between people and places of cultural significance; and 3) between people and the spiritual realm. Whānau concepts of whakapapa data tend to be context‐specific, suggesting that it is more useful to think of whakapapa data as dynamic and relational rather than a fixed, inherent attribute.

year: 2026-02