 Well, so what I'm going to do right now is I'm going to mute myself and I'm going to make Jonas and Irina the presenters. And I would say the floor is yours. You can, as a presenter, Irina, you can share your own screen by clicking on top of the, I mean, I assume you know this model, but you have an option for screen share. Yeah, there you are, perfect. And I will also make Jonas a presenter, if that, oh no, okay, so I can only make one person presenter at the time, I'm sorry about that. So, but Jonas, you can easily unmute yourself. I think, I see you are unmuted right now, so I think you can just talk. So just shout if you want to change presenters so that you want to share your screen. And for all others, what I would suggest is that you keep yourself muted and that you ask your questions in the chat. I think that will be slightly easier than if we all talk, but if it becomes too complicated, yeah, just unmute yourself and ask your question and talking. Okay, so Irina, I'm not sure if you want to say something or you want to ask before we start. Maybe we can do a brief introduction. Yeah, yeah, please. Yes, thank you. Yes, so as you can see in the video, my name is Irina Vipalts-Pervar and I'm employed in the Slovenian social science data archives, but I'm also leading CESDA training team and one of the parts that we were presenting in the online recording is data management guide that was prepared inside CESDA and probably I'll go through some of these parts later on today. So some questions might pop up when you see things. Okay, I was just looking for the link to the CESDA data management guide. I wanted to post that, but I'm going to do that in a second. Yeah, so I'm Jonas. I work in Germany at the GASIS data archive for the social sciences. So there's also the connection to social sciences, but I'm not myself a social scientist but have a background in, first of all, it was literature and now it's on top of that I have a degree in library information science and at the GASIS data archive I'm responsible on the one hand for archive workflows and quality assurance there, but I have also quite a lot to do with research data management and questions of licensing copyright etc. So I think that is probably more my area of expertise. I also know a bit about data protection, but I think for that topic Irina is probably the more experienced expert. Yes, so thank you. And let me just say that actually this area in legal and ethical is developing quite quickly in the last few years and as you probably know there are country specific regulations that we don't know about so clearly. So some of the things might be about the GDPR in your country. As it is for Slovenia, I think that we at this point we still don't have a national law. So we are waiting for it. Yes, okay, so we have a question. We even have three questions. So what I would suggest that we start with these questions that were submitted to Menti. In the meantime if you have any audience has follow up questions just type in the chat we're watching that one as well. So the first question is the secondary use in the consent form in case that research is contact meta analysis or empirical review paper which requires a data from other studies. How is it that it could be done? Okay, so I'm not sure if I understand the question. I think it's a licensing question, it's probably one of the more complicated ones. And I think in any case that Irene and I will be answering a lot, it depends. So if I understand it correctly, oh wait, it's a question with the consent form. I think it's both, so perhaps you can do it from the licensing and then we can just say something about consent. And maybe if the person in the chat is present in the chat you can also say whether the question has been answered. Yes, I also copied it into the chat so we don't have to switch back and forth. So I think what this question refers to is that if a researcher conducts research reusing other data and is required then to publish his or her data when they publish an article, the question is how do I deal with the rights issue here because I reuse data from someone else and can I just go and republish this data because it forms the basis of my own research. So I think that is the question. And it's basically, as I already said, we're a lot of times the answer is going to be dependent. So first of all, it depends on the licenses that were applied to the original data. So if you do a meta-analysis and reuse data from someone else, you should have a look at the kind of license that is attached to that data. And that license very often is going to tell you what you can or can do with the data. And if you can, for example, republish it. Yes, so I think the reasoning also depends what are these data were free of charge, let's say at the beginning. So if you're using the OEC data, then probably you will not be able to publish the data, but it's really good that you try to deeply record linkages. So you can say I use this and this variable from this and this data and I calculated something from that. So you might be using syntaxes. As it is for the consent form, it goes the same way. So it's basically a link to what was consented on the primary step. So if the consent was given for some sort of research purposes, I would assume that the consent would be then the same also for any kind of secondary analysis. It is, however, best that we do work with some sort of anonymous data. So you might try to match data together, but not on the level of personal identifiers. So this is something that you might think of. But yeah, again, it depends also of the topic and the team, whether it's really complicated data, whether it has a lot of personal information that might harm people that are involved. Yeah, I think I would like to reinforce that because as you so first of all, I think the original consent form and the original consent given that has to match with the original license applied to the data. So in theory, I think if you reuse the data in accordance with the license, I would expect that all of all of the questions relating to consent are are actually covered. Because the original researcher would have to apply a license that is in tune with the consent form. So if the consent form made it clear that the data can be shared and reused by others and this is reflected in the license. And I think that there shouldn't be a problem. And I also want to reinforce again what Irina said about the syntaxes. So if you can't publish the data somewhere else, then I think the way to go about this would be to say, this is the data I used, give reference to where it can be accessed. And then you could, for example, provide the syntax that you use to harmonize data and to manipulate it or to process it. So everyone looking at your publication could then go back him or herself, get the data and do the same things that you did with the data to replicate your results, for example. Okay. Thank you very much. Maybe if the person who asked the question is in the chat, you can say whether this has answered your question. And in any case, I'm going to move to the next one. Okay, so this is about data protection impact assessment. What is the definition of if the risk remains high? So probably I'll not be able to give a strict answer that because this also depends on what kind of technology you have at hand and again, what kind of data you have. And but I think it's one of the things described now in GDPR that it's, you know, you need to think of kind of reasonable effort in order to re-identify for the third year. Again, I think it's not just in the data protection regulation, but it's it goes back to our ethical kind of standards as researchers that you need to minimize any kind of risk to harm, you know, whoever is either your person or organization answering that. So again, I think a lot of things really depends on the content that you have and what that actually means to a specific unit that gave the answer. So I think it's more like, you know, think about it ethically will harm that person when I publish this data. Additional thing that I would like to add is what we've seen in data archiving and what is sometimes forgotten by researcher is that it's not only the data file that needs to be properly protected, but it's the data file in the combination with other information that you publish that might actually reveal something on specific persons or institutions. So be careful about that. So it's not only a data file, but it's a whole bunch of documents that you will make public. So the combination of that needs to, you know, minimize the risk of impact. Yeah. Okay. Thank you, Irina. I'll go to the last question that's in the mentor now. So what is the most recommended or common creative commons licenses and when should data owners register for a license? Yeah, I can start here. Oops. Sorry. No problem. Maybe I'm going to start with the second question. When should data owners register for a license? Actually, to clarify that, you don't have to register for this at all. So basically what you do is so you don't have to apply anywhere for a license or, you know, say, I don't know, enter your details anywhere. What you do is you just publish the license along with your data or your publication. So you can simply, in the case of Creative Commons, you just have a look at the kind of license that you would like to use. And then you copy the image or the text from the Creative Commons page and attach that to your data or as a read me or you use it in the data repository. We publish that. So there is no, there are no barriers really there to getting hold of a license, especially Creative Commons license. As for the second or the first question, which is the most recommended license, I do think that Creative Commons is a good tool in that it is, you know, it is very widely used. So Creative Commons licenses have the advantage that a lot of people are going to recognize them. And they have seen the logos before they have vaguely, at least vaguely familiar with with the different licensing options. I think they are the way they are presented on the Creative Commons webpage makes it fairly clear what they can be, what the licenses mean. So that's a big plus in terms of what Creative Commons license you should use that very strongly depends on on your data. It depends on the may depend on the consent form. So, so first of all, if there is personal data involved, so data that falls under data protection regulations, obviously you can't use an open license because it'll be very difficult to publish the data in the first place. But for anonymized data, I think my personal opinion is you should try to make the data as openly available as possible. So the fewer restrictions you put on the use of the data, the more widely it can be used and so that could, for example, be a Creative Commons. Attribution license or CC buy were basically, you know, re-users only have to say where the data came from or you could, you could maybe use a CC buy share like which means that nobody can take the data and make it more, you know, put it in a more restricted domain again. But it really depends on what you feel comfortable with and what the data allows you to do. Yes, if I can second what I just said, so it really depends again on on the data file that you have and the consent and sometimes the data are just so specific so it cannot be or you would not like it to be commercially used. So you need to add a non-commercial license to it. Regardless of that, I would really like to point you to repositories. So most of the repositories has this worked out and they can be of much help to you all. So even before you start collecting data, this is one of the things that we would like data management plan to be for. So even before you start collecting, do try to contact your local national repository that is also could be, you know, specific to the topic and talk this over with them because there are many things that they know and they can kind of suggest. And also many repositories had their own licenses. So if you decide you will deposit that one repository or there are requests from publishing houses, it's good that you check whether you can actually give this data to them under the license they propose. So it's important that you check this soon in advance. Yeah, it's also the publishing houses are an important point because I know for example that in the case of there is a journal called Scientific Data. That's a nature journal where they basically data journal and so any publications made there about data, you have to publish the data as well in a repository. And what they for example require is that the data may not, so the data has to be open to commercial use as well. So if you want to publish a paper in scientific data, publish your data along with it, the data isn't allowed to have a license that excludes commercial use, for example. So sometimes it's good to check what the requirements from publishing houses here are as well. There was a related question. So I just quickly skip to that one. So not all data can be copyrightable and you cannot put a CC license on data that's not copyrightable right only CC zero for clarity. Well, it's true that not all data can be copyrighted. So especially if it really roughly the the rule is that the more work and thinking and individuality you put into creating the data and processing the data, the more likely it is that it can be copyrighted. But for example, if you just have a database that I don't know, like for just temperature measures that something that came right out of a sensor, for example, and you're just, you know, taking this the way that the sensor gave it to you or the measurement instrument gave it to you, then it would probably not be copyrighted. The thing is, you could put you could still put a CC license on it, but users would not have to comply with the license. That's one thing you could you could put a CC zero license on this to make sure that, you know, as you said that to create clarity because I think that's a very good thing about licenses that, you know, they really make transparent what you can or cannot cannot do with the data and they spell it out because I think many users sometimes aren't quite clear what they're allowed to do. And I would also like to add and Yona said, I don't know whether you can confirm this or not, but at least my understanding is the CC zero doesn't mean that you don't need to cite somebody. So it actually just mean that you can use the data as you want to also embed it in different other tools if you want to manipulate it differently, but you still need to refer to where it was the original. Yeah, I think that there we have to distinguish between the legal side, which is that for CC zero you don't have to reference the the creator but if we're talking about good scientific practice and research integrity, then I would say you always have to reference your sources. So in that case, you know, in a scientific in a research context, I would definitely say that even if it's a CC zero, then you should still have a citation of make clear where it comes from. Yeah. Okay, thank you very much. Let's go. Let's skip to the next question because some some others have come in. It's been answered. So this is two questions asked by Garrett in the chat and I've just dropped them in the Mentimeter. What are you taking appraisal analysis of potential data deposits into repository where researchers refuse to deposit consent forms along with research data. Should this result in a decision to refuse to deposit. Currently, we don't have a we have a different view on that in different archives. Because sometimes. Yeah, I mean, it again depends on what kind of data you have how important these data site are for for future button in a general rule. At least in in case we want to at least see how the consent was written because currently there's no agreement in repositories. So at least not in social science, whether our house would need to save consent forms as well. Because currently, you know, the archives would already get anonymous data in house. So that's kind of the rule. This is something that you signed when you signed. Kind of. That you as a researcher, you know, said that you the data to give the repository are anonymous. However, again, we still want to see the form so we see what actually researcher promise to a specific person involved. But yes, it might be an issue and sometimes it's just a lot of things in the back to we need to consider whether data set is really important for historical reasons and for some information we would still save that but put high embargo on it. So it might be, you know, years time when this data would be released, or something like that. But again, it depends on what's there in the back, but in general, some archives that we see and under says umbrella do now imply that you need to deposit consent forms along the research data. So yeah, sometimes you just don't have it because you originally say, I want to have this data anonymous so people would just not put any kind of personal information inside the data at the time where the collection is made so it's a lot of things that you need to consider, you know, how the information that was written, what's written in the consent if it is there, and what kind of data so variables that you have in a data set. Yeah, so at the geysers data archive, we also do not, we don't want the consent forms to be honest because in the worst case, we get anonymous data and then the consent forms aren't anonymous because maybe the name is on there or something. So what we also would do is we would have to look at a sample consent form to see how the consent was raised and if it in fact allows for the positive data in a repository. But we would argue that it's the responsibility of the researcher to deal with the consent forms. I mean, with data protection, that's really a big issue because as soon as the consent form contains personal data, I think the researcher would also be obliged to delete that at some point when they don't need that anymore, which makes it really difficult to, you know, when someone does come back and have questions about, you know, how was consent achieved. I mean, it could be really important to have the forms, but I mean, it's a difficult field really. Yeah, I think this would probably, you know, be more obvious in following years, but currently we all have these questions of who need to save this and where do they need to save, then what happens if researcher moves from one organization to another, it's primary organization or researcher's responsibility. So a lot of questions are there in the back. And I think this is not really agreed yet. So it will be on the table for probably next years. Yes. Okay, so thank you. And I think that answers the follow up question that Garrett asked as well whether the data and the consent form should be held together in one location, unless you've got anything else to add to that. Yeah, so I just think that yes, in a level if you want to protect, you know, people that gave you consent or organization please do keep them separately. Okay. So this has been answered. And then a question by Chris sir is so does one has to consider future technologies for the anonymization of data when publishing sensitive data. So, yes, on one hand. I think, again, what is stated in the GDPR. I think that researchers or even archives will need to check this data file on some basis so perhaps once or, or, you know, once per year once per two years, whether current technologies or future technologies at the time will actually be able to denonymize the data. But at the time that you publish and put the data in the hands of others, I think it's a bit hard for you to maintain this. So, this is also one of the things that why I would propose that you publish the data through trusted repositories that at least by my understanding we need to take care of this also in the future. I think to that it's I think for individual researchers. This is a really hard one. So, I would also, I would agree with arena that, you know, depositing the data in a repository that has discipline specific expertise. So, in this case, I when when sensitive data is I mean sensitive data will not go into a general repository legs in order anyway so it will have to be protected. But I think that we as data archives and data repositories, we have to to monitor the situation. I think we will have to, you know, from time to time reassess, you know, is this data still can this still be considered anonymous or has something changed in the situation and then we as archives would have to take action there. Ideally, of course, together with the data depositors and data producers so if we still have contact information for for them, we would probably discuss with them, you know, how to how to deal with potential problems but it is something that, you know, that this is evolving and it will just something that will keep us busy probably from now on into the future. Okay, thank you. So for now there are no more questions anymore in the mentor is there anybody who wants to ask a question to you and as an arena right now. If so maybe I suggest you just unmute yourself it might be quicker. We need some background music. It's very good news. It means that you've been very clear and and I think it was it's this is very enlightening. I don't know arena or you know, is there anything else that you want to share with the audience here or that you are any any additions to what's been said now during this this Q&A session or during the in the tutorial or with any of the learning materials that's been shared. So perhaps I would just like to again expose that there are so many different chapters in DM guide that this weekend by says the archives and anyone that's interesting either in this topic or the topics that cover a whole research data life cycle can go there and browse it it's a work of a year of a whole team of says experts including Jonas. So a lot of information there and it's we are trying to update it, you know, every year so information will be there. And also there are several local workshops organized again by your national representative archives. So you might go and check their web pages and see if they're offering something in this relation to the data management and or perhaps even ask them to organize something. Yeah, I don't I don't think I have anything to add. I mean, I said I also worked on the on the says the data management guide and I really think it's a it's a really good resource. Even though that's you know, praising ourselves but I think it's it's very comprehensive and even I think that even if you're not from the social sciences I think some of the chapters on the legal questions on the licensing data sharing. They are also can also be relevant to you if you're not from the social sciences and there is contact information. So if you have questions about anything you could get in touch with us or the group and I think that even if you're from a from a different discipline and not from the social sciences. We, I mean, we're quite well connected to other other archives. So I think that we could also probably be of help and you know identifying someone else from your discipline who could be helpful here. Yes, thank you. Thank you. I think that's actually a very useful, very useful remark in general that is that sometimes we do, you know, like sometimes the trainings or webinars or tutorials might seem targeted toward one one or one specific discipline but that does not mean that there cannot be given any advice that is either more general or very specific for another discipline. So, if ever you have any questions and the expert is in another field than yours just don't hesitate to to reach out in any case because a lot of the principles are very similar. Aren't they so. Okay, thank you. Thank you very much. Can I ask one question. Yes, it's it's Libby from Jesus. Hi. This is maybe not a fair question and to be honest, I think it's one I should also know the answer to but I'm interested in your views. I know, you know, I completely agree, you know, it is tuning our own horn a little bit I do think that the says to guide is really a good overview. I'm wondering though for for researchers who are, you know, one step beyond that that is there reasonably from I'm sorry and I'm referring particularly to questions about GDPR implementation. So for researchers who are kind of know know the basics, or for people who are are teaching researchers and want to give them one one level beyond, but essentially don't want to send them to read you know all 89 articles. So is there a particularly good interim resource on GDPR in particular that you think is well suited to researchers. So as you probably know, Scott's published something in August. So this is kind of a combined source for that. Do you mean the FAQ. Oh yes. Yeah, okay. But no, actually, you know, I was looking at different web pages of different institutions and how to go about it. But it's also what's important and we don't have it so detailedly here in the guide is again that these are there are national legislation so it's not only a data protection. That are in a country specific by Slovenia, for example, we have also other laws that are related to that, especially research laws. So it's really a lot of different combination of things that a person really need to know. And yes, I said I know that you're dealing with that a lot and I think at one point will need to sit down again and try to figure out but I didn't really find a good. You know, other examples that I would suggest that would be specific for research, you know, so that is there. So you can find a lot of things that are explaining all the articles and chapters that are in recitals that are in GDPR. And yes, and let me just try to find it so I think and I'll put it in a chat. And I don't because I don't know what I have it also in the slides. So this is one of the links that I found recently that has a whole chapters there. And when you click it, you also you see the issue that you need to see then direct to GDPR also the impact that will actually have for your organization or what you need to do. So I found it this really kind of interesting so they're like pluses and minuses and things like that in there. But again, this again links to the whole GDPR and it's not only the things that are related to the researchers. Okay, but good to know. Thanks very much. And Moets, I see your question. I actually downloaded the file from Scott and I'll try to find it and it will be probably in a minute or something here of this meeting as well. Okay, thanks. Yeah, I was just browsing the German organizations web page because they have a publication also on data protection research, but it's only available in German. So there is no, yeah, there's no English translation. Okay. But even even, yeah. Honestly, if you have that you can link it because we might get researchers that are can read this. Yeah, I will post it in the chat as well. So let me see. So Scott's post is on the academia. And I think most of you can can access these so just need to register you might already have the account so I also added link to the Scots. Scots document. So general data protection regulation researcher and archiving questions. I think that just let me see, publish the July 2018. And yeah, Scott is a lot with these questions at the UK. Okay, in any case, maybe Irina and Jonas, if you think of any other resources that might be useful, you can just send them to me as well. And I can add them to the general to the general information page about this webinar series. Just like with links. Yeah. Are there any other questions. Okay, I would just like to mention, and sometimes this is not clear, but many of the archives already UK data service and also the ICPSR have the wording related to the future use of data files that you should add information sheet or the consent form. So you can find some links in my presentation already, but do try to go online because there are many things already there really and it's not worth of, you know, kind of using too much time for your own to figure it out how it should be recorded. Okay. In that case, I think I will, I will close the session right here. And I would really, really like to thank you Irina and Jonas for being present here and for answering the questions and also I would like to thank the people in the audience who asked their questions because I think we're very interesting and this was a very, very interesting conversation. Like I said, we're going to record this. And we will distribute recordings somewhere I think next week it will depend a bit because there's it's a holiday here so but you will receive in any case one follow up mail with all the final with all the final information and recordings and presentations and things like that. Well, if nobody has anything more to add, I would, I would suggest that I close the session now. And again, Irina and Jonas, thank you very much. Yeah, thank you for the invitation. No, it was interesting. Thank you. Okay. Yeah. Bye. Bye.