Regulation of Data Collection Methods in Social Media Terms of Service.

<aside> πŸ“— "TOS are often designed to be as broad as possible, and therefore it may not be in the site’s best interest to be specific, and to provide context."

</aside>

LinkedIn TOS are designed to protect the company's interests, not their users.

<aside> πŸ“— "Research has also shown that, regardless of this lack of understanding, many users still feel legally and morally bound by TOS and related documents - regardless of whether they are presented as legally binding (Wilkinson-Ryan 2017). Simply the appearance of a legal-looking document is enough to provoke this reaction, even if a user does not agree to any terms. Researchers currently disagree about the ethics of violating TOS (Vitak, Shilton, and Ashktorab 2016), but this finding suggests that some may feel morally bound regardless of the legal legitimacy of the document."

</aside>

Simply the appearance of a legal-looking LinkedIn TOS is enough for many users to feel it is legally binding.

<aside> πŸ“— "Though some may draw a hard line ethical judgment dependent on respecting the wishes of a company or not breaking a contract, this is certainly not the only way that judgment might be made. When weighing harms and benefits, are you considering only study participants, or also society at large? Do you consider the potential harms beyond intent? Moreover, context is important when it comes to considering these harms."

</aside>

Should we respect the interests of LinkedIn or consider all the users at large?

<aside> πŸ“— However, when it comes to ethics, context is critical. Researchers should consider the broader consequences of data collection and analysis practices, but there are also times when it is appropriate to stray from β€œrules.”

</aside>

Depending on the context breaking TOS might be the right thing to do.

<aside> πŸ“— The question of ethics ... is also complicated by the tension that sometimes exists between principles of good scientific research (openness, transparency, reproducibility) and respect for legal constraints - particularly when those constraints are set by a social media company that may have an agenda that seems contrary to the values of outsiders (Weller and Kinder-Kurlanda 2017)

</aside>

Inguro endorses the principles of scientific research such as openness, transparency and reproducibility.

Internet Research Ethics

<aside> πŸ“— "There is a larger story here: one about decentralization and returning control of the social internet to the people who make it."

</aside>

Inguro empowers users and returns control over the data they own.

<aside> πŸ“— "Aaron Swartz in 2011 that made clear how ripe it was for abuse. Swartz was accused of programmatically downloading large numbers of academic articles from the JSTOR database. He had permission to download these articles as a person, but because he used a program to do it, he was accused of violating the CFAA. He committed suicide preceding the trial, but if convicted he could have been sentenced to 35 years in prison and been forced to pay up to a million dollars in fines. β€˜Guerrilla Open Access Manifesto' reminds us that there is no justice in following unjust laws.

</aside>

There is no justice in following unjust and non-legally binding document, such as the LinkedIn TOS.