MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2553345517

Data Privacy in Electronic Commerce: Analysing Legal Provisions in Iran

2016· article· en· W2553345517 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kamal Halili Hassan, Parviz Bagheri

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Internet Banking and Commerce · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPrivacy, Security, and Data Protection
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationInformation privacyPrivacy policyData Protection Act 1998Information privacy lawInternet privacyPrivacy lawThe InternetPrivacy by DesignComputer securityComputer scienceE-commercePrivacy softwarePersonally identifiable informationLawBusinessPolitical scienceWorld Wide Web
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article discusses the legal protection of data privacy in electronic commerce in Iran. Currently, there is a gap in respect of data privacy protection in Iran as there is no specific privacy legislation in force. Consequently, e-consumers dealing in internet commerce are less protected. However there are rules and regulations in the laws in Iran such as the Islamic Republic (IR) of Iran Constitution, Computer Crimes Act, Penal Code, and Civil Liability Act which relate to privacy in general, although not directly related to data privacy in e-commerce. The Electronic Commerce Law (ECL) is the main legislation in Iran which contains some provisions on personal data privacy. This article discusses the relevant provisions in the ECL pertaining to data messages and privacy and interprets its various meanings to determine whether they are in line with well-established principles found in good data privacy protection measures.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.055
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.286 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations68
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Internet Banking and CommerceSame topicPrivacy, Security, and Data ProtectionFrench-language works237,207