Respond to legitimate harm. Preserve the scholarly record whenever possible.

Scope

This policy is intended to apply to requests involving public repository files, metadata, images, data, software, personal information, confidential material, legal claims, security concerns, and related access restrictions.

Submitting a Takedown or Restriction Request

A request should identify the exact record or file, the requester’s authority or interest, the nature of the alleged harm, relevant rights or legal basis, and the action requested.

• Stable identifier or repository URL
• Specific file, passage, image, data element, or metadata field
• Explanation of ownership, privacy interest, authority, or risk
• Supporting documents or evidence
• Contact information and statement of accuracy

Initial Assessment and Temporary Measures

The Institute should assess whether the request is sufficiently specific, credible, within repository authority, and urgent enough to require temporary restriction.

Temporary action may be taken before final review when continued access presents a credible risk of serious privacy harm, unlawful disclosure, public safety danger, security compromise, or violation of a binding order.

Copyright and Ownership Complaints

Copyright complaints should identify the protected work, the allegedly infringing material, the requester’s rights or authority, and why the repository use is not authorized.

Review may consider licenses, permissions, authorship, public-domain status, fair use, contractual rights, and counter-notices.

Privacy, Personal Data, Confidentiality, and Consent

Requests may involve exposed identifiers, health or participant information, private correspondence, confidential records, location data, consent limitations, or material creating substantial personal harm.

Responses may include metadata correction, de-identification, redaction, replacement files, access controls, or complete restriction when lesser measures are insufficient.

Court Orders, Subpoenas, Government Requests, and Legal Process

Legal requests should be reviewed for authenticity, jurisdiction, scope, authority, confidentiality, and consistency with applicable rights and obligations.

The Institute should disclose or restrict only what is lawfully required and should seek clarification or narrowing when a demand appears unclear or overbroad.

Security, Safety, and Emergency Restrictions

Immediate restriction may be appropriate for active cybersecurity vulnerabilities, dangerous operational details, export-controlled information, credible threats, restricted infrastructure data, or other material presenting imminent risk.

Emergency action should receive prompt follow-up review, documented justification, and a defined date for reconsideration.

Notice to Authors, Depositors, and Affected Parties

Authors or depositors should ordinarily receive notice of the request, the action taken, the principal basis, and an opportunity to respond.

Notice may be delayed or limited when prohibited by law, necessary to preserve evidence, or likely to increase immediate harm.

Preservation of the Scholarly and Administrative Record

The repository should preserve the original submission, metadata, request, evidence, communications, access changes, decisions, notices, and later restoration history.

A restricted or removed work should ordinarily retain its identifier and landing page with a neutral status notice, unless that notice itself would create harm.

Counter-Notices, Appeals, Reconsideration, and Restoration

Authors, depositors, rights holders, and affected parties may provide additional evidence or request reconsideration of a restriction, redaction, or removal decision.

Access should be restored when the legal, privacy, security, contractual, or rights-based restriction no longer applies or was imposed in error.

Permanent removal should require documented approval and should remain exceptional when redaction, correction, replacement, or restricted access can adequately address the concern.

Framework date: July 2026