Cyberlaw Central

I attended the ABA Techshow here in Chicago from Thursday through Saturday, and had a wonderful time.

On Wednesday evening I was one of the 100 invited guests of the Lexthink! Lounge, presented by Dennis Kennedy, Matthew Homann and JoAnna Forshee. My bowling was a bit rusty, but the conversation and fellowship was great. Rob Robinson took photos, here is a link to his post from which you can follow the link to the Flickr photo set.

At Techshow, I attended sessions relating to electronic discovery, extranets, MS Sharepoint, information security, computer forensics, advanced Internet searching, and use of technology to reduce the risk of legal malpractice. It was very educational and informative.

I especially enjoyed meeting and talking with the following people, in no particular order:
Tom Mighell
Dennis Kennedy
Matt Homann
Sabrina Pacifici
Blair Janis
Rob Robinson
Ben Cowgill
Jim Calloway
Adriana Linares
Ernie Svenson
Nerino Petro
David Moon

Here’s looking forward to next year’s show!

Word is spreading through the blogosphere about a new coalition that aims to protect Network Neutrality. The group, called Save The Internet, is obtaining support across the political spectrum. Here is the Statement of Principles:

We believe that the Internet is a crucial engine for economic growth and democratic discourse. We urge Congress to take steps now to preserve network neutrality, a guiding principle of the Internet, and to ensure that the Internet remains open to innovation and progress.

Network neutrality is the Internet’s First Amendment. Without it, the Internet is at risk of losing the openness and accessibility that has revolutionized democratic participation, economic innovation and free speech.

From its beginnings, the Internet was built on a cooperative, democratic ideal. It has leveled the playing field for all comers. Everyday people can have their voices heard by thousands, even millions of people. Network neutrality has prevented gatekeepers from blocking or discriminating against new economic, political and social ideas.

The major telecommunications legislation now under consideration in Congress must include meaningful and enforceable network neutrality requirements to keep the Internet free and open to all.

Here is a link to the Frequently Asked Questions list. A representative sample follows:

Who wants to get rid of net neutrality?

The nation’s largest telephone and cable companies — including AT&T, Verizon, Comcast and Time Warner — want to be Internet gatekeepers, deciding which Web sites go fast or slow and which won’t load at all.

They want to tax content providers to guarantee speedy delivery of their data. They want to discriminate in favor of their own search engines, Internet phone services, and streaming video — while slowing down or blocking their competitors.

These companies have a new vision for the Internet. Instead of an even playing field, they want to reserve express lanes for their own content and services — or those from big corporations that can afford the steep tolls — and a leave the rest of us on a winding dirt road.

When I last wrote about Net Neutrality, I expressed concern that it be considered on its merits and not be solely a political issue. I will keep an eye on this and other groups here on the blog, but I sure like how it has begun by garnering support across political lines.

May I suggest adding Blawg Review #52 to your reading list? David Giacalone has added his stylistic touch and haiku to the best in legal blogs for the past week. David describes his edition like this:

This Blawg Review edition is set up like most of our posts: a lot of white space, a little organization, some graphic images for contrast, and a bunch of haiku (which relate humans to nature) and senryu (which focus on human nature), touched off with occasional insights and/or wise-cracks from the alterred egos.

I was pleased to see that David included my post on the importance of keeping the Net Neutrality issue from being framed as purely a political issue. However, the real gems here are the other posts and the haiku. Be sure to read the whole thing to appreciate the artistic sensibility that went into creating it. It’s one reason why David’s blog has been in my blogroll for a long, long time.

Network Neutrality is one of the concepts the Internet was based upon. Essentially, one person’s traffic is just as important as the next piece of traffic. The packets of information that are reassembled on the other end back into your email message are not treated any differently than your neighbor’s video streaming packets. Before Congress currently is a piece of legislation in which the telecommunications companies are supporting that would change that. If it passes, the owners of the physical network the Internet travels over will be able to prioritize that traffic. For example, a Verizon customer viewing a streaming video provided by Verizon would receive priority over other traffic. A bill is coming out of a House Energy & Commerce subcommittee that is expected to be reviewed by the whole committee later in April. In the subcommittee, an amendment endorsed by Amazon.com, eBay, Google, Microsoft and Yahoo that would have returned the bill to a Net Neutrality position was defeated. Declan McCullagh of CNET News has written an article in which he claims in the headline that “Republicans defeat Net neutrality proposal,” but a more careful reading of the article shows that the amendment was not defeated on straight party lines, one Republican voted in favor of the amendment and four Democrats voted against it.

I’m concerned that this important issue is being trivialized into a political issue. A careful review of the proposed bill is needed, not a descent into political demagoguery. A bill supported by the owners of the information infrastructure is being opposed by the companies whose continued financial viability depends on the information that travels over that infrastructure. Both sides have an important stake in determining the best outcome for this issue. It’s not purely a political issue. Politics will be part of it, as it seems the infrastructure owners have strong Republican support, and Republicans currently control both houses of Congress and the Presidency. Information is the answer, explaining the issues in such a fair and balanced way that an equitable bill can be passed. Personally, I believe an appeal for legislative help to keep a business viable is a sign that the business model the business depends on is dated, outmoded, or otherwise obsolete. Accordingly, I have little sympathy for companies that thought the system worked well enough in order for them to have built their networks under the current rules in the first place. Still, if a change is truly needed, and a compelling case is made to show the need, I am not opposed to some concessions.

If you have an opinion on Net Neutrality, please express it in the comments to this post.