Spring 2011 ISP Speaker Series
January 25, 2011: Carol Rosenberg, "A Conversation with Carol Rosenberg & Linda Greenhouse"
February 4, 2011: Amy Kapczynski, "Free Beer, and the Price of Cost"
February 10, 2011: Dave Levine, "The People’s Trade Secrets"
February 18, 2011: Christina Spiesel and Michael Fischer, "Legitimacy and Democracy in the Face of Electronic Voting"
February 25, 2011: Tarleton Gillespie, "The Private Governance of Digital Content, or how Apple intends to offer you ‘freedom from porn"
March 4, 2011: Dr. Edmund Yeh, "From Where to What: A New Architecture for the Internet"
March 28, 2011: Rachel Maddow, "A Conversation with Rachel Maddow"
April 1, 2011: John Palfrey and Urs Gasser, "Interop: The Art and Science of Working Together" (Video)
April 8, 2011: Peter C. Schreiber, "Legal and Public Policy Implications of Geospatial Technologies"
April 15, 2011: Talha Syed and Amy Kapczynski, "Nonexcludability and the Limits of Patents"
Fall 2010 ISP Speaker Series
September 14, 2010: Joe Karaganis, "Media Piracy in Emerging Economies"
October 8, 2010: James Grimmelmann, "Sealand and HavenCo: A New Interpretation"
October 22, 2010: Aram Sinnreich, "Mashed Up: Music, Technology, and the Rise of Configurable Culture (2010)"
October 26, 2010: Philip Howard, "The Digital Origins of Democracy: Information Technology and Political Islam"
October 26, 2010: Dahlia Lithwick, "A Conversation with Dahlia Lithwick"
November 5, 2010: Milton Mueller, "Networks and States (MIT Press 2010)"
November 9, 2010: Barbara van Schewickt, "Internet Architecture and Innovation"
November 18, 2010: Bob Woodward, "Watergate, Open Government and Investigative Journalism: A Retrospective and Glimpse Into the Future of the Freedom of Information Act"
November 30, 2010: Monroe Price, "Adventures in Transnational Communications: Defining the Stake One State Has in the Media Systems of Another"
December 1, 2010: Jonathan Zittrain, "Minds for Sale"
December 9, 2010: Nate Persily, "The 2010 Redistricting Cycle and the Internet"
December 10, 2010: Jeanne Fromer, "The Dormant IP Clause"
Spring 2010 ISP Speaker Series
Spring 2010 ISP Speaker Series
January 29, 2010: Julie Cohen, "The Structural Conditions of Human Flourishing in the Information Society"
February 5, 2010: Frank Pasquale, "Search as Speech: Does the First Amendment Limit Regulation of Google?"
February 22, 2010: Arianna Huffington, "The First Amendment Online"
March 5, 2010: James Grimmelmann, "The Google Books Settlement: Class Action, Copyright, Antitrust, or All of the Above?"
March 26, 2010: Christina Mulligan, "Principles for Radical Copyright Reform"
April 2, 2010: Nicholas Bramble, "Should the FCC Let AT&T Be? Standing on the Shoulders of Weary Giants of Flesh and Steel"
April 9, 2010: David Post, "Can We Defend Free Speech on the Net?"
April 15, 2010: Amy Goodman, "The Power of Independent Journalism in the Struggle for a Better World"
April 23, 2010: Beth Noveck, "Open Government and the First Amendment: Strengthening our Democracy through Transparency, Participation, and Collaboration"
Fall 2009 ISP Speaker Series
Fall 2009 ISP Speaker Series
September 8, 2009: Siva Vaidhynathan, "The Googlization of Everything"
September 15, 2009: Molly Beutz Land, "Health Information and Human Rights"
September 22, 2009: Shai Reshef, "Educating the Many and Not the Few: A Digital Model for Change"
October 6, 2009: Stephen Schultz, "RECAPture the Law: The Growing Movement to Free the Electronic Record"
October 7, 2009: Jimmy Wales, "Wikipedia, its Purpose, its Criticisms, and its Place in the Academic/Human Sphere"
October 13, 2009: Mark Pittman, "Busting the American Casino: How Freedom of Information Can Tame the Federal Reserve"
October 27, 2009: Gigi Sohn, "Content and its Discontents: What Net Neutrality Does and Doesn’t Mean for Copyright"
October 29, 2009: Jason Silva & Max Lugavere, "Media Revolution: Putting the Media in the Hands of Citizen Journalists"
November 17, 2009: Fred Von Lohmann, "Owners of Copies v. Copyright Owners: Understanding Copyright’s Exhaustion Doctrine"
December 1, 2009: Chris Hansen, "Gene Patents: Patently Unconstitutional?"
December 9, 2009: Mimi Calter, "Copyright Registries: Rising into the Public Domain"
December 15, 2009: Thomas Goetz, "Does Privacy Matter? Medical Information in a Time of Collective Wisdom"
Spring 2009 Lunch Speaker Series Schedule
Spring 2009 Lunch Speaker Series Schedule
February 3, 2009: Motohiro Tsuchiya, Keio University
February 10, 2009: Victoria Stodden, Harvard University
February 17, 2009: Nicholas Economides, "Net Neutrality on the Internet: A Two-Sided Market Analysis"
March 10, 2009: Mark Webbink, "Harnessing Social Networks to Improve Patent Quality and Patent Knowledge"
March 24, 2009: Anthony Townsend, Institute for the Future
March 31, 2009: Aram Sinnreich, New York University
April 7, 2009: Elizabeth Stark, iCommons and Yale Information Society Project
April 15/22, 2009: James Grimmelman, New York Law School
April 28, 2009: Jean Burgess, Queensland University of Technology, Australia
Fall 2008 Lunch Speaker Series Schedule
Fall 2008 Lunch Speaker Series Schedule
September 16, 2008: John Kelly, "Mapping Blogospheres," Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School
October 7, 2008: Danielle Citron, "Cyber Civil Rights," University of Maryland School of Law
October 14, 2008: Chris Anderson, “Stabilizing the News Network,” Columbia University
November 4, 2008: Katherine Strandburg, “User Innovation and Intellectual Property Law,” DePaul University
November 11, 2008: Marc Smith, Telligent Systems Research
November 18, 2008: Michelle Dennedy, Sun Microsystems
December 2, 2008: Biella Coleman, “These are the Best of Times and these are the Worst of Times: Free Software and the Global Politics of Intellectual Property Law,” New York University
December 9, 2008: Cindy Cohn, Electronic Frontier Foundation
December 16, 2008: Christina Dunbar-Hester, “Do New Media Have Old Politics?,” Annenberg School for Communication, University of Pennsylvania
Spring 2008 Lunch Speaker Series Schedule
Spring 2008 Lunch Speaker Series Schedule
February 5, 2008: Helen Nissenbaum, "Contextual Integrity as a Normative Guide for Privacy"
February 12, 2008: Julia Sonnevend, "The Pictorial Revolution: Towards an Iconology for Digital Photos"
February 19, 2008: Dan Brenner, "Who'd You Say Killed the Internet? Networks and Transparency"
February 26, 2008: Susan Crawford, "The Radio and the Internet"
March 4, 2008: Richard Whitt, "The New Emergence Economics of Innovation and Growth, and What It Means for Public Policy"
March 11, 2008: Laura Forlano, "Anytime? Anywhere?: Local Innovation, Use and Community-Building at WiFi Hotspots"
April 15, 2008: Drew Endy, "Chromosome Cowboys and DNA Wizards: Ownership, Sharing, and Innovation Frameworks in Synthetic Biology"
April 22, 2008: Yvonne Cripps, "Gene Patents: Where Property, Intellectual Property and Information Meet"
April 29, 2008: Gaia Bernstein, "In the Shadow of Innovation"
May 6, 2008: Lea Shaver, "Defining and Measuring A2K: A Blueprint for an Index of Access to Knowledge"
"iP: YouTube, MySpace, Our Culture"
Thursday, April 23, 2008
The object of intellectual property law’s desire—culture—is changing. Culture is no longer understood simply as incontestable tradition, or canned commodity. Increasingly, culture is participatory community. We are moving away from culture as Mickey Mouse—the immutable, canned product of a corporation—to culture empowered by a computer mouse. To paraphrase Foucault, modern man invents himself. Foucault wrote long before Web 2.0 enabled individuals to rip, mix, and create culture from the bottom-up. In fact, the vision he expressed echoed Kant’s Enlightenment imperative, “Sapere Aude!” Think for oneself! But by and large, through the late 20th century, Enlightenment, where it emerged at all, had come mostly to the political sphere. The cultural spheres have remained largely in the control of traditional authorities backed by the force of law, if not God. Enlightenment freedom has meant freedom in the public sphere.
Today, Enlightenment goes the next mile, as social movements and new technologies usher in modern modes of being within culture, not just without it. The central argument of this book is that an intellectual property law befitting this new participatory century must lift its gaze beyond the narrow goal of incentivizing the creation of more intellectual products to facilitating critical and autonomous participation in the cultural sphere. Modernity is not simply technology. A modern intellectual property law must promote our capacity to author our own lives.
"Harnessing Social Networks to Improve Patent Quality and Patent Knowledge"
Tuesday, March 10, 2008
The presentation will focus on the work of New York Law School's Center for Patent Innovations and its groundbreaking projects to improve both patent quality and understanding of patents. The presentation will walk through the history and purpose of the PeertoPatent project run in conjunction with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, including results from the first 18 months of the pilot. The presentation will then touch on the upcoming PeertoPatent pilot in the United Kingdom and how it will differ from the U.S. pilot in its focus. We will then turn to the Center's Post-Issue PeertoPatent program which focuses on identifying prior art relevant to issued patents, and the challenge of non-meritorious patents, particularly in the field of software. Finally, the presentation will touch on the Center's new Open Patent project intended to test the value of tagging and visualization technologies in conjunction with patent databases.
Mark H. Webbink is a visiting professor of law and executive director of the Center for Patent Innovations at New York Law School. Mr. Webbink received his B.A. Degree from Purdue University in 1972, his Masters in Public Administration from the University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill in 1974, and his J.D., magna cum laude, from North Carolina Central University School of Law in 1994. From 1994 to 2000 Webbink practiced with Moore & Van Allen, PLLC in Durham, North Carolina, where his practice focused on intellectual property transactions. In 2000 Webbink joined Red Hat, Inc. as its first general counsel. He was subsequently elected a senior vice president and secretary of the company. Webbink served as general counsel until June 2004 when he returned to his primary area of interest as deputy general counsel for intellectual property. He served in that role through August 2007, when he retired from Red Hat. Webbink continues to serve Red Hat as special counsel for intellectual property matters. During Webbink's tenure with Red Hat he developed a number of groundbreaking intellectual property practices, including Red Hat's Patent Promise and the legal foundations for Red Hat's subscription model for open source software.
Mr. Webbink has written and spoken extensively on the subjects of open source software, software patents, and patent reform, including testimony before the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property, the Federal Trade Commission and Department of Justice, and the National Academy of Sciences. Webbink has had articles published by the Queensland University of Technology, the Duke Law and Technology Review, Internet Law & Business, and New South Wales Society for Computers and the Law. Webbink's article Understanding Open Source Software has been reprinted around the world as a primer on open source licensing. Since 2005 Webbink has contributed the On the Docket column in Linux Magazine. Webbink has lectured at the Computer Law Institute of the Practicing Law Institute, Georgetown's Advanced Computer and Internet Law Institute, the Association of Corporate Counsel, the Licensing Executives Society, and numerous law schools, including the University of California – Berkeley, Harvard University, Columbia University, University of Michigan, Queensland University of Technology, and University of North Carolina – Chapel Hill, as well as Duke University.
"Net Neutrality on the Internet: A Two-Sided Market Analysis"
Nicholas Economides is an internationally recognized academic authority on network economics, electronic commerce and public policy. His fields of specialization and research include the economics of networks, especially of telecommunications, computers, and information, the economics of technical compatibility and standardization, industrial organization, the structure and organization of financial markets and payment systems, antitrust, application of public policy to network industries, strategic analysis of markets and law and economics.
Professor Economides has published more than 100 articles in top academic journals in the areas of networks, telecommunications, oligopoly, antitrust, product positioning and on the liquidity and the organization of financial markets and exchanges. He holds a PhD and MA in Economics from the University of California at Berkeley, as well as a BSc (First Class Honors) in Mathematical Economics from the London School of Economics. Previously, he taught at Columbia University (1981-1988) and at Stanford University (1988-1990). He is editor of the Information Economics and Policy, Netnomics, Quarterly Journal of Electronic Commerce, the Journal of Financial Transformation, Journal of Network Industries, on the Advisory Board of the Social Science Research Network, editor of Economics of Networks Abstracts by SSRN and former editor of the International Journal of Industrial Organization. His website on the Economics of Networks has been ranked as one of the top four economics sites worldwide by The Economist magazine.
Professor Economides is Executive Director of the NET Institute, http://www.NETinst.org, a worldwide focal point for research on the economics of network and high technology industries. He is advisor to the US Federal Trade Commission, the governments of Greece, Ireland, New Zealand and Portugal, the Attorney General of New York State, major telecommunications corporations, a number of the Federal Reserve Banks, the Bank of Greece and major Financial Exchanges. He serves on the Advisory Board of the Economist Intelligence Unit. He has commented extensively in broadcast and in print on high technology, antitrust and public policy issues. A complete CV is available at http://www.stern.nyu.edu/networks/cvnoref.html.
"Do New Media Have Old Politics?"
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
This paper contextualizes discourses surrounding new media technologies by examining activism around community media, using as a case study an activist group who since the mid-1990s have advocated for greater citizen access to low-power FM (LPFM) radio. I argue that the significance of new and emerging communication technologies can be grasped most effectively when emerging technologies are considered in a dynamic field that includes older technologies; emerging technologies are often viewed through the lens of patterns of use and interpretation of older technologies, at least initially. I follow the activists’ assessments of not only FM radio but emerging digital technologies, including webstreaming and wi-fi networks. In practice, the activists circumspectly negotiate expanding their efforts to encompass community wi-fi networks, while trying to retain the vision, flavor, and organizing strategies from their LPFM campaigns.
Christina Dunbar-Hester is a Postdoctoral Fellow at Annenberg School for Communication at the University of Pennsylvania. She completed her doctoral studies in Science & Technology Studies at Cornell University in spring 2008. Her dissertation project was an ethnographic examination of contemporary activism around low-power FM radio, and her research interests include social studies of technology, media activism, sound studies, and the politics of public engagement of scholarship.
"Your World Delivered to the NSA: Warrantless Domestic Wiretapping Litigation Update"
Tuesday, December 9, 2008
Cindy Cohn is the Legal Director for the Electronic Frontier Foundation as well as its General Counsel. She is responsible for overseeing the EFF's overall legal strategy and supervising EFF's 9 staff attorneys. Ms. Cohn first became involved with the EFF in 1995, when the EFF asked her to serve as the lead attorney in Bernstein v. Dept. of Justice, the successful First Amendment challenge to the U.S. export restrictions on cryptography. Outside the Courts, Ms. Cohn has testified before Congress, been featured in the New York Times, San Francisco Chronicle, Frontline and elsewhere for her work on cyberspace issues. The National Law Journal named Ms. Cohn one of 100 most influential lawyers in America in 2006 for "rushing to the barricades wherever freedom and civil liberties are at stake online." In 2007 the Journal named her one of the 50 most influential women lawyers in America. Ms. Cohn is a graduate of the University of Michigan Law School. She did her undergraduate studies at the University of Iowa and the London School of Economics.
"Old and New Net Wars over Free Speech, Freedom and Secrecy or How to Understand the Hacker and Lulz battle against the C0$"
Tuesday, December 2, 2008
In this talk I present a cultural history and political analysis of one of the oldest Internet wars, often referred to as "Internet vs Scientology," which in recent times has witnessed a different incarnation in the form of "Project Chanology," which is orchestrated by a group called Anonymous who has led a series of online attacks and real world protests against Scientology. I argue that to understand the significance of these battles and protests, we must examine how the two groups stand in a culturally antipodal relation to each other. Through this analysis of cultural inversion, I will consider how long-standing liberal ideals take cultural root in the context of these battles, use these two cases to reveal important political transformations in Internet/hacker culture between the mid 1990s and today and finally will map the tension between pleasure/freedom (the “lulz”) and moral good ("free speech") found among Anonymous in terms of the tension between liberal freedom and romantic/Nietzschian freedom/pleasure.
Gabriella Coleman is an anthropologist who examines the role of the law and new media technologies in extending and critiquing liberal values and sustaining new forms of political activism. Between 2001-2003 she conducted ethnographic research on computer hackers primarily in San Francisco, the Netherlands, as well as those hackers who work on the largest free software project, Debian. In 2005-2006 she was a fellow at the Center for Cultural Analysis at Rutgers University and last year was a Killam postdoctoral fellow at the University of Alberta. She is completing a book manuscript "Coding Liberal Freedom: Hacker Pleasure and the Ethics of Free and Open Source Software" and is starting a new project on patient activism on the Internet with a focus on psychiatric survivors and consumers. She is the recipient of numerous grants and awards, including ones from the National Science Foundation, the Woodrow Wilson Foundation, and the Social Science Research Council.
"Information without Borders"
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
Michelle Dennedy is Chief Privacy Officer for Sun Microsystems, Inc. Michelle is responsible for the continued development and implementation of Sun's data privacy policies and practices, working across Sun's business groups to drive the company's continued data privacy excellence. Data privacy is a cornerstone of Sun's approach to compliance with complex, demanding regulations including Sarbanes-Oxley, the EU Directive, California State Senate Bills, as well as escalating policy and process oriented requirements being imposed globally. Michelle also works with Sun's product development teams and partners to deliver best-practice privacy enabling products and services.
Michelle co-founded Sun's internal Privacy Council, an organization that includes and engages with stakeholders from across the company and is dedicated to promoting and promulgating a cohesive practice throughout the organization to protect Sun's relationships with its customers and employees. Leveraging her persuasion skills honed in law practice and courtroom litigation, Michelle is a sought-after and provocative public speaker, evangelizing new approaches and business justifications for soundly-defined, transparent privacy policies and systems that protect healthy, safe global businesses.
Michelle has a JD from Fordham University School of Law and a BS degree with university honors from Ohio State University.
"Pictures of traces of places, people, and groups: visualizing computer-mediated collective action"
Tuesday, November 11, 2008
Studies of computer mediated collective action systems, now sometimes called social media or Web 2.0, provide insights into their structure and dynamics and point to important enhancements. In this talk I will review projects that highlight and attempt to enhance computer mediated collective action and point towards future work. Three sociological traditions, social network theory, collective action dilemma theory, and interactionist sociologies, provide a set of frames for social media activity. Combining these approaches with data mining and information visualization techniques leads to a deeper understanding of the range of social behavior and aggregate performance of social media spaces and participants. Social media systems may vary in form but most share common data structures, notably directed graphs representing relationships created by connections between users. Visualizations of a variety of social media spaces will illustrate the roles that are most critical to the success of collective efforts to generate value on the web. Tools like (Excel) .NetMap are freely available to support these explorations (see: http://www.codeplex.com/netmap).
Marc Smith is a sociologist specializing in the social organization of online communities and computer mediated interaction. He founded and managed the Community Technologies Group at Microsoft Research in Redmond, Washington for ten years and is now an independent consultant to the social media industry in Silicon Valley. He is the co-editor of Communities in Cyberspace (Routledge), a collection of essays exploring the ways identity; interaction and social order develop in online groups. Smith's research focuses on computer-mediated collective action: the ways group dynamics change when they take place in and through social cyberspaces. Many “groups” in cyberspace produce public goods and organize themselves in the form of a commons (for related papers see: http://delicious.com/marc_smith/Paper). Smith's goal is to visualize these social cyberspaces, mapping and measuring their structure, dynamics and life cycles. He developed the "Netscan" web application and data mining engine that allows researchers studying Usenet newsgroups to get reports on the rates of posting, posters, crossposting, thread length and frequency distributions of activity.
This research offers a means to gather historical data on the development of social cyberspaces and can be used to highlight the ways these groups differ from, or are similar to, face-to-face groups. Smith is applying this work to the development of a generalized community platform for Microsoft, providing a web based system for groups of all sizes to discuss and publish their material to the web.
Smith received a B.S. in International Area Studies from Drexel University in Philadelphia in 1988, an M.Phil. in social theory from Cambridge University in 1990, and a Ph.D. in Sociology from UCLA in 2001.
“User Innovation and Intellectual Property Law”
Tuesday, November 4, 2008
In this presentation, I will consider the implications for patent doctrine of user innovation motivated primarily by the benefits of developing and using an invention. User innovators range from commercial firms, which invent new production methods in expectation of competitive advantage, to individual hobbyists motivated entirely by their enjoyment of the inventive process. The user innovator paradigm contrasts sharply with the seller innovator picture which dominates patent policy. Moreover, empirical studies show that user innovators, rather than choosing between trade secrecy and patenting as patent doctrine often assumes, regularly “freely reveal” their innovations to others. I will discuss specific implications of user innovation in the contexts of business method patenting and research tool exemptions. I will also argue that new and evolving innovation paradigms necessitate a rethinking of global innovation regulation such as the TRIPS agreement.
Katherine Strandburg is visiting Fordham University School of Law from DePaul University College of Law, where she teaches patent law, cyberlaw, and information privacy law. She has also visited at New York University (2008-09) and University of Illinois (2005) law schools. Her research interests are in patent law; science and technology policy; law and network science; user and open and collaborative innovation; and information privacy law. Her past and forthcoming publications have appeared in the Boston College, Wisconsin, and Colorado Law Reviews, and the Berkeley Technology Law Journal, among others. She has also co-authored three law professor amicus briefs to the Supreme Court on patent issues. Professor Strandburg obtained her law degree from the University of Chicago Law School with high honors in 1995 and served as a law clerk to the Honorable Richard D. Cudahy of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. She is an experienced litigator and is licensed to practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office.
Prior to her legal career, Professor Strandburg was a research physicist at Argonne National Laboratory, having received her Ph.D. from Cornell University in 1984 and done postdoctoral research at Carnegie Mellon. She was a visiting faculty member of the physics department at Northwestern University from 1990-1992.
"Cyber Civil Rights"
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Social networking sites and blogs have increasingly become breeding grounds for anonymous online groups that attack women, people of color, and members of other traditionally disadvantaged groups. These destructive groups target individuals with defamation, threats of violence, and technology-based attacks that silence victims and concomitantly destroy their privacy. Victims go offline or assume pseudonyms to prevent future attacks, thereby losing the social and economic opportunities associated with a vibrant online presence and impoverishing online dialogue. Attackers manipulate search engines to reproduce their lies and threats for employers and clients to see, creating digital “scarlet letters” that ruin reputations.
Today’s cyber attack groups update a history of anonymous mobs coming together to victimize and subjugate vulnerable people. The social science literature identifies conditions that magnify dangerous group behavior and those that tend to defuse it. Unfortunately, Web 2.0 technologies accelerate mob behavior. With little reason to expect self-correction of this intimidation of vulnerable individuals, the law must respond.
General criminal statutes and tort law proscribe much of the mobs’ destructive behavior, but the harm they inflict also ought to be understood and addressed as civil rights violations. Civil rights suits reach societal harm that may otherwise go unaddressed and would play a crucial expressive role. When these attacks consist of defamation, true threats, intentional infliction of emotional distress, and technological sabotage, acting against them does not offend First Amendment principles. To the contrary, it helps preserve vibrant online dialogue.
Danielle Citron is an Associate Professor at the University of Maryland School of Law. Professor Citron writes in the areas of information privacy law, cyberspace law, and administrative law, with an emphasis on the legal issues surrounding the government’s reliance on information technologies. Her current work focuses on the Internet’s implications for civil rights. Professor Citron’s recent articles include Cyber Civil Rights, 89 Boston University Law Review (forthcoming 2009), Open Code Governance, 16 University of Chicago Legal Forum (forthcoming 2008), Technological Due Process, 85 Washington University Law Review 1249 (2008), Reservoirs of Danger: The Evolution of Public and Private Law at the Dawn of the Information Age, 80 Southern California Law Review 241 (2007), and Minimum Contacts in a Borderless World: Voice over Internet Protocol and the Coming Implosion of Personal Jurisdiction Theory, 39 U.C. Davis Law Review 1481 (2006). She was voted the “Teacher of the Year” by the University of Maryland law school students in 2005. Beginning in October, she will be a permanent blogger at Concurring Opinions.
Before teaching, Professor Citron worked as a litigation associate at Willkie, Farr & Gallagher where she served as a MFY Legal Services fellow. She also spent two years as a law clerk for the Honorable Mary Johnson Lowe of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. She received her B.A. cum laude from Duke University and obtained her law degree from Fordham Law School where she graduated Order of the Coif.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
The Blogosphere is a complex network containing meaningful, distinct structures. These map onto social and cultural formations we intuitively understand: subcultures, ideological factions, professions, communities of interest, communities of practice, project teams, identity groups, etc. These structures commingle in the network, subtly melding across diffuse boundaries. Using a combination of large-scale social network analysis, statistics, text mining and human content analysis, we map and interpret this emergent global network of public discourse. In this talk, we will look briefly at a range of international blogospheres, and then more in depth at the English language and Farsi language blogospheres, where distinct network formations reveal the footprint of politics and culture in the US and Iran.
John Kelly is the founder and lead scientist of Morningside Analytics. His research blends Social Network Analysis, content analysis, and statistics to solve the problem of making complex online networks visible and understandable. John has an M.Phil. from Columbia University (Ph.D. pending), and has studied communications at Stanford and at Oxford’s Internet Institute. He is an Affiliate at the Berkman Center for Internet and Society at Harvard Law School.
"Contextual Integrity as a Normative Guide for Privacy"
Tuesday, February 5, 2008
* Nissenbaum, H. (2004). Privacy as contextual integrity. Washington Law Review, 79(1), 119-157.
* Barth, A., Datta, A., Mitchell, J. C., & Nissenbaum, H. (2006). Privacy and contextual integrity: Framework and applications. Paper presented at the IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy.
Helen Nissenbaum is a professor of Media, Culture and Communication at New York University and a faculty fellow, of the Information Law Institute. She studies ethical and political issues relating to information technology and new media, particularly, privacy, politics of search engines, and values embodied in the design of information technologies and systems. Research grants from the U.S National Science Foundation, the Ford Foundation, and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security have supported her research. Books include Emotion and Focus, Computers, Ethics and Social Values (co-edited with D.J. Johnson), and Academy and the Internet (co-edited with Monroe Prince). She is a co-founding editor of the journal, Ethics and Information Technology. Before NYU, Nissenbaum served as Associate Director at Princeton's University Center for Human Values and held a postdoctoral fellowship at the Center for the Study of Language and Information at Stanford. She earned a B.A. with honors from the University of Witwatersand, Johannesburg, and an M.A. in Education and Ph.D. in philosophy from Stanford University.
"The Pictorial Revolution: Towards an Iconology for Digital Photos"
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
Iconology is the interdisciplinary, general study of images across the media. I would like to consider the kinds of differences I recognized between the basic assumptions of the iconology related concepts of art history, visual culture and cultural sociology. These disciplines all examine the cultural relevance of visual representations and try to construct adequate theoretical frameworks for them. They all struggle with understanding and experiencing the mythical and mysterious lives of images, and aim to provide concepts about the meaning, appearance, vitality, silence, power, powerlessness and social impact of visual representations. Nevertheless, all these disciplines have their limitations that come from their methodological and conceptual traditions. I would like to shed light on the limitations in their approaches with the aim to take steps towards a new iconology that is also well-suited for the interpretation of digital photos.
W. J. T. Mitchell used the term “the pictorial turn” in the 90-ies for describing and analyzing the replacement of words by visual images as the dominant form of expression in our society. As I write this sentence, millions of digital photographs are being taken and many posted to Flickr, YouTube, personal websites and social networking sites all around the world. People capture family events, moments of political relevance, landscapes, architectural wonders, paintings and whatever seems as interesting at that second. Moments of everyday life are preserved in digital format and these digital files create archives of the collective visual memory of the globe. We could describe the present experience rather as a pictorial revolution, than a pictorial turn. I mean this in two main senses: one, the increasing level of participation of the general public in image production and, two, the changing culture and notion of image editing related to a restructuring process of editorial elites.
An iconology for digital photos has to face most of the challenges of all previous iconologies: digital photographs are part of the larger family of visual representations. Nevertheless, digital photos also create new roadblocks for the theories of the enthusiastic researcher and have a tendency to resist hermeneutical and structuralist interpretational efforts. I will consider these new challenges along with the traditional ones.
Julia Sonnevend is a resident fellow with The Information Society Project at Yale Law School and an assistant professor in the Department of Communications, Institute for Art Theory and Media Research, Eötvös Loránd University Budapest. She received her Master of Laws degree from Yale Law School, her Juris Doctorate and her Master of Arts degrees in Aesthetics and German Literature from Eötvös Loránd University. Sonnevend is interested in the intersections between communications, art history, cultural sociology and legal theory, her research areas include: visual culture, democratization of visual media, iconology, representation of justice in art and media, access to knowledge, democratic culture, law and performance, art and activism, media criticism, post-socialist identities, Eastern-European media, cultural memory, cultural trauma, feminist theories, contemporary Hungarian and German literature.
"Who'd You Say Killed the Internet? Networks and Transparency"
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
"Network neutrality" has gone through many iterations in public policy debates, with many critics pointing to network architecture or feared network practices as being an impediment to the free-flow character of the Internet. What are the complaints, and what are the policy factors that ought to be considered in developing commercial and government policies toward ISP networks?
Daniel Brenner is Senior Vice President for Law & Regulatory Policy at the National Cable & Telecommunications Association, Washington, D.C., where he has served since 1992. Previously, he served as Director of the Communications Law Program and a member of the faculty at UCLA Law School. He also served as Counsel to LeBoeuf, Lamb, Greene & MacRae (now Dewey & LeBoeuf). Brenner was Senior Legal Advisor to Chairman Mark Fowler of the Federal Communications Commission. He was also Vice-Chairman of the U.S. Delegation to the ITU World Radio Conference in Geneva, Switzerland in 1984. He has served as a consultant on telecommunications issues for the RAND Corporation and the International Media Fund, and as a Senior Fellow at The Annenberg Washington Program and serves on the adjunct faculty of Georgetown School of Law.
Brenner has served on the Board of Directors of Tekelec (Nasdaq: TKLC), an international telecommunications equipment manufacturer based in North Carolina, since 1990. He is on the Board of Cable Positive, the cable industry’s AIDS awareness organization and served as a Trustee of Stanford University from 1982 to 1987. Brenner was appointed by the President of the United States and served as a member and Vice-Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Corporation for Public Broadcasting from 1986 to 1991. He is a graduate of Stanford University, Stanford Law School, and the senior executive program of Stanford School of Business.
"The Radio and the Internet"
Tuesday, February 26, 2008
In this article, I evaluate the multi-billion-dollar 700 MHz auction regime established by the FCC in 2007-08 as a case study in the institutional role of the Commission. The Commission's solicitude for the interests of large traditional communications players is still as firmly in place as it was in the 1920s. Congressional pressures and the sense that the Internet ethos has contributed to the economy did lead the Commission in 2007-08 to take a moderately less-protective approach to the wireless incumbents' business plans. Yet the Commission's vision of the "public interest" remains incoherent. The FCC still appears to believe that it is best for dominant private wireless carriers (the high-power broadcasters of our day) to be able to dictate in detail how the airwaves are used.
I suggest that the public interest would best be served by nudging this country towards the Internet "no permission required," "common carriage" ethos. No auction is truly neutral, and the background assumptions of the 700 MHz auction are likely to lead to stalled innovation for US wireless communications and continued inadequate Internet access.
Susan Crawford is currently a Visiting Professor of Law at Yale Law School, teaching internet law and communications law. Last term (fall 2007), she was a visiting professor at the University of Michigan Law School. She is a member of the board of directors of ICANN and is the founder of OneWebDay, a global Earth Day for the internet that takes place each Sept. 22. Ms. Crawford received her B.A. (summa *** laude, Phi Beta Kappa) and J.D. from Yale University. She served as a clerk for Judge Raymond J. Dearie of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York, and was a partner at Wilmer, Cutler & Pickering (Washington, D.C.) until the end of 2002, when she left that firm to enter the legal academy. Susan, a violist, usually lives in New York City and teaches at Cardozo Law School.
"The New Emergence Economics of Innovation and Growth, and What It Means for Public Policy"
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
I will discuss how the hoary "Old School Economics" still teaches us that the market is linear and always seeks equilibrium, that economic actors are perfectly rational, with perfect knowledge of themselves and the marketplace, that production is generated only by capital markets or government subsidy, that growth is exogenous, and the whole of the economic system is always equal to the sum of its parts. It turns out that every one of these key assumptions is plain wrong. While the ramifications for the study and practice of economics cannot be overstated, the implications for the public policy world that has rested for so long on those assumptions cannot be overlooked.
Today's discussions about national communications policy often seem to be rooted to the past, in the form of economic and technology assumptions that more or less ended in the 1960s. As it turns out, the rise of new economic thinking, along with new technology platforms culminating in the Internet, together directly challenge many of those chief assumptions. Now is an appropriate time to articulate the fundamental economic and technology tenets that should form the basis for our nation's communications and information policies, and to begin suggesting some ways those policies should be recast in their light.
I will introduce the "rough formula" for Emergence Economics – namely, that individual agents, acting through interconnected networks, engage in the evolutionary processes of differentiation, selection, and amplification, which in turn generate a host of positive emergent economic phenomena. The Internet then will be discussed as a notable and perhaps unique product of market and non-market forces, as a layered infrastructure, and as a platform for broad-based innovation and human communication. Next I will turn to some key emergent phenomena, including ideas, innovation, economic growth, and what we call "Net effects". Finally, these economic and technological elements will be brought to to bear in the world of public policy, where old concepts about communications law and regulation should be reexamined, and in some cases given new life.
I will end with a discussion of the proper role of the government policymaker — the legislator, the regulator, the reviewing judge – in the face of an innovation-fueled, network-connected, emergent economy. At bottom, the lessons here point to caution, and even outright skepticism about becoming a more active force in the market, but always tempered by optimism. The tools of government, when employed sparingly, carefully, and deliberately, and in the right context, can successfully facilitate a more optimum environment for new ideas, economic growth, and human freedom. However, this bottom-up regulatory approach requires an appreciation for, and understanding of, the component elements of Emergence Economics.
Richard S. Whitt is the Washington Telecom and Media Counsel for Google Inc. In that capacity, Rick is responsible for Google’s strategy and advocacy on all wireline, wireless, and media matters before the Federal Communications Commission, other Federal agencies, and the U.S. Congress. Most recently he has represented the company’s interests on a variety of broadband policy issues (such as network neutrality), spectrum policy matter (such as the 700 MHz auction and TV white spaces), and “unregulation” of VoIP and other Web-based applications.
Prior to joining Google in January 2007, Rick founded and headed NetsEdge Consulting, a public policy consulting firm that provided legal analysis, regulatory strategy, and advocacy counsel to Google and other Web companies. From 1994 to 2006, Rick worked in the legal department at MCI Communications, where he most recently served as vice president for federal law and policy. Rick previously spent over five years as an associate attorney in the communications practices of two large D.C.-based law firms.
Rick is a 1988 *** laude graduate of the Georgetown University Law Center, and a 1984 magna *** laude graduate of James Madison University. He is a resident of Washington, D.C.
"Anytime? Anywhere?: Local Innovation, Use and Community-Building at WiFi Hotspots"
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Mobile and wireless technologies – including mobile phones, wireless fidelity (WiFi), radio frequency identification tags (RFID) and wireless sensors – are rapidly being innovated, adopted and used. These technologies comprise an “invisible” information layer in physical spaces however, there has been little theoretical or applied research conducted to shape the ways in which they are designed and used. This project analyzes the socio-cultural, economic and political dimensions of mobile and wireless technologies, focusing on the ways in which they privilege local innovation, use and community-formation.
The current research has identified a number of important findings, which contradict much thinking about the socio-economic dimensions of the Internet. This is because much research focuses primarily on the virtual and networked aspects of the Internet rather than the local significance. WiFi provides an excellent opportunity to learn more about the Internet’s more local dimensions. The focus on localism emerged from an ongoing research project, which was organized into three parts: 1) a four-year ethnographic study of community wireless organizations and their role in building, using and innovating local infrastructures in the United States and abroad; 2) a 40-question online survey on the use of WiFi in public spaces that was conducted simultaneously in New York, Montreal and Budapest, and garnered over 1300 responses; and, 3) 29 in-depth interviews with mobile professionals who use WiFi in public spaces including parks, cafes and other public spaces.
First, community wireless organizations are significant in that they were early adopters of WiFi technology, having innovated open source software for managing wireless networks. These groups exemplify peer-to-peer production with one significant difference; rather than organizing their activities merely online, they must work face-to-face, climbing towers and rooftops, in order to build their networks. Second, community wireless networks were important forerunners to the municipal wireless networks that are currently being proposed and implemented. One challenge that municipal wireless networks face is that they know very little about the ways in which wireless networks are currently being used. The survey on the use of WiFi, conducted in three cities, aims to better understand the way WiFi use differs from Internet use. The wireless network at Bryant Park in New York, which was sponsored by Google for two years, emerged from the survey as one of the most frequently used wireless networks. Research findings illustrate that the availability of WiFi is a significant factor in determining where people go and that the majority of people surveyed use WiFi to search for information relevant to their geographic location. However, to date, few business models have capitalized on the possibility of using ‘splash pages’ on wireless networks for featuring content and advertising. Finally, the in-depth interviews with mobile professionals expand upon the survey findings by offering qualitative descriptions of the ways in which communities that form around WiFi hotspots in cafes, parks and other public spaces enable social support, knowledge-sharing and collaboration. In sum, this project argues that WiFi interacts with socio-economic factors to support local innovation, use and community-formation, an argument that could be adopted for the analysis of other mobile and wireless technologies.
This project has important business and public policy implications. From a business perspective, it helps to define the kinds of content, services and applications – including advertising and search -- that might be designed for mobile and wireless technologies. From a public policy perspective, it provides empirical evidence for specific policy recommendations with respect to municipal wireless networks, spectrum regulation, and network neutrality.
Laura Forlano is a Visiting Fellow at the Information Society Project at Yale Law School and a Ph.D. Candidate in Communications at Columbia University. She is researching the intersection of the adoption and use of mobile and wireless technologies and organizational innovation. In particular, her dissertation focuses on the way that community wireless organizations, new proposals for regulating spectrum, and the use of wireless networks are examples of the re-emergence of a community form of organizing, collaboration and coordination. She received partial funding for her dissertation project from Microsoft Research and conducted comparative international research in Japan, Hungary and Germany. Forlano is an Adjunct Faculty member in the Design and Management department at Parsons The New School for Design where she teaches Design in Everyday Experience, Introduction to Design and Management, and Sustainable Design. She serves as a board member of NYCwireless, a non-profit organization that promotes the deployment of free, public WiFi networks and the New York City Computer Human Interaction Association.
"Towards an international instrument on limitations and exceptions"
Tuesday, March 25, 2008
This paper examines policy options and modalities for framing an international instrument on limitations and exceptions to copyright within the treaty obligations of the current international copyright system. We consider and evaluate options for the design of such an instrument, including questions of political sustainability and institutional home. Part I sketches the rationale for a multilateral approach to the question of L&E’s. Part II explores flexibilities inside the international copyright acquis. Part III evaluates the benefits and costs of alternative frameworks for a possible instrument. Finally, part IV sets out the basic contours of a multilateral instrument on L&E’s.
| Supporting Report |
Bernt Hugenholtz is Professor of Intellectual Property Law and Director of the Institute for Information Law of the University of Amsterdam (IViR). In 1989 he received his doctor’s degree *** laude from the University of Amsterdam, where he defended his thesis on copyright protection of works of facts. He has written numerous books, studies and articles on a variety of topics involving copyright, information technology, new media and the Internet. At the University of Amsterdam he teaches courses in copyright law, international copyright law and industrial property law. He was a member of the Amsterdam Bar and partner of the law firm Stibbe between 1990 and 1998. Since 2003 he has been a deputy judge at the Court of Appeal in Arnhem.
Prof. Hugenholtz is a member of the Dutch Copyright Committee that advises the Minister of Justice of the Netherlands, and has acted as a consultant to the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO), the European Commission, and several national governments. He has been on international missions representing WIPO in China and Indonesia, and is a regular speaker at international conferences.
Prof. Hugenholtz is General Editor of the Information Law Series,which is published by Kluwer Law International. In 2001 he was elected a finalist in the Law category of the World Technology Awards http://www.nature.com/nature/wta/
"Being Google in Washington"
Tuesday, April 8, 2008
Prior to joining Google, Alan Davidson was Associate Director of the Center for Democracy and Technology, a public interest group promoting civil liberties and human rights online. He has written and spoken widely on privacy, free speech, encryption, and copyright online. Davidson is also an Adjunct Professor at Georgetown University's program in Communications, Culture, and Technology, teaching a graduate seminar on Internet architecture and public policy. He holds an MA from MIT from the Technology and Policy Program, and a JD from Yale Law School.
"Chromosome Cowboys and DNA Wizards: Ownership, Sharing, and Innovation Frameworks in Synthetic Biology"
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
Ongoing improvements in DNA sequencing and DNA synthesis technologies are making genetic material (physical DNA molecules) and genetic information (DNA sequence data) interconvertible. For example, researchers have demonstrated the construction of DNA molecules up to 7,700,000 base pairs, a length that is long enough to encode all known viruses, most important bacteria, and almost the entire genome of S. cerevisiae (baker's yeast). As a second example, a thousand high school and college students now meet annually via the International Genetically Engineered Machines Competition, typically presenting engineered biological systems comprised of dozens of unique genetically encoded functions; in support of their projects hundreds of thousands of standard biological parts (e.g., BioBrick parts) are freely shared across over 30 countries. How do the ongoing advances and emerging practices of synthetic biology impact or map into the existing ownership, sharing, and innovation framework supporting biotechnology? Will anything need to change?
Drew Endy has been helping to start the Department of Biological Engineering at MIT. He is also a co-founder of Codon Devices, Inc. and president of the BioBricks Foundation, a not-for-profit organization promoting open access to biological technologies. He started and leads the organization of the International Meeting on Synthetic Biology conference series, and advises various government and private organizations on matters related to the ongoing development of biological technologies. At MIT, Dr. Endy´s lab research has resulted in (a) the first example of refactoring the genome of a natural biological system, (b) an abstraction hierarchy for engineering genetic devices, including a common signal carrier for transcription-based devices, and (c) experiments suggesting that the behavior of natural molecular biological systems is determinable, and perhaps not so stochastic. His future research interests are implementing reliable behavior in engineered biological devices, and developing a practical framework for designing reproducing machines whose designs are readily understandable by humans. More via http://mit.edu/endy/
"Gene Patents: Where Property, Intellectual Property and Information Meet"
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
This talk will address questions concerning the effect of latest developments in genomics and gene patents, with particular reference to the meaning and scope of patents on human genes and what constitutes infringement. Public and private law will also meet here with some discussion of constitutional issues.
Professor Cripps, an internationally acclaimed scholar and teacher, became the first holder of the Harry T. Ice Chair of Law at Indiana University in 2000. She specialises in intellectual property law and biotechnology. Her book Controlling Technology: Genetic Engineering and the Law, published in 1980, was the first comprehensive treatment of the legal implications of biotechnology. She is also the author of other books, including The Legal Implications of Disclosure in the Public Interest, now in its second edition, and more than 40 articles on intellectual property, privacy law, and biotechnology.
In addition to her years in the faculty of law at Cambridge University, she has regularly taught as a visiting professor at the Cornell Law School and also at the University of Texas at Austin as well as in Paris. Professor Cripps is a barrister in both England and New Zealand, and has served as an advisor on intellectual property law and biotechnology to the House of Lords, on biotechnology issues to the New Zealand Government, on constitutional matters to the Sri Lankan Ministry of Justice, and as a consultant on intellectual property to various law firms and corporations. Her research on bioethics and cloning was cited in the most recent issue of the Harvard Law Review and in "Why can't you buy a kidney to save your life?" Boston Globe, July 1, 2007
Her courses include: intellectual property (especially patents) and biotechnology, and comparative public law.
"In the Shadow of Innovation"
Tuesday, April 29, 2008
The intellectual property wars are on. Scholars, judges, legislators, corporations, creators and inventors disagree about the role of intellectual property rights. Yet, surprisingly everyone agrees about innovation - everyone loves innovation. Innovation appears everywhere: in legal scholarship, case law, legislative hearings, newspapers and blogs. Innovation is uniformly admired and aspired to - it is not questioned, often assumed to have historically held this central role.
The Article presents a study of case law, which demonstrates that contrary to common belief, innovation has only recently attained its central role in our legal discourse. The celebration of innovation is, in fact, a relatively recent trend originating in the mid-1980s - at the advent of the intellectual property wars.
The Article critically examines the celebration of innovation, arguing that while innovation is promoted to advance progress and human welfare, its exclusive status frustrates the very same goal. While focusing on the beginning of the technological life cycle, the legal regime dedicates sparse attention and few resources to the cycle's subsequent stage: the diffusion process. The promotion of progress and human welfare is as dependent on the technology's diffusion - its social adoption process - as it is reliant on its innovation.
To support this argument, the Article discusses two recent diffusion failures, involving digital music and genetic testing. While legal discourse focuses on the effects of copyright enforcement on digital music innovation and the ramifications of gene patents for innovation in the field of genetics, it fails to invest its resources to resolve the social adoption problems of these very same technologies. The Article concludes by proposing ways toward resolving the diffusion failures of genetic testing and digital music technologies.
Gaia Bernstein is an Associate Professor at Seton Hall University School of Law. Professor Bernstein’s scholarship focuses on the inter-relations between technology, law and society, examining the diffusion processes of new technologies, including both medical and communications technologies. Her teaching and research interests are in the areas of intellectual property, law and genetics, Internet law, information privacy law and reproductive technologies. Among her articles are: The Paradoxes of Technological Diffusion: Genetic Discrimination and Internet Privacy, 39 CONNECTICUT LAW REVIEW 241 (2006); Accommodating Technological Innovation: Identity, Genetic testing and the Internet, 57 VANDERBILT LAW REVIEW 963 (2004); and The Socio Legal Acceptance of New Technologies: A Close Look at Artificial Insemination, 77 WASHINGTON LAW REVIEW 1035 (2002).
Prior to joining the Seton Hall faculty in 2004, Professor Bernstein was a fellow at the Engelberg Center of Innovation Law & Policy and at the Information Law Institute at the New York University School of Law. Her degrees include: a J.S.D. from the New York University School of Law, an LL.M. from Harvard Law School, a J.D. (Intellectual Property concentration with Honors) from the Boston University School of Law, and a B.A. in Psychology and Political Science (magna *** laude) from Tel Aviv University. Professor Bernstein practiced law at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP in New York and at S. Horowitz & Co. in Israel.
"Defining and Measuring A2K: A Blueprint for an Index of Access to Knowledge"
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
| Paper |
Access to knowledge (A2K) is increasingly recognized as the central human development issue of our time. Yet to date there has been little literature defining precisely what is meant by this term, much less how to evaluate the progress toward achieving it. To help bridge this gap, this article offers a blueprint for an A2K index: a quantitative tool integrating a variety of data points to assess how well countries promote access to knowledge. The proposed index tracks five key dimensions of access to knowledge: education for informational literacy, access to the global knowledge commons, access to knowledge goods, an enabling legal framework, and effective innovation systems. The resulting conceptual map offers a concrete introduction to the A2K framework for information scholars and professionals.
Lea Shaver is the Access to Knowledge (A2K) Program Director at the Information Society Project. Her current research interests include developing a cross-national A2K Index and advancing A2K within the international human rights framework. Prior to joining ISP, Lea interned at the United Nations Development Programme in Honduras, the Center for Reproductive Rights' International Program, and the chambers of U.S. District Judge David F. Hamilton. Most recently she conducted research on socio-economic rights in South Africa as a Fulbright Scholar. Lea holds bachelor's and master's degrees in the social sciences from the University of Chicago and a J.D. from Yale Law School.