I use Google Reader to help me locate interesting blog entries, news articles, law review articles, etc. I subscribe to slightly more than 500 different blogs, so I receive hundreds of items per day from Google Reader. I spend on average about two hours per day reviewing all of these entries.

I review each entry to determine whether it is on topic, timely, etc. If I think it is, I then highlight the title of the article and use bit.ly (a URL shortener) to generate a tweet. The tweet consists of the title of the linked article (in quotes), plus the shortened bit.ly URL. I then post the finished tweet to the appropriate Twitter account.

You may see other tweets that contain the identical title (in quotes). That means that the other Twitter user used a process similar to what I have just described. It is a fairly standard process used by Twitter users who post the same types of tweets that I do. But usually the URL will vary, depending on what URL shortener they used.

Hope that explains the process. If you have any further questions, please feel free to contact me directly at mdscott@swlaw.edu.

The program will be divided into four panel discussions addressing a variety of topics, including:

1. The New Government Energy Policies and CleanTech’s Opportunities: Incentives and Market Drivers

2. Learning from the World’s Renewable Energy Leaders

3. Clean Technology Innovation and Protection (focusing on cleantech patents, licensing and tech transfer)

4. Financing Clean Technologies

The keynote speech will be given by Ted Flanigan, President, EcoMotion, Irvine, CA

More detailed information on the event, as well as a copy of the conference brochure, is available here.

The cost for the entire event is only $195 (early bird discount) and 5 CLE credit hours are available. (Space is limited to 95 attendees, so early registration is advised.) Online registration is available here.

I look forward to seeing you and your colleagues at the Summit. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me directly at mdscott@swlaw.edu.

The IT Law Wiki has reached an important milestone with the posting of its 5000th article. We are grateful to all of the lawyers, law students and law professors who have contributed to the wiki.

While the work done thus far has been impressive, there is much more to be done. We have thus far been able to summaries only slightly more than 850 cases — most of which were decided in U.S. courts. We hope to continue to expand the number of case summaries and could use help in doing so. We are also looking to expand the number of articles that focus on non-U.S. law.

So we are issuing a general “Call for Articles” to accelerate the growth of the wiki.

If you are a law professor, and you have your students writing papers for your class, consider suggesting to those who write the best papers that they post them to the wiki.

If you are a lawyer that supervises law clerks or young associates who may not be fully occupied due to the slowing economy, consider having them do research for the wiki. It will keep them busy and help them continue to develop their research and writing skills.

Also, if you are a lawyer, law professor or judge writing papers for conferences or your firm’s website, consider posting them to the IT Law Wiki as well.

Authors retain copyright ownership of all materials posted to the wiki, and those postings are made under a Creative Commons license.

If you don’t have the time to post the materials yourself, you can forward them to me at mdscott@swlaw.edu, and I will make sure they are promptly posted.

Onward to 10,000 articles!!

The fact is lawyers have been “specializing” in videogame law since the 1980s. When I began working as General Counsel for a multimedia developer in the early 1990s, the basic legal issues of videogame law already had been well established. What was still unclear was the appropriate business model/licensing structure for such games – particularly when a videogame was to be based on a movie, or when a multimedia product was going to include pre-existing content (music, video clips, text) from other sources. And while entertainment companies and videogame developers are still debating which entity provides the most “value” to a given interactive product, the basic legal issues surrounding their relationship are well settled.

When the Internet emerged as a burgeoning field in the mid-1990s, a lot of young lawyers touted “Internet law” as the next big thing. However, except for a few areas, such as domain names as trademarks and privacy issues, most of the bread-and-butter legal issues (copyright infringement, licensing, business deals) were merely variations on what had gone before.

And while it is true that the emergence of MMOs (Massive Multiplayer Online games) have given rise to several interesting new issues (particularly ownership of “virtual property”), most of what lawyers do in the videogame arena is well-settled.

The fact is that “Videogame Law” is so well established that law schools are offering courses (see here and here) in the field to law students.

In light of these facts, it is hard to understanding why two well-respected newspapers would run articles on this issue as if it was something brand new. Perhaps a slow news day?

1. Tell me about the new Information Technology (IT) Law Summer Program in London?

The program will allow students to earn six units of course credit while enjoying five incredible weeks in London. Each student will choose two of four courses: Comparative Electronic Commerce Law, Comparative Information Privacy Law, International Cybercrimes or Drafting Information Technology Agreements. Classes will be held from 9-1, Monday through Thursday, which makes every weekend a three-day weekend. Classes will be supplemented by field trips, guest speakers and various social events.

2. When did you develop the idea for the IT Summer Law Program?

I have been interested in expanding the school’s offerings in international technology law since I joined the full-time faculty in 2003. There are not a lot of professors in Los Angeles, or even the United States, that have expertise in this area. Because of the growing importance of the European Union, and the enactment of new IT laws in the EU, it made sense to locate the program within the EU where we can hire professors knowledgeable in comparative US-EU IT laws.

3. Is this the first program of its kind?

Yes. There have been summer abroad programs that offer one or two courses in IT law, but this is the only program that focuses exclusively on international IT law. This gives students interested in practicing in this field a great opportunity to learn from professors who are internationally recognized educators in the field. It should give students participating in the program a distinct advantage over other students in getting a job in the IT sector.

4. Why London?

I actually looked at several other cities in Europe first. I had a list of characteristics I was looking for in a host city. None of the other cities had all of those characteristics; London did. In London you have first class housing and classroom facilities, a great transportation system, plenty of cultural, social and educational opportunities, easy access to other European destinations, a safe environment, and the ability to attract a world-class faculty.

London is, in my opinion, the most exciting city in the world. Spending five weeks in London is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. There is a dizzying array of things to do in London, from watching tennis stars at Wimbledon to enjoying plays, musicals and outdoor concerts just down the street from the school. We are literally only blocks away from the British Museum, the British Library and numerous historical sites. Stonehenge, Oxford, the Edinburgh Festival (and many other destinations) are easily accessible by train or bus. In addition, most European cities are no more than an hour or two away. For example, there is a train within walking distance of the dorm that will whisk you to downtown Paris in just two hours. You can have lunch overlooking the Eiffel Tower and be back in London in time for dinner, or spend the entire weekend in Paris or another wonderful destination.

5. What makes this such an exciting and timely program?

The Internet and electronic commerce are the fastest growing business sectors worldwide. Every company, whether considered “high tech” or otherwise, understands the importance of being “online.” As a result, there is an enormous demand for tech-savvy attorneys, even when there is a downturn in the economy. These classes are unique and will provide students with an international perspective on IT law that is simply not available elsewhere.

6. How and why was each participating faculty member selected for the program?

Having practiced in the international IT law field for almost 30 years, I have had the opportunity to travel extensively and get to know IT lawyers and academics worldwide. When I was planning this program I contacted dozens of recognized experts in the field and asked them whom they thought were the best educators in IT law in the U.S. and the UK. That search led me to each of the professors who will be teaching in the program. As shown by their biographies, they are all accomplished authors, speakers and teachers. It is a truly an amazing faculty.

7. What are some of the biggest issues in IT law and how will this program help prepare students interested in the field?

When a company establishes a website, it is instantly doing business globally. That means that the company is potentially subject to the laws of every country in which its website is accessible, including contract law, privacy law, and criminal law. It is not sufficient for a company’s lawyers to understand only the laws of the country in which that company is located. They must understand the potential impact of foreign laws on their client’s business, and the potential liability that client may face around the world. This program will provide students with that global perspective.

The genre will be science fiction, the location Jupiter, and the title “The Red Spot.” “Site 209.” My daily output will be posted at a new blog created just for this event. You are invited to come along for the ride.

A recent article by John Mackoff in the New York Times pointed out that the U.S. is beginning to lose its status as the crossroads of the Internet, with many countries and international companies routing traffic around the United States because of their concern that we are spying on their communications. “While the United States carried 70 percent of the world’s Internet traffic a decade ago, he estimates that portion has fallen to about 25 percent.” Many countries are expanding their Internet capabilities to provide an alternative to U.S.-based Internet services – business that we are losing and will never get back. As noted in the article:

“That lack of investment mirrors a pattern that has taken place elsewhere in the high-technology industry, from semiconductors to personal computers. The risk . . . is that upstarts like China and India are making larger investments in next-generation Internet technology that is likely to be crucial in determining the future of the network, with investment, innovation and profits going first to overseas companies.”

As a result, “[w]e are, by comparison, militarily weaker, economically poorer and technologically less unique than we were then.”

Will the new president, whomever he is, make a change? Do either of the candidates have a “real” technology policy that might turn things around? I haven’t seen one yet. Let’s just hope the winner has one.

Law students need to know a lot about a lot of different areas, not just of law, but history, business, literature, culture, languages, etc. This breadth of learning should start in college, continue through law school, and into practice.

There is a wonderful quote from Vladimir Nabokov, Russian author of Lolita (and many other works):

The more things we know the better equipped we are to understand any one thing and it is a burning pity that our lives are not long enough and not sufficiently free of annoying obstacles, to study all things with the same care and depth as the one we now devote to some favorite subject or period. And yet there is a semblance of consolation within this dismal state of affairs: in the same way as the whole universe may be completely reciprocated in the structure of an atom, . . . an intelligent and assiduous student [may] find a small replica of all knowledge in a subject he has chosen for his special research. . . . and if, upon choosing your subject, you try diligently to find out about it, if you allow yourself to be lured into the shaded lanes that lead from the main road you have chosen to the lovely and little known nooks of special knowledge, if you lovingly finger the links of the many chains that connect your subject to the past and the future and if by luck you hit upon some scrap of knowledge referring to your subject that has not yet become common knowledge, then will you know the true felicity of the great adventure of learning….

(Quoted in Vladimir Nabokov: The American Years, by Brian Boyd.)

My son is getting ready to go to college in the fall. He wants to be a lawyer, and is already trying to find classes (as a freshman) that will “better equip” him for law school. I am telling him that he needs to take a broad, liberal arts education, which will give him the breadth and depth of understanding of human culture, interaction, philosophy, society, history, etc. This will give him the grounding he needs to understand how law works in context. But I can see it is going to be a battle.

I was an earlier adopter of cell phones, getting my first one in 1985 when I had a small law firm and needed to be in regular communication with my office. However, I quickly found that it was as much of a nuisance as an assistance to my practice and in the early 1990s I got rid of it. I didn’t like the idea of being “always on” — always accessible by employees, other attorneys, and worst yet, my clients. I often needed time to decompress and couldn’t do so if I was expected to always be accessible by phone. I needed time to think uninterrupted. I found that when I ridded myself of the cell phone I was able to provide just as good service to my clients, just as good supervision to my employees and at the same time could allocate my time the way that I wanted to do so, not how others wanted to allocate my time for me. I didn’t lose any clients nor were there any “emergencies” that couldn’t wait for me to get back to the office.

I didn’t get another cell phone until 2005 when my youngest son wanted one and we could get 2 for the price of one. I now find that people are more courteous about calling me and I don’t have this constant barrage of calls every time some little crisis arises. I probably use my cell phone significantly less than others, and yet find it a useful and “appropriate” technology for my lifestyle today.

The same is true of my computers. I have a good, relatively fast Apple computer on which I am running an older version of Microsoft Office. While many of my students have newer, faster machines, and the most current version of Office, I really see no reason to update my technology. It does what I need at an acceptable speed. I don’t consider myself a Luddite, just someone that believes that new technologies should serve me, not the other way around.

Why am I writing about this at all? Because there is currently a raging debate going on at our law school as well as law schools nationwide (and perhaps worldwide) about Internet access in the classrooms. Students have always found ways to entertain themselves in class (other than actually listening to the professor and learning the subject matter). In the early days it was passing notes and whispering to one another. Others doodled or did crossword puzzles. However, with the advent of personal computers and wireless Internet access, the diversions have expanded to include email, watching YouTube videos, shopping online, etc. No matter the ranking of the law school or the quality of the teaching, students more and more are being diverted by the cornucopia of options available online, and are less engaged than ever.

A recent article from the University of Chicago Law School has created quite a stir on campuses nationwide. The administration recently announced that it was cutting off Internet access in the classrooms due to the fact that students are distracted by the Internet and are not participating in classes. Chicago, one of the best law schools in the country, has decided that allowing students access to the Internet in the classrooms is an unacceptable distraction. The article indicates that administrators were amazed at how pervasive surfing was during classes, and how students were not listening, professors would have to repeat questions a second time because students did not hear them the first time, and how the Internet was destroying the classroom experience for too many students.

When several professors suggested that our law school do the same last fall, I was cool to the idea. I saw the value of allowing students the freedom to use the Internet to supplement what I was talking about in the classroom, and generally felt that our students were old enough to understand the importance of being active participants in class. However, this year I have seen the classroom dialogue disappear. It is now a soliliquy — I talk, they surf. I have come to the conclusion, as more and more professors and administrators have, that the siren call of the Internet is too strong for all but the most dedicated students. The MTV generation, with its need to multitask, finds that it does not have the discipline to focus attention on one thing at a time. And the only way to try to get students to reengage in the dialogue that is such a critical part of the legal learning process is to remove the temptation of the Internet from the classroom.

I believe that laptop computers are an appropriate technology in the classroom (although they can also be abused by being used to play games or turn students into stenographers), but the Internet is not. Whether, and if so when, my law school will join the growing ranks of educational institutions nationwide that are blocking Internet access from the classroom I do not know. But in my opinion, the sooner the better.

According to Internet experts, in its effort to block YouTube within the country, Pakistan Telecom created a dummy route that sent YouTube traffic into a “black hole.” Pakistan Telecom then announced that dummy route to its own telecommunications partner, PCCW, based in Hong Kong. PCCW accepted that dummy route for YouTube and relaying it to other Internet providers around the world. Apparently, ISPs now had two conflicting online “roads” leading to YouTube. But because an important online protocol called Border Gateway Protocol favors longer routing addresses, which are thought to be more specific, at least 97 major ISPs and thousands of smaller ones chose the dummy route, Pakistan’s black hole, for YouTube.

When YouTube realized the problem, YouTube began telling ISPs that they should direct traffic around Pakistan’s dummy route. YouTube also removed the video clip that had concerned the Pakistani officials.

Steven M. Bellovin, a professor of computer science at Columbia, said the same Internet routing problem had been exploited in the past by spammers and others, but he was worried that it could be more widely used now that people are aware of how easy it is to create the same scenario via a couple of emails. “If it’s a big site that’s affected, it will be spotted and dealt with within an hour or so, as happened this time,” he wrote in an e-mail message. “If it’s a small site, it might take a lot longer to find someone who would think to look at this.”

Bellovin sums up the question very succinctly: “The question is this: When is the pain from routing incidents great enough that we’re forced to act? It would have been nice to have done something before this, since now all the world’s script kiddies have seen what can be done.”