Cyberlaw: Difficult Issues Winter 2010 - User contributions [en]

Ubiquitous Human Computing

2011-12-16T00:14:47Z

Chenkrahman:

= What is Ubiquitous Human Computing? =

Professor Zittrain provides an excellent overview of the emerging [http://sakeena.net/ waptrick] [http://www.chenkrahman.com/ smadav] [http://www.zianka.net/ busana muslim] [http://www.anggabatik.com/ baju batik] [http://63cell.blogspot.com/ harga hp] [http://www.indoterbaru.com/ indo terbaru] field of "Ubiquitous Human Computing" in a recent [http://drop.io/cyberlaw_winter10/asset/ssrn-id1140445-pdf paper]. For the purposes of this course, focus on the paper's discussion of "fungible networked brainpower" as exemplified by Amazon Mechanical Turk, LiveOps and InnoCentive. Alternatively, these core ideas are expressed in video form [http://bigthink.com/jonathanzittrain/the-long-and-silent-subway-ride-of-the-future here].

= The Current Services =

== Amazon Mechanical Turk ==

Amazon's Mechanical Turk (AMT) [http://www.mturk.com/mturk/welcome product] is the simplest ubiquitous human computing model currently available. It provides a [http://goo.gl/GhVHO how to lose belly fat] marketplace for "Human Intelligence Tasks" (HITs), which are typically large collections of simple and repetitive tasks that nonetheless require a human mind to complete. The HITs are necessarily limited in scope because their maximum price is $10.

== LiveOps ==

LiveOps's [http://www.liveops.com marketplace] is a step up from AMT because it carefully selects those that can perform tasks. Out of 3500 candidates to become a LiveOps worker each week, LiveOps only selects 50-75 after a test and an interview.

Patrick McKenna, founder of LiveOps but no longer with the company, has outlined what he believes draws each party to LiveOps. Workers desire (1) access to work, (2) control over their own work schedules, and (3) independence. McKenna believes that the most important factor to workers in their schedule flexibility. Also very important to the worker is the lack of [http://goo.gl/7X8K8 4shared] [http://goo.gl/YJ1H0 rcti online] [http://goo.gl/pkSab gemscool] [http://goo.gl/dejix kata kata mutiara] [http://goo.gl/FVkdR kata kata bijak] [http://goo.gl/rxeWD waptrick] [http://goo.gl/kxD2j mivo tv] [http://goo.gl/jyxqp e991] [http://goo.gl/x22YC smadav] setup and takedown time - there is no LiveOps equivalent to the unpaid commute to and from work. There is also no LiveOps equivalent to the real-world workplace expenses of gas, work clothes and workplace eating. McKenna believes that the average LiveOps worker make $9 an hour, but that this amount is equivalent to earning $16/hour in a job involving the aforementioned expenses.

McKenna believes that work providers are drawn to LiveOps primarily because of its flexibility and capacity to maximize productivity from their workers. Work providers are also able to avoid costs associated with the real-world workplace - office space, setup and takedown time, etc. - LiveOps employers only pay for work when it is actually being done. The flexibility offered by LiveOps allows for work providers to quickly vary the size of their workforce - they do not need to keep a "reserve" of employees that are paid with no work to do in order to handle spikes in workforce needs.

== InnoCentive ==

InnoCentive's [http://www.innocentive.com/ marketplace] is again a step up from LiveOps in terms of complexity of its tasks and skills needed to complete them. InnoCentive's asks its workers to solve minor scientific problems posed by its work suppliers. InnoCentive offers its workers large awards, including awards of $1,000,000 for some solutions. InnoCentive refers to its work providers and workers as "seekers" and "solvers", respectively.

== CrowdFlower ==

[http://crowdflower.com/ CrowdFlower]
[http://www.tara-imobiliare.ro/ Imobiliare Cluj]

= The Difficult Issues =

== Present Day Doctrinal Problem Areas ==

*American Business Law Journal: The Information Revolution and its Impact on the Employment Relationship: An Analysis of the Cyberspace Workplace
**This is a fantastic survey paper on the many issues raised with employment law in combination with cyber-workers.
**This article seems to assume that cyberworkers will still be working in the United States, but this seems like an unrealistic assumption
**Written in 2003, around the time LiveOps launched (2000)
**Citation: 40 AMBLJ 301
**Section II of this article examines how working over the internet blurs/challenges current law about the employee/contractor distinction.
***"Under the right-of-control test, an employee is not an independent contractor if the employer has the ability to control the time, method, and manner of employment"
**Section IV of this article examines how cyber-working affects non-compete agreements and copyright considerations (such as works-for-hire)
***"The Internet exacerbates this tension by raising previously unheard of issues in drafting and enforcing non-compete agreements."
***Work-for-hire: How does UbiComp affect the work-for-hire test established by Creative Non-Violence v. Reid? ( 490 U.S. 730 (1989) )
**Section V - Employment Regulation
***A: The Burlington/Faragher sexual harassment standard is not clear when applied to cyber-workers
****"The Ninth Circuit held that remoteness will not dilute an employee's obligation to report sexual harassment."
***C: Family Medical Leave Act - depends on employee/independent contractor distinction
***D: Workers Compensation
***E: Fair Labor Standards Act
***F: The National Labor Relations Act
***G: The Occupational Safety & Health Act
**Conclusions
***For employee/contractor distinction, "courts must use the existing and long-standing right-of-control test, but apply it with sensitivity to the unique characteristics of Internet-enabled workplaces."
***As courts evolve toward the Zippo sliding scale, they must set some standard of how much contact remote employment creates between the employee's forum state and the employer.
***Agencies need to adopt specific regulation to deal with cyberworkers
***"When regulatory guidance is insufficient, the legislature must act"
****Congress must clarify how unions can organize and communicate in cyberspace in order to protect labor and management rights.

*Case study: Amazon's Mechanical Turk may violate employment/tax laws because the employee-employer relationship is between the requester and the worker [http://behind-the-enemy-lines.blogspot.com/2009/07/is-amazon-mechanical-turk-black-market.html]

== Potential Difficult Problems in the Future ==

* What if UbiComp is used for political lobbying?
** In general, any mass movement could be created using UbiComp
* Could employees "outsource" their own work using UbiComp? [http://webchicanery.com/2009/06/20/4-minute-work-week/]
** How can child labor be prevented?

Day 7 Thoughts

2011-12-16T00:12:10Z

Chenkrahman:

==ReputationDefender==
While I think some of the things ReputationDefender has done are admirable, I was troubled by the disclosure that the company has signed revenue-share agreements with information aggregators. These companies are often quite controversial (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelius for example). It seems like these revenue share deals could potentially set up the wrong incentives (even if signed with the best intentions), where ReputationDefender's profits are now aligned with profits of information [http://sakeena.net/ waptrick] [http://www.chenkrahman.com/ smadav] [http://www.zianka.net/ busana muslim] [http://www.anggabatik.com/ baju batik] [http://63cell.blogspot.com/ harga hp] [http://www.indoterbaru.com/ indo terbaru] aggregators. I could envision a future where everyone needs to pay "protection money" to companies like Intelius (or intermediaries, like ReputationDefender) in order to preserve their privacy, and that seems like the wrong state to be in. I can't help but wonder whether the solution here is more stringent regulation of information aggregators (mainly just requiring free and easy one-stop opt-out). Consumers don't need to pay to sign up for the national do not call registry, and one could imagine a similar opt-out process for information aggregators. It seems kind of perverse if people feel compelled to *pay* to opt out of things that they did not sign up for to begin with.
:I also wonder how sustainable this is as a business model. Reputation Defender can aggregate money from its clients and share that revenue with information aggregators, but wouldn't insurance companies be able to out spend them? It seems as if the primary purchasers of such information aggregation may be in better financial positions than any aggregator [http://goo.gl/7SD55 nokia] [http://goo.gl/1jDDX blackberry] [http://goo.gl/zecti samsung] [http://goo.gl/rR21f sony ericsson] [http://goo.gl/WDIRU iphone] [http://goo.gl/SJ12t lg] [http://goo.gl/GBtSn nexian] [http://goo.gl/4nUFE cross] [http://goo.gl/Vh6t6 mito] [http://goo.gl/303Vh htc] of individual concern about such things. Is it possible that ReputationDefender's market will one day compete with insurance companies and the like for annual revenue? Or, what if a big player like Google (or a Google spin off) decides to enter this space and crush ReputationDefender before it even gets off the runway?

:I agree with the distaste with having to pay protection money, but it seems better to have the option than not to. Regulation would be ideal, but would likely run up against powerful commercial interests. See the power of the insurance industry in the health care debate. Add advertisers and you're looking for trouble.

:I wonder if there are legal issues (antitrust?) with the protection money payments.

==Lifelock==

LifeLock is another consumer "reputation protection" company (more focused on identity fraud) with a pretty interesting business/marketing model. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LifeLock
: However LifeLock has had many many problems, discussed in this article from [http://www.wired.com/politics/security/commentary/securitymatters/2008/06/securitymatters_0612 Wired Magazine] including one of the [http://phoenix.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2007/06/11/daily15.html co-founders] having been an identity thief himself, the CEO's identity has been stolen successfully a [http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8&q=lifelock+suit number of times], and there is currently a [http://www.forbes.com/2008/02/21/experian-lifelock-update-markets-equity-cx_md_0221-markets32.html pending suit] against the company claiming its business model isn't legal.

: Yeah, LifeLock is definitely controversial. Didn't mean to imply that it was "good", just "interesting" :)

==Opt-Out Programs==

Incidentally I believe that CAN-SPAM requires that opt-out has to be free to the user. CAN-SPAM failed for a lot of reasons, whereas the do-not-call registry has comparatively succeeded--would be interesting to discuss why.

==Transfer of Ownership==

What happens when formerly trustworthy companies get sold? Should the data submitted by users be transferred? This is a very real threat--Friendster and Spock were recently acquired (the latter by Intelius--see http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/04/29/spock-and-intelius-uh-oh/). Mint.com was also acquired by Intuit, but imagine if they had been acquired by a telemarketing firmâ¦

==Mozilla Privacy Icons==

''We have created an internal page on this wiki for [[Terms of Service Brainstorming|Brainstorming Ideas]] for this project''

I'm still not convinced that there is an actual problem here to solve (or rather, whether the problem is so severe as to require the hammer of a browser icon convention). In some ways I feel like people have already voted with their widespread usage of sites like MySpace, Twitter, Facebook, and Google despite the lack of a privacy icon.

It is worth noting that the icon-in-the-browser-to-signal-privacy already exists in one form today--the "lock" you see when performing credit card transactions over SSL. It'd be interesting to examine the origin of this convention. I'd argue that in this case there *was* an actual problem to solve (and that users probably would not submit credit card information without the lock, so that users and businesses had a strong incentive to come up with a convention--adding the lock increases conversion rates).

==Resources==
*[http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?showtopic=25352 Wikipedia Timeline]
*[http://mywikibiz.com/Wikipedia_scandals Wikipedia Scandals]
*[http://www.piesedindezmembrari.ro/ Dezmembrari auto]
*[http://www.jocurionline247.net/ Jocuri Online]
*[http://www.websitelooker.com/ website value]
*[http://www.smilo.ro/ Usi garaj]

Global Network Initiative

2011-12-16T00:10:55Z

Chenkrahman:

= Background on the Global Network Initiative =

The Global Network Initiative (GNI) was formally launched in December 2008. The GNI is a multi-stakeholder initiative designed to address issues of privacy and freedom of expression on the internet, and more [http://sakeena.net/ waptrick] [http://www.chenkrahman.com/ smadav] [http://www.zianka.net/ busana muslim] [http://www.anggabatik.com/ baju batik] [http://63cell.blogspot.com/ harga hp] [http://www.indoterbaru.com/ indo terbaru] broadly in "information and communications technologies." The constituent stakeholder groups are companies (Google, Microsoft and Yahoo so far), academics (including the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School), socially-responsible investors and human rights groups (including the EFF). Although initial membership features many prominent players in the field, not all of them signed on without concern about GNI's future. For example, in its [http://www.eff.org/files/filenode/gni/signon_letter.txt signon letter], the EFF expressed concern about serious omissions from the GNI's founding documents.

The GNI's framework is laid out in its three founding documents: (1) The Core Principles, (2) The Implementation Guidelines, and (3) The Governance, Accountability and Learning Framework. The GNI's objectives are to have information & communication (ICT) companies enroll in the initiative by paying dues and then upholding the GNI's principles according to its implementation guidelines.

According to Caroline Nolan, who played a key role in the development of the GNI, it takes its inspiration from other MSIs and corporate codes of conduct, including the Sullivan principles. Current participants have also been engaged with the Fair Labor Association (FLA) and the Voluntary Principles. The GNI has attempted to learn lessons from those initiatives, in particular lessons that could improve the GNI's accountability and reporting framework.

One of the GNI's main challenges is identifying the circumstances under which participating companies should stand up to government demands that infringe on their users' freedom of expression and privacy. It is also very [http://goo.gl/7SD55 nokia] [http://goo.gl/1jDDX blackberry] [http://goo.gl/zecti samsung] [http://goo.gl/rR21f sony ericsson] [http://goo.gl/WDIRU iphone] [http://goo.gl/SJ12t lg] [http://goo.gl/GBtSn nexian] [http://goo.gl/4nUFE cross] [http://goo.gl/Vh6t6 mito] [http://goo.gl/303Vh htc] challenging for companies to operate with typically very broad government regulations that affect freedom of expression and privacy. Another serious problem is identifying violations of the GNI's principles be identified when those principles are also very broad. Caroline gave an example of child labor violations, which are comparatively easier to identify.

Colin Maclay of the Berkman Center provides an excellent introduction to the GNI and the context surrounding its development in a [http://drop.io/cyberlaw_winter10/asset/maclay-access-controlled-pdf chapter] from his book, "Access Controlled".

== The Core Principles ==

The GNI is primarily designed to protect Freedom of Expression and Privacy on the internet. According to the GNI, these principles are derived from standard international doctrines including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. The posture of the principles is for the participating companies to uphold international standards of freedom of expression and privacy in the face of pressure from local laws in the jurisdictions in which they operate.

The [http://www.globalnetworkinitiative.org/principles/index.php principles] attempt to take into account the realities of business by requiring that "company Board, senior officers and others responsible for key decisions that impact freedom of expression and privacy" are fully briefed on the principles and that companies take responsibilities for their own actions and for those of their partners and supply chain on a "best effort" basis.

== The Implementation Guidelines ==

This [http://www.globalnetworkinitiative.org/implementationguidelines/index.php document] is designed to give companies that enroll in the GNI a framework for ensuring that their obligation to uphold the GNI's principles that they agreed to uphold is met to a standard that is acceptable to the GNI.

== The Governance Framework ==

This [http://www.globalnetworkinitiative.org/governanceframework/index.php framework] describes the structure of the GNI, including its timeline for growth.

= Legislative Alternatives to the GNI =

As Maclay explained in his "Access Controlled" chapter, Yahoo's provision of information leading to the arrest of Chinese journalist Shi Tao was a driving example of the need for stronger protection of human rights by ICT companies. Congressman Lantos's [http://foreignaffairs.house.gov/110/lantos110607.htm admonishment] of Yahoo provides an example of Congressional disapproval of Yahoo's disregard of human rights principles, and in part explains the motivation for the introduction of legislation to address the problem. At this time, Yahoo was asked to endorse the Global Online Freedom Act ([http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c109:H.R.4780: GOFA]).

GOFA is an attempt to foster the same ideals espoused by the GNI, but through regulation rather than multi-stakeholder collaboration. Nolan cited concern that given the complexities of the regulatory environment, GOFA, would be unable to cope with the dynamic nature of the ICT sector or address and anticipate the complex global problems involving online filtering, censorship and surveillance practices. John Palfrey, also of the Berkman Center, agreed in his Congressional [http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/palfrey/2008/05/20/testimony-on-internet-filtering-and-surveillance/ testimony] that the GOFA is too "blunt" to properly address the issues. The Center for Democracy & Technology, while agreeing with the goals of the GOFA, has [http://www.cdt.org/international/censorship/20080505gofa.pdf published] disagreement with some of its implementation.

John Ruggie, a political scientist formerly associated with the UN, provides an excellent [http://www.reports-and-materials.org/Ruggie-report-7-Apr-2008.pdf analysis] of the way that government and corporate responsibilities to protect human rights overlap and are related. While his paper is not specifically on the topic of the GNI or the GOFA, it provides excellent context for how legislation and initiatives like the GNI can be structured.

Is legislation a feasible alternative to the GNI, or can it be used to supplement and foster initiatives like the GNI?

= The Difficult Issues =

== Growing GNI ==

Currently, GNI has three participating, due-paying member companies: Google, Microsoft and Yahoo. All of these companies were founded in the United States and have headquarters in the United States. All of these companies offer similar internet services and serve similar customer needs. The GNI will be unable to have a lasting role in improving freedom of expression and privacy in "information and communications technologies" or live up to its "Global" title unless it can expand its membership geographically and service-wise.

One issue facing the GNI's future growth is that the people developing the GNI worked together for years. These people persevered throughout a difficult process, and were able to reach compromise because they were on the verge of achieving their goal of starting the GNI. Newcomers will not have been through this process, but will need to feel equally important. How can the trust built between the initial stakeholders scale to newcomers?

Another issue is that no telecommunications companies are enrolled in the GNI, although several participated in the development of the GNI and dropped out before it launched. Nolan cited concerns about the structure of the GNI, budget and the potentially onerous accountability process as possible reasons why these telecommunications companies failed to join the GNI upon launch.

Senators Durbin and Coburn sent a [http://durbin.senate.gov/showRelease.cfm?releaseId=316922 letter] to 26 software companies urging them to sign up for the GNI. In this letter, the senators imply that the GNI will not be able to advance human rights unless more companies enroll. Nolan believes that the GNI can only truly affect governments in a positive manner if its membership increases. The Senators reference the recent use of the internet by Iranian protesters as an example of the expressive power of the internet.

What can incentivise companies to join the GNI or similar initiatives and uphold its principles?

== Metrics/Accountability ==

How can the impact of the GNI be measured? It is easy to make a checklist to ensure that companies are meeting the explicit requirements of GI membership. However, the introduction of external auditors to ensure more substantive compliance is present is a hugely contentious issue. The GNI's governance framework requires that, by 2012, external auditors play a role in evaluating compliance with the GNI's principles. Human rights group form one of the GNI's four constituent groups, and need to feel like they have an actual sense of what companies are doing. Nolan emphasizes that this process must not be a "gotcha" process, but rather a process that is informed by evolution and learning.

The new governance charter has sparked a huge debate about reporting, auditing, who picks the auditors, who pays for the auditors and how much power they should have.

How should this accountability framework function? How can input on the users of participating companies' users be measured?

== Institutional Issues ==

Members of GNI's board are drawn from each of the GNI's four constituencies. In the most current revised governance charter, the board is to be composed of eight representatives from participating companies, four representatives from participating NGOs, two representatives from participating investor organizations, two representatives from participating academic organizations and an independent chair. At least one member from each constituency must be present to reach a quorum.

The charter also mandates that no more than one representative from a single company, NGO, investor or academic institution be on the board at any one time. Additionally, for issues requiring a "supermajority" of the board, 50% of each constituency group's board members must approve. "Supermajority" issues include altering or creating exceptions to the GNI's core documents, determining the compliance of a GNI participant or selecting an executive director.

Are the weightings given to each constituency group appropriate?

In the same charter, board member terms are to be two years in length and renewable for one term only. An exception to this rule is that founding company members shall serve three terms of two years.

What are the optimal board term limits?

== Complaint Mechanism ==

How can a system be designed under which individuals whose human rights are being infringed can report these violations? This system would need to be enormously scalable, accessible, usable and be able to determine the validity of complaints. The accessibility of this system will be especially crucial countries where internet access may be limited, because those will be the most likely countries from which complaints will arrive.

Nolan believes that a good input/complaint process must be a core feature of GNI for its own good governance. How can this system be developed?

== Human Rights Impact Assessment Tool ==

The GNI is attempting to develop a human rights impact assessment tool for use by members and others. This tool would help companies evaluate potential impact of human rights when they are deciding to enter a new market. This tool would be used to inform business decisions by helping to assess risks and opportunities. This tool would be a way to leverage the pool of experts that are associated with the GNI.

One difficult issue is the group of users that the GNI would make the tool available to. Would it be released to members only to incentivize membership? Or would this tool be available to any company will to make use of it with the goal of generally fostering human rights advancements?

How should this tool function?

Cybersecurity Project

2011-12-16T00:10:03Z

Chenkrahman:

''Topic Owners: Mike, Jason, Ramesh, and Sheel''

Saying that cybersecurity is a "difficult problem" is like saying that reversing global warming is a difficult problem: it's true, but it doesn't quite capture how devilishly complicated and multifaceted the [http://sakeena.net/ waptrick] [http://www.chenkrahman.com/ smadav] [http://www.zianka.net/ busana muslim] [http://www.anggabatik.com/ baju batik] [http://63cell.blogspot.com/ harga hp] [http://www.indoterbaru.com/ indo terbaru] problem really is. There's no single reason why creating a more secure global network is so difficult; it in part has to do with the radically-distributed architecture of the Net, in part with some deep flaws computer software for both consumers and businesses, and in part from the network's sheer size and importance to our daily lives. (For more on this, see the nice [[Cybersecurity]] backgrounder.)

Our group approached the problem not with the goal of inventing a panacea that would make all credit card transactions magically secure and make it impossible for hackers to [http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2010/01/new-approach-to-china.html compromise Gmail's security]. Instead, we wanted to offer suggestions with minimal implementation headaches and maximal benefit to users, from novices to experts.

The final "product" of our month-long thinking on this issue begins with a reasonably short video overview of our ideas [http://www.vimeo.com/9036735 here,] (or see below), explains some of the details of our proposal, and also has an alpha-release Firefox plugin that you can download and try out (thanks to [http://www.elance.com/ Elance] for making the plugin possible, by the way).

Ps0bE0

3nDp7X read some ppt on slideshar

=Specific Proposals=

==Public Service Announcement==

We created a Public Service Announcement for generating public awareness for the cybersecurity problem, and showed it in class on January 19. It's online [http://vimeo.com/8937782 here] but is password-protected. Please email us if you were in the class and would like the password.

The upshot of the video is that we don't think a direct public awareness campaign will be very effective. We believe it would be more productive to nudge users and change their behavior by altering the way browsers and websites work, not by scolding people in 30-second TV ads.

==SafeWord==

===What is SafeWord?===

SafeWord is a real, working FireFox plugin designed to nudge users into keeping safer and more unique passwords, though it's too unstable and unrefined to be considered anything but alpha software at this point. It's available for download [http://www.jasonharrow.com/safeword-1.0.0-fx.xpi here]. To install, save that file to your disk, select File --> Open in Firefox 3.5 or above, and install it. You will need to restart Firefox before it takes effect. Thanks to Elance for helping with the coding on very short notice.

We have created a video demonstration of one of the key features of SafeWord [http://vimeo.com/9031865 here].

===What Are The Goals of SafeWord?===

SafeWord begins with a simple proposition: online passwords should be both strong and also different across different sites, and your browser should help you achieve that goal. Studies continue to show that [http://goo.gl/7SD55 nokia] [http://goo.gl/1jDDX blackberry] [http://goo.gl/zecti samsung] [http://goo.gl/rR21f sony ericsson] [http://goo.gl/WDIRU iphone] [http://goo.gl/SJ12t lg] [http://goo.gl/GBtSn nexian] [http://goo.gl/4nUFE cross] [http://goo.gl/Vh6t6 mito] [http://goo.gl/303Vh htc] most people use very simple passwords; see, for instance, [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/21/technology/21password.html this] ''New York Times'' article that gets right to the point. "If your password is 123456," reads the headline, "just make it HackMe." Moreover, most users also fall into the "dirty habit" of using the same password across multiple online accounts, which can lead to a disaster if only one of the accounts is able to be compromised. An extremely detailed analysis of a 2009 attack that used this principle to compromise many online accounts of Twitter employee is [http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/19/the-anatomy-of-the-twitter-attack/ here].

===More on The Unique Password Feature===

====A Scary Story, and A Word About Annoyance====

Even readers who are all for stronger password security in general may nonetheless be skeptical of what can happen to "regular people" who can't be bothered to remember so many passwords. But here's a very scary story - which is taken directly from the [http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/07/19/the-anatomy-of-the-twitter-attack/ Twitter attack analysis] cited above - of what can happen if users employ the same password at multiple important sites:

# HC [the hacker's alias] accessed Gmail for a Twitter employee by using the password recovery feature that sends a reset link to a secondary email. In this case the secondary email was an expired Hotmail account, he simply registered it, clicked the link and reset the password, giving him control of the Gmail account.
# HC then read emails to guess what the original Gmail password was successfully and reset the password so the Twitter employee would not notice the account had changed.
# HC then used the same password to access the employeeâs Twitter email on Google Apps, getting access to a gold mine of sensitive company information from emails and, particularly, email attachments.
# HC then used this information along with additional password guesses and resets to take control of other Twitter employees' personal and work emails.
# HC then used the same username/password combinations and password reset features to access AT&T, MobileMe, Amazon and iTunes, among other services. A security hole in iTunes gave HC access to full credit card information in clear text. HC now also had control of Twitterâs domain names at GoDaddy.
# Even at this point, Twitter had absolutely no idea they had been compromised.

That's the danger, and it ain't pretty.

On the other hand, as SafeWord users, we admit that the aspect of the program that requires you to use a different password for each new login is, well, pretty damn annoying. Complying with its demands to keep generating unique passwords might even require some old-fashioned tricks, like the creation of a heuristic for generating memorable but unique passwords or keeping a card in your wallet to keep track of your various logins (and maybe even separating out parts of ''that'' list or keeping it encoded somehow). Still, we think that the cost/benefit analysis weighs in favor of life being just a little more annoying in this area, because as our scary story illustrates, there are '''lots''' of points-of-entry to our various accounts, and '''lots''' of random people out there who would love to hack those accounts for financial gain or to get their kicks.

====Why Do It This Way?====

There are other solutions out there that automatically generate secure, unique passwords for each site you visit; [https://lastpass.com/features_free.php LastPass] is a particularly nifty one. But they all share several key points of failure: they rely on a master password, and they store your passwords in the cloud. Relying on a master password is particularly problematic, because a compromise of that password can lead to the same disastrous chain of events that we are trying to prevent. The only way to truly reduce the risk of this type of threat is to decentralize everything. And if that takes encouraging people to work a little harder, we at least want to make people aware that this just might be worth the hassle. Similarly, there are problems with storing passwords in the cloud, including intruder problems and problems if the company goes out of business or the cloud becomes inaccessible.

====Extension v. Built-in Feature====

Initially, we hoped to build this extension to make a pitch to Mozilla that they should think about building this kind of functionality into the browser. But as we have used a now-working copy of SafeWord in our browsers - admittedly, it's an alpha copy that's not even close to ready for prime-time - at least two of us (i.e. jharrow and rnagarajan) see that it's just too intrusive for mainstream users. If the average, busy user gets a pop-up every time he comes across a new website and tries to use an old password, he will get angry at the browser. If this happens a few times, he will probably switch from Firefox to another browser. So right now, the idea works best as an extension for people who really believe in password security and want a little nudge when they are thinking of giving in to the instinct to just use the password they used last time. But if SafeWord could work only with websites that store important personal information -- email providers, financial institutions, retailers with your credit card information -- and ignore the local newspaper's website, perhaps the balance between security and frustration would be a little closer to the former.

===More on the Stronger Password Feature===

On the other hand, the idea of adding a feature that helps users create more secure passwords - even if they are reused across multiple accounts - is a simple fix that should enhance the browsing experience for most users.

Increasingly, many websites are giving users some guidelines on password security. For instance, Yahoo!'s sign-up page looks like this:

[[Image:Yahoo.png]]

We think that's great. But not all sites have that feature. For instance, you get no visual feedback if you sign-up for an Amazon account with a weak password:

[[Image:Amazon1.png]]

Your browser can change this state-of-affairs easily. Here's the new view, with a SafeWord bar underneath the password field reminding you that your password is weak:

[[Image:Amazon2.png]]

SafeWord even lets you customize the password strength options:

[[Image:Amazon3.png]]

We think something like this really could be built into the browser, and would both add to the user experience and increase security.

==Tower Defense==

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_defense Tower Defense] is a metaphor for a particular strategy of addressing cybersecurity threats.<ref> Tower Defense is a genre of computer game in which the player places 'towers' alongside a path that goes across the screen. Enemies cross the screen along the path and the towers shoot at the enemies, hopefully eliminating them before they reach the other side of the screen. The Player does not have control over the towers' operation, only their placement. Similarly, Tower Defense as a cybersecurity strategy would hopefully place concerned users strategically throughout IP addresses on the internet such that they could passively identify and correct viruses and botnets passing through nearby computers.</ref> Certain threats, like [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Distributed_denial_of_service#Distributed_attack Distributed Denial-of-Service] attacks or malware like [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malware#Infectious_malware:_viruses_and_worms viruses and worms] take advantage of the free rider problems associated with security on the internet -- ignoring secure computers and instead leveraging the still significant number of insecure computers to wreak havoc online. No matter how much understanding a public awareness campaign might generate, some percentage of users will remain unaware and their computers will remain susceptible to botnets and malware. Companies such as eBay, Amazon, [http://yourbookmaker.co.uk/bet365 bet365] and Google, which might be in a position to alert users when their computers are infected, don't want to alert their users for fear of driving away business. Tower Defense is a strategy to address this issue by empowering educated users to help out their less computer-savvy friends and neighbors with computer security problems just...because.

Since the initial conception of this idea, there have been some promising signs that [http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/01/13/facebook-joins-with-mcafee-to-clean-up-malware-on-site/ organizations] are starting to take steps in [http://stopbadware.org/home/pr_01252010 this] direction.

===How Tower Defense Works===
[[Image:Tower Defense Diagram.png]]

Tower Defense can be conceived in three ways: (1) as an "Amber Alert" for internet threats, (2) as a kind of invasive surgical procedure to remove malware, or (3) as an independent community of 'Good Cyber Samaritans.'

Each of of these different conceptions would have largely the same structure, shown in the diagram above: An infected computer signs in to a website such as Facebook or eBay. At this point, both the website and the ISP can tell that the computer may be infected.<ref> ISPs and websites can tell when a computer has a port open, waiting for commands that is not related to where the user is browsing</ref> Rather than inform the user directly and risk alienating his/her business, the ISP or website informs the Tower Defense program that it is connected to an infected computer. The Tower Defense program can then either (1) inform the user that his/her computer may be infected, (2) connect to the infected computer through the website or ISP to quarantine or cure the infected computer ''with'' the users knowledge and permission, or (3) connect to the infected computer through the website or ISP to quarantine or cure the infected computer ''without'' the users knowledge and permission.

Hopefully, the Tower Defense program can act as a kind of Mutual Aid Treaty for the Internet, allowing websites and ISPs to (perhaps anonymously) combine their information about possible online threats so that all can be safer (This, however, may create free rider problems of its own).

==="Amber Alert" For The Internet===

What if a coalition of leading Internet sites were willing to share certain information about security threats with a third party organization (like [http://stopbadware.org/home/index StopBadware]), and the third-party would vet the information and then issue certain "Amber Alerts" that all the sites would be willing to publicize in some way? When there's a particularly egregious security hole in an [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Explorer_6 old browser], for instance, if all the leading websites actively encouraged its users to patch it, that has the potential to do a lot of good. Google has just recently begun to do this by [http://googleenterprise.blogspot.com/2010/01/modern-browsers-for-modern-applications.html phasing out support] for older browsers with security issues.

If such actions and recommendations are filtered through a reliable third-party, perhaps the companies who are reluctant to contribute their information won't be threatened by the embarrassment of having an "Amber Alert" put out, and perhaps actions like the ones Google has begun to take can become more effective. Sure, there would be negative consequences for a company, just as a company who undertakes a product recall generates bad publicity. But ultimate the hope is that companies will realize the net positive value of this transaction, and that consumers will look kindly on companies promoting a new level of honesty and transparency.

===Cyber Surgery===

Just as it is impossible to eliminate all security threats by informing internet users of security problems in the abstract, it may also be impossible to eliminate these threats by simply alerting users that their computer may be infected. Since these users apathy or unwillingness to take steps towards security are the original source of the problem, an "Amber Alert" system may be insufficient to substantially eliminating the problem.

Under a Cyber Surgery model, a website or ISP could inform the Tower Defense program running passively on an educated users computer that an infected computer is logged into the site/ISP. The Tower Defense program could then connect to the infected users computer via Mesh Networking through the ISP or website and quarantine or remove the malware on the infected computer. Because this model is designed to overcome user inertia or apathy, this quarantining or removal of malware would have to occur without the infected computer's user's knowledge or consent.

There are a number of new dangers to this approach. First, hackers may try to subvert this software to quarantine or delete good files on other computers rather than malware and viruses. Hopefully a Tower Defense program would preclude this possibility by running passively on a users computer and would not present any opportunity for the user to interact with or control the program. Next, running software or altering the state of another computer without permission may not be ethical or legal. The legal ramifications could be removed through legislation if Congress or the relevant governing body could be convinced that this is a good use of the technology. The ethical dilemma is trickier. Finally, creating a centralized list of infected computers could be very dangerous if hackers were to get ahold of it. This may be mitigated by not maintaining a centralized list, but instead only having the websites or ISPs inform individual Tower Defense programs running on individual computers when a virus or piece of malware is nearby, thus diluting and dispersing the risk. Still, even on a single computer, the few pieces of information about infected computers nearby could cause a problem in the hands of hackers.

===Good Cyber-Samaritans===

Finally, if legal or technological barriers preclude the creation of a Tower Defense program operating as an Amber Alert or Cyber Surgeon, perhaps there could be a network of young people who think security is important and who don't mind hanging around their local library for a few hours helping people update software and patching security holes. Companies and ISPs could upload possible security issues to a Stop Badware-like website where educated and interested users could go, and propose solutions which the companies could then implement. Essentially, this is crowdsourcing cybersecurity patches. This solution becomes ever-more feasible as a greater proportion of users switches to laptop computers and as projects showing that people are willing to assist strangers for the sheer fun and satisfaction of the experience - from building an [http://www.wikipedia.org encyclopedia] to giving them a [http://www.couchsurfing.org couch to crash on] for free - flourish. Relying on people's good natures could be a new way to make progress on this problem.

This proposal has its own challenges. Many companies still believe in security through obscurity and might not be inclined to share their security breaches with a publicly accessible website. Also, there would have to be a process for vetting the security fixes to make sure that they both work and don't include new trojans. Also, this kind of higher-level skilled work is not as readily appropriate to crowdsourcing as things like the tasks commonly associated with Mechanical Turk.

==Distress Password==

This was an idea originally discussed at the Liberation Technologies Seminar in the Fall of 2009 and was expanded upon by the team. Imagine you have confidential information in your email (as most of us do) and you are captured by a hostile terrorist organization. They demand your Facebook and Gmail passwords. As of now, we only have one password: the real one. But, what if we had a distress password that, if entered could:

# delete the account, or say it was 'temporarily suspended';
# show the email account, but only emails that you had marked as safe (or, in other words, only those which you hadn't filtered as 'private'); and/or
# require to you call customer service due to 'unauthorized activity'

This seems like it could be implemented fairly easily by any email service provider.

==Password Picture==

The purpose of the password picture idea is to prevent against keystroke detectors on public computers gaining access to passwords. Keystroke loggers have the ability to detect, generally in a covert manner without the user knowing, all the actions that the user is performing with his or her keyboard. Also, bots that troll cyberspace and attempt to guess passwords using various permutations and combination are incapable of seeing pictures and interpreting them (hence the CAPTCHA and RECAPTCHA systems). This dual authentication system would require the typical typed-in password, as well as the user to select, from a series of pictures, the picture or pictures that match the category given at the time of signup (perhaps updated every 3 months). Keystroke loggers wouldn't be able to see the clicks that are occurring by the mouse on the pictures, and bots wouldn't be able to successfully enter a secured area solely through guessing. It would work like this:

Say, when creating an account on Gmail, Gmail gave me the category 'tree' and 'car'. Here is what would happen when I went to log in:

# I'd have to type my password
# Then, from a series of 20 pictures, I would have to pick the one that is a tree. (A step that only a human can perform)
# Then, from a series of 20 pictures, I would have to pick the one that is a car. (A step that only a human can perform)

At the end of the day, through two different modes of password authentication, security increases in a relatively painless way.

=Footnotes=
<references />

Future of Wikipedia

2011-12-15T23:53:18Z

Chenkrahman:

[http://sakeena.net/ waptrick] [http://www.chenkrahman.com/ smadav] [http://www.zianka.net/ busana muslim] [http://www.anggabatik.com/ baju batik] [http://63cell.blogspot.com/ harga hp] [http://www.indoterbaru.com/ indo terbaru]
[http://goo.gl/MIqYf teak 123 best teak garden furniture manufacturer wholesale in indonesia]

Cybersecurity

2011-12-15T23:49:27Z

Chenkrahman:

atjPIW can i comment here
Sure visit this one : [http://www.websitelooker.com/ website value]
[http://sakeena.net/ kata bijak] [http://www.chenkrahman.com/ rcti] [http://www.zianka.net/ busana muslim] [http://www.anggabatik.com/ baju batik] [http://63cell.blogspot.com/ handphone terbaru]

Privacy and Anonymity on the Internet

2011-12-15T23:47:57Z

Chenkrahman:

On the internet, it can be tempting to view yourself as an anonymous browser, [http://sakeena.net/ kata bijak] [http://www.chenkrahman.com/ rcti] [http://www.zianka.net/ busana muslim] but increasingly the public is becoming aware of just how untrue that is. A study by the [http://epic.org/reports/surfer-beware.html Electronic Privacy Information Center] surveyed the 100 most frequently visited sites on the internet; of those 100 none met the basic privacy standards established by EPIC and only 17 had any privacy terms at all. In a medium with so little protection and so much information available, [http://nymag.com/news/features/27341/ children] are particularly vulnerable.

Consider whether consumers on the internet truly make informed decisions regarding their privacy. The Terms of Use of Facebook for example - have you ever really read them all the way through? What about Harvard Law School's privacy terms for our email or administrative boards? Does the average user read and understand those terms? Some technological [http://www.anggabatik.com/ baju batik] [http://63cell.blogspot.com/ handphone terbaru] projects like the [https://wiki.mozilla.org/Drumbeat/Challenges/Privacy_Icons Drumbeat Privacy Icons] project are working on new ways to inform users about the privacy regulations of the sites they visit. (Drumbeat is looking for proposals on how to develop a system of "privacy icons" that could easily label websites according to the degree of privacy retained by the user.) And there are also technological businesses and solutions such as [http://www.google.com/#hl=en&source=hp&q=reputationdefender&aq=0&aqi=g1g-s4g1g-s1&oq=reputationd&fp=a50ffc77dda4c0bc ReputationDefender], but are these enough to address the issue?

Unlike snail mail, your email can be readily surveilled by government officials without a warrant because courts have held that there is no expectation of privacy on the internet.

Is this true? How much is changed by new platforms for social interaction that are based on unprecedented standards of privacy, such as [http://www.patientslikeme.com/ PatientsLikeMe]?

Main Page

2011-12-15T21:48:40Z

Chenkrahman:

Welcome to Difficult Problems in Cyberlaw, a January course taught by Professor Jonathan Zittrain and Elizabeth Stark [http://goo.gl/nNBUb gemscool], co-hosted by Stanford Law School and Harvard Law SchooI.

In addition to this wiki, this class maintains a [http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/difficultprobs/ blog] and [http://twitter.com/DifficultProbs twitter feed]. Check them out!

If you are a student, please see the [[Student Responsibilities]] section and [[Course Logistics]]. For admins looking for details on field trips, please visit [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/difficultproblems/Main_Page#Field_Trip_Logistic here]. All regular class meetings will be at '''Stanford Law School Classroom 280B'''.

This [http://www.law.stanford.edu/contact/#maps map site] has a map of the [http://www.aaccessmaps.com/show/map/us/ca/bayarea Bay Area], [http://ucomm.stanford.edu/map/ Stanford campus], [http://goo.gl/yLMju kata mutiara], and [http://transportation.stanford.edu/images/visitor-bus.pdf visitor parking] at Stanford.

The four main difficult problems to be addressed are:
*[[Global Network Initiative]] ([[GNI Brainstorming |Group Page]])
*[[Ubiquitous Human Computing]] ([[Ubicomp Brainstorming |Group Page]])
*[[Future of Wikipedia]]
*[[Cybersecurity]] ([[Cybersecurity Project|Final Project]]) ([[Cybersecurity Brainstorming |Brainstorming Page]])

Cross-cutting themes include:
*[[Due process on the Internet among private sheriffs]]
*[[The role of intermediaries]]
*[[Motivating good and bad actors]]
*[[Collaborating and relying on masses]]
*[[Privacy and Anonymity on the Internet]]

Group presentation schedule:
*Friday, Jan. 15th: Ubiquitous Human Computing
*Tuesday, Jan. 19th: Cybersecurity
*Wednesday, Jan. 20th: Global Network Initiative
*Thursday, Jan. 21st: Future of Wikipedia

==WEEK ONE: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS==

<center> '''Monday, January 4th''' </center>

'''LUNCH''': 12-2pm SLS, Room 280B
:Student introductions [http://www.chenkrahman.com/ smadav]

'''CLASS''': 7:20-9:20pm SLS Room 280B
:A brief overview of the course, its goals and expectations, including an introduction to the difficult problems and the cross-cutting themes.
:A quiz on Zittrain's book, [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/ The Future of the Internet: And How to Stop It] will be given.
:Brief introduction to the Global Network Initiative

''Readings For Class'':
*Read [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/ The Future of the Internet: And How to Stop It]
*Explore the [http://www.globalnetworkinitiative.org/ Global Network Initiative] website [http://goo.gl/MIqYf teak 123 best teak garden furniture manufacturer wholesale in indonesia]
*Read the [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cyberlaw_winter10/GNI GNI Wiki Primer]

''Assignments'': Before next class, post [[Day 2 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 1 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Tuesday, January 5th''' </center>

'''CYBERSECURITY BACKGROUND: ''BONUS''''': 2-4pm SLS Room 280B
: Professor Zittrain will interview Professor [http://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/directory/index.html?id=559 Jack Goldsmith] as an overview of cybersecurity as it has evolved and as it can potentially be addressed.

*''Bonus Writing Opportunity'': produce a summary of the cybersecurity event, to be used as background reading for Thursday

'''CLASS''': 5:15-7:15pm SLS Room 280B
:Identify the first-order problems regarding corporate responsibility and free expression on the internet. Examine how GNI attempts to address these problems and then evaluate whether GNI is a success and whether better approaches could be taken.
:Introduction to ubiquitous human computing.

''Guests:''
*Mark Chandler, CISCO
*Chuck Cosson, Microsoft
*Dunstan Hope, BSR

''Readings:''
*Read Rhys Blakely,[http://sakeena.net/ rcti] ''[http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/media/article728898.ece Yahoo in second Chinese blog Row],'' TimesOnline, Feb. 9, 2006.
*Read Colin Maclay,[http://www.indoterbaru.com/ indo terbaru] "[http://drop.io/cyberlaw_winter10/asset/maclay-access-controlled-pdf Protecting Privacy and Expression Online]," ''in'' Access Controlled (Ronald Diebert et al., eds., MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 2010).
*Read GNI [http://blog-rahman.blogspot.com/ e991][http://www.globalnetworkinitiative.org/cms/uploads/1/GNI_-_Principles_1_.pdf Guiding Principles]
*Read the [http://63cell.blogspot.com/ harga hp][http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cyberlaw_winter10/Ubiquitous_Human_Computing UbiComp Wiki Primer]

''Assignments'': Before next class, post [[Day 3 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 2 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Wednesday, January 6th''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 7:00pm
:Examine the nature of ubiquitous human computing and potential future applications of human computing and the dangers.
:Introduction to cybersecurity.

''Guests'':
*Lukas Biewald, [http://crowdflower.com/ CrowdFlower]
*Bjoern Hartman, see his [http://bjoern.org/projects/catbook/ Mechanical Turk Cats Book]
*Aaron Koblin, see his [http://www.aaronkoblin.com/work.html Ten Thousand Cents and Sheep Market projects]

''Readings'':
*Visit [http://www.zianka.net/ busana muslim][http://www.mturk.com/ Mechanical Turk], [http://www.liveops.com/ LiveOps], [http://www.crowdflower.com CrowdFlower] or other human computing site
**Watch the [http://www.anggabatik.com/ baju batik][http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/2167086 12-minute video] of Lukas' CrowdFlower presentation at TechCrunch
*Skim Nancy R. Mansfield, ''[http://www.allbusiness.com/technology/internet-technology/618188-1.html The information revolution and its impact on the employment relationship: an analysis of the cyberspace workplace]'', American Business Law Journal (2003).
*Kate Thomas,[http://almunawwar.net/ pesantren] ''[http://www.seiu.org/2009/12/insurers-hire-mafia-to-spam-congress.php Insurers Hire Mafia to Spam Congress]'', SEIU.org Blog, Dec. 10, 2009.
*Read Jonathan Zittrain, ''[http://drop.io/cyberlaw_winter10/asset/ssrn-id1140445-pdf Ubiquitous Human Computing]'', SSRN Paper No 32/2008 (July 2008).
*Read the [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cyberlaw_winter10/Cybersecurity Cybersecurity Wiki Primer]

'''ASSIGNMENT: Due -- Email Admin with Problem Topic Choice'''

''Assignment'': Before next class, post [[Day 4 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 3 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Thursday, January 7th''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 11:40am
:Cybersecurity has been identified as one of the greatest threats facing the United States today, but it is ill-defined and almost impossible to address. How can we frame this problem to better inspire solutions? How should government, military, businesses, and internet/tech approach the problem from different angles and do these different approaches work together?
:Introduction to Future of Wikipedia

''Guests'':
*Chuck Cosson, Microsoft

''Readings'':
*Listen to David Clark, [http://www.musikdahsyat.info/ lagu terbaru][http://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/newsandevents/events/sl20090304 The Internets We Did Not Build].
*Col. Allen & Lt. Col Demchak, ''[http://drop.io/cyberlaw_winter10 The Palestinian-Israeli Cyberwar]'', Military Review (2003).
*Kim Zetter, ''[http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/08/revealed-the-in/ Revealed: The Internet's Biggest Security Hole]'', Wired (2008).
*Review Zittrain, [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/ The Future of the Internet: And How to Stop It]; Chapter 3
*Skim CENTRA Technology, [http://www.anehuniklucu.com/ berita unik][http://drop.io/cyberlaw_winter10 Cyber Compendium] Workshop, Nov. 2009.
*Skim the White House [http://www.whitehouse.gov/assets/documents/Cyberspace_Policy_Review_final.pdf Cyberspace Policy Review] (2009); focus on the introduction/overview and the Near & Mid-Term Action Plans.
*Read [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cyberlaw_winter10/Future_of_Wikipedia Future of Wikipedia] wiki background paper

''Assignment'': Before next class, post [[Day 5 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 4 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Friday, January 8th''' </center>

'''FIELD TRIP: ''BONUS''''': 10:30 am eBay office visit (shuttle from SLS), including JZ talk and meeting with eBay lawyers and security experts
*If you're unable to attend, you might want to watch JZ's [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dw3h-rae3uo Minds for Sale talk].

'''CLASS''': 3:00-5:00pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 3:30pm
:Wikipedia has grown quickly and rapidly to become one of if not the largest online content-generating collaboration. Following the 2009 Wikimania, Wikimedia has undertaken a self-review, looking at strategies for the future of Wikipedia. Is it a sustainable model? and if so, to what other fields is it applicable? How can its reception in academia be improved? and what are its applications for education?
:Brief introduction of next week's cross-cutting themes

''Guests'':
*Stu West, [http://www.gadgetsnew.us/ new gadgets][http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees#Stu_West Wikimedia Foundation Board Member]
*Mike Godwin, Wikimedia General Counsel
*Phoebe Ayers, Wikimedia volunteer

''Readings'':
*Review Zittrain, [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/ The Future of the Internet: And How to Stop It]; Chapter 6
*Peruse Wikipedia's [http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page Strategy Page]
*Strona, ''[http://prawo.uni.wroc.pl/~kwasnicki/EkonLit6/WikipediaSoul.pdf The Battle for Wikipedia's Soul]'', The Economist, March 6, 2008.
*''[http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/26/wiki A Stand Against Wikipedia?]'', Inside Higher Ed, Jan. 26, 2007.
*Browse [http://trendsandroid.com/ games android][http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/ Wikipedia Watch] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Wikipedia Criticism of Wikipedia]
*''[http://www.resourceshelf.com/2009/11/23/wsj-volunteers-log-off-as-wikipedia-ages/ Wikipedia Volunteers Log Off as Wikipedia Ages]'', Wall Street Journal.
*''[http://infodisiac.com/blog/2009/12/new-editors-are-joining-english-wikipedia-in-droves/ New editors are joining English Wikipedia in droves?]'', Infodisiac, Dec. 6, 2009.

''Assignment'': Before next class, post [[Day 6 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 5 Thoughts]]

'''EVENING EVENT: ''BONUS''''': Cocktails and hors d'oeuvres at David Hornik's office in Palo Alto after class.

----

<center> '''Saturday, January 9th''' </center>

Tour of San Francisco (Optional); details TBD. To give input and suggestions, visit [[Tour Ideas]].

==WEEK TWO: CROSS-CUTTING THEMES==

<center> '''Monday, January 11th''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 7:20-9:20pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 7:50pm
:One potential way to address some of the problems addressed in this course is through innovations and technological solutions. Several solutions have changed the way our browsers work and thereby changed the way we interact with the internet, making life better. In what other areas could a similar approach be applied? Change the technology, save the world.
:Introduction to cross-cutting theme of privacy, anonymity and liability on the internet

''Guests'':
*John M. Agosta, [http://disputefinder.cs.berkeley.edu/ DisputeFinder]
*Tye Rattenbury, DisputeFinder
*Rob Ennals, DisputeFinder
*Tad Hersch, DisputeFinder

''Readings'':
*Visit [http://www.herdict.org/web/ HerdictWeb]
*Watch [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NggzBHSXdCo Video explanation of Herdict] (student suggested)
*Zittrain's [http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2009/02/10/berkman-jz-on-herdict/ Comments on Herdict] at a Berkman Center Lunch
*Visit [http://disputefinder.cs.berkeley.edu/ DisputeFinder] (Test it out!)
*Visit [https://www.new.net/ New.net]
**How can .church domain names exist when it does not exist? Look at the new.net domain decoder
**Compare with [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Internet_top-level_domains List of Internet Domains]
*Read Introduction to Ann Bartow, ''[http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlg/vol322/383-430.pdf Internet Defamation As Profit Center: The Monetization of Online Harrassment]'', 32 Harvard Journal of Law & Gender 383 (2009).

''Assignment'': Before next class, post [[Day 7 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 6 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Tuesday, January 12th''' </center>

'''WORKSHOP: ''BONUS''''': 1-2pm Faculty Lounge, Stanford [http://public.resource.org/law.gov/ law.gov workshop]
Hosted by Carl Malamud
:Some students attend the entire workshop, 10am-3pm

'''CLASS''': 5:15-7:15pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 5:45pm
:Privacy and anonymity can raise significant issues for accountability for online actions. Users often believe they are more anonymous than they truly are online - how can we better educate the public about the reality of privacy online? Consider the Drumbeat privacy project and creative commons issues.
:Introduction to the cross-cutting theme of due process and dispute resolution on the internet.

''Guests'':
*Ryan Calo, SLS Fellow
*Ebele Okobi-Harris, Yahoo! Director of Business and Human Rights
*Mark Surman, Mozilla
*Michael Fertik, Reputation Defender
*Carl Malamud
*Julie Martin, Mozilla
*Aza Raskin, Mozilla

''Readings'':
*Browse [http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] for discussion
*Review Zittrain, [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/ The Future of the Internet: And How to Stop It]; Chapter 9 on Data Genealogy
*Odia Kagan, ''[http://www.ibls.com/internet_law_news_portal_view.aspx?s=latestnews&id=1915 Fighting Anonymous Defamation],'' Int'l Business Law Services, November 26, 2007.
*Consider commercial applications; visit [http://www.reputationdefender.com/ ReputationDefender]
*[https://wiki.mozilla.org/Drumbeat/Challenges/Privacy_Icons Drumbeat privacy icon challenge] backgrounder

''Additional Materials'' (suggested by student):
*Watch [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCbKv9yiLiQ Message from Anonymous to the Church of Scientology];
*Skim [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_%28group%29 Wikipedia's article about Anonymous Group];
*Read about (and use!) [http://www.torproject.org/ Tor]

''Assignment'': Before next class, post [[Day 8 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 7 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Wednesday, January 13th''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 7:00pm
:How do our due process concerns translate to the internet and online communities? Should due process exist on the internet? Is the internet public or private space and under what terms do we have the privilege or right to access?
:Consider, for example, how much due process should be required to remove an account from Facebook, Google or Twitter. How much due process is necessary for a take-down on YouTube and what right of appeal do you have in any of these circumstances?
:Introduction to online collaboration and group motivation strategies

''Guests'':

* Kim Scott, Google

''Readings'':

* Skim Elizabeth Thornburg, ''[http://faculty.smu.edu/ethornbu/Thornburg%20Macro.doc Going Private: Technology, Due Process, and Internet Dispute Resolution]'', 34 Univ. Cal. Davis 151 (2000).
* Read through the Facebook or Google terms of service (see the primer above)
* Recall Zittrain, Chapter 7, on [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/archives/18#48 Private Sheriffs]
* Terri Wells, ''[http://www.seochat.com/c/a/Search-Engine-News/Beware-the-Google-Death-Penalty/ Beware the Google 'Death Penalty']'',Search Engine News (2006)
* Social media rules and regulations on [http://www.sorezki.com/services/smo/ Social media marketing]

''Assignment'': Before next class, post [[Day 9 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 8 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Thursday, January 14th''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 11:40am
:Online collaboration projects require internet organizations to motivate and coordinate large groups of people. This requires both motivating good actors to participate and motivating bad actors either to not participate or to conform to the rules/standards of the site. How can website hosts face these challenges? How involved should the users of cooperatively developed sites be in their governments?

''Guests'':
*Daniel Hoffer, [http://www.couchsurfing.org/ Couchsurfing]
*Micah Schaffer
*Dan Scholnick, [http://www.trinityventures.com/venture-capital-team/bio.php?first-name=Dan&last-name=Scholnick Trinity Ventures]
*Ben Rigby, [http://beextra.org The Extraordinaries]
*Stu West, [http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees#Stu_West Wikimedia Foundation Board Member]

''Readings'':
*F. Gino, Jun Gu, & Chen-Bo Zhong, ''[http://drop.io/cyberlaw_winter10 Contagion or Restitution? When bad apples can motivate ethical behavior]'', 45 J. Experimental Social Psychology 1299-1302 (2009).
*Browse [http://www.opencouchsurfing.org/ OpenCouchSurfing.org] posts and complaints
*Review readings from Friday, January 8th on Wikipedia and motivation of contributors

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 9 Thoughts]]

'''CLASS SOCIAL''': Bonus, evening, details TBD

----

<center> '''Friday, January 15th''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 1:00-3:00pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 1:30pm
:Ubiquitous Human Computing presentation (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Fabio Rosati, Elance

''Group Documents'':
*[http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AVl_o5lQOXEqZGMzejN4OG5fMjEzZnFyeG54ZG4&hl=en Best practices ]
*[http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AVl_o5lQOXEqZGMzejN4OG5fMjE2Z3pjNWR2ZGM&hl=en Technological solutions ]

''Thoughts about the discussed solutions'': [[UHC Solutions]]

==WEEK THREE: SOLUTIONS==

<center> '''Monday, January 18th''' </center>

'''NO CLASS''': [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr._Day Martin Luther King, Jr. Day]

----

<center> '''Tuesday, January 19th''' </center>

'''FIELD TRIP: ''BONUS''''': Google, 3:30pm

'''CLASS''': Held at Google during visit
:Cybersecurity presentation (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Mitchell Baker

----

<center> '''Wednesday, January 20th''' </center>

'''FIELD TRIP: ''BONUS'':''' Facebook, 12:30-2pm (TBC)

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 7:00pm
:Global Network Initiative presentation (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Esther Wojcicki

----

<center> '''Thursday, January 21st''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 11:40am
:Future of Wikipedia presentation (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Craig Newmark, [http://www.craigslist.org/about/craig_newmark Craigslist founder] and [http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board#Craig_Newmark Wikimedia Foundation Advisory Board member]
*[http://www.websitelooker.com/ website value]
*Edward Wes
*Jack Herrick, founder of [http://www.wikihow.com/Main-Page WikiHow]
*Stu West, [http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees#Stu_West Wikimedia Foundation Board Member]

'''WRAP-UP DINNER''': 7:20-9:20pm SLS Student Lounge

<center> '''Friday, January 22nd''' </center>

'''ReputationDefender visit''': 2:30pm
----

<center> '''January 31st''' </center>

'''FINAL PROJECTS DUE'''

Main Page

2011-11-22T23:37:29Z

Chenkrahman: /* WEEK ONE: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS */

Welcome to Difficult Problems in Cyberlaw, a January course taught by Professor Jonathan Zittrain and Elizabeth Stark [http://goo.gl/nNBUb gemscool], co-hosted by Stanford Law School and Harvard Law SchooI.

In addition to this wiki, this class maintains a [http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/difficultprobs/ blog] and [http://twitter.com/DifficultProbs twitter feed]. Check them out!

If you are a student, please see the [[Student Responsibilities]] section and [[Course Logistics]]. For admins looking for details on field trips, please visit [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/difficultproblems/Main_Page#Field_Trip_Logistic here]. All regular class meetings will be at '''Stanford Law School Classroom 280B'''.

This [http://www.law.stanford.edu/contact/#maps map site] has a map of the [http://www.aaccessmaps.com/show/map/us/ca/bayarea Bay Area], [http://ucomm.stanford.edu/map/ Stanford campus], [http://goo.gl/yLMju kata mutiara], and [http://transportation.stanford.edu/images/visitor-bus.pdf visitor parking] at Stanford.

The four main difficult problems to be addressed are:
*[[Global Network Initiative]] ([[GNI Brainstorming |Group Page]])
*[[Ubiquitous Human Computing]] ([[Ubicomp Brainstorming |Group Page]])
*[[Future of Wikipedia]]
*[[Cybersecurity]] ([[Cybersecurity Project|Final Project]]) ([[Cybersecurity Brainstorming |Brainstorming Page]])

Cross-cutting themes include:
*[[Due process on the Internet among private sheriffs]]
*[[The role of intermediaries]]
*[[Motivating good and bad actors]]
*[[Collaborating and relying on masses]]
*[[Privacy and Anonymity on the Internet]]

Group presentation schedule:
*Friday, Jan. 15th: Ubiquitous Human Computing
*Tuesday, Jan. 19th: Cybersecurity
*Wednesday, Jan. 20th: Global Network Initiative
*Thursday, Jan. 21st: Future of Wikipedia

==WEEK ONE: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS==

<center> '''Monday, January 4th''' </center>

'''LUNCH''': 12-2pm SLS, Room 280B
:Student introductions [http://www.chenkrahman.com/ smadav]

'''CLASS''': 7:20-9:20pm SLS Room 280B
:A brief overview of the course, its goals and expectations, including an introduction to the difficult problems and the cross-cutting themes.
:A quiz on Zittrain's book, [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/ The Future of the Internet: And How to Stop It] will be given.
:Brief introduction to the Global Network Initiative

''Readings For Class'':
*Read [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/ The Future of the Internet: And How to Stop It]
*Explore the [http://www.globalnetworkinitiative.org/ Global Network Initiative] website
*Read the [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cyberlaw_winter10/GNI GNI Wiki Primer]

''Assignments'': Before next class, post [[Day 2 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 1 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Tuesday, January 5th''' </center>

'''CYBERSECURITY BACKGROUND: ''BONUS''''': 2-4pm SLS Room 280B
: Professor Zittrain will interview Professor [http://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/directory/index.html?id=559 Jack Goldsmith] as an overview of cybersecurity as it has evolved and as it can potentially be addressed.

*''Bonus Writing Opportunity'': produce a summary of the cybersecurity event, to be used as background reading for Thursday

'''CLASS''': 5:15-7:15pm SLS Room 280B
:Identify the first-order problems regarding corporate responsibility and free expression on the internet. Examine how GNI attempts to address these problems and then evaluate whether GNI is a success and whether better approaches could be taken.
:Introduction to ubiquitous human computing.

''Guests:''
*Mark Chandler, CISCO
*Chuck Cosson, Microsoft
*Dunstan Hope, BSR

''Readings:''
*Read Rhys Blakely,[http://sakeena.net/ rcti] ''[http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/media/article728898.ece Yahoo in second Chinese blog Row],'' TimesOnline, Feb. 9, 2006.
*Read Colin Maclay,[http://www.indoterbaru.com/ indo terbaru] "[http://drop.io/cyberlaw_winter10/asset/maclay-access-controlled-pdf Protecting Privacy and Expression Online]," ''in'' Access Controlled (Ronald Diebert et al., eds., MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 2010).
*Read GNI [http://blog-rahman.blogspot.com/ e991][http://www.globalnetworkinitiative.org/cms/uploads/1/GNI_-_Principles_1_.pdf Guiding Principles]
*Read the [http://63cell.blogspot.com/ harga hp][http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cyberlaw_winter10/Ubiquitous_Human_Computing UbiComp Wiki Primer]

''Assignments'': Before next class, post [[Day 3 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 2 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Wednesday, January 6th''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 7:00pm
:Examine the nature of ubiquitous human computing and potential future applications of human computing and the dangers.
:Introduction to cybersecurity.

''Guests'':
*Lukas Biewald, [http://crowdflower.com/ CrowdFlower]
*Bjoern Hartman, see his [http://bjoern.org/projects/catbook/ Mechanical Turk Cats Book]
*Aaron Koblin, see his [http://www.aaronkoblin.com/work.html Ten Thousand Cents and Sheep Market projects]

''Readings'':
*Visit [http://www.zianka.net/ busana muslim][http://www.mturk.com/ Mechanical Turk], [http://www.liveops.com/ LiveOps], [http://www.crowdflower.com CrowdFlower] or other human computing site
**Watch the [http://www.anggabatik.com/ baju batik][http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/2167086 12-minute video] of Lukas' CrowdFlower presentation at TechCrunch
*Skim Nancy R. Mansfield, ''[http://www.allbusiness.com/technology/internet-technology/618188-1.html The information revolution and its impact on the employment relationship: an analysis of the cyberspace workplace]'', American Business Law Journal (2003).
*Kate Thomas,[http://almunawwar.net/ pesantren] ''[http://www.seiu.org/2009/12/insurers-hire-mafia-to-spam-congress.php Insurers Hire Mafia to Spam Congress]'', SEIU.org Blog, Dec. 10, 2009.
*Read Jonathan Zittrain, ''[http://drop.io/cyberlaw_winter10/asset/ssrn-id1140445-pdf Ubiquitous Human Computing]'', SSRN Paper No 32/2008 (July 2008).
*Read the [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cyberlaw_winter10/Cybersecurity Cybersecurity Wiki Primer]

'''ASSIGNMENT: Due -- Email Admin with Problem Topic Choice'''

''Assignment'': Before next class, post [[Day 4 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 3 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Thursday, January 7th''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 11:40am
:Cybersecurity has been identified as one of the greatest threats facing the United States today, but it is ill-defined and almost impossible to address. How can we frame this problem to better inspire solutions? How should government, military, businesses, and internet/tech approach the problem from different angles and do these different approaches work together?
:Introduction to Future of Wikipedia

''Guests'':
*Chuck Cosson, Microsoft

''Readings'':
*Listen to David Clark, [http://www.musikdahsyat.info/ lagu terbaru][http://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/newsandevents/events/sl20090304 The Internets We Did Not Build].
*Col. Allen & Lt. Col Demchak, ''[http://drop.io/cyberlaw_winter10 The Palestinian-Israeli Cyberwar]'', Military Review (2003).
*Kim Zetter, ''[http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/08/revealed-the-in/ Revealed: The Internet's Biggest Security Hole]'', Wired (2008).
*Review Zittrain, [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/ The Future of the Internet: And How to Stop It]; Chapter 3
*Skim CENTRA Technology, [http://www.anehuniklucu.com/ berita unik][http://drop.io/cyberlaw_winter10 Cyber Compendium] Workshop, Nov. 2009.
*Skim the White House [http://www.whitehouse.gov/assets/documents/Cyberspace_Policy_Review_final.pdf Cyberspace Policy Review] (2009); focus on the introduction/overview and the Near & Mid-Term Action Plans.
*Read [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cyberlaw_winter10/Future_of_Wikipedia Future of Wikipedia] wiki background paper

''Assignment'': Before next class, post [[Day 5 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 4 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Friday, January 8th''' </center>

'''FIELD TRIP: ''BONUS''''': 10:30 am eBay office visit (shuttle from SLS), including JZ talk and meeting with eBay lawyers and security experts
*If you're unable to attend, you might want to watch JZ's [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dw3h-rae3uo Minds for Sale talk].

'''CLASS''': 3:00-5:00pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 3:30pm
:Wikipedia has grown quickly and rapidly to become one of if not the largest online content-generating collaboration. Following the 2009 Wikimania, Wikimedia has undertaken a self-review, looking at strategies for the future of Wikipedia. Is it a sustainable model? and if so, to what other fields is it applicable? How can its reception in academia be improved? and what are its applications for education?
:Brief introduction of next week's cross-cutting themes

''Guests'':
*Stu West, [http://www.gadgetsnew.us/ new gadgets][http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees#Stu_West Wikimedia Foundation Board Member]
*Mike Godwin, Wikimedia General Counsel
*Phoebe Ayers, Wikimedia volunteer

''Readings'':
*Review Zittrain, [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/ The Future of the Internet: And How to Stop It]; Chapter 6
*Peruse Wikipedia's [http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page Strategy Page]
*Strona, ''[http://prawo.uni.wroc.pl/~kwasnicki/EkonLit6/WikipediaSoul.pdf The Battle for Wikipedia's Soul]'', The Economist, March 6, 2008.
*''[http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/26/wiki A Stand Against Wikipedia?]'', Inside Higher Ed, Jan. 26, 2007.
*Browse [http://trendsandroid.com/ games android][http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/ Wikipedia Watch] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Wikipedia Criticism of Wikipedia]
*''[http://www.resourceshelf.com/2009/11/23/wsj-volunteers-log-off-as-wikipedia-ages/ Wikipedia Volunteers Log Off as Wikipedia Ages]'', Wall Street Journal.
*''[http://infodisiac.com/blog/2009/12/new-editors-are-joining-english-wikipedia-in-droves/ New editors are joining English Wikipedia in droves?]'', Infodisiac, Dec. 6, 2009.

''Assignment'': Before next class, post [[Day 6 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 5 Thoughts]]

'''EVENING EVENT: ''BONUS''''': Cocktails and hors d'oeuvres at David Hornik's office in Palo Alto after class.

----

<center> '''Saturday, January 9th''' </center>

Tour of San Francisco (Optional); details TBD. To give input and suggestions, visit [[Tour Ideas]].

==WEEK TWO: CROSS-CUTTING THEMES==

<center> '''Monday, January 11th''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 7:20-9:20pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 7:50pm
:One potential way to address some of the problems addressed in this course is through innovations and technological solutions. Several solutions have changed the way our browsers work and thereby changed the way we interact with the internet, making life better. In what other areas could a similar approach be applied? Change the technology, save the world.
:Introduction to cross-cutting theme of privacy, anonymity and liability on the internet

''Guests'':
*John M. Agosta, [http://disputefinder.cs.berkeley.edu/ DisputeFinder]
*Tye Rattenbury, DisputeFinder
*Rob Ennals, DisputeFinder
*Tad Hersch, DisputeFinder

''Readings'':
*Visit [http://www.herdict.org/web/ HerdictWeb]
*Watch [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NggzBHSXdCo Video explanation of Herdict] (student suggested)
*Zittrain's [http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2009/02/10/berkman-jz-on-herdict/ Comments on Herdict] at a Berkman Center Lunch
*Visit [http://disputefinder.cs.berkeley.edu/ DisputeFinder] (Test it out!)
*Visit [https://www.new.net/ New.net]
**How can .church domain names exist when it does not exist? Look at the new.net domain decoder
**Compare with [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Internet_top-level_domains List of Internet Domains]
*Read Introduction to Ann Bartow, ''[http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlg/vol322/383-430.pdf Internet Defamation As Profit Center: The Monetization of Online Harrassment]'', 32 Harvard Journal of Law & Gender 383 (2009).

''Assignment'': Before next class, post [[Day 7 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 6 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Tuesday, January 12th''' </center>

'''WORKSHOP: ''BONUS''''': 1-2pm Faculty Lounge, Stanford [http://public.resource.org/law.gov/ law.gov workshop]
Hosted by Carl Malamud
:Some students attend the entire workshop, 10am-3pm

'''CLASS''': 5:15-7:15pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 5:45pm
:Privacy and anonymity can raise significant issues for accountability for online actions. Users often believe they are more anonymous than they truly are online - how can we better educate the public about the reality of privacy online? Consider the Drumbeat privacy project and creative commons issues.
:Introduction to the cross-cutting theme of due process and dispute resolution on the internet.

''Guests'':
*Ryan Calo, SLS Fellow
*Ebele Okobi-Harris, Yahoo! Director of Business and Human Rights
*Mark Surman, Mozilla
*Michael Fertik, Reputation Defender
*Carl Malamud
*Julie Martin, Mozilla
*Aza Raskin, Mozilla

''Readings'':
*Browse [http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] for discussion
*Review Zittrain, [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/ The Future of the Internet: And How to Stop It]; Chapter 9 on Data Genealogy
*Odia Kagan, ''[http://www.ibls.com/internet_law_news_portal_view.aspx?s=latestnews&id=1915 Fighting Anonymous Defamation],'' Int'l Business Law Services, November 26, 2007.
*Consider commercial applications; visit [http://www.reputationdefender.com/ ReputationDefender]
*[https://wiki.mozilla.org/Drumbeat/Challenges/Privacy_Icons Drumbeat privacy icon challenge] backgrounder

''Additional Materials'' (suggested by student):
*Watch [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCbKv9yiLiQ Message from Anonymous to the Church of Scientology];
*Skim [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_%28group%29 Wikipedia's article about Anonymous Group];
*Read about (and use!) [http://www.torproject.org/ Tor]

''Assignment'': Before next class, post [[Day 8 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 7 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Wednesday, January 13th''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 7:00pm
:How do our due process concerns translate to the internet and online communities? Should due process exist on the internet? Is the internet public or private space and under what terms do we have the privilege or right to access?
:Consider, for example, how much due process should be required to remove an account from Facebook, Google or Twitter. How much due process is necessary for a take-down on YouTube and what right of appeal do you have in any of these circumstances?
:Introduction to online collaboration and group motivation strategies

''Guests'':

* Kim Scott, Google

''Readings'':

* Skim Elizabeth Thornburg, ''[http://faculty.smu.edu/ethornbu/Thornburg%20Macro.doc Going Private: Technology, Due Process, and Internet Dispute Resolution]'', 34 Univ. Cal. Davis 151 (2000).
* Read through the Facebook or Google terms of service (see the primer above)
* Recall Zittrain, Chapter 7, on [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/archives/18#48 Private Sheriffs]
* Terri Wells, ''[http://www.seochat.com/c/a/Search-Engine-News/Beware-the-Google-Death-Penalty/ Beware the Google 'Death Penalty']'',Search Engine News (2006)
* Social media rules and regulations on [http://www.sorezki.com/services/smo/ Social media marketing]

''Assignment'': Before next class, post [[Day 9 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 8 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Thursday, January 14th''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 11:40am
:Online collaboration projects require internet organizations to motivate and coordinate large groups of people. This requires both motivating good actors to participate and motivating bad actors either to not participate or to conform to the rules/standards of the site. How can website hosts face these challenges? How involved should the users of cooperatively developed sites be in their governments?

''Guests'':
*Daniel Hoffer, [http://www.couchsurfing.org/ Couchsurfing]
*Micah Schaffer
*Dan Scholnick, [http://www.trinityventures.com/venture-capital-team/bio.php?first-name=Dan&last-name=Scholnick Trinity Ventures]
*Ben Rigby, [http://beextra.org The Extraordinaries]
*Stu West, [http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees#Stu_West Wikimedia Foundation Board Member]

''Readings'':
*F. Gino, Jun Gu, & Chen-Bo Zhong, ''[http://drop.io/cyberlaw_winter10 Contagion or Restitution? When bad apples can motivate ethical behavior]'', 45 J. Experimental Social Psychology 1299-1302 (2009).
*Browse [http://www.opencouchsurfing.org/ OpenCouchSurfing.org] posts and complaints
*Review readings from Friday, January 8th on Wikipedia and motivation of contributors

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 9 Thoughts]]

'''CLASS SOCIAL''': Bonus, evening, details TBD

----

<center> '''Friday, January 15th''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 1:00-3:00pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 1:30pm
:Ubiquitous Human Computing presentation (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Fabio Rosati, Elance

''Group Documents'':
*[http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AVl_o5lQOXEqZGMzejN4OG5fMjEzZnFyeG54ZG4&hl=en Best practices ]
*[http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AVl_o5lQOXEqZGMzejN4OG5fMjE2Z3pjNWR2ZGM&hl=en Technological solutions ]

''Thoughts about the discussed solutions'': [[UHC Solutions]]

==WEEK THREE: SOLUTIONS==

<center> '''Monday, January 18th''' </center>

'''NO CLASS''': [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr._Day Martin Luther King, Jr. Day]

----

<center> '''Tuesday, January 19th''' </center>

'''FIELD TRIP: ''BONUS''''': Google, 3:30pm

'''CLASS''': Held at Google during visit
:Cybersecurity presentation (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Mitchell Baker

----

<center> '''Wednesday, January 20th''' </center>

'''FIELD TRIP: ''BONUS'':''' Facebook, 12:30-2pm (TBC)

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 7:00pm
:Global Network Initiative presentation (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Esther Wojcicki

----

<center> '''Thursday, January 21st''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 11:40am
:Future of Wikipedia presentation (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Craig Newmark, [http://www.craigslist.org/about/craig_newmark Craigslist founder] and [http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board#Craig_Newmark Wikimedia Foundation Advisory Board member]
*Edward Wes
*Jack Herrick, founder of [http://www.wikihow.com/Main-Page WikiHow]
*Stu West, [http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees#Stu_West Wikimedia Foundation Board Member]

'''WRAP-UP DINNER''': 7:20-9:20pm SLS Student Lounge

<center> '''Friday, January 22nd''' </center>

'''ReputationDefender visit''': 2:30pm
----

<center> '''January 31st''' </center>

'''FINAL PROJECTS DUE'''

Main Page

2011-11-18T22:24:42Z

Chenkrahman:

Welcome to Difficult Problems in Cyberlaw, a January course taught by Professor Jonathan Zittrain and Elizabeth Stark [http://goo.gl/nNBUb gemscool], co-hosted by Stanford Law School and Harvard Law SchooI.

In addition to this wiki, this class maintains a [http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/difficultprobs/ blog] and [http://twitter.com/DifficultProbs twitter feed]. Check them out!

If you are a student, please see the [[Student Responsibilities]] section and [[Course Logistics]]. For admins looking for details on field trips, please visit [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/difficultproblems/Main_Page#Field_Trip_Logistic here]. All regular class meetings will be at '''Stanford Law School Classroom 280B'''.

This [http://www.law.stanford.edu/contact/#maps map site] has a map of the [http://www.aaccessmaps.com/show/map/us/ca/bayarea Bay Area], [http://ucomm.stanford.edu/map/ Stanford campus], [http://goo.gl/yLMju kata mutiara], and [http://transportation.stanford.edu/images/visitor-bus.pdf visitor parking] at Stanford.

The four main difficult problems to be addressed are:
*[[Global Network Initiative]] ([[GNI Brainstorming |Group Page]])
*[[Ubiquitous Human Computing]] ([[Ubicomp Brainstorming |Group Page]])
*[[Future of Wikipedia]]
*[[Cybersecurity]] ([[Cybersecurity Project|Final Project]]) ([[Cybersecurity Brainstorming |Brainstorming Page]])

Cross-cutting themes include:
*[[Due process on the Internet among private sheriffs]]
*[[The role of intermediaries]]
*[[Motivating good and bad actors]]
*[[Collaborating and relying on masses]]
*[[Privacy and Anonymity on the Internet]]

Group presentation schedule:
*Friday, Jan. 15th: Ubiquitous Human Computing
*Tuesday, Jan. 19th: Cybersecurity
*Wednesday, Jan. 20th: Global Network Initiative
*Thursday, Jan. 21st: Future of Wikipedia

==WEEK ONE: DEFINING THE PROBLEMS==

<center> '''Monday, January 4th''' </center>

'''LUNCH''': 12-2pm SLS, Room 280B
:Student introductions

'''CLASS''': 7:20-9:20pm SLS Room 280B
:A brief overview of the course, its goals and expectations, including an introduction to the difficult problems and the cross-cutting themes.
:A quiz on Zittrain's book, [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/ The Future of the Internet: And How to Stop It] will be given.
:Brief introduction to the Global Network Initiative

''Readings For Class'':
*Read [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/ The Future of the Internet: And How to Stop It]
*Explore the [http://www.globalnetworkinitiative.org/ Global Network Initiative] website
*Read the [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cyberlaw_winter10/GNI GNI Wiki Primer]

''Assignments'': Before next class, post [[Day 2 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 1 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Tuesday, January 5th''' </center>

'''CYBERSECURITY BACKGROUND: ''BONUS''''': 2-4pm SLS Room 280B
: Professor Zittrain will interview Professor [http://www.law.harvard.edu/faculty/directory/index.html?id=559 Jack Goldsmith] as an overview of cybersecurity as it has evolved and as it can potentially be addressed.

*''Bonus Writing Opportunity'': produce a summary of the cybersecurity event, to be used as background reading for Thursday

'''CLASS''': 5:15-7:15pm SLS Room 280B
:Identify the first-order problems regarding corporate responsibility and free expression on the internet. Examine how GNI attempts to address these problems and then evaluate whether GNI is a success and whether better approaches could be taken.
:Introduction to ubiquitous human computing.

''Guests:''
*Mark Chandler, CISCO
*Chuck Cosson, Microsoft
*Dunstan Hope, BSR

''Readings:''
*Read Rhys Blakely, ''[http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/media/article728898.ece Yahoo in second Chinese blog Row],'' TimesOnline, Feb. 9, 2006.
*Read Colin Maclay, "[http://drop.io/cyberlaw_winter10/asset/maclay-access-controlled-pdf Protecting Privacy and Expression Online]," ''in'' Access Controlled (Ronald Diebert et al., eds., MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, 2010).
*Read GNI [http://www.globalnetworkinitiative.org/cms/uploads/1/GNI_-_Principles_1_.pdf Guiding Principles]
*Read the [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cyberlaw_winter10/Ubiquitous_Human_Computing UbiComp Wiki Primer]

''Assignments'': Before next class, post [[Day 3 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 2 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Wednesday, January 6th''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 7:00pm
:Examine the nature of ubiquitous human computing and potential future applications of human computing and the dangers.
:Introduction to cybersecurity.

''Guests'':
*Lukas Biewald, [http://crowdflower.com/ CrowdFlower]
*Bjoern Hartman, see his [http://bjoern.org/projects/catbook/ Mechanical Turk Cats Book]
*Aaron Koblin, see his [http://www.aaronkoblin.com/work.html Ten Thousand Cents and Sheep Market projects]

''Readings'':
*Visit [http://www.mturk.com/ Mechanical Turk], [http://www.liveops.com/ LiveOps], [http://www.crowdflower.com CrowdFlower] or other human computing site
**Watch the [http://www.ustream.tv/recorded/2167086 12-minute video] of Lukas' CrowdFlower presentation at TechCrunch
*Skim Nancy R. Mansfield, ''[http://www.allbusiness.com/technology/internet-technology/618188-1.html The information revolution and its impact on the employment relationship: an analysis of the cyberspace workplace]'', American Business Law Journal (2003).
*Kate Thomas, ''[http://www.seiu.org/2009/12/insurers-hire-mafia-to-spam-congress.php Insurers Hire Mafia to Spam Congress]'', SEIU.org Blog, Dec. 10, 2009.
*Read Jonathan Zittrain, ''[http://drop.io/cyberlaw_winter10/asset/ssrn-id1140445-pdf Ubiquitous Human Computing]'', SSRN Paper No 32/2008 (July 2008).
*Read the [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cyberlaw_winter10/Cybersecurity Cybersecurity Wiki Primer]

'''ASSIGNMENT: Due -- Email Admin with Problem Topic Choice'''

''Assignment'': Before next class, post [[Day 4 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 3 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Thursday, January 7th''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 11:40am
:Cybersecurity has been identified as one of the greatest threats facing the United States today, but it is ill-defined and almost impossible to address. How can we frame this problem to better inspire solutions? How should government, military, businesses, and internet/tech approach the problem from different angles and do these different approaches work together?
:Introduction to Future of Wikipedia

''Guests'':
*Chuck Cosson, Microsoft

''Readings'':
*Listen to David Clark, [http://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/newsandevents/events/sl20090304 The Internets We Did Not Build].
*Col. Allen & Lt. Col Demchak, ''[http://drop.io/cyberlaw_winter10 The Palestinian-Israeli Cyberwar]'', Military Review (2003).
*Kim Zetter, ''[http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2008/08/revealed-the-in/ Revealed: The Internet's Biggest Security Hole]'', Wired (2008).
*Review Zittrain, [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/ The Future of the Internet: And How to Stop It]; Chapter 3
*Skim CENTRA Technology, [http://drop.io/cyberlaw_winter10 Cyber Compendium] Workshop, Nov. 2009.
*Skim the White House [http://www.whitehouse.gov/assets/documents/Cyberspace_Policy_Review_final.pdf Cyberspace Policy Review] (2009); focus on the introduction/overview and the Near & Mid-Term Action Plans.
*Read [http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/cyberlaw_winter10/Future_of_Wikipedia Future of Wikipedia] wiki background paper

''Assignment'': Before next class, post [[Day 5 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 4 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Friday, January 8th''' </center>

'''FIELD TRIP: ''BONUS''''': 10:30 am eBay office visit (shuttle from SLS), including JZ talk and meeting with eBay lawyers and security experts
*If you're unable to attend, you might want to watch JZ's [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dw3h-rae3uo Minds for Sale talk].

'''CLASS''': 3:00-5:00pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 3:30pm
:Wikipedia has grown quickly and rapidly to become one of if not the largest online content-generating collaboration. Following the 2009 Wikimania, Wikimedia has undertaken a self-review, looking at strategies for the future of Wikipedia. Is it a sustainable model? and if so, to what other fields is it applicable? How can its reception in academia be improved? and what are its applications for education?
:Brief introduction of next week's cross-cutting themes

''Guests'':
*Stu West, [http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees#Stu_West Wikimedia Foundation Board Member]
*Mike Godwin, Wikimedia General Counsel
*Phoebe Ayers, Wikimedia volunteer

''Readings'':
*Review Zittrain, [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/ The Future of the Internet: And How to Stop It]; Chapter 6
*Peruse Wikipedia's [http://strategy.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page Strategy Page]
*Strona, ''[http://prawo.uni.wroc.pl/~kwasnicki/EkonLit6/WikipediaSoul.pdf The Battle for Wikipedia's Soul]'', The Economist, March 6, 2008.
*''[http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2007/01/26/wiki A Stand Against Wikipedia?]'', Inside Higher Ed, Jan. 26, 2007.
*Browse [http://www.wikipedia-watch.org/ Wikipedia Watch] and [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criticism_of_Wikipedia Criticism of Wikipedia]
*''[http://www.resourceshelf.com/2009/11/23/wsj-volunteers-log-off-as-wikipedia-ages/ Wikipedia Volunteers Log Off as Wikipedia Ages]'', Wall Street Journal.
*''[http://infodisiac.com/blog/2009/12/new-editors-are-joining-english-wikipedia-in-droves/ New editors are joining English Wikipedia in droves?]'', Infodisiac, Dec. 6, 2009.

''Assignment'': Before next class, post [[Day 6 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 5 Thoughts]]

'''EVENING EVENT: ''BONUS''''': Cocktails and hors d'oeuvres at David Hornik's office in Palo Alto after class.

----

<center> '''Saturday, January 9th''' </center>

Tour of San Francisco (Optional); details TBD. To give input and suggestions, visit [[Tour Ideas]].

==WEEK TWO: CROSS-CUTTING THEMES==

<center> '''Monday, January 11th''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 7:20-9:20pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 7:50pm
:One potential way to address some of the problems addressed in this course is through innovations and technological solutions. Several solutions have changed the way our browsers work and thereby changed the way we interact with the internet, making life better. In what other areas could a similar approach be applied? Change the technology, save the world.
:Introduction to cross-cutting theme of privacy, anonymity and liability on the internet

''Guests'':
*John M. Agosta, [http://disputefinder.cs.berkeley.edu/ DisputeFinder]
*Tye Rattenbury, DisputeFinder
*Rob Ennals, DisputeFinder
*Tad Hersch, DisputeFinder

''Readings'':
*Visit [http://www.herdict.org/web/ HerdictWeb]
*Watch [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NggzBHSXdCo Video explanation of Herdict] (student suggested)
*Zittrain's [http://www.hyperorg.com/blogger/2009/02/10/berkman-jz-on-herdict/ Comments on Herdict] at a Berkman Center Lunch
*Visit [http://disputefinder.cs.berkeley.edu/ DisputeFinder] (Test it out!)
*Visit [https://www.new.net/ New.net]
**How can .church domain names exist when it does not exist? Look at the new.net domain decoder
**Compare with [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Internet_top-level_domains List of Internet Domains]
*Read Introduction to Ann Bartow, ''[http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlg/vol322/383-430.pdf Internet Defamation As Profit Center: The Monetization of Online Harrassment]'', 32 Harvard Journal of Law & Gender 383 (2009).

''Assignment'': Before next class, post [[Day 7 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 6 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Tuesday, January 12th''' </center>

'''WORKSHOP: ''BONUS''''': 1-2pm Faculty Lounge, Stanford [http://public.resource.org/law.gov/ law.gov workshop]
Hosted by Carl Malamud
:Some students attend the entire workshop, 10am-3pm

'''CLASS''': 5:15-7:15pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 5:45pm
:Privacy and anonymity can raise significant issues for accountability for online actions. Users often believe they are more anonymous than they truly are online - how can we better educate the public about the reality of privacy online? Consider the Drumbeat privacy project and creative commons issues.
:Introduction to the cross-cutting theme of due process and dispute resolution on the internet.

''Guests'':
*Ryan Calo, SLS Fellow
*Ebele Okobi-Harris, Yahoo! Director of Business and Human Rights
*Mark Surman, Mozilla
*Michael Fertik, Reputation Defender
*Carl Malamud
*Julie Martin, Mozilla
*Aza Raskin, Mozilla

''Readings'':
*Browse [http://creativecommons.org/ Creative Commons] for discussion
*Review Zittrain, [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/ The Future of the Internet: And How to Stop It]; Chapter 9 on Data Genealogy
*Odia Kagan, ''[http://www.ibls.com/internet_law_news_portal_view.aspx?s=latestnews&id=1915 Fighting Anonymous Defamation],'' Int'l Business Law Services, November 26, 2007.
*Consider commercial applications; visit [http://www.reputationdefender.com/ ReputationDefender]
*[https://wiki.mozilla.org/Drumbeat/Challenges/Privacy_Icons Drumbeat privacy icon challenge] backgrounder

''Additional Materials'' (suggested by student):
*Watch [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCbKv9yiLiQ Message from Anonymous to the Church of Scientology];
*Skim [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anonymous_%28group%29 Wikipedia's article about Anonymous Group];
*Read about (and use!) [http://www.torproject.org/ Tor]

''Assignment'': Before next class, post [[Day 8 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 7 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Wednesday, January 13th''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 7:00pm
:How do our due process concerns translate to the internet and online communities? Should due process exist on the internet? Is the internet public or private space and under what terms do we have the privilege or right to access?
:Consider, for example, how much due process should be required to remove an account from Facebook, Google or Twitter. How much due process is necessary for a take-down on YouTube and what right of appeal do you have in any of these circumstances?
:Introduction to online collaboration and group motivation strategies

''Guests'':

* Kim Scott, Google

''Readings'':

* Skim Elizabeth Thornburg, ''[http://faculty.smu.edu/ethornbu/Thornburg%20Macro.doc Going Private: Technology, Due Process, and Internet Dispute Resolution]'', 34 Univ. Cal. Davis 151 (2000).
* Read through the Facebook or Google terms of service (see the primer above)
* Recall Zittrain, Chapter 7, on [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/archives/18#48 Private Sheriffs]
* Terri Wells, ''[http://www.seochat.com/c/a/Search-Engine-News/Beware-the-Google-Death-Penalty/ Beware the Google 'Death Penalty']'',Search Engine News (2006)
* Social media rules and regulations on [http://www.sorezki.com/services/smo/ Social media marketing]

''Assignment'': Before next class, post [[Day 9 Predictions]].

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 8 Thoughts]]

----

<center> '''Thursday, January 14th''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 11:40am
:Online collaboration projects require internet organizations to motivate and coordinate large groups of people. This requires both motivating good actors to participate and motivating bad actors either to not participate or to conform to the rules/standards of the site. How can website hosts face these challenges? How involved should the users of cooperatively developed sites be in their governments?

''Guests'':
*Daniel Hoffer, [http://www.couchsurfing.org/ Couchsurfing]
*Micah Schaffer
*Dan Scholnick, [http://www.trinityventures.com/venture-capital-team/bio.php?first-name=Dan&last-name=Scholnick Trinity Ventures]
*Ben Rigby, [http://beextra.org The Extraordinaries]
*Stu West, [http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees#Stu_West Wikimedia Foundation Board Member]

''Readings'':
*F. Gino, Jun Gu, & Chen-Bo Zhong, ''[http://drop.io/cyberlaw_winter10 Contagion or Restitution? When bad apples can motivate ethical behavior]'', 45 J. Experimental Social Psychology 1299-1302 (2009).
*Browse [http://www.opencouchsurfing.org/ OpenCouchSurfing.org] posts and complaints
*Review readings from Friday, January 8th on Wikipedia and motivation of contributors

''Thoughts after class'': [[Day 9 Thoughts]]

'''CLASS SOCIAL''': Bonus, evening, details TBD

----

<center> '''Friday, January 15th''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 1:00-3:00pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 1:30pm
:Ubiquitous Human Computing presentation (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Fabio Rosati, Elance

''Group Documents'':
*[http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AVl_o5lQOXEqZGMzejN4OG5fMjEzZnFyeG54ZG4&hl=en Best practices ]
*[http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AVl_o5lQOXEqZGMzejN4OG5fMjE2Z3pjNWR2ZGM&hl=en Technological solutions ]

''Thoughts about the discussed solutions'': [[UHC Solutions]]

==WEEK THREE: SOLUTIONS==

<center> '''Monday, January 18th''' </center>

'''NO CLASS''': [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Luther_King,_Jr._Day Martin Luther King, Jr. Day]

----

<center> '''Tuesday, January 19th''' </center>

'''FIELD TRIP: ''BONUS''''': Google, 3:30pm

'''CLASS''': Held at Google during visit
:Cybersecurity presentation (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Mitchell Baker

----

<center> '''Wednesday, January 20th''' </center>

'''FIELD TRIP: ''BONUS'':''' Facebook, 12:30-2pm (TBC)

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 7:00pm
:Global Network Initiative presentation (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Esther Wojcicki

----

<center> '''Thursday, January 21st''' </center>

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 11:40am
:Future of Wikipedia presentation (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Craig Newmark, [http://www.craigslist.org/about/craig_newmark Craigslist founder] and [http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Advisory_Board#Craig_Newmark Wikimedia Foundation Advisory Board member]
*Edward Wes
*Jack Herrick, founder of [http://www.wikihow.com/Main-Page WikiHow]
*Stu West, [http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees#Stu_West Wikimedia Foundation Board Member]

'''WRAP-UP DINNER''': 7:20-9:20pm SLS Student Lounge

<center> '''Friday, January 22nd''' </center>

'''ReputationDefender visit''': 2:30pm
----

<center> '''January 31st''' </center>

'''FINAL PROJECTS DUE'''