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

GNIAssociateMember

2010-01-20T04:46:50Z

TylerLacey:

[[Image:GNI Associate Member No Logo copy.png]]

File:GNI Associate Member No Logo copy.png

2010-01-20T04:46:19Z

TylerLacey:

GNIAssociateMember

2010-01-20T04:42:06Z

TylerLacey:

[[Image:Associate_Member_Draft_1.png]]

GNIAssociateMember

2010-01-20T04:41:13Z

TylerLacey: New page: GNIAssociateMember

[[GNIAssociateMember]]

GNI Brainstorming

2010-01-20T04:40:58Z

TylerLacey:

* Remember, GNI is about government privacy, not consumer privacy.
*GNI is about free expression, privacy, responsible company decision making.

= Problems =

== Membership ==

[[GNIAssociateMember]]

# Who should be in the GNI?
# Why do companies have to join GNI when they can just follow principles and not bind themselves and make themselves a target?
# Do we need different GNIs?
## One for hardware, for software, service providers? or different policies/implementation guidance?
## Different tiers representing different levels of commitment?
# How do we incentivize joining?
## What are the benefits of joining GNI?
### Expanding the scope of service of GNI as a way to incentivize small companies?
### Subpoena resistance clinic?
# How should GNI work?
## an organization where only members can participate and benefit, or a forum where companies can share practice about HR protection?
# How should the complaint process work?
## Accessibility

== Publicity / Branding ==

We need a logo! Let's get some logos for our presentation.

== What should GNI be doing ==

1. Subpoena resistance? Is this a problem people are really facing?

- Is this more a problem for companies that are not part of GNI? This a way to incentivize small companies to join?

- What do small companies care about privacy? Maybe they do

- A chart with some basic explanation of how ECPA works http://www.cybertelecom.org/security/ecpanotes.htm#sub

- Recognize that don't always need to fight subpoena. There are legit requests even in repressive regimes.

- Can we do something with the Google Italy case?

- But a lot of these cases will be in places that don't speak English.

- Europe harder to share litigation costs because many don't have case law system.

- Subpoena resistance clinic too broad. We need to think "All these subpoenas out there against companies. Is there some way that GNI can help?"

== Google.cn annoucment ==

Is it a failure that Google didn't go to the GNI with their decision to make the China announcement or during their investigation?

== Alternatives to GNI ==

# Maybe GNI is a nice try but not working? In that case, how do we solve the problems of privacy and free expression internationally?
# More general international privacy rules?

= Potential Solutions to these problems =

== Subpoena Resistance ==

Is there a way that GNI could play a role in helping organizations determine the validity of subpoenas and to determine whether compliance with a given subpoenas is supported by GNI principles?

Could be a pool of lawyers/students that can review subpoenas, such as a clinic, or could be the preparation of a toolkit to make subpoena analysis easier for companies with few resources.

== Branding ==

* New Logo?
** Would this be like a the GNI "stamp of approval" that we talked about in class
** Could this logo appear on privacy pages of participating companies to build the GNI brand?
* New name?
** "Global Network Initiative" seems very bland, generic and easy to forget
* Promotional material
** Brochure?
** Video?
* building up community?
* resources to use: chilling effects, herdict, etc.

GNI Brainstorming

2010-01-20T04:40:19Z

TylerLacey:

* Remember, GNI is about government privacy, not consumer privacy.
*GNI is about free expression, privacy, responsible company decision making.

= Problems =

== Membership ==

# Who should be in the GNI?
# Why do companies have to join GNI when they can just follow principles and not bind themselves and make themselves a target?
# Do we need different GNIs?
## One for hardware, for software, service providers? or different policies/implementation guidance?
## Different tiers representing different levels of commitment?
# How do we incentivize joining?
## What are the benefits of joining GNI?
### Expanding the scope of service of GNI as a way to incentivize small companies?
### Subpoena resistance clinic?
# How should GNI work?
## an organization where only members can participate and benefit, or a forum where companies can share practice about HR protection?
# How should the complaint process work?
## Accessibility

== Publicity / Branding ==

We need a logo! Let's get some logos for our presentation.

== What should GNI be doing ==

1. Subpoena resistance? Is this a problem people are really facing?

- Is this more a problem for companies that are not part of GNI? This a way to incentivize small companies to join?

- What do small companies care about privacy? Maybe they do

- A chart with some basic explanation of how ECPA works http://www.cybertelecom.org/security/ecpanotes.htm#sub

- Recognize that don't always need to fight subpoena. There are legit requests even in repressive regimes.

- Can we do something with the Google Italy case?

- But a lot of these cases will be in places that don't speak English.

- Europe harder to share litigation costs because many don't have case law system.

- Subpoena resistance clinic too broad. We need to think "All these subpoenas out there against companies. Is there some way that GNI can help?"

== Google.cn annoucment ==

Is it a failure that Google didn't go to the GNI with their decision to make the China announcement or during their investigation?

== Alternatives to GNI ==

# Maybe GNI is a nice try but not working? In that case, how do we solve the problems of privacy and free expression internationally?
# More general international privacy rules?

= Potential Solutions to these problems =

== Subpoena Resistance ==

Is there a way that GNI could play a role in helping organizations determine the validity of subpoenas and to determine whether compliance with a given subpoenas is supported by GNI principles?

Could be a pool of lawyers/students that can review subpoenas, such as a clinic, or could be the preparation of a toolkit to make subpoena analysis easier for companies with few resources.

== Branding ==

* New Logo?
** Would this be like a the GNI "stamp of approval" that we talked about in class
** Could this logo appear on privacy pages of participating companies to build the GNI brand?
* New name?
** "Global Network Initiative" seems very bland, generic and easy to forget
* Promotional material
** Brochure?
** Video?
* building up community?
* resources to use: chilling effects, herdict, etc.

[[Image:Associate Member Draft 1.png]]

GNI Brainstorming

2010-01-20T04:38:57Z

TylerLacey:

GNI Brainstorming

2010-01-19T22:07:44Z

TylerLacey: Undo revision 887 by TylerLacey (Talk)

GNI Brainstorming

2010-01-19T22:04:53Z

TylerLacey:

File:Associate Member Draft 1.png

2010-01-19T22:01:53Z

TylerLacey:

Main Page

2010-01-19T20:20:51Z

TylerLacey: /* WEEK THREE: SOLUTIONS */

Welcome to Difficult Problems in Cyberlaw, a January course taught by Professor Jonathan Zittrain and Elizabeth Stark, co-hosted by Stanford Law School and Harvard Law School.

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], 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 Brainstorming |Group 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).

''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
*Stu West, [http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees#Stu_West Wikimedia Foundation Board Member] (tentative)

'''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

2010-01-18T22:26:59Z

TylerLacey: /* WEEK THREE: SOLUTIONS */

Welcome to Difficult Problems in Cyberlaw, a January course taught by Professor Jonathan Zittrain and Elizabeth Stark, co-hosted by Stanford Law School and Harvard Law School.

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], 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 Brainstorming |Group 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).

''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''': 5:15-7:15pm SLS Room 280B or Google (TBC), guests to begin arriving at 5:45pm
: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
*Stu West, [http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees#Stu_West Wikimedia Foundation Board Member] (tentative)

'''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

2010-01-18T18:29:10Z

TylerLacey: /* WEEK THREE: SOLUTIONS */

Welcome to Difficult Problems in Cyberlaw, a January course taught by Professor Jonathan Zittrain and Elizabeth Stark, co-hosted by Stanford Law School and Harvard Law School.

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], 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 Brainstorming |Group 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).

''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''': 5:15-7:15pm SLS Room 280B or Google (TBC), guests to begin arriving at 5:45pm
: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
*Stu West, [http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees#Stu_West Wikimedia Foundation Board Member] (tentative)

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

----

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

'''FINAL PROJECTS DUE'''

Main Page

2010-01-18T18:28:55Z

TylerLacey: /* WEEK THREE: SOLUTIONS */

Welcome to Difficult Problems in Cyberlaw, a January course taught by Professor Jonathan Zittrain and Elizabeth Stark, co-hosted by Stanford Law School and Harvard Law School.

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], 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 Brainstorming |Group 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).

''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''''': Reputation Defender, 1pm

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

'''CLASS''': 5:15-7:15pm SLS Room 280B or Google (TBC), guests to begin arriving at 5:45pm
: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
*Stu West, [http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees#Stu_West Wikimedia Foundation Board Member] (tentative)

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

----

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

'''FINAL PROJECTS DUE'''

Main Page

2010-01-18T18:14:34Z

TylerLacey: /* WEEK THREE: SOLUTIONS */

Welcome to Difficult Problems in Cyberlaw, a January course taught by Professor Jonathan Zittrain and Elizabeth Stark, co-hosted by Stanford Law School and Harvard Law School.

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], 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 Brainstorming |Group 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).

''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''''': Reputation Defender, 1pm

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

'''CLASS''': 5:15-7:15pm SLS Room 280B or Google (TBC), guests to begin arriving at 5:45pm
: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
*Stu West, [http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Board_of_Trustees#Stu_West Wikimedia Foundation Board Member] (tentative)

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

----

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

'''FINAL PROJECTS DUE'''

GNI Brainstorming

2010-01-14T23:44:11Z

TylerLacey: /* Subpoena Resistance */

* Remember, GNI is about government privacy, not consumer privacy.
*GNI is about free expression, privacy, responsible company decision making.

= Problems =

== Membership ==

# Who should be in the GNI?
# Why do companies have to join GNI when they can just follow principles and not bind themselves and make themselves a target?
# Do we need different GNIs?
## One for hardware, for software, service providers?
## Different tiers representing different levels of commitment?
# How do we incentivize joining?
## What are the benefits of joining GNI?
### Expanding the scope of service of GNI as a way to incentivize small companies?
### Subpoena resistance clinic?

== Publicity / Branding ==

We need a logo! Let's get some logos for our presentation.

== What should GNI be doing ==

1. Subpoena resistance? Is this a problem people are really facing?

- Is this more a problem for companies that are not part of GNI? This a way to incentivize small companies to join?

- What do small companies care about privacy? Maybe they do

- A chart with some basic explanation of how ECPA works http://www.cybertelecom.org/security/ecpanotes.htm#sub

- Recognize that don't always need to fight subpoena. There are legit requests even in repressive regimes.

- Can we do something with the Google Italy case?

- But a lot of these cases will be in places that don't speak English.

- Europe harder to share litigation costs because many don't have case law system.

- Subpoena resistance clinic too broad. We need to think "All these subpoenas out there against companies. Is there some way that GNI can help?"

== Google.cn annoucment ==

Is it a failure that Google didn't go to the GNI with their decision to make the China announcement or during their investigation?

== Alternatives to GNI ==

# Maybe GNI is a nice try but not working? In that case, how do we solve the problems of privacy and free expression internationally?
# More general international privacy rules?

= Potential Solutions to these problems =

== Subpoena Resistance ==

Is there a way that GNI could play a role in helping organizations determine the validity of subpoenas and to determine whether compliance with a given subpoenas is supported by GNI principles?

Could be a pool of lawyers/students that can review subpoenas, such as a clinic, or could be the preparation of a toolkit to make subpoena analysis easier for companies with few resources.

== Branding ==

* New Logo?
** Would this be like a the GNI "stamp of approval" that we talked about in class
** Could this logo appear on privacy pages of participating companies to build the GNI brand?
* New name?
** "Global Network Initiative" seems very bland, generic and easy to forget
* Promotional material
** Brochure?
** Video?

GNI Brainstorming

2010-01-14T21:44:34Z

TylerLacey: New page: * Remember, GNI is about government privacy, not consumer privacy. *GNI is about free expression, privacy, responsible company decision making. = Problems = == Membership == # Who shoul...

* Remember, GNI is about government privacy, not consumer privacy.
*GNI is about free expression, privacy, responsible company decision making.

= Problems =

== Membership ==

# Who should be in the GNI?
# Why do companies have to join GNI when they can just follow principles and not bind themselves and make themselves a target?
# Do we need different GNIs?
## One for hardware, for software, service providers?
## Different tiers representing different levels of commitment?
# How do we incentivize joining?
## What are the benefits of joining GNI?
### Expanding the scope of service of GNI as a way to incentivize small companies?
### Subpoena resistance clinic?

== Publicity / Branding ==

We need a logo! Let's get some logos for our presentation.

== What should GNI be doing ==

1. Subpoena resistance? Is this a problem people are really facing?

- Is this more a problem for companies that are not part of GNI? This a way to incentivize small companies to join?

- What do small companies care about privacy? Maybe they do

- A chart with some basic explanation of how ECPA works http://www.cybertelecom.org/security/ecpanotes.htm#sub

- Recognize that don't always need to fight subpoena. There are legit requests even in repressive regimes.

- Can we do something with the Google Italy case?

- But a lot of these cases will be in places that don't speak English.

- Europe harder to share litigation costs because many don't have case law system.

- Subpoena resistance clinic too broad. We need to think "All these subpoenas out there against companies. Is there some way that GNI can help?"

== Google.cn annoucment ==

Is it a failure that Google didn't go to the GNI with their decision to make the China announcement or during their investigation?

== Alternatives to GNI ==

# Maybe GNI is a nice try but not working? In that case, how do we solve the problems of privacy and free expression internationally?
# More general international privacy rules?

= Potential Solutions to these problems =

== Subpoena Resistance ==

Is there a way that GNI could play a role in helping organizations determine the validity of subpoenas and to determine whether compliance with a given subpoenas is supported by GNI principles?

== Branding ==

* New Logo?
** Would this be like a the GNI "stamp of approval" that we talked about in class
** Could this logo appear on privacy pages of participating companies to build the GNI brand?
* New name?
** "Global Network Initiative" seems very bland, generic and easy to forget
* Promotional material
** Brochure?
** Video?

Main Page

2010-01-14T21:34:56Z

TylerLacey:

Welcome to Difficult Problems in Cyberlaw, a January course taught by Professor Jonathan Zittrain and Elizabeth Stark, co-hosted by Stanford Law School and Harvard Law School.

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], 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]]
*[[Future of Wikipedia]]
*[[Cybersecurity]] ([[Cybersecurity Brainstorming |Group 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'':
*Stuart 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).

''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]

''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'':
*Maynard Webb, LiveOps
*Fabio Rosati, Elance

==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''''': Reputation Defender, 1pm

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

'''CLASS''': 5:15-7:15pm SLS Room 280B or Google (TBC), guests to begin arriving at 5:45pm
: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

----

<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
*Edward Wes

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

----

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

'''FINAL PROJECTS DUE'''

Day 9 Predictions

2010-01-14T18:53:22Z

TylerLacey: /* Motivations and Community */

==Online Trust and Identity==

It's kind of puzzling that a service like couchsurfing works despite the fact that it relies on people's ability to trust complete strangers. If now people can rely on reviews made by other users, it would be interesting to know how the site dealt with that issue in the beginning. What's especially interesting (and different) about couchsurfing is that people cannot hide under anonymity - they actually meet up in person, so there's no way to shield yourself under a pseudonym as you can on most other websites or web services. Does that contribute to people acting a little more nobly?

The amount of trust that people place in online applications has, I believe, risen significantly over the past 10 years. In 2000, people were skeptical of giving their credit card number to ecommerce sites, and in 2010 a site like Blippy can raise over $1m to build a service that shares all your purchases with the world (http://kara.allthingsd.com/20100114/blippy-opens-to-public-and-scores-high-profile-investors-including-twitters-evan-williams-for-the-the-twitter-of/). I would be interested to hear though how, if at all, Couchsurfing separates itself from taking responsibility when a user has a bad experience. All too often in social apps, companies take the "we're just the platform" defense and I wonder how much they subscribe to that. CS' terms of service, quite predictably, deny that their site is even involved in users contacting each other.

We'd be also interested in hearing about the identity verification system that Daniel mentioned at approx. 23:30 in the YouTube video mentioned bellow. How are they getting access to passport numbers and credit card numbers? If it is that much better at identifying people, why hasn't eBay implemented something like this? Is this a safe system (from a security and data protection point of view)? Besides the verification system, discussing other mechanisms to foster online trust (such as the CS vouching system), their failures and successes, seems extremely important.

==Motivations and Community==

It's interesting how the Extraordinaries (great name, reminded me of the Pixar movie The Incredibles) is for-profit, while Couchsurfing is non-profit. Will the Extraordinaries be able to build a Couchsurfing or Wikipedia-type community even though it's for-profit? Alternately, we might discuss how the non-profit of CS may have given rise to such a strong community of dissenters. If CS were a so-called [http://www.bcorporation.net/ B-Corp], as the Extraordinaries apparently aspires to be, would be people as angry at the supposed "betrayal" of the core values of the organization? It would also be really interesting to hear if they have a vetting process for people who want to "create missions." Have they gotten any "bad seeds" themselves? Do people try to scam the system and create illegitimate missions? Or is it just built on a system of trust?

We were struck by the fissures within the couchsurfing movement. It seems inevitable in these bottom-up, free internet communities that there will be intense fights over the direction of the project. What keeps communities like Wikipedia and Couchsurfing from still providing useful services despite all the chatter? Could that balance be reversed? While community members that care enough to fight intensely about the direction of their project are also likely to be valuable contributors while continuing the fight, these intense fights can drive away new members. How do we keep the community motivated enough to keep contributing?

===Bad Apples in An Online Community===

The OCS site leveled several general criticisms at CS and its governance structure, but other eye-catching rebukes involved the actions of a few "bad apples". It would be interesting to see the CS people consider whether their structure of vouching and verification truly offer the best protection against such isolated incidents, and whether the partially-open nature of the organization can lend enough critical eyes to "guilt" (using Gino et al's word choice) everyone into better behavior. Perhaps the existence of Open Couchsurfing itself provides some outsider review--what changes has Couchsurfing considered or actually implemented since these contrarian voices began their loose campaign?

==Additional Info==

Here is a related youtube video, [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IDNKhAIOww CouchSurfing: What one website reveals about the future of the net].

Day 9 Predictions

2010-01-14T18:46:54Z

TylerLacey:

==Online Trust and Identity==

It's kind of puzzling that a service like couchsurfing works despite the fact that it relies on people's ability to trust complete strangers. If now people can rely on reviews made by other users, it would be interesting to know how the site dealt with that issue in the beginning. What's especially interesting (and different) about couchsurfing is that people cannot hide under anonymity - they actually meet up in person, so there's no way to shield yourself under a pseudonym as you can on most other websites or web services. Does that contribute to people acting a little more nobly?

The amount of trust that people place in online applications has, I believe, risen significantly over the past 10 years. In 2000, people were skeptical of giving their credit card number to ecommerce sites, and in 2010 a site like Blippy can raise over $1m to build a service that shares all your purchases with the world (http://kara.allthingsd.com/20100114/blippy-opens-to-public-and-scores-high-profile-investors-including-twitters-evan-williams-for-the-the-twitter-of/). I would be interested to hear though how, if at all, Couchsurfing separates itself from taking responsibility when a user has a bad experience. All too often in social apps, companies take the "we're just the platform" defense and I wonder how much they subscribe to that. CS' terms of service, quite predictably, deny that their site is even involved in users contacting each other.

We'd be also interested in hearing about the identity verification system that Daniel mentioned at approx. 23:30 in the YouTube video mentioned bellow. How are they getting access to passport numbers and credit card numbers? If it is that much better at identifying people, why hasn't eBay implemented something like this?

==Motivations and Community==

It's interesting how the Extraordinaries (great name, reminded me of the Pixar movie The Incredibles) is for-profit, while Couchsurfing is non-profit. Will the Extraordinaries be able to build a Couchsurfing or Wikipedia-type community even though it's for-profit? Alternately, we might discuss how the non-profit of CS may have given rise to such a strong community of dissenters. If CS were a so-called [http://www.bcorporation.net/ B-Corp], as the Extraordinaries apparently aspires to be, would be people as angry at the supposed "betrayal" of the core values of the organization? It would also be really interesting to hear if they have a vetting process for people who want to "create missions." Have they gotten any "bad seeds" themselves? Do people try to scam the system and create illegitimate missions? Or is it just built on a system of trust?

We were struck by the fissures within the couchsurfing movement. It seems inevitable in these bottom-up, free internet communities that there will be intense fights over the direction of the project. What keeps communities like Wikipedia and Couchsurfing from still providing useful services despite all the chatter? Could that balance be reversed? How do we keep the community motivated enough to keep contributing?

===Bad Apples in An Online Community===

The OCS site leveled several general criticisms at CS and its governance structure, but other eye-catching rebukes involved the actions of a few "bad apples". It would be interesting to see the CS people consider whether their structure of vouching and verification truly offer the best protection against such isolated incidents, and whether the partially-open nature of the organization can lend enough critical eyes to "guilt" (using Gino et al's word choice) everyone into better behavior. Perhaps the existence of Open Couchsurfing itself provides some outsider review--what changes has Couchsurfing considered or actually implemented since these contrarian voices began their loose campaign?

==Additional Info==

Here is a related youtube video, [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IDNKhAIOww CouchSurfing: What one website reveals about the future of the net].

Day 8 Predictions

2010-01-14T01:57:26Z

TylerLacey: /* Should there be Due Process Online */

For those who aren't familiar, here are [http://creativecommons.org/dmca/ Creative Commons'] and [http://www.google.com/dmca.html Google's] explanations of DMCA Notice and Takedown Procedures, one example of Due Process online

==Should there be Due Process Online==
It seems like there should be, though we can't predict where the folks from Google believe it should come from. On the one hand, you might think that Google is "just" a company, and their due process obligations are not greater than those of any other private entity who effects your life: i.e. send a letter to the complaint department and pray. At the entire other end of the spectrum, you might think that Google is such a critical point-of-control online that the government should have no problem regulating them in areas from copyright to even their handling of search results and their imposition of the death penalty. My guess is that Google believes itself to be in the former, "leave-us-alone" pile.

One thought is that due process is important in the legal system because nobody has a choice about whether they are subjected to its processes. However, the market may incentivize a proper balance of due process from online service providers. For example, if the Google death penalty becomes so pervasive that the search results are no longer relevant enough for users, or if unfairness generates enough badwill that users will switch to a different search engine, Google may be incentivized to offer different processes. In reality, Google's status as an incumbent would make these factors unlikely to affect Google's decision making but it is possible that they could have effect in less mature fields with more competitors.

It's great how the website with the article on the Google death penalty was filled with mostly internal links, which seems to be intended to raise its Google rank.

As it is, Google and other service providers like facebook are a black box. In the Death Penalty article it seemed that a site could be given the death penalty without even knowing it had done something wrong; theoretically a company could set up spam that attempts to increase the page rank of a competitor with the intention it gets the Google Death Penalty. Clearer guidelines are needed and more open and transparent procedures for resolving cases. Our guest, however, might point out that spammers are infinitely creative, and trying to set up rules in advance to deal with every possible situation is just inviting people of ill-will to take advantage of Google. Thus, it might be argued that the company should have every right to optimize its product for the vast majority of non-malicious users around the word. For those reasons, along with the additional burdens that would place on Google, our guest is unlikely to be receptive to imposing additional procedure and transparency, but maybe an appeal to the "Don't be evil" side of the company would help?

What about companies that aren't as obviously influential as Google (but hope to be). It seems a lot of us might be offended because of something akin to the "essential service" that Google has--so we become rightfully critical of how they punish/banish users. But how might other companies know when they cross the threshold from bullied to bully?

==Due Process Defaults==

There are at least two default possibilities for due process of takedowns on the internet: (1) Due process afforded before takedown (default on), and (2) take down immediately upon request and afford due process to restore the content (default off). Google will probably take the stance that (2), default off, is a more appropriate standard for internet due process. Since internet content can do a great deal of harm in a very short period of time, it makes sense to take it down immediately (after someone has complained that it might be harmful information) and create a process by which the uploaded can ask that it be restored. That way the damage of offensive content is mitigated, but could not be unilaterally censored. (also, this process probably does the best job of limiting the liability of companies like Google, YouTube, etc). I think one of the biggest problem companies such as Google face is however that after summary proceedings, which in Europe can take more than 3 months after the lawsuit was filed, the procedure on the merits can take years and years (up to 6 or even more years), so it takes too much time until the case comes to an end (unless parties are willing to settle). Another problem are the huge damages (imposed on a daily basis in case of non-compliance) that are imposed very easily and run up very quickly. I would like to hear the thoughts of the guests on this.

:The counter argument to the above is that this cripples the generatively of the internet. If anyone can request that content be taken down which web companies must comply with, it would be possible for anyone to (at least temporarily) gag the production of new content. A better compromise might be to require that the requester make some showing of who they are and how they will be harmed (at something resembling a probable cause standard) before web companies must comply with such a complaint.
:Due process is needed for the protection of the party against which actions to be taken, and in the interest of public notice. According to Facebook terms of service, an account will be disabled if it is found to repeatedly infringe other people's intellectual property rights. Here a due process is needed to disable an account on Facebook. How many times does "repeatedly" refer to? Who have the final say on this "infringement" of other people's intellectual property rights? Hope to hear more from our guest on their practice to deal with this, and how they balance between the alleged owner of the right and the one against whom the action to be taken.

It would also be interesting to hear how different companies have complained and whether any of them have slayed the Giant - known as Google. Have any ever threatened back or been able to have some worthy leverage against Google?

==Google and China==
Although today's class isn't about this topic, it's hard to believe it won't come up. It will be interesting to hear whether the Google guest will have a response to Jason's concern that Google disengaging with China will allow unscrupulous actors to dominate the world's biggest internet market, and that Google, even if it had to make compromises, could do more good than evil by working inside China.
:Yes, The voice of "Google in China" not "Google China" is around for a while. It will be interesting to hear how Google will do business in China if it finally decided to pull out. This will have a huge impact on not only the internet users in China, but also the resellers and strategic partners of Google China.

:I think there is some connection between the Google-China news and today's topic. From a macro perspective, what kind of due process should be given to Google (or any other type of Internet service provider) before the decision is made to force them to withdraw? Today's speaker should have some good insights into Google's experiences with Turkey to might help us understand what the coming fight with China may look like. Another thing to consider with regard to today's topic is whether there should be (if any) due process afforded to China itself - by releasing the publicity statement, Google is essentially making wide allegations against (presumably) the Chinese Government - does this raise due process concerns? Was this the best or only way to handle it? It certainly got the world's attention, and I do find it doubtful that China would have responded in any other way.

:: I absolutely agree that Google-China has the flavor of a due process question--although we should keep in mind the different types of "rights" in play (perhaps there's a fundamental human right not to be turned over to hostile authorities, and a consumer right to retain control over one's data, but is there really a right to be listed in a search engine? or to have access to such a search engine at all?). Just as what we call "rights" may be flexible, "due process" could be flexible too--for instance, does a GNI decision count as due process, even if it's only an association of private parties? For some additional context on these issues, check out this [http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/30/magazine/30google-t.html excellent article] on Google, Turkey, Thailand, and free-speech concerns, which seems to indicate Google is much more interested in establishing a process than some of our classmates above predicted.

: Another concern: will there be due process for those individual's whose email accounts were breached? Will they be informed, and what, if anything, would they be entitled to?

Day 7 Predictions

2010-01-12T22:41:36Z

TylerLacey: /* Mozilla and Privacy */

In the spirit of today's issues, our collective anonymous predictions are set out below:

== Reputation Defender ==

Probably, Mr. Fertik will try to persuade us that Reputation Defender offers great advantages to improve our reputation (even promoted by Dr. Phil?!), and the service obviously has a lot of merit--assuming you have the ability to pay for it. It gives people a great way to remove defamatory, or potentially defamatory, content in a way where it harms nobody and helps those who it should. However, we hope that the students and guests will discuss whether these kinds of initiatives are just one bridge too far; is Reputation Defender a tool to defend or artificially improve one's reputation? (And does it matter?)

:We'd also like to hear about the tactics Reputation Defender uses to increase Google page ranks (MyEdge) in a way that makes sure it doesn't get the Google Death Penalty, as well as what technological or legal tools Reputation Defender would add if it could.

== Anonymity ==

We hope our guests will not be too narrowly focused on the need to ensure accountability through identification and attribution. The democratic benefits of leaving an option open for anonymous contribution is important also, to help encourage frank speech and content. It seems to me that this would be particularly relevant in the US jurisdiction, where strong First Amendment principles are unlike what we see pretty much anywhere else in the world (which also raises the discrete sub-issue of how we can reconcile different international views of what an appropriate level of privacy protection might be). Like Dispute Finder discussed yesterday - their emphasis is not to resolve an issue in dispute, but to highlight for the public that there is a conflict, which cannot exist without vocalization of many different points of view, no matter how unpopular.

In terms of anonymity on the Internet in the user's control, I think services such as Tor do quite a good job. There still are weaknesses associated with the exit nodes of Tor allowing hackers to access user names and passwords due to the lack of encryption technologies available.

== Mozilla and Privacy ==

Besides this, Ryan and the people of Mozilla will show the great advantages of understandable privacy policies in the form of icons. This might encourage people to actually check whether the website uphold certain privacy standards. Even more importantly, it would allow users, in an easy way, to realize the diverse range of privacy policies (and amount of information released to third parties) that various add-ons have (the Location Aware feature of Firefox version 3.5, for example, can tap into a wide range of information). While the advantages of easy-to-understand privacy icons are straightforward, the guests likely to justify why modifications to the browsers that we use are a necessary or desired way to implement them.

As we discussed yesterday, the people at the Mozilla foundation can take any idea to improve the internet from a fanciful theory to a concrete reality very quickly. It seems likely, then, that they are deluged with causes to adopt and browser functionality to build in. It would be interesting to hear how they decided what to focus on, and why privacy rose to the top of the list. Mozilla has, in effect, the ability to bundle any plug-in that its desire with Firefox by making it core browser functionality. The guests are likely to address whether there is a happy medium between bundling functionality with Firefox and relying entirely on users tracking down and installing plug-ins (like DisputeFinder requires). Is there a possibility of a central plug-in repository that can allow useful plug-ins to take off more easily? Can the decision of which plug-ins/concepts could be "promoted" to core browser functionality be crowdsourced somehow?

Day 7 Predictions

2010-01-12T22:16:51Z

TylerLacey:

In the spirit of today's issues, our collective anonymous predictions are set out below:

On the issue of online defamation, I hope our guests will not be too narrowly focused on the need to ensure accountability through identification and attribution. The democratic benefits of leaving an option open for anonymous contribution is important also, to help encourage frank speech and content. It seems to me that this would be particularly relevant in the US jurisdiction, where strong First Amendment principles are unlike what we see pretty much anywhere else in the world (which also raises the discrete sub-issue of how we can reconcile different international views of what an appropriate level of privacy protection might be). Like Dispute Finder discussed yesterday - their emphasis is not to resolve an issue in dispute, but to highlight for the public that there is a conflict, which cannot exist without vocalization of many different points of view, no matter how unpopular.

Probably, Mr. Fertik will try to persuade us that Reputation Defender offers great advantages to improve our reputation (even promoted by Dr. Phil?!). However, I hope that the students and guests will discuss that these kinds of initiatives are just one bridge too far. Is reputation defender a tool to defend or artificially improve your reputation?

There are, however, a lot of merits behind services like Reputation Defender. Many people believe that Reputation Defender is one of the best things that has happened to the Internet (assuming, of course, you have the ability to pay for it). It gives people a great way to remove defamatory, or potentially defamatory, content in a way where it harms nobody and helps those who it should. I'm really interested in the tactics Reputation Defender uses to increase Google page ranks (MyEdge) in a way that makes sure it doesn't get the Google Death Penalty.

In terms of anonymity on the Internet in the user's control, I think services such as Tor do quite a good job. There still are weaknesses associated with the exit nodes of Tor allowing hackers to access user names and passwords due to the lack of encryption technologies available.

Besides this, Ryan and the people of Mozilla will show the great advantages of understandable privacy policies in the form of icons. This might encourage people to actually check whether the website uphold certain privacy standards. Even more importantly, it would allow users, in an easy way, to realize the diverse range of privacy policies (and amount of information released to third parties) that various add-ons have (the Location Aware feature of Firefox version 3.5, for example, can tap into a wide range of information). While the advantages of easy-to-understand privacy icons are straightforward, the guests likely to justify why modifications to the browsers that we use are a necessary or desired way to implement them.

As we discussed yesterday, the people at the Mozilla foundation can take any idea to improve the internet from a fanciful theory to a concrete reality very quickly. It seems likely, then, that they are deluged with causes to adopt and browser functionality to build in. It would be interesting to hear how they decided what to focus on, and why privacy rose to the top of the list. Mozilla has, in effect, the ability to bundle any plug-in that its desire with Firefox by making it core browser functionality. The guests are likely to address whether there is a happy medium between bundling functionality with Firefox and relying entirely on user tracking down and installing plug-ins like DisputeFinder requires. Is there a possibility of a central plug-in repository that can allow useful plug-ins to take off more easily. Can the decision of which plug-ins/concepts could be "promoted" to core browser functionality be crowdsourced somehow?

Day 7 Predictions

2010-01-12T22:13:12Z

TylerLacey:

Main Page

2010-01-12T00:09:02Z

TylerLacey:

Welcome to Difficult Problems in Cyberlaw, a January course taught by Professor Jonathan Zittrain and Elizabeth Stark, co-hosted by Stanford Law School and Harvard Law School.

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], 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]]
*[[Ubiquitous Human Computing]]
*[[Future of Wikipedia]]
*[[Cybersecurity]]

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 the 15th: Ubiquitous Human Computing
*Tuesday the 19th: Cybersecurity
*Wednesday the 20th: Global Network Initiative
*Thursday the 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'':
*Stuart 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]
*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

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

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

----

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

'''FIELD TRIP: ''BONUS'':''' Facebook '''POSTPONED'''

'''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'':
*Glenn Brown, Google
*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://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).

''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

''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

==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''''': Reputation Defender, 1pm

'''CLASS''': 5:15-7:15pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 5:45pm
:Cybersecurity presentation (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Mitchell Baker

----

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

'''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

----

<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
*Edward Wes

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

----

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

'''FINAL PROJECTS DUE'''

Day 6 Predictions

2010-01-11T22:31:14Z

TylerLacey:

Daniel: Our guests will probably discuss at length the challenges that Dispute Finder and most web-based cooperative tools bump into while attempting to harness input from virtual crowds. I guess they will talk about Dispute Finderâs design difficulties, such as costs and trade-offs (between precision and recall, between user-friendliness and number / quality of features, etc). Theyâll most likely also summon stories from the interviews discussed in the document we received, perhaps to illustrate content-layer problems with measurement of "information sources reliability"; usersâ misunderstandings / trouble with logic operations; and group biases.
I would love to hear their views on the [http://courses.ischool.berkeley.edu/i256/f09/lectures/RobEnnalsGuestLecture.ppt proposed use of Turks] to improve the database of disputed claims and arguments, as well as on the current biases of the disputed facts / arguments presently listed by the software.

:Jason: I predict that there will be a good deal of discussion of what Daniel calls the "user-friendliness" aspect of these tools - and I hope there is, because it's critical. Specifically, what is the necessary ratio between DisputeFinder or Herdict "passive users" and "active reporters" to make a project successful? I say this because both Herdict and DisputeFinder look somewhat sparsely-populated for them to be maximally-useful right now. For example, Herdict is [http://www.herdict.org/web/explore/country/CN;jsessionid=4A2D95D3EB7A8F96B073DE77D3654D53 reporting] that 2 Chinese users have reported YouTube as inaccessible. How do I interpret that? What percent of people who might know about and like Herdict in China are reporting back to Herdict? We know that Wikipedia is successful in spite of the fact that only a very small portion of readers become really regular editors - but Wikipedia is also one of the most visited sites in the world. I hope we discuss what strategies these organizations are employing to build participation for these more niche offerings. [[User:Jharrow|Jharrow]] 18:20, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

:Reuben: When Daniel talks about the challenges of web-based cooperative tools, my first thought is about the challenge of a achieving a critical mass. I poked around with Dispute Finder for just over an hour this morning and during the entirety of my browsing the New York Times, Washington Post, Miami Herald, and Slate I only came across one disputed claim. No offense to America's news media, but my guess is that what I read is more disputed than that, but that there just aren't enough people trolling the news sites and adding claims to the dispute finder database for the service to actually be that helpful yet. Jason's point about passive users versus active reporters is important. I too would like to hear about how to reach a critical mass and how many active users are needed in order to have a useful service. I'd also like to hear about the potential for users to participate in a more passive manner - notwithstanding the privacy issues, if Herdict could just monitor my browsing and automatically send a report whenever I come across an inaccessible website, something akin to a Last.fm for my click stream, the data would seem to be much more complete than simply recording whatever I choose to report. Never underestimate the laziness of the average person. My prediction is that our guests acknowledge the shortcomings in their current offerings while remaining optimistic about the possibilities of community based technology. [[User:ReubRodriguez|ReubRodriguez]] 18:49, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

::Ramesh: I agree with Reuben on the usefulness of Dispute Finder and Herdict. While Wikipedia (and Yelp, and a few other sites) show that sometimes, you can get useful content for free, that's not always the case. DisputeFinder didn't find many disputes when I did my regular scan of news websites, even when reading articles on topics like medical marijuana and same-sex marriage. It seems like applications like DisputeFinder and Herdict would be better if they were more automated -- if DisputeFinder automatically attached itself to controversial terms, and especially, as Reuben suggested, if Herdict was not based on self-reporting.

:: Franny: I agree that a threshold level of dedicated trusted users (see Vicki's comments below) resolves many problems. I hope our guests will discuss the strategies used by DisputeFinder, or any other website initiatives dependent on a large and broad variety of user input: (1) to attract that user base; and (2) to cope during the interim period while they continue to try to attract that user base. For example, I wonder to what extent DisputeFinder has considered building in redundancy as a means of increasing the accuracy of its results (to borrow a strategy from CrowdFlower), or perhaps some combination of automation and redundancy.

:Tyler: I completely agree with above thoughts about Herdict and DisputeFinder needing to collect a critical mass of users before becoming useful. This seems to echo the idea that wikipedia was not useful for its first several years because it did not possess a critical mass of articles. However, I think there are some differences because individual pieces of wikipedia could become useful before wikipedia as a whole in that individual articles could become independantly useful before wikipedia became as comprehensive as it is today. I don't see that Herdict or DisputeFinder have the same capability to be useful while scaling because they require users to explicitly decide to install plugins and begin using their services before any benefit can be gained by that user. Wikipedia was able to gradually grow in prominence as users occasionally found information on wikipedia that they wanted through web searches. I am wondering if Herdict or DisputeFinder can take advantage of automated solutions to increase their seemingly as-yet sparsely populated databases? For example, could web crawling robots be used to identify at least some inaccesible sites with the expectation that this list could then be pruned by users rather than expecting it to materialize entirely by user submissions? Could DisputeFinder use a web crawling robot, in conjunction with sophisticated text parsers to begin identifying at least some topics that clearly involve dispute? I expect and hope that the guests will discuss some strategies for increasing the datasets of their projects to the point that they can obtain their critical mass of users and data more quickly. [[User:TylerLacey|TylerLacey]] 19:49, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Emily:
Dispute Finder bears an inherent flaw: individuals, not algorithms, decide whom and what to trust for information. Consider the watch on your wrist. If your watch starts to get the time wrong, you might try to fix the watch. You hope and pray your watch starts giving you accurate, dependable information because you like your watch. You might even love your watch. But, if it continues to betray your trust, and the people in your trusted circle insist your watch is wrong, you give up. You decide to trust a new watch, but your new watch will probably be reminiscent of your old watch with respect to personal taste, experience, and preferences. Most people are intuitive enough (though they donât necessarily convert insights into complex conclusions about source x versus source y) to know that 120 seconds of live, relatively unedited sound on Fox News Live or MSNBC Dayside is less likely to contain factually accurate information â even if relatively unimportant, like the location of a fire, or the total number of casualties in a mass shootingâ than a compulsively edited, fact-checked tome in the Sunday NY Times magazine, the Economist, or the New Yorker.

Article 3.5 of the Dispute Finder document, âDetermining Trustworthy Sources,â seems a bit absurd. It actually acknowledges the marketability challenges of its own software: âUnfortunatelyâ¦the sites people actually trust are often those that share the personâs own point of view.â So, again, what is this software and what, really, is the point? Segway into âCross-cutting themes.â Save the world. How? Is Dispute Finder intended to help people sue other people for libel? Richard Jewel (now deceased) had a reasonably compelling case. Thatâs probably why he successfully sued (for libel) every organization, from CNN, to NBC, to the NY Post. All settled. He collected from each of them. But Richard Jewel didnât need help from Dispute Finder. Richard Jewel had a case.

Cross-cutting themes: âChange the technology, save the world.â Okay, why not? Isnât there something else smart people at Intel and UC Berkeley could be doing to make the world better? Last November, the New York Times produced an alarming story [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/us/29foodstamps.html] about the food stamp program in America(ânow expanding at a pace of about 20,000 people a day.â) Also no shortage of children in custody. Last December, the New York Times obtained â and reported on [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/14/nyregion/14juvenile.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=new%20york%20family%20court%20juvenile%20department%20of%20justice%20youth&st=cse]â a âconfidential draft reportâ prepared by a task force appointed by NY gov David Paterson: âNew York Stateâs current approach fails the young people who are drawn into the system, the public whose safety it is intended to protect, and the principles of good governance that demand effective use of scarce state resources.â Story also says the situation was so bad that the DOJ, at one point, was threatening to âtake over.â

So, if Intel is interested in contributing, how about addressing real problemsâhelping real peopleâ that could affect real, collective societal change and improvement? Children and education seem like obvious places to start. Basics like hardware and mentors could go a long way. Children in poverty struggle with range of issues, including asthma, low self-esteem, obesity, and depression. Consider children in places like the South Bronx (Jonathan Kozolâs children [http://www.amazon.com/Amazing-Grace-Children-Conscience-Nation/dp/0060976977]): allocation of resources in places like this (and/or lower-middle class communities), especially from companies like Intel, could change lives; give voices to people from whom we do not often hear.

Interested to hear thoughts on Internet privacy, though I'm not sure adults have an expectation of privacy anywhere [http://gawker.com/5444885/facebooks-mark-zuckerberg-on-your-erased-privacy-these-are-the-social-norms-now] on the Internet. If you want privacy, don't put yourself on the Internet. Finally, on the subject of online harassment, if we accept that the Internet is a public place, to what extent is it acceptable to regulate online communication, including but not limited to comments deemed 'offensive' on blogs?

Predictions. Guests will be nice. Class will be nice. Hope to hear more about Dispute Finder's business model.

Tyler: I would like an explanation for why the contributor of a disputed claim on DisputeFinder needs to provide a link to an article that illustrates the opposing point of view. If there are no article, isn't it still valuable to identify a claim as disputed, especially since this could break DisputeFinder's dataset building-process into two parts? I could enter a disputed claim without a link to another source and then another user, once alerted to the potential dispute could track down and enter the article. I see the argument that an issue is not actually in dispute if there is no contradictory reports of it, but I wonder if an entry into DisputeFinder should be enough to create a "dispute", rather than requiring a link. I agree that even a blog post outlining the opposing point of view would be more helpful than a "dispute" without any link, but I'm not sure that it should be a requirement. Today I entered a disputed claim as "Works prepared by amazon mechanical turkers are considered works for hire under the United States Copyright Act" to see if DisputeFinder would highlight portions of our wiki (which does not currently have any disputed claims, according to DisputeFinder) but I was stalled when it asked for a link to a web location outlining this dispute. Should I have entered the page on this wiki where we discuss the issue? I hope that the guests discuss this aspect of the DisputeFinder process. [[Special:Contributions/68.65.169.179|68.65.169.179]] 20:11, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

:Tyler: Another question that came up during my lunchtime discussion of DisputeFinder with some of our classmates: is there a practical way that DisputeFinder could leverage the existing collection of topics that wikipedia has flagged as a "point of view" or "non-neutral" to boost DisputeFinder's database of disputes?

Victoria: I completely agree with the former point that DisputeFinder's success is dependent on gaining a critical mass of end users. In addition to the need for more users, I think the platform is very trusting of the end users themselves. DisputeFinder allows for a lot of users to subjectively claim anything is disputed even when it begins to reach the absurd. One EscapistMagazine.com posted in June 2009, that the following topics were included on the disputed list "The 2009 Iran Presidential election was rigged," "" and "Recycling is good for the environment," "2Pac is dead," "Dick Cheney is a robot" and "Italians look good." Although theoretically the idea of a marketplace of ideas works - without the appropriate robust marketplace DisputeFinder becomes a caricature of the truth-seeking function of free speech.

Day 6 Predictions

2010-01-11T19:49:42Z

TylerLacey:

Daniel: Our guests will probably discuss at length the challenges that Dispute Finder and most web-based cooperative tools bump into while attempting to harness input from virtual crowds. I guess they will talk about Dispute Finderâs design difficulties, such as costs and trade-offs (between precision and recall, between user-friendliness and number / quality of features, etc). Theyâll most likely also summon stories from the interviews discussed in the document we received, perhaps to illustrate content-layer problems with measurement of "information sources reliability"; usersâ misunderstandings / trouble with logic operations; and group biases.
I would love to hear their views on the [http://courses.ischool.berkeley.edu/i256/f09/lectures/RobEnnalsGuestLecture.ppt proposed use of Turks] to improve the database of disputed claims and arguments, as well as on the current biases of the disputed facts / arguments presently listed by the software.

:Jason: I predict that there will be a good deal of discussion of what Daniel calls the "user-friendliness" aspect of these tools - and I hope there is, because it's critical. Specifically, what is the necessary ratio between DisputeFinder or Herdict "passive users" and "active reporters" to make a project successful? I say this because both Herdict and DisputeFinder look somewhat sparsely-populated for them to be maximally-useful right now. For example, Herdict is [http://www.herdict.org/web/explore/country/CN;jsessionid=4A2D95D3EB7A8F96B073DE77D3654D53 reporting] that 2 Chinese users have reported YouTube as inaccessible. How do I interpret that? What percent of people who might know about and like Herdict in China are reporting back to Herdict? We know that Wikipedia is successful in spite of the fact that only a very small portion of readers become really regular editors - but Wikipedia is also one of the most visited sites in the world. I hope we discuss what strategies these organizations are employing to build participation for these more niche offerings. [[User:Jharrow|Jharrow]] 18:20, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

:Reuben: When Daniel talks about the challenges of web-based cooperative tools, my first thought is about the challenge of a achieving a critical mass. I poked around with Dispute Finder for just over an hour this morning and during the entirety of my browsing the New York Times, Washington Post, Miami Herald, and Slate I only came across one disputed claim. No offense to the America's news media, but my guess is that what I read is more disputed than that, but that there just aren't enough people trolling the news sites and adding claims to the dispute finder database for the service to actually be that helpful yet. Jason's point about passive users versus active reporters is important. I too would like to hear about how to reach a critical mass and how many active users are needed in order to have a useful service. I'd also like to hear about the potential for users to participate in a more passive manner - notwithstanding the privacy issues, if Herdict could just monitor my browsing and automatically send a report whenever I come across an inaccessible website, something akin to a Last.fm for my click stream, the data would seem to be much more complete than simply recording whatever I choose to report. Never underestimate the laziness of the average person. My prediction is that our guests acknowledge the shortcomings in their current offerings while remaining optimistic about the possibilities of community based technology. [[User:ReubRodriguez|ReubRodriguez]] 18:49, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

:Tyler: I completely agree with above thoughts about Herdict and DisputeFinder needing to collect a critical mass of users before becoming useful. This seems to echo the idea that wikipedia was not useful for its first several years because it did not possess a critical mass of articles. However, I think there are some differences because individual pieces of wikipedia could become useful before wikipedia as a whole in that individual articles could become independantly useful before wikipedia became as comprehensive as it is today. I don't see that Herdict or DisputeFinder have the same capability to be useful while scaling because they require users to explicitly decide to install plugins and begin using their services before any benefit can be gained by that user. Wikipedia was able to gradually grow in prominence as users occasionally found information on wikipedia that they wanted through web searches. I am wondering if Herdict or DisputeFinder can take advantage of automated solutions to increase their seemingly as-yet sparsely populated databases? For example, could web crawling robots be used to identify at least some inaccesible sites with the expectation that this list could then be pruned by users rather than expecting it to materialize entirely by user submissions? Could DisputeFinder use a web crawling robot, in conjunction with sophisticated text parsers to begin identifying at least some topics that clearly involve dispute? I expect and hope that the guests will discuss some strategies for increasing the datasets of their projects to the point that they can obtain their critical mass of users and data more quickly. [[User:TylerLacey|TylerLacey]] 19:49, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Emily:
Dispute Finder bears an inherent flaw: individuals, not algorithms, decide whom and what to trust for information. Consider the watch on your wrist. If your watch starts to get the time wrong, you might try to fix the watch. You hope and pray your watch starts giving you accurate, dependable information because you like your watch. You might even love your watch. But, if it continues to betray your trust, and the people in your trusted circle insist your watch is wrong, you give up. You decide to trust a new watch, but your new watch will probably be reminiscent of your old watch with respect to personal taste, experience, and preferences. Most people are intuitive enough (though they donât necessarily convert insights into complex conclusions about source x versus source y) to know that 120 seconds of live, relatively unedited sound on Fox News Live or MSNBC Dayside is less likely to contain factually accurate information â even if relatively unimportant, like the location of a fire, or the total number of casualties in a mass shootingâ than a compulsively edited, fact-checked tome in the Sunday NY Times magazine, the Economist, or the New Yorker.

Article 3.5 of the Dispute Finder document, âDetermining Trustworthy Sources,â seems a bit absurd. It actually acknowledges the marketability challenges of its own software: âUnfortunatelyâ¦the sites people actually trust are often those that share the personâs own point of view.â So, again, what is this software and what, really, is the point? Segway into âCross-cutting themes.â Save the world. How? Is Dispute Finder intended to help people sue other people for libel? Richard Jewel (now deceased) had a reasonably compelling case. Thatâs probably why he successfully sued (for libel) every organization, from CNN, to NBC, to the NY Post. All settled. He collected from each of them. But Richard Jewel didnât need help from Dispute Finder. Richard Jewel had a case.

Cross-cutting themes: âChange the technology, save the world.â Okay, why not? Isnât there something else smart people at Intel and UC Berkeley could be doing to make the world better? Last November, the New York Times produced an alarming story [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/us/29foodstamps.html] about the food stamp program in America(ânow expanding at a pace of about 20,000 people a day.â) Also no shortage of children in custody. Last December, the New York Times obtained â and reported on [http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/14/nyregion/14juvenile.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=new%20york%20family%20court%20juvenile%20department%20of%20justice%20youth&st=cse]â a âconfidential draft reportâ prepared by a task force appointed by NY gov David Paterson: âNew York Stateâs current approach fails the young people who are drawn into the system, the public whose safety it is intended to protect, and the principles of good governance that demand effective use of scarce state resources.â Story also says the situation was so bad that the DOJ, at one point, was threatening to âtake over.â

So, if Intel is interested in contributing, how about addressing real problemsâhelping real peopleâ that could affect real, collective societal change and improvement? Children and education seem like obvious places to start. Basics like hardware and mentors could go a long way. Children in poverty struggle with range of issues, including asthma, low self-esteem, obesity, and depression. Consider children in places like the South Bronx (Jonathan Kozolâs children [http://www.amazon.com/Amazing-Grace-Children-Conscience-Nation/dp/0060976977]): allocation of resources in places like this (and/or lower-middle class communities), especially from companies like Intel, could change lives; give voices to people from whom we do not often hear.

Interested to hear thoughts on Internet privacy, though I'm not sure adults have an expectation of privacy anywhere [http://gawker.com/5444885/facebooks-mark-zuckerberg-on-your-erased-privacy-these-are-the-social-norms-now] on the Internet. If you want privacy, don't put yourself on the Internet. Finally, on the subject of online harassment, if we accept that the Internet is a public place, to what extent is it acceptable to regulate online communication, including but not limited to comments deemed 'offensive' on blogs?

Predictions. Guests will be nice. Class will be nice. Hope to hear more about Dispute Finder's business model.

Day 5 Predictions

2010-01-08T22:54:29Z

TylerLacey:

Victoria: My prediction is that the speakers are going to be extolling the virtues of Wikipedia and explaining that although the site has gone under some transformations it is still a vibrant force. I would concede that I think it is. Most people I know still immediately turn to Wikipedia for a quick run down of a topic or an answer to a quick question. However, as time moves on the site is becoming less innovative and more standard. I would like to ask them about their understanding and personal experiences in trying to keep Wikipedia young. Moreover, having read that 85% of the contributors to Wikipedia are male I'd specifically love to ask Phoebe whether she feels that the articles are written from the male gaze and lack the other gender's perspective.

:: Sharona: Like Vickie, I was also struck by the statistics on the demographic breakdown, and I would love to hear their thoughts on whether they feel wikipedia really does represent a wide range of views, or more specifically (especially in the US) that of a white male. Another thing I think they will likely discuss - and probably not have a good answer for - is the question of privacy and defamation on wikipedia and other wikimedia projects. Can, or should, the website and/or its users or editors be held accountable if allegedly defamatory posts are not removed? Who makes that call? And what standards are used? It seems to me that there's no easy answer to this: while they may not run into strictly legal issues, it could definitely affect reader's trust in the information or fear that they too are vulnerable.

::: Ramesh: I was struck by the Economist's comparison of the number of articles about Pokemon and the Solidarity movement on English Wikipedia. I expect the Wikipedians will admit that they are disproportionately white, young, male, more interested in science fiction than what others might consider more interesting forms of culture, etc, and that's a problem, but that there's really no better solution. They may be right; is there a better internet resource in English on Solidarity than Wikipedia? Maybe when Google Books is fully up and running, it would be a better resource (or just co-opted and summarized by Wikipedia).

Bruno: I expect our guests to focus their comments on the strategies Wikipedia is adopting to address two of what seems to be the main problems of the project: (i) quality/accuracy of its articles, and (ii) issues concerning vandalism. After reading the materials, I was struck by the fact that Wikipedia doesn't seem to be worried about increasing its user base. The increasing amount of rules, the hostility of veteran users to newbies and the efforts to attract more scientists to participate in the project suggest that in fact they would be interested in less, but more qualified participation. Just like the attitude of our guest from CrowdFlower, perhaps a sort of procrastination to address a problem that is not yet so concrete might be operating here: with over 40 thousand contributors it's not clear when more means actually less.

:: Sheel: I'd be interested in hearing Wikimedia's reaction to this: what if people started using CrowdFlower or MechanicalTurk, if they don't already, to pay people 10 cents or so to go edit Wikipedia pages? I know they weren't okay with MyWikiBiz, but this is much more under the radar. Finally, I'd like to hear where the debate is on inclusionists v. exclusionists (meaning those who want to produce the 'integrity' of the encyclopedia and shy away from what may be deemed as frivolous by some portion of editors). My guess is that there is still no concrete answer---if enough editors are passionate about editing/creating a new page, then it'll stay.

::: Andrew: I also hope to hear some discussion about the intersection between Wikipedia and paid crowdsourcing. The possibilities here aren't all nefarious (what about an mturk task to fix Wikitypos?)

Daniel: In addition to the topics above, I expect a discussion about the possible increase in vulnerability Wikipedia faces at the content layer, on par with a less dynamic environment. Since most pages are already done, at least in the English version, editors may feel less motivated to monitor existing, but seldom edited pages which are not on the "watch list". As a consequence, they can be more easily twisted by outsiders. In connection with that issue, I guess that our guests will raise the question "how does it feel to be a Wikipedian?" - and try to describe the community feeling from the perspective of insiders, and the challenges to bring more people in.

Franny: Main problems within the wikipedia bubble are summarized well above - I think that we also need to examine the problem of how to improve/encourage the transfer of wikipedia's benefits (e.g. generativity and sense of community) outside of the wikipedia microcosm. To that end, I hope that our guests will discuss their experiences with similar applications and initiatives (e.g. citizendium, etc.), and provide their views of the successes or weaknesses.

:Jason: Great point by Franny; I too hope they address how Wikipedia's success can to other initiatives. After all, I've been struck by just how ''sui generis'' Wikipedia seems to be, and now that we are in 2010, I think we need to start asking whether Wikipedia is an outlier or whether its principles of both creation and governance can really generalize to other projects. Of course, as I write that, I find myself wondering whether free and open source software is another example of the Wikipedia model. Further, I wonder what they think of as other really good candidates for adopting Wikipedia's new form of participatory self-government. For instance, some of us have been laughing about Stanford's new, fairly permissive policies when it comes to handing in papers at the end of the semester (you can still pass the . Could these new policies have been created by the Stanford community via wiki? What would the outcome have been?

Juan: I would like to hear their opinions on
1. How to deal with vandalism and spams while keeping the generativity of Wikipedia as much as possible. Now they've created several restrictions to lower of the possibility of attacks by vandals and spams, such as blocking IP addresses of repeat offenders, using full protection and semi-protection functions to restrict editing of certain pages. However, these restrictions limits free editability and thus seems jeopardize its generativity.
2. The prospect of wikipedia in China. How will it compete with its local counterpart Hudong. Unlike wikipedia, Hudong rewards top contributors with gifts ranging from post cards to MP3 players, and offers some features that complies with Chinese users' habits. Recently, it even launched it partnership with some popular overseas Chinese website, making its first steps to expand into overseas Chinese market. What is wikipedia's strategy facing this situation? Is there any possibility to establish some cooperation or strategic partnership between these two on-line encyclopedias?
3. Sustainable problem. Dedicated editor may leave because of life cycle change, motivation by other UGC websites, tire of anti-threat work, and etc. How will wikipedia attract new editors and keep them?

Ethan: In addition to all the issues mentioned above, I'd like to know how Wikipedia addresses censorship efforts from various governments. We talked about how the Chinese government forced Google to remove certain search results (e.g. falun gong) and I'm wondering if Wikipedia receives such requests. Censorship doesn't necessarily have to be so nefarious-- it's illegal to deny holocaust in 13 countries according to Wikipedia, truth is not an absolute defense to defamation in Korea, etc. How will Wikipedia abide by local laws when pressed?

:Tyler: Check out this story for an actual example of this happening: http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/11/wikipedia_murder/

Elisabeth: I predict we'll hear that Wikipedia's editor corp is either growing or sufficiently large already. But I'd like to solicit some ideas on how active editors' time could be better leveraged if numbers do start dropping. Some of the articles we read suggested that editors spent a lot of time bickering over minor points--perfecting one page while ignoring a slew of others. Are there ways to eliminate the bureaucracy and consciously turn to a state that maximizes pages edited at least once vs. pages edited by 100 people? On the subject of growing pains more generally, can they point to examples of online communities that have overcome the problem they're having -- an influx of newcomers -- that inspire them?
I'd also like to hear whether the donation strategy is feasible for funding Wikipedia long-term, or if they're planning on using other Wikimedia projects to fund some of it, or if there's some other theory.

Main Page

2010-01-08T22:39:27Z

TylerLacey: /* WEEK THREE: SOLUTIONS */

Welcome to Difficult Problems in Cyberlaw, a January course taught by Professor Jonathan Zittrain and Elizabeth Stark, co-hosted by Stanford Law School and Harvard Law School.

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], 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]]
*[[Ubiquitous Human Computing]]
*[[Future of Wikipedia]]
*[[Cybersecurity]]

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]]

==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'':
*Stuart 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]
*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

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

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

----

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

'''FIELD TRIP: ''BONUS'':''' Facebook '''POSTPONED'''

'''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'':
*Glenn Brown, Google
*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://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).

''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

''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
:Group 1 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

==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''''': Reputation Defender, 1pm

'''CLASS''': 5:15-7:15pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 5:45pm
:Group 2 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Mitchell Baker

----

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

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 7:00pm
:Group 3 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

----

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

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 11:40am
:Group 4 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Craig Newmark
*Edward Wes

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

----

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

'''FINAL PROJECTS DUE'''

Day 4 Predictions

2010-01-07T18:27:57Z

TylerLacey:

Amanda: I am very interested to hear Chuck's take on the relationship between the government, large corporations like Microsoft, and the defcon-attending hacker community (like the L0pht group mentioned in the Wired article). Is the government receptive to both groups? I imagine the relationship specifically between the hacker community and the government can become tense because the interests of both groups is not exactly aligned and is sometimes conflicting. Have they been able to successfully work together around a common threat like cybersecurity? While I imagine the government often tries to recruit from the hacker community, and I'm interested to hear where they draw the lines legally as far as subversive behavior within the hacker community (ie do they bend the rules for the sake of potential advances in cybersecurity?).
:Of course there are great advances yet to be made in the relationship between white-hat hackers and corporations like Microsoft. Skepticism abounds from both sides for obvious reasons, as well as entrenched interests and preconceptions based on past interactions ("Hackers are simply criminals", or on the other side "Microsoft is The Man").

:Tyler: To follow up on the above predictions, I am interested in hearing Chuck describe what he feels is the proper balance between government and private corporations dealing with cybersecurity. This may be an actual allocation of roles, or more of a question about how much of private industry's culture of innovation and rapid change can be transplanted into the government. Professor Goldsmith painted a picture where the government is not, and is unable to, secure the cyber-interests of the United States so when we hear that 90% of US military traffic runs through private networks, are we shocked that this number is so high or that it is not closer to 100%?

Vickie: I'm going to dovetail from Amanda's comment and say that I think Chuck is going to speak more specifically about the ID program he was talking about the other day as a possible solution to cybersecurity. Just as in the Wired article - identification solves a large percent of the problem, mostly through accountability. However, this seems too Orwellian for my blood. Unlike a passport that is shown in person - a computer ID is never going to be checked person to person. The computer will always be the intermediary. Moreover, this type of program may deter people from doing things on the Internet that they normally would do - if it wasn't anonymous. Visit certain political sites, fetish sites etc. etc. At what point is our fear balanced by our need for an Internet that is not being surveyed.

:Ramesh: I wonder what Chuck would say are the benefits to anonymity on the internet, and whether they are outweighed by the security risks. It seems like there could be a creditable argument saying just that. Also, I wonder about problems in scaling up ID programs -- one would assume that many countries would not participate, but if desirable content could only be accessed by an ID, perhaps consumers would then demand their nations also issue internet IDs.

Hector: Some of Chuck's points from his remarks on Tuesday that stuck with me most were the strengthening of internet identification and alternative networks that use something else than TCP. I hope that he elaborates on the possible applications of the latter.

Lien: I'm very interested to hear (i) what Chuck thinks the biggest cybersecurity risk is that Microsoft and other simular major private companies face and (ii) how the company is prepared for attack on its system and will react on it. I however predict he's not gonna answer that question...

Reuben: On Tuesday we spent a great deal of time on the attribution problem of cybersecurity which is related to deterrence and retaliation. I'd like to hear more about that, but I'd also like to hear about how we shore up our own defenses and incentivize security. I'll be interested to hear who Chuck thinks should be responsible for security. There is a dilemma for a company like Microsoft that may not want to have the burden of cybersecurity thrust upon them, but may also resist government mandates and control. I think Chuck will probably recognize that both public and private sector have a role to play, but he will emphasize the need for government to provide more leadership in the area.

Jason: Especially since we have already had some discussion on the security issue, I think the class will be able to offer some interesting solutions for problems that exist pretty high-up in the stack, like user behavior, software, ID schemes, and other things that happen at the end node. But I predict that we'll be somewhat flummoxed about what's going on and what to do about the fundamental nature of the network, like the implications of the stuff that Clark was talking about in [http://www.ischool.berkeley.edu/newsandevents/events/sl20090304 his talk] that we listened to. I certainly am - though hopefully we'll make a bit of headway in class.

Day 3 Thoughts

2010-01-07T17:16:29Z

TylerLacey:

Tyler: I am wondering if the terms in AMT's conditions of use that works prepared by turkers are to be considered works for hire would be considered valid. My initial instinct is that it would not necessarily be so.

: To paraphrase, the Copyright Act defines a work for hire as (17 U.S.C. 101):

* 1) a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment
** The factors to make determination were listed in the CCNV v Reid case (790 U.S. 730, 1989)
*** The two most important factors are provision of employee benefits and tax treatment (from Aymes v. Bonelli, 980 F.2d 857, 1992)
* OR 2) a work specially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work if:
** 1. category: is one of:
*** part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work
*** a translation
*** a supplementary work â adjunct to a work made by another author
*** a compilation
*** an instructional text â systematic instructional activities
*** a test
*** answer material for a test
*** an atlas
** 2. intent: if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made for hire
must fit into one of the 8 categories to be a contracted work made for hire (p132)
Most work produced for HITs would not seem to fall into either of these categories.

::Michael: I think many works produced through HITs are going to be considered compilations or collective works. Certainly David's Sheep or 100 Dollar Bill are compilations so long as they are taken as a whole. Even in any attempt to monetize the individual elements, the Turk Participation Agreement states that any works which cannot be considered works for hire are assigned to the requester. (full text copied below)

::Section 3(a): "As a Provider, the Requester for whom you provide Services is your client, and as such, you agree that the work product of any Services you perform is deemed a "work made for hire" for the benefit of the Requester, and all ownership rights, including worldwide intellectual property rights, will vest with the Requester immediately upon your performance of the Service. To the extent any such rights do not vest in Requester under applicable law, you hereby assign or exclusively grant (without the right to any compensation) all right, title and interest, including all intellectual property rights, to such work product to Requester." [https://www.mturk.com/mturk/conditionsofuse The full policy can be found here.]

::Jason: Michael just sort of stole my mojo - I was about to say a similar thing - but Tyler, I guess I too don't see why you think HITs are not works-for-hire under test 2. Take the book about cats: it seems to me that Bjoern specifically ordered those stories for his compilation, which would fall under the rule. I guess there could be a problem of asymmetry if both parties need to know that they work is being commissioned, since in many cases only the commissioner might know what it's being used for. But given the Mechanical Turk terms of service that Michael reproduces above - which probably constitutes a "written instrument" - I think the Turker would be hard-pressed to argue that he had zero notice, even if he didn't know specifically what his work would be used for.

:::Andrew: I think there's certainly enough wiggle room in the words "specially ordered or commissioned" to support a claim that the AMT contract does not effect WMFH status, at least in some cases. Take the cats book: When it was ordered, Bjorn himself didn't know what he was going to do with the cats when he got them. How could he argue that he had "specially ordered or commissioned" them for that compilation at the time of the contract? More generally, I think the 'meeting of the minds' aspect is more important than Jason suggests, given that it's the basis of so much doctrine in contract interpretation. That is, I think it's an open question whether a task which the performer does not know to have a certain purpose can be said to be "specially ordered or commissioned" for that purpose with regard to the written instrument.

::Sharona: While I agree with Jason and Michael that this is probably a work made for hire, do you think this may run into contracts of adhesion problems? Or, do you think if the average turker was aware of what his "original" (after all, to be copyrightable, it must be original) work would be used for, he would have agreed to the Participation Agreement? Does it matter?

::Tyler: To follow up on my original thought, I agree that an argument could be made for HITs to be WMFH, but I see big problems with the "specially ordered or commissioned" language as Andrew mentioned. Also, I'm not sure mention in the terms of service would qualify as a written instrument signed by both parties.

Day 3 Thoughts

2010-01-07T07:05:45Z

TylerLacey:

Day 3 Thoughts

2010-01-07T07:05:15Z

TylerLacey:

Day 3 Thoughts

2010-01-07T07:02:45Z

TylerLacey:

Day 3 Thoughts

2010-01-07T06:58:11Z

TylerLacey: New page: I am wondering if the terms in AMT's conditions of use that works prepared by turkers are to be considered works for hire would be considered valid. My initial instinct is that it would no...

I am wondering if the terms in AMT's conditions of use that works prepared by turkers are to be considered works for hire would be considered valid. My initial instinct is that it would not necessarily be so.

To paraphrase, the Copyright Act defines a work for hire as:

* 1) a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employer
* OR 2) a work specially ordered or commissioned for use as a contribution to a collective work if:
** 1. category: is one of:
*** as part of a motion picture or other audiovisual work
*** as a translation
*** as a supplementary work â adjunct to a work made by another author
*** as a compilation
*** as an instructional text â systematic instructional activities
*** as a test
*** as answer material for a test
*** as an atlas
** 2. intent: if the parties expressly agree in a written instrument signed by them that the work shall be considered a work made for hire
must fit into one of the 8 categories to be a contracted work made for hire (p132)

Main Page

2010-01-07T06:51:49Z

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

Welcome to Difficult Problems in Cyberlaw, a January course taught by Professor Jonathan Zittrain and Elizabeth Stark, co-hosted by Stanford Law School and Harvard Law School.

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], 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]]
*[[Ubiquitous Human Computing]]
*[[Future of Wikipedia]]
*[[Cybersecurity]]

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]]

==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'':
*Stuart 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]
*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

''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]

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

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

----

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

'''FIELD TRIP: ''BONUS'':''' Facebook 12:30-2:00pm

'''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'':
*Glenn Brown, Google
*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://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).

''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

''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
:Group 1 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

==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''''': Reputation Defender, 1pm

'''CLASS''': 5:15-7:15pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 5:45pm
:Group 2 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

----

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

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 7:00pm
:Group 3 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

----

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

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 11:40am
:Group 4 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Craig Newmark
*Edward Wes

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

----

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

'''FINAL PROJECTS DUE'''

Day 3 Predictions

2010-01-07T00:08:32Z

TylerLacey:

Daniel: My guess is that three issues will be focused:

1- ''labor rights'' â workers in UHC are not attached to a safe work environment, do not receive any fringe benefits, health care, etc., and as of yet there are no unions for Turks and the like. It is quite easy to see homeworkers as nonworkers, and to build [http://www.missconceptions.net/downloads/mturk-pca09-web.pdf digital sweatshops].

2- workersâ new ''expectation of complete anonymity'', that go way beyond privacy demands in regular work environments. Hopefully ethical issues concerning this faceless workforce will be discussed, as well as its potential identity and community feelings (taking into account that, unlike bearers of [http://www.iab.net/about_the_iab/recent_press_releases/press_release_archive/press_release/pr-061009-value formal jobs], UHC workers have shifting numbers, not social security ones). Still on this topic, I expect debates about people willing to perform otherwise shameful tasks, and about the opportunities for children, sick or unfit workers in general to work / be worked.

3- the ''use of UHC for complex, creative tasks'', analyzed in conjunction with a look at the economics of commoditized labor pools. Resulting discussions could examine quality control and its costs, and [http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1357054.1357127 proper design], necessary to unleash [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQ3Q6Y6Ylqo creativity] and demand more than repetitive, boring tasks from fellow anonymous humans. On that note, it is nice to see that, as scientific experiments with Mechanical Turks [http://experimentalturk.wordpress.com/ become more popular], academic attention is drawn towards the problematic incentives in the platformâs most common setting (low payment + repetitive tasks), which encourages Turks to finish HITs as fast as they can, [http://experimentalphilosophy.typepad.com/experimental_philosophy/2010/01/looking-for-subjects-amazons-mechanical-turk.html at the expense of proper comprehension of the tasks].
: Andrew: Since at least some of our guests tonight are "creatives", I hope to hear some discussion about the relationship between full-time freelancers and websites that crowdsource complex, creative tasks (e.g. Worth1000, [http://www.istockphoto.com/index.php iStockPhoto]). At a Berkman lunch last spring, [http://crowdsourcing.typepad.com/ Jeff Howe] cited a [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1122462 study] that showed only 4% of iStockPhoto sellers derived their primary income from the site. As the site and its peers begin to dominate the market for stock photography, what happens to the livelihoods of those who depended on stock photography for a living? Protectionist worries like this parallel those about outsourcing more generally and are vulnerable to the same counters about progress and efficient markets; I hope some of those arguments play out tonight.

My wish list for the session: discussions of solutions / tools such as [http://turkopticon.differenceengines.com/ Turkopticon], a Firefox application designed to identify and expose âshady employersâ.

Michael: Since two of our guests have used UHC for artistic projects, I expect one or both of them will respond to some [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cult_of_the_Amateur/ Cult of the Amateur]-style criticisms. I am especially interested to hear whether our speakers think UHC improves the quality of creative/design work that can be accomplished or aggregated from UHC or whether it represents a possible step backward from looking to established professionals for this kind of work. Based on the backgrounds of the speakers, I would imagine Bjoern Hartman and Aaron Koblin will argue that UHC presents the possibility for improvement over the previous paradigm of established professionals. I imagine one or more of the speakers may believe that UHC doesn't really represent a change in quality of such higher level work, but just a difference in kind.

I don't know if any of our guests plan on discussing this topic, but I would be especially interested to hear their perspectives on UHC's effect on the morality of work done. Anonymity on the internet can sometimes remove users' filters of social convention and politeness. So UHC might make it easier for users of Mechanical Turk or CrowdFlower to do work (either voluntarily or unknowingly) that would be morally dubious. There also seems to be a lot of noise in the Mechanical Turk system especially -- a lot of scams rather than true HIT tasks. A possible solution would be to use the existing Mechanical Turk or CrowdFlower functionality for users to rank the morality of the various tasks and provide marginally greater pay or benefits for tasks with higher moral/utility rankings. But I would be interested to hear to what extent our guests think this is a problem.

Ramesh: I predict that the founders of human computing websites will be more focused on the technology and potential of the websites and may have a blind spot for the legal issues that may be raised by UHC (applicability of minimum wage and other laws) while as law students, we may naturally focus on the legal issues implicated.

: Tyler: I agree that Lukas is obviously very excited about the technology and the potential of his website and similar websites. However, I believe that the "blind spot" that Ramesh predicts will be more of a "worrisome spot". I think Lukas will be extremely worried about the legal implications concerning products in his space. I think a lot of this worry is justified since it is likely unsettled or unclear law that even an experienced employment lawyer could only guess about, and it I think Lukas may be kept up at night by the potential for new or clarified law to derail his project. I suspect that Lukas will have attempted a risk analysis of his business plan with respect to legal risks, but have had great difficulty because of the challenges associated with assigning probabilities and magnitudes to the risks that he faces.

Alternatively, perhaps the founders of UHC websites will see them simply as a continuation of current trends, especially the increasing numbers of contractors in the labor force of large companies and governments and the outsourcing of call-center (and increasingly higher-skilled) jobs overseas. Does UHC present any problems that are different from the current trends? What role can employment and labor law play in a world where increasing numbers of workers are "independent contractors" or even Mechanical Turks? Will technology re-enact Lochner?

Franny:
Given the guest list, I diplomatically disagree with Daniel (and agree with Ramesh) and would expect these guests to address the positive potential and advantages of human computing applications into business, arts and culture, as well as the benefits available through this new type of labour force with built-in autonomy. As libertarian as I may be in my views, I agree with Daniel that there is a real possibility that UHC can develop into a last resort for unskilled workers to earn income in order to survive. I just don't think that the negative aspects will be the focus of today's session.

I would also be interested to hear our guests' thoughts on whether UHC can be applied to tasks in which sensitive information is involved, and if so, how could private content be protected?

:Jason: Totally agree with Franny here. I was at first somewhat surprised that in the talk that Lukas gave at TechCruch 50 there was zero discussion of any of the legal aspects of this (no one asked, "Um, do you have to withhold taxes from the workers?" or "What if it turned out that someone was a child?" or "Won't your business model be ruined if it turns out you have to pay taxes for not providing health insurance to these people?" or anything along those lines) - but, of course, I forgot that I'm a law student and that's not the lens through which they are viewing this technology. Faced with a room of (mostly) lawyers, these questions will obviously come more the fore than they were there, but I suspect that the considerable advantages and potential of this type of work will dominate the discussion.

:Reuben: I wonder how feasible it is to actually make any real money as a mechanical turk. All of the tasks I tried took me at least a few minutes to read the instructions and then a little bit of time to actually perform the task. I suppose if someone did the same repetitive task over and over it would cut down on the amount of downtime and you could more quickly make some money, but at $.02 a task (which seems to be a going rate), even if you spent as little as 30 seconds on each HIT, it works out to $2.40 an hour. You need to pay about $.07 a task to add to the basic minimum wage. I see how the employers/taskmasters benefit, but aside from the novelty, I don't see any real benefit for the turkers. I'd love to hear from Lukas what the average worker makes doing CrowdFlower tasks.

Juan:

By doing quality control and tracking the quality history of workers, Crowdflower moves one step closer to a real employer. How will it and other human computing websites deal with labor law issues, such as employment relationship, jurisdiction conflict, non-compete agreement, anti-discrimination, disability, leave time, wage and hour requirements, and etc. Also, building up workers' career path, balancing between monitoring and privacy intrusion, disclosing information for workers to evaluate the moral value and giving them the opportunity to opt out, shall be new problems in the cyberspace. Besides, this paid work on-line may have an impact on those contributions without payments. How will we address this issue to make sure people will have incentives to embark on free works.

Another thing I want to hear is whether UHC will develop verticals like the traditional industries. How will it develop those verticals not suitable for on-line outsourcing per its nature?

Sheel: The 'quality history of workers' that Juan alluded to is particularly interesting to me. Crowdflower seems to integrate the 'reputation' of workers in ways that Mechanical Turk doesn't do for its HITs. I'd like to hear Lukas's thoughts on this mechanism---how easy is it for users who have a low reputation to just start all over, taking the good (long history with website) away from the bad (similar to the online reputation possibilities that JZ mentioned in his book)? Does CrowdFlower only track user names in this manner? Also, would Crowdflower ever consider having tasks cost a higher amount for the vendor with the stipulation that only those with a certain reputation will be able to perform them?

My prediction is that the reputation system will be naturally brought about in conversation when Lukas is describing his company as his 'competitive advantage'. He will probably say that there isn't a need to have tasks cost a higher amount for the services of those with a good reputation (if the question is posed) because the service is inherently reliable as it can recognize spammers from truly competent workers.

Sharona: I agree with Franny and Ramesh - I think the speakers will generally focus more on the positive contributions these types of sites can offer - the innovation from crowd sourcing, the efficiency, the specialization - and less concern over the legal issues. One thing I would like to hear is whether they think these tasks will continue to be performed by US residents, or how quickly they will also be outsourced to English speaking (or non-English speaking) people across the world looking for menial labor especially. Another thing to consider is how or if people could actually make a career out of doing tasks online, or whether it is just something to supplement another job. How will things like health benefits or insurance policies come into play for these kinds of workers?

Yosuke:
I agree with the majority opinion, I think guests will not really focus on negative aspects of ubiquitous human computing, such as potential problems of child labors in developing countries, as JZ stated in [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/archives/21#41 this paragraph in his book]. While I guess they will address some amazingly positive aspects of UHC.

Vickie: My guess here is that the "creative types" as Andrew called them are going to be psyched about the creative potential of mechanical turk but less satisfied by the "mundane tasks" that are fueled through the programs (as stated by Aaron Koblin in this video http://vimeo.com/3199933). I believe Koblin and Hartmann are not going to be happy to hear as much about CrowdFlower. Koblin, specifically said in his presentation in this video that he limited the amount of times his contributors could use HITs for his art projects. Unlike CrowdFlower Koblin isn't looking to use Turkers as steadfast blinded workers. He seems very conscious of all the Marxist qualms with the program.

Lien: I also agree that the speakers will try to keep it positive. I'm however interested to hear whether these "human computing companies" ran into law suits already because of legal issues, both in the EU and other continents. Further, did they already got (negative?) reactions from governments, human rights organisations, labor organisations, unions, etc. . Also, if a human computing company would be sued by a turk, does it involve the "requester" (as the "employer"?) in the lawsuit? Speaking to my colleagues in Europe, none of them had really heard of this mechanical turk fenomenon. However, I'm sure that taking into account our very strict labor law that highly advantages employees, and strong influence of labor unions, labor regulations will become a huge issue.

Day 3 Predictions

2010-01-07T00:05:13Z

TylerLacey:

Daniel: My guess is that three issues will be focused:

1- ''labor rights'' â workers in UHC are not attached to a safe work environment, do not receive any fringe benefits, health care, etc., and as of yet there are no unions for Turks and the like. It is quite easy to see homeworkers as nonworkers, and to build [http://www.missconceptions.net/downloads/mturk-pca09-web.pdf digital sweatshops].

2- workersâ new ''expectation of complete anonymity'', that go way beyond privacy demands in regular work environments. Hopefully ethical issues concerning this faceless workforce will be discussed, as well as its potential identity and community feelings (taking into account that, unlike bearers of [http://www.iab.net/about_the_iab/recent_press_releases/press_release_archive/press_release/pr-061009-value formal jobs], UHC workers have shifting numbers, not social security ones). Still on this topic, I expect debates about people willing to perform otherwise shameful tasks, and about the opportunities for children, sick or unfit workers in general to work / be worked.

3- the ''use of UHC for complex, creative tasks'', analyzed in conjunction with a look at the economics of commoditized labor pools. Resulting discussions could examine quality control and its costs, and [http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1357054.1357127 proper design], necessary to unleash [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rQ3Q6Y6Ylqo creativity] and demand more than repetitive, boring tasks from fellow anonymous humans. On that note, it is nice to see that, as scientific experiments with Mechanical Turks [http://experimentalturk.wordpress.com/ become more popular], academic attention is drawn towards the problematic incentives in the platformâs most common setting (low payment + repetitive tasks), which encourages Turks to finish HITs as fast as they can, [http://experimentalphilosophy.typepad.com/experimental_philosophy/2010/01/looking-for-subjects-amazons-mechanical-turk.html at the expense of proper comprehension of the tasks].
: Andrew: Since at least some of our guests tonight are "creatives", I hope to hear some discussion about the relationship between full-time freelancers and websites that crowdsource complex, creative tasks (e.g. Worth1000, [http://www.istockphoto.com/index.php iStockPhoto]). At a Berkman lunch last spring, [http://crowdsourcing.typepad.com/ Jeff Howe] cited a [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1122462 study] that showed only 4% of iStockPhoto sellers derived their primary income from the site. As the site and its peers begin to dominate the market for stock photography, what happens to the livelihoods of those who depended on stock photography for a living? Protectionist worries like this parallel those about outsourcing more generally and are vulnerable to the same counters about progress and efficient markets; I hope some of those arguments play out tonight.

My wish list for the session: discussions of solutions / tools such as [http://turkopticon.differenceengines.com/ Turkopticon], a Firefox application designed to identify and expose âshady employersâ.

Michael: Since two of our guests have used UHC for artistic projects, I expect one or both of them will respond to some [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Cult_of_the_Amateur/ Cult of the Amateur]-style criticisms. I am especially interested to hear whether our speakers think UHC improves the quality of creative/design work that can be accomplished or aggregated from UHC or whether it represents a possible step backward from looking to established professionals for this kind of work. Based on the backgrounds of the speakers, I would imagine Bjoern Hartman and Aaron Koblin will argue that UHC presents the possibility for improvement over the previous paradigm of established professionals. I imagine one or more of the speakers may believe that UHC doesn't really represent a change in quality of such higher level work, but just a difference in kind.

I don't know if any of our guests plan on discussing this topic, but I would be especially interested to hear their perspectives on UHC's effect on the morality of work done. Anonymity on the internet can sometimes remove users' filters of social convention and politeness. So UHC might make it easier for users of Mechanical Turk or CrowdFlower to do work (either voluntarily or unknowingly) that would be morally dubious. There also seems to be a lot of noise in the Mechanical Turk system especially -- a lot of scams rather than true HIT tasks. A possible solution would be to use the existing Mechanical Turk or CrowdFlower functionality for users to rank the morality of the various tasks and provide marginally greater pay or benefits for tasks with higher moral/utility rankings. But I would be interested to hear to what extent our guests think this is a problem.

Ramesh: I predict that the founders of human computing websites will be more focused on the technology and potential of the websites and may have a blind spot for the legal issues that may be raised by UHC (applicability of minimum wage and other laws) while as law students, we may naturally focus on the legal issues implicated.

: Tyler: I agree that Lukas is obviously very excited about the technology and the potential of his website and similar websites. However, I believe that the "blind spot" that Ramesh predicts will be more of a "worrisome spot". I think Lukas will be extremely worried about the legal implications concerning products in his space. I think a lot of this worried is justified since it is likely unsettled or unclear law, and it I think Lukas may be kept up at night by the potential for new or clarified .aw to derail his project. I suspect that Lukas will have attempted a risk analysis of his business plan with respect to legal risks, but have had great difficulty because of the challenges associated with assigning probabilities and magnitudes to the risks that he faces.

Alternatively, perhaps the founders of UHC websites will see them simply as a continuation of current trends, especially the increasing numbers of contractors in the labor force of large companies and governments and the outsourcing of call-center (and increasingly higher-skilled) jobs overseas. Does UHC present any problems that are different from the current trends? What role can employment and labor law play in a world where increasing numbers of workers are "independent contractors" or even Mechanical Turks? Will technology re-enact Lochner?

Franny:
Given the guest list, I diplomatically disagree with Daniel (and agree with Ramesh) and would expect these guests to address the positive potential and advantages of human computing applications into business, arts and culture, as well as the benefits available through this new type of labour force with built-in autonomy. As libertarian as I may be in my views, I agree with Daniel that there is a real possibility that UHC can develop into a last resort for unskilled workers to earn income in order to survive. I just don't think that the negative aspects will be the focus of today's session.

I would also be interested to hear our guests' thoughts on whether UHC can be applied to tasks in which sensitive information is involved, and if so, how could private content be protected?

:Jason: Totally agree with Franny here. I was at first somewhat surprised that in the talk that Lukas gave at TechCruch 50 there was zero discussion of any of the legal aspects of this (no one asked, "Um, do you have to withhold taxes from the workers?" or "What if it turned out that someone was a child?" or "Won't your business model be ruined if it turns out you have to pay taxes for not providing health insurance to these people?" or anything along those lines) - but, of course, I forgot that I'm a law student and that's not the lens through which they are viewing this technology. Faced with a room of (mostly) lawyers, these questions will obviously come more the fore than they were there, but I suspect that the considerable advantages and potential of this type of work will dominate the discussion.

:Reuben: I wonder how feasible it is to actually make any real money as a mechanical turk. All of the tasks I tried took me at least a few minutes to read the instructions and then a little bit of time to actually perform the task. I suppose if someone did the same repetitive task over and over it would cut down on the amount of downtime and you could more quickly make some money, but at $.02 a task (which seems to be a going rate), even if you spent as little as 30 seconds on each HIT, it works out to $2.40 an hour. You need to pay about $.07 a task to add to the basic minimum wage. I see how the employers/taskmasters benefit, but aside from the novelty, I don't see any real benefit for the turkers. I'd love to hear from Lukas what the average worker makes doing CrowdFlower tasks.

Juan:

By doing quality control and tracking the quality history of workers, Crowdflower moves one step closer to a real employer. How will it and other human computing websites deal with labor law issues, such as employment relationship, jurisdiction conflict, non-compete agreement, anti-discrimination, disability, leave time, wage and hour requirements, and etc. Also, building up workers' career path, balancing between monitoring and privacy intrusion, disclosing information for workers to evaluate the moral value and giving them the opportunity to opt out, shall be new problems in the cyberspace. Besides, this paid work on-line may have an impact on those contributions without payments. How will we address this issue to make sure people will have incentives to embark on free works.

Another thing I want to hear is whether UHC will develop verticals like the traditional industries. How will it develop those verticals not suitable for on-line outsourcing per its nature?

Sheel: The 'quality history of workers' that Juan alluded to is particularly interesting to me. Crowdflower seems to integrate the 'reputation' of workers in ways that Mechanical Turk doesn't do for its HITs. I'd like to hear Lukas's thoughts on this mechanism---how easy is it for users who have a low reputation to just start all over, taking the good (long history with website) away from the bad (similar to the online reputation possibilities that JZ mentioned in his book)? Does CrowdFlower only track user names in this manner? Also, would Crowdflower ever consider having tasks cost a higher amount for the vendor with the stipulation that only those with a certain reputation will be able to perform them?

My prediction is that the reputation system will be naturally brought about in conversation when Lukas is describing his company as his 'competitive advantage'. He will probably say that there isn't a need to have tasks cost a higher amount for the services of those with a good reputation (if the question is posed) because the service is inherently reliable as it can recognize spammers from truly competent workers.

Sharona: I agree with Franny and Ramesh - I think the speakers will generally focus more on the positive contributions these types of sites can offer - the innovation from crowd sourcing, the efficiency, the specialization - and less concern over the legal issues. One thing I would like to hear is whether they think these tasks will continue to be performed by US residents, or how quickly they will also be outsourced to English speaking (or non-English speaking) people across the world looking for menial labor especially. Another thing to consider is how or if people could actually make a career out of doing tasks online, or whether it is just something to supplement another job. How will things like health benefits or insurance policies come into play for these kinds of workers?

Yosuke:
I agree with the majority opinion, I think guests will not really focus on negative aspects of ubiquitous human computing, such as potential problems of child labors in developing countries, as JZ stated in [http://yupnet.org/zittrain/archives/21#41 this paragraph in his book]. While I guess they will address some amazingly positive aspects of UHC.

Vickie: My guess here is that the "creative types" as Andrew called them are going to be psyched about the creative potential of mechanical turk but less satisfied by the "mundane tasks" that are fueled through the programs (as stated by Aaron Koblin in this video http://vimeo.com/3199933). I believe Koblin and Hartmann are not going to be happy to hear as much about CrowdFlower. Koblin, specifically said in his presentation in this video that he limited the amount of times his contributors could use HITs for his art projects. Unlike CrowdFlower Koblin isn't looking to use Turkers as steadfast blinded workers. He seems very conscious of all the Marxist qualms with the program.

Lien: I also agree that the speakers will try to keep it positive. I'm however interested to hear whether these "human computing companies" ran into law suits already because of legal issues, both in the EU and other continents. Further, did they already got (negative?) reactions from governments, human rights organisations, labor organisations, unions, etc. . Also, if a human computing company would be sued by a turk, does it involve the "requester" (as the "employer"?) in the lawsuit? Speaking to my colleagues in Europe, none of them had really heard of this mechanical turk fenomenon. However, I'm sure that taking into account our very strict labor law that highly advantages employees, and strong influence of labor unions, labor regulations will become a huge issue.

Day 2 Thoughts

2010-01-06T21:28:19Z

TylerLacey: /* Cybersecurity */

== Cybersecurity ==

Daniel: the idea of a "digital driver's license" has been around for [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrpajcAgR1E some time now]. Effective and simple [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_signature digital signature] schemes, outside corporate or governmental control, sound much more promising to me.

Jason: This was a great discussion. To borrow a taxonomy from the [http://consc.net/papers/facing.html philosophy of mind], I particularly liked that we were trying to identify the "hard" problems and the "easy" problems of cybersecurity - even if we didn't always agree about what they are. In theory, though, we might identify a class of easy problems because they seem to have incremental solutions. If your drone transmissions are getting intercepted, use encryption! If you're worried about data loss, generate lots of backups to the cloud or to a mesh network! If you're worried about your credit card being stolen when you buy on Amazon, how about a government-generated user ID system? Or (somewhat more controversially), if your Air Traffic Control system is vulnerable, spend some money and update it - maybe making it more appliancized, maybe adding more points of human control.

But that still leaves the hard problems that seem to need quantum solutions. How can we solve the attribution problem when the global network was fundamentally designed to be pretty anonymous? How do we rectify the fact that the Internet carries both regular civilian communications and government transmissions? And how can we guarantee that hardware is secure when the only way to verify that it was built to spec is to take it apart? I'm looking forward to talking more about both kinds of problems, and both kinds of solutions.

: Tyler: While I agree that it is a serious problem when we can't trust our hardware, I thought it was also a good point brought up in class that there is no reason why we should trust the software that runs on top of the hardware either. Is it possible to write software that we can trust even if we know or assume that it is running on malicious hardware? Are there any out of the box techniques that would allow us to use untrusted software running on untrusted hardware but still have some degree of security?

Chuck: First of all, my thanks to Prof. Zittrain and to all of you for allowing me to participate (including on your wiki). I hope what I offered was helpful and perhaps even thought-provoking. Second, here are some of the links I mentioned for more on the identity/security issues: http://www.microsoft.com/endtoendtrust and in particular the white paper under the "vision" link. For those inclined for a geekier dive, there is Kim Cameron's excellent blog at http://www.identityblog.com/. Finally, I'd also note our blog post on one of our big projects, the US-China Internet Industry Forum and Craig Mundie's remarks in particular, which touched on these cybersecurity issues in that context. http://bit.ly/8BpJfe

== GNI ==

Reuben: I think we should all congratulate ourselves on our prognostication skills. A lot of our predictions were right on the money. After reviewing my notes, I came away with a few main points. It seems the GNI has had two main benefits for those involved. First, it has helped companies establish processes for how they will handle sticky situations that arise in fields of free expression and privacy where previously those concerns went unrepresented or were dealt with an ad hoc scramble. Secondly, GNI has facilitated relationships between companies and human rights organizations that allow the two sides to work together collaboratively to map out strategies and get more effective results.

While the panelists recognized the effectiveness of the GNI in at least certain situations, I was a bit surprised by the degree to which at least some participants seemed to welcome government involvement in order to force more attention on the activities of smaller companies who don't stand out the same way a Microsoft, Google, Yahoo, or CISCO might.

Jason: I think that the discussion took a bit of steam out of the "Difficult" part of the "Difficult Problems" equation - at least with regard to why Cisco is not participating in GNI and how they make decisions that implicate human rights issues. Mark's explanation of Cisco's position was exceedingly compelling: to my mind, he left little doubt that they really do have a different sort of impact on human rights than companies higher up in the stack; that they face a vastly different competitive landscape and client base than other ICT companies; and that they have well-developed standards and principles going forward. From where I sit, they would be completely crazy to join the GNI - it'd be all potential downside with no upside that I can tell, for either the company or for human rights. (Sadly, Cisco did not pay me to say all that, even if I just completely toed the company line.)

Chuck: I am also impressed (but not surprised) by your prognostication skills. I'd only add that, in addition to the two points Reuben notes above, GNI has generated a systematic way for companies to make publically credible the steps they take. This, I think, is where companies not in GNI are missing out. When there are these cases (as Mark noted) of public condemnation of companies - which can at times generate more heat than light - it is very helpful to be able to point to the process that GNI creates and demonstrate that your company not only has standards and principles but that these are being followed in practice. I also think GNI is very aware that different business sectors have different needs. Microsoft, like Cisco, sells products and services to governments (servers are in a somewhat similar position to routers as part of network infrastructure) and we stand to benefit from guidance in those areas. Related to that, and on the point about government involvement, I'd also note that the GNI principles are applicable across a company's operations, including in the US, and in that respect it's important that governments address their own practices as well as look for constructive steps to help advance user trust in other markets. I hope that came across in the class, but if not I wanted to note it here too. Thanks again.

Day 1 Thoughts

2010-01-06T21:18:53Z

TylerLacey:

Tyler: I thought JZ's point about "half-assed" censorship was quite interesting. For example, I like the idea that Google created google.cn, while retaining an easy way for people in China to use a Chinese-language, uncensored google.com instead, as a way of convincing the Chinese government that it had taken steps to censor content that it had been ordered to censor but without actually preventing access to anything. A similar example of Microsoft censoring the titles of blogs but not their content was also given that I found interesting. I wonder if there are other, more subtle, behaviors that have been built into products that allow for the appearance of censorship without actually fully implementing the censorship?
: Jason: But notice that how effective this all is depends on what you think about how powerfully the "Principle of Bovinity" operates (amazingly, there appears to be no Wikipedia article on this topic - someone get on that! - but you can check out [http://www.cato-unbound.org/2009/05/11/lawrence-lessig/continuing-the-work-of-code/ this Lessig article] and scroll down to the second block quote). By this, I mean that if 99% of all users use Baidu or Google.cn without checking Google.com, isn't that more than enough control for the whole censorship project to accomplish its goal? Isn't "good enough" censorship really all the government is looking for? Those who believe in the strong operation of this principle might be highly skeptical of "work-around" solutions, even if they seem really easy to people like us. Here's Lessig in ''Code'' (quoted in that Cato link): "I think it is as likely that the majority of people would resist these small but efficient regulators of the Net as it is that cows would resist wire fences. This is who we are, and this is why these regulations work."

Juan: I agree. Google.com is indeed accessible in China via the home page of Google.cn. However, the question is how many people have knowledge of this small icon and really choose to click it to see the difference. Especially Google China does not promote Google.com in its marketing event, part of because Google China is a separate entity and its main task is to drive the traffic of Google.cn instead of Google.com. Also, one of the reason why Google.com is accessible in China is Chinese government have not noticed it. If there is enough awareness among Chinese people, government will know it too and I doubt if this service will be available then. In fact, during the anniversary of Tiananmen Square protest, Google.com is not accessible to Chinese people for several day.

Also interesting is the distinction between the two types of countries that may want to filter online content. The first type, like Saudi Arabia, can filter content as it comes into the country because its network topology is small and simple enough that each incoming server can be configured to support the government-ordered censorship. The second type, like China, has too large of a network to rely on an approach that is working in Saudi Arabia and must rely more heavily on the content servers/providers doing the filtering themselves. Are there steps, such as encrypting URLs to make keyword filtering more difficult, that could make filtering more difficult in either of the types of countries?

Reuben: I think a good point to remember for this class is that there are approaches to solving problems other than law, be it a technical solution, an incentives based solution, or other. JZ is right that lawyers and law students can fall into the trap of just saying "There oughtta be a law!" and minimizing the difficulty of actually getting a law passed.
: Tyler: I agree that this is a good point to keep in mind. I expect that as we get into our groups and start trying to make some progress on the difficult issues that we have been discussing the most creative and potentially effective solutions will combine regulatory and technical approaches. For example, regulation needs to be less powerful, and therefore in theory easier to pass, if innovative technology can start altering the incentives in the right direction at the same time.

Main Page

2010-01-06T03:49:33Z

TylerLacey: /* WEEK THREE: SOLUTIONS */

Welcome to Difficult Problems in Cyberlaw, a January course taught by Professor Jonathan Zittrain and Elizabeth Stark, co-hosted by Stanford Law School and Harvard Law School.

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], 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]]
*[[Ubiquitous Human Computing]]
*[[Future of Wikipedia]]
*[[Cybersecurity]]

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]]

==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

''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 Lukass' 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
*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'':
*Stuart 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]
*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

''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]

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

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

----

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

'''FIELD TRIP: ''BONUS'':''' Facebook 12:30-2:00pm

'''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'':
*Glenn Brown, Google
*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://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).

''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

''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
:Group 1 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

==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''''': Reputation Defender, 1pm

'''CLASS''': 5:15-7:15pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 5:45pm
:Group 2 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

----

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

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 7:00pm
:Group 3 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

----

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

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 11:40am
:Group 4 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Craig Newmark
*Edward Wes

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

----

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

'''FINAL PROJECTS DUE'''

Main Page

2010-01-06T03:48:44Z

TylerLacey:

Welcome to Difficult Problems in Cyberlaw, a January course taught by Professor Jonathan Zittrain and Elizabeth Stark, co-hosted by Stanford Law School and Harvard Law School.

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], 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]]
*[[Ubiquitous Human Computing]]
*[[Future of Wikipedia]]
*[[Cybersecurity]]

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]]

==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

''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 Lukass' 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
*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'':
*Stuart 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]
*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

''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]

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

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

----

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

'''FIELD TRIP: ''BONUS'':''' Facebook 12:30-2:00pm

'''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'':
*Glenn Brown, Google
*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://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).

''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

''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
:Group 1 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

==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''''': Reputation Defender, 1pm

'''CLASS''': 5:15-7:15pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 5:45pm
:Group 2 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

----

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

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B
:Group 3 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

----

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

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B, guests to begin arriving at 11:40am
:Group 4 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Craig Newmark
*Edward Wes

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

----

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

'''FINAL PROJECTS DUE'''

Day 1 Thoughts

2010-01-05T19:45:45Z

TylerLacey:

Main Page

2010-01-05T19:43:32Z

TylerLacey: /* WEEK TWO: CROSS-CUTTING THEMES */

Welcome to Difficult Problems in Cyberlaw, a January course taught by Professor Jonathan Zittrain and Elizabeth Stark, co-hosted by Stanford Law School and Harvard Law School.

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], 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]]
*[[Ubiquitous Human Computing]]
*[[Future of Wikipedia]]
*[[Cybersecurity]]

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]]

==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
: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

''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 Lukass' 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
: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
*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 ['''NOTE CLASS TIME''']
: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'':
*Stuart West, Wikimedia Foundation Board Member
*Mike Godwin, Wikimedia General Counsel
*Phoebe Ayers, Wikimedia

''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
: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]
*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
: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

''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]

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

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

----

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

'''FIELD TRIP: ''BONUS'':''' Facebook 12:30-2:00pm

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B
: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'':
*Glenn Brown, Google
*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://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).

''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
: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

''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 '''NOTE CLASS TIME'''
:Group 1 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

==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''''': Reputation Defender, 1pm

'''CLASS''': 5:15-7:15pm SLS Room 280B
:Group 2 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

----

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

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B
:Group 3 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

----

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

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B
:Group 4 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Craig Newmark
*Edward Wes

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

----

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

'''FINAL PROJECTS DUE'''

Main Page

2010-01-05T19:42:39Z

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

Welcome to Difficult Problems in Cyberlaw, a January course taught by Professor Jonathan Zittrain and Elizabeth Stark, co-hosted by Stanford Law School and Harvard Law School.

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], 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]]
*[[Ubiquitous Human Computing]]
*[[Future of Wikipedia]]
*[[Cybersecurity]]

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]]

==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
: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

''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 Lukass' 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
: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
*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 ['''NOTE CLASS TIME''']
: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'':
*Stuart West, Wikimedia Foundation Board Member
*Mike Godwin, Wikimedia General Counsel
*Phoebe Ayers, Wikimedia

''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
: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]
*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]].

----

<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
: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

''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]

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

----

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

'''FIELD TRIP: ''BONUS'':''' Facebook 12:30-2:00pm

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B
: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'':
*Glenn Brown, Google
*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://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).

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

----

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

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B
: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

''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

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

----

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

'''CLASS''': 1:00-3:00pm SLS Room 280B '''NOTE CLASS TIME'''
:Group 1 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

==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''''': Reputation Defender, 1pm

'''CLASS''': 5:15-7:15pm SLS Room 280B
:Group 2 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

----

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

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B
:Group 3 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

----

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

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B
:Group 4 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Craig Newmark
*Edward Wes

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

----

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

'''FINAL PROJECTS DUE'''

Day 1 Thoughts

2010-01-05T19:41:31Z

TylerLacey: New page: Tyler: I thought JZ's point about "half-assed censorship was quite interesting. I like the idea that Google created google.cn, with an easy way for people in China to use a Chinese-languag...

Tyler: I thought JZ's point about "half-assed censorship was quite interesting. I like the idea that Google created google.cn, with an easy way for people in China to use a Chinese-language, uncensored google.com instead, as a way of convincing the Chinese government that it had taken steps to censor content that it had been ordered to but without actually preventing access to anything. A similar example of Microsoft censoring the titles of blogs but not their content was also given. I wonder if there are other, more subtle, behaviors that have been built into products that allow for an appearance of censorship without actually fully implementing the censorship?

Also interesting that the two types of countries that may want to filter online content. The first type, like Saudi Arabia, can filter content as it comes into the country because its network topology is small and simple enough that each incoming server can be configured to support the government-ordered censorship. The second type, like China, has too large of a network to rely on an approach that is working in Saudi Arabia and must rely more heavily on the content servers themselves doing the filtering. Are there steps, such as encrypting URLs to make keyword filtering more difficult, that could make filtering more difficult in either of the types of countries?

Main Page

2010-01-05T19:34:28Z

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

Welcome to Difficult Problems in Cyberlaw, a January course taught by Professor Jonathan Zittrain and Elizabeth Stark, co-hosted by Stanford Law School and Harvard Law School.

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], 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]]
*[[Ubiquitous Human Computing]]
*[[Future of Wikipedia]]
*[[Cybersecurity]]

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]]

==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]].

----

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

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B
: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

''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 Lukass' 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]].

----

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

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B
: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
*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]].

----

<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 ['''NOTE CLASS TIME''']
: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'':
*Stuart West, Wikimedia Foundation Board Member
*Mike Godwin, Wikimedia General Counsel
*Phoebe Ayers, Wikimedia

''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]].

'''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
: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]
*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]].

----

<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
: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

''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]

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

----

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

'''FIELD TRIP: ''BONUS'':''' Facebook 12:30-2:00pm

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B
: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'':
*Glenn Brown, Google
*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://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).

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

----

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

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B
: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

''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

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

----

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

'''CLASS''': 1:00-3:00pm SLS Room 280B '''NOTE CLASS TIME'''
:Group 1 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

==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''''': Reputation Defender, 1pm

'''CLASS''': 5:15-7:15pm SLS Room 280B
:Group 2 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

----

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

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B
:Group 3 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

----

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

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B
:Group 4 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Craig Newmark
*Edward Wes

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

----

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

'''FINAL PROJECTS DUE'''

Main Page

2010-01-05T19:33:54Z

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

Welcome to Difficult Problems in Cyberlaw, a January course taught by Professor Jonathan Zittrain and Elizabeth Stark, co-hosted by Stanford Law School and Harvard Law School.

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], 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]]
*[[Ubiquitous Human Computing]]
*[[Future of Wikipedia]]
*[[Cybersecurity]]

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]]

==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]].

----

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

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B
: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

''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 Lukass' 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]].

----

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

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B
: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
*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]].

----

<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 ['''NOTE CLASS TIME''']
: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'':
*Stuart West, Wikimedia Foundation Board Member
*Mike Godwin, Wikimedia General Counsel
*Phoebe Ayers, Wikimedia

''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]].

'''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
: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]
*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]].

----

<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
: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

''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]

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

----

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

'''FIELD TRIP: ''BONUS'':''' Facebook 12:30-2:00pm

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B
: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'':
*Glenn Brown, Google
*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://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).

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

----

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

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B
: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

''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

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

----

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

'''CLASS''': 1:00-3:00pm SLS Room 280B '''NOTE CLASS TIME'''
:Group 1 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

==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''''': Reputation Defender, 1pm

'''CLASS''': 5:15-7:15pm SLS Room 280B
:Group 2 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

----

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

'''CLASS''': 6:30-8:30pm SLS Room 280B
:Group 3 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

----

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

'''CLASS''': 11:10am-1:10pm SLS Room 280B
:Group 4 Presentation of proposed solution (60 min)
:Discussion of solution's strengths and weaknesses and other approaches to consider

''Guests'':
*Craig Newmark
*Edward Wes

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

----

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

'''FINAL PROJECTS DUE'''

Day 2 Predictions

2010-01-05T19:00:54Z

TylerLacey:

= Mark =

Sheel: Cisco, with its involvement in China's Golden Shield Project and $16 Billion investment (http://www.socialfunds.com/news/article.cgi/2825.html), doesn't want to have to deal with issues of human rights that might diminish ROI. Notable quote from article and 2008 testimony: Chandler said, "Cisco does not customize, or develop specialized or unique filtering capabilities, in order to enable different regimes to block access to information." My guess: Mark Chandler will affirm this statement tomorrow, but the real reason is that following the GNI principles would be a poor business decision and CISCO isn't willing to make any sacrifice.
: Elisabeth: we might push back on the idea that this would be a poor business decision, and solicit Cosson and Hope's opinions. Yahoo and Google have faced real backlash for their actions, and GNI serves as something of a safety net against that backlash. We could also ask Chandler if he can imagine how GNI could be structured such that it would be worthwhile for Cisco to join--it would be interesting to see if what he says matches up with what Cosson says GNI needs to do to recruit new members.
:: Andrew: I doubt Chandler would be cynical (frank?) enough to respond this way, but Cisco may be shielded from the kind of "PR risks" that Yahoo/Google/Microsoft face, since their products and services reside below the content layer and are less intuitively understandable to the general public. Along these lines, I hope to hear some discussion about the sources of contention between stakeholders at different architectural layers. How do differences in the type of actions governments request from these companies translate to materially different policy preferences, given the extreme broadness of the principles at issue?
:: Hector: I agree with Andrew and wonder whether Cisco will go to lengths to emphasize the hardware-side of its products/services. This may be a more palatable version of JZ's "gun's don't kill people" framing: "Look, we provide hardware and the software interfaces that are infinitely customizable." Such an argument works only to the extent that the products/services are general-use (generative?) and the extent that CISCO is '''truly''' removed from any immoral end-use.

Daniel: I believe Chandler will provide his professional - and hopefully personal - account on the role CISCO plays in [facilitating / enabling / providing neutral tools] to allow for "different regimes" to control their nationals' internet experience. Cosson and Hope will probably dedicate more time to in depth discussion of two issues: involvement of industry actors other than the GNI founding members and the types of incentives that are needed for that, including legal alternatives and public exposure of "do some evil" firms. Also, given that we will not have representatives from Google and Yahoo, these companies are likely to figure prominently in the examples of events, actions and concessions to be avoided.

Sanford Lewis: I predict that Mr. Chandler will not discuss in very much depth the extent to which external stakeholder and stockholder pressure has shaped company policy, unless he is prompted by student questions to discuss this.

Lien: The GNI principles are so general and an "implementation / repetition" of international standards. If a certain company (for whatever reason) does not want to join the GNI, this company still has to comply with these standards. To play the devil's advocate, does joining the GNI change anything in reality or is it just a good thing to join because of the company's image and reputation? Furthermore, the concept of the GNI (sort of self- regulation) is a very American concept. European companies are not very familiar with the kind of approach. The GNI might be a good starting point for a company to obey the certain principles. However, the privacy principles are so broadly written, that if a company would obey to these principles, it would still not be comply with European Privacy legislation. Why would a European company then join the initiative and do all the efforts (e.g. audit, ...), knowing that it would still not comply with European legislation?
: Elisabeth: I also wonder how true it is that these are "international" standards, rather than American or American/European standards.

= Dunstan =
Tyler: I believe Dunstan will try and draw a distinction between situations involving two types of countries. The first type is countries with laws in accordance with GNI principles but that are not enforced or poorly enforced. The second type is countries with laws that on their face are violative of GNI principles. I hope Dunstan will discuss strategies that corporations should use for situations that arise involving both types of countries and the different approaches that GNI stakeholders can collectively take to preemptively forestall problems in each of the two types of countries.

= Chuck =

Tyler: I expect Chuck to express frustration that more corporations have not signed up for GNI and identify some specific reasons why he thinks GNI has so far been unable to recruit any additional corporations from the initial roster of three (Yahoo!, Google, Microsoft). I also hope that Chuck discusses what preparations Microsoft has made to allow GNI auditors access the sensitive Microsoft information.

Day 2 Predictions

2010-01-05T18:57:52Z

TylerLacey: /* Dunstan */