Saturday, May 07, 2011

MIRLN --- 17 April – 7 May 2011 (v14.06)

MIRLN --- 17 April - 7 May 2011 (v14.06) --- by Vince Polley and KnowConnect PLLC (supplemented by related Tweets: http://twitter.com/vpolley #mirln)

o Police Use Data Shared by TomTom GPS Users to Set Targeted Speed Traps

o Password Protected? Can a Password Save Your Cell Phone from the Search Incident to Arrest Doctrine?

o Atoms vs. Bits: Your Phone in the Eyes of the Law

o Telling Traces

NEWS | PODCASTS | RESOURCES | DIFFERENT | LOOKING BACK | NOTES

US Police Increasingly Peeping At E-Mail, Instant Messages (TechWorld, 12 April 2011) - Law enforcement organizations are making tens of thousands of requests for private electronic information from companies such as Sprint, Facebook and AOL, but few detailed statistics are available, according to a privacy researcher. Police and other agencies have "enthusiastically embraced" asking for e-mail, instant messages and mobile-phone location data, but there's no U.S. federal law that requires the reporting of requests for stored communications data, wrote Christopher Soghoian, a doctoral candidate at theSchool of Informatics and Computing at Indiana University, in a newly published paper. "Unfortunately, there are no reporting requirements for the modern surveillance methods that make up the majority of law enforcement requests to service providers and telephone companies," Soghoian wrote. "As such, this surveillance largely occurs off the books, with no way for Congress or the general public to know the true scale of such activities." That's in contrast to traditional wiretaps and "pen registers," which record non-content data around a particular communication, such as the number dialed or e-mail address that a communication was sent to. The U.S. Congress mandates that it should receive reports on these requests, which are compiled by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, Soghoian wrote. If law enforcement wants to intercept e-mail or instant messages in real-time, they are required to report it. Since 1997, federal law enforcement has requested real-time intercepts only 67 times, with state law enforcement agents obtaining 54 intercept orders. Soghoian wrote that those low figures may seem counterintuitive given the real-time nature of electronic communications. But all of the communications are stored, he noted. "It is often cheaper and easier to do it after the fact rather than in real-time," Soghoian wrote. Cox Communications, a major U.S. service provider, charges $3,500 for a wiretap and $2,500 for a pen register. Account information, however, costs a mere $40. Soghoian found through his research that law enforcement agencies requested more than 30,000 wiretaps between 1987 and 2009. But the scale of requests for stored communications appears to be much greater. Citing a New York Times story from 2006, Soghoian wrote that AOL was receiving 1,000 requests per month.

top

Google Wi-Fi Judge Asks if Packet Sniffing Is Spying (Wired, 18 April 2011) - The question of whether Google is liable for damages for secretly intercepting data on open Wi-Fi routers across the United States is boiling down to the definition of a "radio communication." That appears to be the legal theory embraced by the Silicon Valley federal judge presiding over nearly a dozen combined lawsuits seeking damages from Google for eavesdropping on open Wi-Fi networks from its Street View mapping cars. The cars had been equipped with Wi-Fi-sniffing hardware to record the names and MAC addresses of routers to improve Google location-specific services. But those cars were also capturing the contents of internet packets that were sent over unencrypted Wi-Fi as they drove by, something the company said was an accidental leftover from testing. While the company quickly admitted that it had made a mistake and temporarily grounded its fleet of mapping vehicles last year, the company was confronted with a number of investigations around the world, as well as class-action lawsuits that were joined in San Jose, California. The lawsuits are being heard by U.S. District Judge James Ware. At the center of the legal flap is whether Google breached the Wiretap Act. The answer is important not only to Google, but to the millions who use open, unencrypted Wi-Fi networks at coffee shops, restaurants or any other business trying to attract customers. Google said it is not illegal to intercept data from unencrypted, or non-password-protected Wi-Fi networks. Plaintiffs' lawyers representing millions of Americans whose internet traffic was sniffed by Google think otherwise, and are seeking unspecified damages. Judge Ware, however, suggested the answer to the far-reaching privacy dilemma lies in an unanswered question. He has asked each side to define "radio communication" (.pdf) as it applies to the Wiretap Act, and wants to know whether home Wi-Fi networks are "radio communications" under the Wiretap Act. In response, Google wrote last week that open Wi-Fi networks are akin to "radio communications" like AM/FM radio, citizens' band and police and fire bands - and are "readily accessible" to the general public. Indeed, packet-sniffing software, such as Wireshark and Firesheep, is easily available online. Hence, because unencrypted Wi-Fi signals travel over the radio spectrum, they are not covered by the Wiretap Act, (.pdf) Google responded.

top

Social Networking, Users, and Reasonable Expectations of Privacy Under the Fourth Amendment (Media Law Prof Blog, 18 April 2011) - Junichi P. Semitsu, University of San Diego School of Law, has published From Facebook to Mug Shot: How the Dearth of Social Networking Privacy Rights Revolutionized Online Government Surveillance in volume 31 of the Pace Law Review (2011). Here is the abstract: "Each month, Facebook's half billion active users disseminate over 30 billion pieces of content. In this complex digital ecosystem, they live a parallel life that, for many, involves more frequent, fulfilling, and compelling communication than any other offline or online forum. But even though Facebook users have privacy options to control who sees what content, this Article concludes that every single one of Facebook's 133 million active users in the United States lack a reasonable expectation of privacy from government surveillance of virtually all of their online activity. 

Based on Facebook's own interpretations of federal privacy laws, a warrant is only necessary to compel disclosure of inbox and outbox messages less than 181 days old. Everything else can be obtained with subpoenas that do not even require reasonable suspicion. Accordingly, over the last six years, government agents have worked the beat by mining the treasure trove of personal and confidential information on Facebook. 

But while Facebook has been justifiably criticized for its weak and shifting privacy rules, this Article demonstrates that even if it adopted the strongest and clearest policies possible, its users would still lack reasonable expectations of privacy under federal law. First, federal courts have failed to properly adapt Fourth Amendment law to the realities of Internet architecture. Since all Facebook content has been knowingly exposed to at least one third party, the Supreme Court's current Fourth Amendment jurisprudence does not clearly stop investigators from being allowed carte blanche to fish through the entire site for incriminating evidence. Second, Congress has failed to meaningfully revise the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (ECPA) for over a quarter century. Even if the ECPA were amended to cover all Facebook content, its lack of a suppression remedy would be one of several things that would keep Facebook a permanent open book. Thus, even when the government lacks reasonable suspicion of criminal activity and the user opts for the strictest privacy controls, Facebook users still cannot expect federal law to stop their private content and communications from being used against them. 

This Article seeks to bring attention to this problem and rectify it. It examines Facebook's architecture, reveals the ways in which government agencies have investigated crimes on social networking sites, and analyzes how courts have interpreted the Fourth Amendment and the ECPA. The Article concludes with an urgent proposal to revise the ECPA and reinterpret Katz before the Facebook generation accepts the Hobson's choice it currently faces: either live life off the grid or accept that using modern communications technologies means the possibility of unwarranted government surveillance."

top

Righthaven Reeling: Secret Doc Could Doom a Copyright Troll (ArsTechnica, 18 April 2011) - If a company's entire business model is predicated on bringing copyright infringement lawsuits, you might expect that company to make sure it actually has the right to sue first. But a newly unsealed court document casts some doubt on Righthaven's rights; defense attorneys are already using the new document to say that Righthaven cases are a "sham" and are "invalid." And Righthaven's moves to keep this document secret have angered the judge in the case, who ripped into Righthaven in spectacular fashion last Thursday as he unsealed the document. In just over a year, Righthaven has sued several hundred people for copyright infringement over newspaper articles and photographs. The company's epic run of copyright trollery has produced some preposterous cases-suing an Ars Technica writer, suing a paper's own sources for an article, suing nonprofits without warning or takedown requests-and judges have ruled against Righthaven several times on fair use grounds. Still, leaving aside questions of ethics and tactics, it was widely assumed that Righthaven actually had the standing to sue. After Righthaven's Strategic Alliance Agreement was unsealed in a Nevada federal court last week, however, defense attorneys have savaged the company, saying that its copyrights are a "sham" and are "invalid." Lawyers in several different cases have already moved for dismissals and fees. The agreement was revealed (late) during discovery in a Righthaven lawsuit against Democratic Underground. Righthaven is currently attempting to dismiss the suit, but Democratic Underground lawyers won't let them, asking instead for the court to first rule on the issue of fair use in the case. Righthaven has repeatedly tried to dismiss lawsuits that weren't going well rather than let them come to judgment. The agreement describes a 50/50 revenue split between Righthaven and Stephens Media. In addition, the agreement appears to give Righthaven only the right to sue over the story or photograph at issue, but not to exploit it in any other way. Past court cases have ruled that companies cannot bring copyright suits unless they control one of the "exclusive rights" enumerated in the Copyright Acts, rights including copying, distribution, public performance, etc. The "right to sue" is not among them. "Righthaven has been conveyed no rights in the work at issue other than the right to sue for infringement," argue Democratic Underground's lawyers, "a fact that renders the assignment to Righthaven invalid."

top

Steven Bradbury on Cybersecurity (Lawfare, 18 April 2011) - The Harvard National Security Journal has just posted a very interesting essay by Steven Bradbury entitled The Developing Legal Framework for Defensive and Offensive Cyber Operations . (Steve was my successor in running the Office of Legal Counsel for the last four and a half years of the Bush administration.) Steve says he is "not a noted expert on cybersecurity," but then adds that he "did have occasion to advise on cybersecurity issues" while in OLC. As the head of OLC he wrote an important opinion on the legality of the EINSTEIN 2.0 intrusion detection system for government networks (a decision affirmed and elaborated upon by my colleague David Barron when he was running OLC for the Obama administration.) Part of Steve's essay tracks his OLC opinion in explaining why EINSTEIN 2.0 is consistent with the Fourth Amendment and relevant statutes. But Steve goes beyond that opinion and addresses several further issues. He emphasizes that he is "speaking only for [himself] - not for my law firm and not for any current or former client." Nonetheless, the issues he addresses, and the tentative answers he gives, shed more light on the cybersecurity legal issues facing the government, and how the government might be thinking about them, than any source I know. For example, Steve argues that EINSTEIN 2.0 can be expanded to private entities like Defense contractors. "It should be pretty straightforward to do so," he maintains, "provided the network is owned or operated by a single entity or group of entities and is set up like an intranet with a limited set of authorized users, and provided the operator can agree by contract or can be required by regulation to use log-on banners and user agreements like those employed by the federal agencies participating in EINSTEIN." But Steve is skeptical that EINSTEIN 2.0 can be extended to "the public Internet itself." More interesting than Steve's comments on EINSTEIN 2.0 are what he says about offensive cyber operations, including covert cyber-operations, the Title 10 v. 50 debate as it applies to cyber, customary law limitations on cyber operations, and legal issues related to "using offensive cyber capabilities to block or disrupt the servers overseas where WikiLeaks is holding the sensitive U.S. information." The essay is a must-read for those interested in legal issues related to cybersecurity.

top

Best Practices for Keeping Your Home Network Secure (NSA, April 2011) - The cyber threat is no longer limited to your office network and work persona. Adversaries realize that targets are typically more vulnerable when operating from their home network

since there is less rigor associated with the protection, monitoring, and maintenance of most home networks. Home users need to maintain a basic level of network defense and hygiene for both themselves and their family members when accessing the Internet. [Editor: contains common-sense recommendations.]

top

ACLU: Michigan Cops Stealing Drivers' Phone Data (CNET, 19 April 2011) - The Michigan State Police have started using handheld machines called "extraction devices" to download personal information from motorists they pull over, even if they're not suspected of any crime. Naturally, the ACLU has a problem with this. The devices, sold by a company called Cellebrite, can download text messages, photos, video, and even GPS data from most brands of cell phones. The handheld machines have various interfaces to work with different models and can even bypass security passwords and access some information. The problem as the ACLU sees it, is that accessing a citizen's private phone information when there's no probable cause creates a violation of the Constitution's 4th Amendment, which protects us against unreasonable searches and seizures. To that end, it's petitioning the MSP to turn over information about its use of the devices under the Freedom of Information Act. The MSP said it's happy to comply, that is, if the ACLU provides them with a processing fee in excess of $500,000. That's more than $100,000 for each of the five devices the MSP says it has in use.

top

- and -

Police Use Data Shared by TomTom GPS Users to Set Targeted Speed Traps (Law.com, 3 May 2011) - Companies that ask you to allow them to collect information about your use of their product may have good intentions, but sometimes purchasers of that information may have other plans. For example, when you sign up for the TomTom GPS device service, the company asks you if it is OK if they collect "travel time information," and most users agree to this. TomTom says it uses this information to "create high quality traffic information and to route you around traffic jams and get you to your destination as quickly and safely as possible." So far, so good, right? TomTom also sometimes makes this information available to local governments and authorities so that authorities can "better understand where congestion takes place, where to build new roads and how to make roads safer." Again, no problem. Last week, however, TomTom's CEO Harold Goddijn wrote a letter to the company's customers letting them know that, in at least some areas, local police have used the data in an "unforeseen" way that may make TomTom users wish they had never agreed to share information: to place speed cameras where the shared TomTom data shows average speed is higher than the legally allowed speed limit. In his letter, Goddijn writes that TomTom "fully understands some of customers do not like this and we will amend the licensing conditions to stop this type of usage in near future." PC Mag reports that TomTom started selling traffic data to governments earlier this year as a way to supplement weak earnings. After a Dutch newspaper reported that Dutch police were using the data to target speed traps, however, customers became upset, prompting Goddijn's letter.

top

- and -

Password Protected? Can a Password Save Your Cell Phone from the Search Incident to Arrest Doctrine? (SSRN, Adam Gershowitz, 31 August 2010) - Abstract: "Over the last few years, dozens of courts have authorized police to conduct warrantless searches of cell phones when arresting individuals. Under the so-called search incident to arrest doctrine, police are free to search text messages, call histories, photos, voicemails, and a host of other data if they arrest an individual and remove a cell phone from his pocket. Given that courts have offered little protection against cell phone searches, this article explores whether individuals can protect themselves by password protecting their phones. The article concludes, unfortunately, that password protecting a cell phone offers minimal legal protection. In conducting a search incident to arrest, police may attempt to hack or bypass a password. Because cell phones are often found in arrestees' pockets, police may take the phones to the police station where computer savvy officers will have the time and technology to unlock the phone's contents. And if police are themselves unable to decipher the password, they may request or even demand that an arrestee turn over his password without any significant risk of the evidence on the phone being suppressed under the Miranda doctrine or as a Fifth Amendment violation. In short, while password protecting a cell phone may make it more challenging for police to find evidence, the password itself offers very little legal protection. Accordingly, legislative or judicial action is needed to narrow the search incident to arrest doctrine with respect to cell phones."

top

iPhones Secretly Track Their Users' Locations (CNN, 20 April 2011) - Apple devices appear to be tracking their owners' locations and storing data about people's whereabouts without their knowledge, according to a report posted Wednesday on a site called iPhone Tracker. The unauthorized surveillance started in June 2010, when the latest version of Apple's mobile operating system was released, according to two researchers who say they discovered a hidden tracking file and posted it out of concern for users. Apple has not responded to the allegations. The researchers have posted a program online that will let any iPhone user see a map of his or her location over time, going back to June, when iOS 4.0 was released. The program's developers, listed as Alasdair Allan and Pete Warden, say this data is stored on a person's iPhone or 3G-enabled iPad and on computers that are synced with those devices. There's no evidence, they say, that the data is also transmitted to Apple as it's collected. "Cell phone providers collect similar data almost inevitably as part of their operations, but it's kept behind their firewall. It normally requires a court order to gain access to it, whereas this is available to anyone who can get their hands on your phone or computer," they write. [Editor: Wow! I ran the referenced program - on my Macintosh it pulled the phone's GPS data from a backup file on the laptop, and then graphed it onto a map, which you can zoom in, temporally and/or positionally; somehow it shows me in Canada, where I know my phone has not been. Related NYT story here:http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/21/business/21data.html?_r=1 Apple's official Q&A on April 27 doesn't seem to explain why they've associated date/time with location. On May 4, Apple released a software update to reduce the location cache size, disable it when "Location Services" are off, and to stop backing up the cache to connected computers. See also Bought Your Child An iPhone? Stalk Them With Footprints (TechCrunch, 5 May 2011)]

top

- and -

Atoms vs. Bits: Your Phone in the Eyes of the Law (The Atlantic, 26 April 2011) - On the last Friday in November in 2007, James Nix was riding shotgun in a car driving through the streets of Albany, Oregon, a freeway passthrough town between Salem and Eugene. Nix had several outstanding warrants for possession of a controlled substance, endangering the welfare of a minor and violating his parole on an earlier drug conviction. Earlier that day, an Albany police officer saw Nix take a call on his cell and then immediately after sell drugs to someone in classic hand-to-hand, money for drugs, switch. So, he'd tipped off another officer by the name of Jones to watch for the car. After investigating Nix for several weeks, they were going to make an arrest. Officer Jones pulled Nix's friend over in a lawful traffic stop and Nix bolted. He didn't get far before being apprehended, though, and Jones patted him down, finding 22 clear plastic baggies often associated with drug dealing, $370 in cash and a cellphone. Jones said while he counted the money, the phone rang "continually." With enough evidence to make an arrest for selling drugs, Jones called Nix's investigators, who told him to deliver the phone to the Albany PD's mobile phone expert. Without a warrant, the forensics analyst searched the entire contents of the phone and "found text messages that he believed were drug related and images 'consistent with methamphetamine.'" They were subsequently used against Nix in a trial which found him guilty. Ask yourself: Do you think it was OK for the police to search the contents of Nix's phone without a warrant? It's a complicated issue. We have rules against warrantless searches for good reason. On the other hand, law enforcement doesn't want to lose the ability to do everything it can to catch people they think are criminals. Here's the legal issue at the heart of the case, which will be argued before the Oregon Supreme Court next week. We all know that the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution protects everyone from "unreasonable" search and seizure. Since the 18th century, though, many cases have touched on how to define what is and is not unreasonable. Under English common law, it was generally considered reasonable for the police to search you while you were being arrested. It became known as the "search incident to arrest exception" and has been around in American law for well over 100 years. The big change to the exception came in the 1969 case Chimel vs. California, which laid out a key exception to the exception. Namely, if a suspect was arrested in his home, the police couldn't search his whole house. As Wikipedia summarizes it, the police could only search, "the area within the immediate control of the suspect," or as James Nix's attorney Bronson James more colorfully put it, there is a "wingspan rule." If you can reach it, the cops can search it.

top

- and -

Telling Traces (IT Conversations podcast by Deborah Estrin, 30 March 2011) - As an expert in localization and sensory networks Deborah Estrin explains what can be learned and shared in the richness of digital traces of activity. She talks about GIS potential for improving commute patterns as well as calculating one's carbon footprint. The ability to corral data and mash up with maps and analytics empowered high school students to accurately estimate and share their carbon impact. Tracing of individual activity does not just involve automated traces but also experience sampling. A patient's struggle with diabetes and hypertension can yield opportunities to help patients having difficulty with side effects of medications. Self analytics may be prescribed to monitor effects or drug interactions in real-time. This has the potential to prevent a day from being interrupted or lost entirely because of medication challenges. Estrin contends that the capacity of our pretransactional information to be as private or as public we care top make it has drawbacks that users should be circumspect about. If recordable, thoughts, feelings and their biological indicators, probably should not be stored on a cell phone. Use of secure cloud storage could be effective in managing personal information in educated ways and using best practices.

top

E-Discovery Audio Search (KM World, 20 April 2011) - ZyLAB has unveiled its Audio Search Bundle, a desktop software product engineered to identify relevant audio clips from multimedia files and from business tools such as fixed-line telephone, VOIP, mobile and specialist platforms such as Skype or MSN Live. It is designed for technical and non-technical users involved in legal disputes, forensics, law enforcement and lawful data interception to search, review and analyze audio data with the same ease as more traditional forms of electronically stored information (ESI). ZyLAB says Audio Search Bundle transforms audio recordings into a phonetic representation of the way in which words are pronounced, so that investigators can search for dictionary terms as well as proper names, company names or brands without the need to "re-ingest" the data.

top

Another "Round" of Data Insecurity (Steptoe's E-Commerce Law Week, 21 April 2011) - The Massachusetts Attorney General has reached a settlement with the Briar Group LLC, the owner of bars and restaurants in the Boston area, over a data breach in 2009 that exposed over 120,000 debit and credit card accounts of customers. The AG alleged that Briar had engaged in "unfair and deceptive practices" under Massachusetts law by accepting customers' payment cards without taking reasonable steps to secure the customers' personal information. Notably, the breach occurred before the effective date of Massachusetts' data security regulations. But, just as the FTC has done at the federal level, the Massachusetts AG determined that the lack of what she considered reasonable security measures constituted a violation of the law. In addition to paying a civil fine of $110,000, Briar must comply with the Massachusetts data security regulations and the Payment Card Industry Data Security Standards - which, of course, it is required to do, anyway.

top

Courtroom Social Media Lab Readies for May 2 Launch (Ambrogi, 22 April 2011) - An innovative experiment that will turn a working Massachusetts courtroom into a test lab for social media in the courts is gearing up to launch on May 2. Once it starts, most of what happens in the courtroom at Quincy District Court will be streamed live over the Web for anyone to see. In addition, a designated area of the courtroom will be reserved for bloggers and citizen journalists. The courtroom will be equipped with WiFi to access the Internet. Originally named "Order in the Court 2.0," the project has now been renamed OpenCourt. Its website, when it launches, will be at OpenCourt.us. The camera providing the live feed will be controlled by the judge, who will be able to turn it off in certain circumstances. The camera will be turned off for most domestic violence cases and also in any proceedings where state law or court rules prohibit cameras. In addition, the judge will be able to turn off the camera as a matter of judicial discretion. The video feed will be archived and will be available for use by news organizations, bloggers and others. [Editor: see also Take Peek Into Your Local Courtroom with OpenCourt (ReadWriteWeb, 3 May 2011)]

top

The New York Times' Cascade: Data Visualization for Tweets (Mashable, 22 April 2011) - The research and development department of The New York Times has recently been pondering the life cycle of the paper's news stories in social media - specifically, on Twitter. Cascade is a project that visually represents what happens when readers tweet about articles. Even now, however, Cascade is more than just a nifty data visualization. Some journalists think it also gives us new ways of to think about and optimize for sharing and engagement on the social web, especially since it helps identify the most influential sharers, the more shareable terms, and more. Its creators write on the project's website that Cascade "links browsing behavior on a site to sharing activity to construct a detailed picture of how information propagates through the social media space. While initially applied to New York Times stories and information, the tool and its underlying logic may be applied to any publisher or brand interested in understanding how its messages are shared." [Editor: includes interesting 4-minute video.]

top

Ubuntu Linux Boosted by 10,000 Seat PC Win (IT World, 22 April 2011) - Canonical has taken the wraps off a morale-boosting deal that has seen German insurance giant LVM Versicherungen convert 10,000 PCs to use Ubuntu Linux across the company's operations. The project included the conversion of 3,000 desktop and laptop computers in LVM's Muenster HQ with a further 7,000 in the company's agencies around Germany. The core software used by the company is LAS, a Java-based claims-processing application of its own design, backed by Lotus Notes, Adobe's Reader and the OpenOffice suite. The news isn't entirely a surprise given that LVM has been using Ubuntu for some time. But converting a company's entire install base to use the software is still a modest coup. LVM is also a demanding environment for any OS. The company's workforce is bolstered by a small army of self-employed and mobile sales representatives that sell insurance at street and living room level. The LAS system is described as being used by the sales team in an 'always-on' configuration. The official release made no mention of the operating system being displaced but Techworld understands these were running older versions of Windows in recent years.

top

Tech landscape 2011: Top product picks; Rise of Mac viruses; Security for thumbdrives, iPhone; and more (ABA Journal, 26 April 2011) - It's once again time to catch up on the latest-greatest and not so great-in legal technology for attorneys, especially those in solo and small firms. And for that, we turn to authors of the 2011 Solo and Small Firm Legal Technology Guide: Critical Decisions Made Simple-Sharon D. Nelson, John W. Simek and Michael C. Maschke. [Editor: includes recommendations for computerized case management systems.]

top

Biz Cards Go Digital: Firm Adds QR Codes to Business Cards (ABA Journal, 27 April 2011) - A 55-member law firm in northern Virginia is giving its lawyers the option of adding a "Quick Response Code" to their business cards to make it easier to share contact information with colleagues and clients. The Washington Post notes in a brief that while QR codes are common in Europe and Asia, the practice is only recently gaining traction in the United States. The Fairfax-based firm Odin Feldman Pittleman is promoting its adoption of the QR code in a news release (PDF). QR codes, when scanned by smartphones, can transfer more data than could fit on a typical business card and is used as a convenient way to automatically transfer names, addresses and other contact information to digital address books. [Editor: I dropped physical address info from my business cards in 1996; the QR idea is au courant but too late? See " QR Code Resume Makes Your Embossed Paper Look Lame" for more. See also story below about "Bumping" phones to make payments.]

top

Feds to Remotely Uninstall Coreflood Bot from Some PCs (Computerworld, 27 April 2011) - Federal authorities will remotely uninstall the Coreflood botnet Trojan from some infected Windows PCs over the next four weeks. Coreflood will be removed from infected computers only when the owners have been identified by the Department of Justice (DOJ) and they have submitted an authorization form to the FBI. The DOJ's plan to uninstall Coreflood is the latest step in a coordinated campaign to cripple the botnet, which controls more than 2 million compromised computers. Two weeks ago, the DOJ and the FBI obtained an unprecedented temporary restraining order that allowed them to seize five command-and-control (C&C) servers that managed Coreflood. Since then, the U.S. Marshal's Service has operated substitute C&C servers that have disabled the bot on most infected PCs. Those actions have reduced Coreflood by 90% in the U.S. and nearly 75% in other countries, but the government wanted to do more.

top

Why We Need An Open Wireless Movement (EFF, 27 April 2011) - If you sometimes find yourself needing an open wireless network in order to check your email from a car, a street corner, or a park, you may have noticed that they're getting harder to find.

Stories like the one over the weekend about a bunch of police breaking down an innocent man's door because he happened to leave his network open, as well as general fears about slow networks and online privacy, are convincing many people to password-lock their WiFi routers. The gradual disappearance of open wireless networks is a tragedy of the commons, with a confusing twist of privacy and security debate. This essay explains why the progressive locking of wireless networks is harmful - for convenience, for privacy and for efficient use of the electromagnetic spectrum. We will need a political and technological "Open Wireless Movement" to reverse the degradation of this indispensable component of the Internet's infrastructure. Part of the task will simply be reminding people that opening their WiFi is the socially responsible thing to do, and explaining that individuals who choose to do so can enjoy the same legal protections against liability as any other Internet access provider. Individuals, including Bruce Schneier and Cory Doctorow, have laid some of the groundwork. It's time to spread the message far and wide. But an Open Wireless Movement will also need to do technical work: we need to build new technologies to ensure that people have an easy way to share a portion of their bandwidth without affecting the performance of their own network connections while at the same time ensuring that there is absolutely no privacy downside to running an open wireless network. [Editor: I agree completely; part of my home WiFi network is open.]

top

Bank Lets Customers Pay Friends By Bumping iPhones (Mashable, 29 April 2011) - ING Direct customers can now transfer payments to friends with the bump of a cellphone - no account numbers needed. The bank released an updated version of its iPhone app [iTunes link] on Wednesday morning that integrates an API from Bump Technologies, a startup that makes it easy to transfer information between phones by tapping them together. Previously Bump's technology has been used to exchange contact information, photos and music between users. This is the first time that a bank has leveraged it for person-to-person payments. Many banks (including ING Direct) are experimenting with another technology called near field communication (NFC), which could one day power phone-to-phone transactions. But there are a limited number of NFC-enabled devices in the market, and security standards have yet to emerge. Bump is much simpler. The startup's app and API recognize tapping motions and maps them. When a Bump is recognized, a signal is sent to cloud servers that match it with another Bump that occurred at the exact same place and time. It decides those two Bumps are a match, and exchanges information between them. In ING's case, each user will need to log into his or her secure account to send or receive payment. Bump's role is to ID participants in a person-to-person transaction instead of requiring them to type and verify account numbers.

top

Amazon's Cloud Crash Destroyed Many Customers' Data (MSNBC, 29 April 2011) - In addition to taking down the sites of dozens of high-profile companies for hours (and, in some cases, days), Amazon's huge EC2 cloud services crash permanently destroyed some data. Amazon has yet to fully explain what happened when its mission-critical and supposedly bomb-proof systems crashed, but the explanation will be important. As will the explanation for how the company could have permanently destroyed some of its customers data.

top

The Latest from the NLRB on Social Media (Littler, 2 May 2011) - The National Labor Relations Board created a stir in late 2010 by filing an unfair labor practice charge against ambulance company, AMR, for firing an employee who, among other things, called her supervisor a "mental patient" in a Facebook post read by many co-workers. As it turns out, the "Facebook case" was just the beginning of what appears to be a trend by the Board, subsequently joined by unions, to restrict employers' ability to promulgate and enforce social media policies that, in the Board's view, impinge on employees' rights under the National Labor Relations Act. Several recent developments provide a window into the Board's intentions. Last week, the NLRB's Hartford Regional Director, who was responsible for filing the Facebook case, provided useful information about the Board's intentions, both in comments and in handout materials, while speaking on a panel for the Connecticut Bar Association. Below are some of the highlights: * * * [Guidelines, 4 recent filed complaints, best-practices for disclaimers, litigation strategy] * * * In a development that could resonate beyond social media, the Regional Director also revealed that the Regions, at the direction of the Board's Acting General Counsel, are filing complaints to set the stage to reverse the Board's December 2007 decision in Register Guard . In that case, a Republican-dominated Board held that an employer can lawfully impose a broad ban on employee's use of the corporate e-mail system for solicitations and other non-business reasons as long as the policy on its face does not discriminate against union activity and is enforced in a non-discriminatory manner. A reversal of Register Guard could severely crimp employers' ability to regulate employees' social media activity while using corporate electronic resources.

top

EPIC Proposes "Fair Information Practices" for Google (BeSpacific, 3 May 2011) - "Today EPIC submitteddetailed comments on a landmark privacy agreement that requires Google to adopt a "Comprehensive Privacy Plan" to safeguard the privacy and personal information of Internet users. In comments to the Federal Trade Commission, EPIC recommended that the FTC require Google to adopt and implement comprehensive Fair Information Practices http://www.bespacific.com/mt/archives/027172.html

top

New Legal Networking Site Seeks to Keep it Simple (Robert Ambrogi, 5 May 2011) - At the PLI seminar on social media I attended yesterday in New York, one of the speakers, Kelly Hoey, remarked, "I don't ever again want to have to fill out another social media profile." Well Kelly, meet Lawford, a new professional networking site for lawyers that fills out your profile for you. This week marks the private-beta launch of Lawford. Lawford's developers have the ambitious goal of building the largest legal networking platform in the world. In fact, they say that they hope someday to have every lawyer in the world become a contributing part of the site. [See original article for an invite code.] Given the tough time other legal-vertical networking sites have had building up any critical mass of users, not to mention the ABA's recent shuttering of its networking site, Lawford has its work cut out for it. That said, it is approaching the legal market in a unique way, one that cuts out much of the work of joining a professional network. Recognizing that lawyers are tight on time, Lawford aims to make the sign-up process as painless as possible. To do this, it has assembled data on literally every lawyer in the United States. What that means is that it knows who you are before you ever tell it a thing about yourself.

top

Tattoo Design May Halt the Release of Hangover II (CaseClothesed, 5 May 2011) - Tattoo Artist S. Victor Whitmill is suing Warner Bros. Entertainment for using his "art work" on their film "The Hangover Part II." Whitmill originally created the tattoo piece on Mike Tyson's face, and now a main character in "The Hangover Part II" movie is using the same tattoo on his face. Whitmill states that he owns the artwork and the copyright in the original tattoo, and the unauthorized placing of the exact tattoo on another character constitutes copyright infringement. Are tattoos protected, and should Warner Bros. have contacted Whitmill to obtain permission to use it in the film? Maggie Sicklinger recently wrote an article pertaining to this issue, clickhere to read it. The article stated that the Ninth Circuit recently decided in Anderson v. City of Hermosa Beach No. 08-56914, that tattooing is an expressive activity similar to pen and ink drawings, and therefore entitled to full First Amendment protection! Copyright protection extends to expressive work "fixed" in a tangible medium and according to this case, artwork on the body of a person is copyright protected.

top

Applying the Rules of Evidence Related to Authentication to Online Sources (Volokh Conspiracy, 6 May 2011) - Evidence law has special rules that require someone who wants to introduce a document to first introduce "foundation" evidence that shows the document was indeed written by the person who supposedly wrote it; this is called "authentication." Griffin v. State, decided by Maryland's highest court on April 28, has an interesting discussion of how those rules play out with regard to online sources. The case itself involved the authentication of a MySpace Web page, but the discussion can apply to many other online sources as well. Note that this is a different matter than deciding the reliability of an online source, or the admissibility in other respects of an online source (e.g., whether the source contains inadmissible hearsay). It is also a different matter than deciding the factual authenticity of the source given a dispute about the foundation evidence (e.g., if A denies that he wrote a Web page, but B testifies that he had heard A say he did write the Web page). The question is simply what factual foundation - however disputed that factual foundation might be - has to be presented before the document can even be introduced into evidence. It would then be up to the jury to resolve any factual disputes related to that foundation evidence. Here's the court's discussion of some ways that Web page such as a Myspace page can be authenticated in the legal sense, so that the sites' contents can be introduced as evidence: * * *

top

Archiving the Web for Scholars (InsideHigherEd, 6 May 2011) - Many scholars, while struggling to find and patch together the surviving fragments of historical documents, have probably longed for a time machine. In the era of Internet research, they might finally get their wish. Sort of. The Internet Archive, a nonprofit founded in 1996, has provided libraries and other institutions with the tools to preserve "the ephemera of the Web" - websites and their various documents, images, videos, and links - not just by caching a snapshot of the "landing page," but by copying and preserving entire domains that researchers can navigate just as they would have at any point in the site's history - even if the site moves, changes, or disappears. Many libraries are beginning to use the Internet Archive, and its popular WayBack Machine, to develop scholar-friendly archives of websites. The organization currently hosts collections of archived websites for more than 60 different colleges and universities. The idea is essentially to preserve websites the way libraries have long preserved newspapers via microform. As the Internet has increasingly become society's medium of record, it has become common for the authors of scholarly papers to cite Web content that has no corresponding print documents. (Several academic style guides recently added guidelines for citing Twitter and Facebook content.) Web addresses have become so unreliable that the Modern Language Association recently stopped requiring scholars to include URLs when citing websites, instructing them instead to include information that might help readers hunt down the site with search engines. It would be simpler, of course, if they could just cite a library archive where the relevant version of the website is preserved in suspended animation, Wolven says.

top

NOTED PODCASTS

Hearsay Culture - Interview with Prof. David Post (56 minutes; 12 April 2011) - Interview with Prof. David Post of Temple University Beasley School of Law, author of In Search of Jefferson's Moose: Notes on the State of Cyberspace. [Editor: fairly interesting discussion of Jeffersonian precepts, in the context of "The Law of the Horse", et al.]

top

RESOURCES

Privacy Protections for Personal Information Online (CRS, 6 April 2011) - There is no comprehensive federal privacy statute that protects personal information. Instead, a patchwork of federal laws and regulations govern the collection and disclosure of personal information and has been addressed by Congress on a sector-by-sector basis. Federal laws and regulations extend protection to consumer credit reports, electronic communications, federal agency records, education records, bank records, cable subscriber information, video rental records, motor vehicle records, health information, telecommunications subscriber information, children's online information, and customer financial information. Some contend that this patchwork of laws and regulations is insufficient to meet the demands of today's technology. Congress, the Obama Administration, businesses, public interest groups, and citizens are all involved in the discussion of privacy solutions. This report examines some of those efforts with respect to the protection of personal information. This report provides a brief overview of selected recent developments in the area of federal privacy law. This report does not cover workplace privacy laws or state privacy laws.

top

The Path of Internet Law: An Annotated Guide to Legal Landmarks (forthcoming Duke Law & Tech Review, 3 April 2011) - Abstract: "In the classic holiday film "It's a Wonderful Life," a disillusioned George Bailey (played by Jimmy Stewart) makes a wish that he had never lived. Clarence, the Angel in training, grants George his wish and shows him how life in his hometown would have been different if he had never been born. Our Article asks how the law of intellectual property and legal research have been reshaped by the creation of the Internet. This Article provides guideposts for the best legal resources for Internet law to assist busy lawyers and legal academics in tracing the past, present, and future path of Internet Law. This Article unfolds in three parts: Part I traces the path of the history of the Internet as a technology. Part II is a brief timeline of Internet case law and statutory developments for Internet-related intellectual property (IP) law developments. This part of the article highlights intellectual property, but our broader point is that Internet law illuminates every substantive and procedural aspect of U.S. law. During this formative period, the Internet reshaped the path of each branch of the law of intellectual property. Part III presents an annotated guide to the best research resources to assist academics and policymakers in tracing the future path of Internet Law. The future path of Internet law will be less U.S. centric, therefore we review the best available sources for tracing the path of Internet law in a global setting. Finally, we conclude by hazarding some predictions based upon the "sibylline leaves" gathered from extant Internet case law and statutory developments about the future of Internet law."

top

DIFFERENT

Google Map Maker and Admissions (InsideHigherEd, 21 April 2011) - Strategic Enrollment Management (SEM) professionals should be some of the most tech-savvy student affairs practitioners at your campus. With useful technologies being released seemingly on a daily basis, it is crucial that SEM directors, especially those who work in Admissions, be plugged in to new ways that technology can be used to market their campuses. One of the most popular posts on my personal blog is also one of the simplest -- "Campus maps and Google." The post is essentially a snapshot of how some schools use the Google Maps API to create a custom Google map for their campus. Numerous institutions use this option for their campus map. This week,Google announced the availability of Google Map Maker for the United States. Google Map Maker allows users to label building locations, create unique paths/shortcuts, and label the outline of buildings. It's evident that Google recognizes the potential benefit for higher education institutions. The "getting started" web page for Google Map Maker features a section for " Schools and Universities." With Google Map Maker, anyone with a Google account can create custom content on top of your institution's Google Map presence. While the potential for amazing user-generated content is massive, it will be interesting to see if Admissions personnel will utilize Map Maker content.

top

LOOKING BACK - MIRLN TEN YEARS AGO

ONE-THIRD OF ONLINE AMERICA IS ON AMERICA ONLINE A new study by market research firm Jupiter Media Metrix says that 33% of the time Americans spent online last month was spent at services offered by AOL Time Warner, while America Online competitors lagged far behind: Yahoo at 7% and Microsoft sites at 6%. And why are all these people online at AOL? They've got messages. Instant messaging and e-mail accounted for half of all the minutes spent on AOL. A Jupiter senior industry analyst explained: "What this shows is the power of the AOL business model. AOL mixes a content service with an access business and a software business. That mix allows them to control the environment you're living in much more than their competitors do, leading to more time with AOL." (Washington Post 27 Feb 2001) http://washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A58901-2001Feb26.html

top

PRINCETON PROFESSOR BOWS TO RECORDING INDUSTRY (Salon.com, 26 April 2001) -- Bowing to the threat of legal action from the recording industry, a Princeton computer scientists decided against presenting a paper Thursday on how the research team he led broke security on digital music. Edward Felten, an associate professor in Princeton University's computer science department, had remained mum for days on whether he would present the paper at the International Information Hiding Workshop, announced he would not make the information public because threats of legal action had been made against the authors. Early this month, the Secure Digital Music Initiative Foundation -- which has ties with the Recording Industry Association of America -- sent Felten a letter suggesting he could be sued if he released information on how "watermarks" encrypted into digital music files could be broken. http://www.salon.com/tech/wire/2001/04/26/riaa/index.html [Editor: I'll be with Ed next month at the Privacy Law Scholars Conference; Ed now is the FTC's chief technologist.]

top

NOTES

MIRLN (Misc. IT Related Legal News) is a free e-newsletter published every three weeks by Vince Polley at KnowConnect PLLC. You can subscribe to the MIRLN distribution list by sending email to Vince Polley ( mailto:vpolley@knowconnect.com?subject=MIRLN) with the word "MIRLN" in the subject line. Unsubscribe by sending email to Vince with the words "MIRLN REMOVAL" in the subject line.

Recent MIRLN issues are archived at www.knowconnect.com/mirln. Get supplemental information through Twitter: http://twitter.com/vpolley #mirln.

SOURCES (inter alia):

1. The Filter, a publication of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School, http://cyber.law.harvard.edu

2. InsideHigherEd - http://www.insidehighered.com/

3. SANS Newsbites, sans@sans.org

4. NewsScan and Innovation, http://www.newsscan.com

5. BNA's Internet Law News, http://ecommercecenter.bna.com

6. Crypto-Gram, http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram.html

7. McGuire Wood's Technology & Business Articles of Note

8. Steptoe & Johnson's E-Commerce Law Week

9. Eric Goldman's Technology and Marketing Law Blog, http://blog.ericgoldman.org/

10. Law.com

11. Readers' submissions, and the editor's discoveries.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. To view a copy of this license, visit or send a letter to Creative Commons, 543 Howard Street, 5th Floor, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.

PRIVACY NOTICE: Addresses and other personal information provided during the subscription process will be kept confidential, and will not be used for any other purpose . top

Saturday, April 16, 2011

MIRLN --- 27 March – 16 April 2011 (v14.05)


MIRLN --- 27 March – 16 April 2011 (v14.05) --- by Vince Polley and KnowConnect PLLC (supplemented by related Tweets: http://twitter.com/vpolley #mirln)

**** MIRLN PODCASTS ****
The MIRLN podcasts now are on iTunes -- http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/mirln/id424352330 or search for “MIRLN”. Or, you can find them at http://www.knowconnect.com/mirln/podcast/, and an RSS feed is available.

·      Enabling Distributed Security in Cyberspace
·      Long-Form Journalism Finds a Home
·      Companies Pick and Choose Which Data Breaches to Report
·      Public Records And Court Dockets - Portal To The World – Courtport
·      Why the ABA Survey Gets it Wrong on Blogs
·      Taming Information Technology Risk: A New Framework for Boards of Directors
·      FBI Wants Public Help Solving Encrypted Notes From Murder Mystery
·      Is Righthaven Harming the News Industry?
·      Court Rules That Instant Message Conversation Modified the Terms of a Written Contract
·      NSA to Investigate NASDAQ Hack
·      Ninth Circuit Decides Cotterman Case, Reversing District Court on Laptop Seizure at the Border
·      Amazon Strong-Arms a Third-Party Kindle Service
·      App Called “Creepy” Pinpoints People’s Location Based On Their Social Networking Activity
·      Federal Courts Discuss Smartphone Policies
·      Online Applications Too Risky? One Firm Takes the Plunge
·      New Yorkers Hurt All Over
·      French High Court Upholds Company’s Review of Employees’ Email
o   Should Companies Restrict Web Access For Employees? Maybe a Little.
·      How Can a Law Firm Touting E-Discovery Expertise Screw Up a Litigation Hold?
·      The Cronon Case: Part II
·      Cloud Computing and Personal Data, Round Two
·      Major Law Firms Fall Victim to Cyber Attack
o   Law Firms Under Siege
o   Law Firm Loses $78K in Massive Malware Scheme That Was Disabled by Feds
·      2010: A Record Year for Domain Name Dispute Arbitrations
·      NLRB to Press Reuters Over Reaction to Twitter Post
·      Attack Sheds Light on Internet Security Holes
·      Feds Defend Twitter Dragnet On WikiLeaks Supporters
·      Announcing DoctoredReviews.com, a Website Against Doctors’ Efforts to Squelch Online Patient Reviews
·      Twitter In the Courtroom
·      “I’m from the NSA, and We Don’t Get Out Much”

NEWS | PODCASTS | RESOURCES | DIFFERENT | LOOKING BACK | NOTES

Enabling Distributed Security in Cyberspace (DHS, 23 March 2011) – Summary: This paper was prepared under the direction of Philip Reitinger, Deputy Under Secretary for the National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD), U.S. Department of Homeland Security, with support from the NPPD Cyber+Strategy Staff, the federally funded Homeland Security Systems Engineering and Development Institute (HS SEDI), and the NPPD Office of Cybersecurity and Communications (CS&C). In 2010, NPPD sponsored a government workshop to discuss a draft of this paper. Recommendations from that workshop have been incorporated. This paper explores a future – a “healthy cyber ecosystem” – where cyber devices collaborate in nearreal time in their own defense. In this future, cyber devices have innate capabilities that enable them to work together to anticipate and prevent cyber attacks, limit the spread of attacks across participating devices, minimize the consequences of attacks, and recover to a trusted state. This paper presents three building blocks as foundational for a healthy cyber ecosystem: automation, interoperability, and authentication. The paper then considers how these building blocks contribute to ecosystem maturity and explores incentives for creating such a system. It concludes with thoughts on the way ahead. The envisioned endstate is focused specifically on capabilities that can be achieved in the near and midterm by utilizing standardsbased software and information to strengthen selfdefense through automated collective action. This paper is meant to provoke discussion and further exploration of the topic. http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/nppd-cyber-ecosystem-white-paper-03-23-2011.pdf

Long-Form Journalism Finds a Home (NYT, 27 March 2011) - In 2009, Evan Ratliff, a freelance writer for Wired, and Nicholas Thompson, a senior editor there, had just concluded a particularly satisfying article in which Mr. Ratliff tried to drop off the grid for a month and obscure his whereabouts in the digital age, while Wired magazine offered $5,000 to the person who could find him. It was a hit. But it was also the kind of deeply reported journalism that was going the way of the fax machine. “In the digital realm, there is infinite space, but somehow this hasn’t resulted in a flowering of long-form content,” Mr. Ratliff said. He had long considered building a Web site that would be more hospitable to long articles, but had also been spending a fair amount of time on his subway commute reading those pieces on his iPhone. The men called Jefferson Rabb, a programmer and Web designer known for building remarkable sites for books. In bars up and down Atlantic Avenue in Brooklyn, the three talked about whether there was a way to use these devices to make the Web a friend, not an enemy, of the articles they liked to work on and read. And, in what may be the first tangible result of journalists gathered in a bar to complain about the state of reading, they did something beyond ordering another round. The result is The Atavist, a tiny curio of a business that looks for new ways to present long-form content for the digital age. All the richness of the Web — links to more information, videos, casts of characters — is right there in an app displaying an article, but with a swipe of the finger, the presentation reverts to clean text that can be scrolled by merely tilting the device. “We wanted to build something that people would pay for,” said Mr. Thompson, who has since switched to being a senior editor of The New Yorker and has had to pull back to consulting for the project. “The Web is good at creating short and snappy bits of information, but not so much when it comes to long-form, edited, fact-and-spell-checked work.” Readers who buy an article from The Atavist and read it on an iPad — there are also less media-rich versions for the Kindle and the Nook — could begin reading the piece at home and then when driving to work, toggle to an audio version. In each item, there is a timeline navigation that seems natural and simple, and a place for comments that mimics the notes that people put in the margins of complicated, interesting pieces. Since opening for business at the end of January, The Atavist has published three long pieces that are native to the tablet in concept and execution, and it has had over 40,000 downloads of its app. Writers are paid a fee to cover reporting expenses and then split revenue with The Atavist. For the time being, an article costs $2.99 for the iPad and $1.99 for the Kindle or Nook. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/28/business/media/28carr.html?_r=1&ref=business [Editor: I’ve tried this, and think the package/tools are quite good, but the writing lacks.]

Companies Pick and Choose Which Data Breaches to Report (Network World, 28 March 2011) - One in 7 information technology companies have not reported data breaches or losses to outside government agencies, authorities or stockholders. In addition, only 3 out of 10 said they report all data breaches and losses suffered related to intellectual property, while 1 in 10 organizations will only report data breaches and losses that they are legally obliged to report, and no more. Six in 10 said they currently “pick and choose” the breaches and losses of sensitive data they decide to report, “depending on how they feel about them.” Those were some of the key findings from a McAfee and Science Applications International Corp. (SAIC) survey that queried 1,000 technology managers in the U.S., United Kingdom, Japan, China, India, Brazil and the Middle East on questions about intellectual property and security. The report, entitled “Underground Economies: Intellectual Capital and Sensitive Corporate Data Now the Latest Cybercrime Currency,” said the main reasons for not disclosing data breaches are fear of media coverage, damage to the brand and shareholder value. “The admission of a significant vulnerability could flag other attackers so very few companies are willing to be public about intellectual capital losses,” the report says. http://www.networkworld.com/news/2011/032811-mcafee-underground.html?source=NWWNLE_nlt_daily_pm_2011-03-28&elq_mid=13313&elq_cid=996107

Public Records And Court Dockets - Portal To The World – Courtport (FutureLawyer, 28 March 2010) - Public records, court dockets - Free Trial - Court port. I am on a legal research and court records research roll right now. Yesterday, I showed you how to research the law cheaply and efficiently, without a subscription to an expensive legal research service. (You know who they are). Today, we shift focus to over 10,000 court records databases, including full docket searching in the entire Federal case database. Criminal records searches, records in all State, Federal, State, County, and Municipal databases. Licensing and disciplinary records for every kind of professional, and detailed records about just about anyone. For $10 a month, the lawyer can know anything that is material to his client, witness, opponent, or do complete legal research for a fraction of the cost of more expensive systems. http://futurelawyer.typepad.com/futurelawyer/2011/03/public-records-and-court-dockets-portal-to-the-world-courtport.html

Why the ABA Survey Gets it Wrong on Blogs (Robert Ambrogi, 29 March 2011) - Let me ask you a question: Where are you more likely to buy a car, at a Superbowl commercial or at your local auto dealer? Given that most people would say auto dealer, it follows that Superbowl commercials must not be effective at selling cars, right? Of course not. The question, as phrased, makes no sense. You can’t buy a car from a TV commercial. Do Superbowl commercials help sell cars? I don’t know, but I do know that the above question doesn’t help me figure out the answer. Now consider the recent ABA survey that concluded that consumers do not rely on blogs to find a lawyer. If you’ve missed the debate about this, start with Kevin O’Keefe’s post, making sure to read the comments from Will Hornsby and Kevin’s replies, then read this post from Carolyn Elefant, and then this one from Scott Greenfield. Here is the question the ABA survey asked: “If you needed a lawyer for a personal legal matter, how likely would you be to use the following resources to find one?” Among the resources listed were websites, directories, social networking sites and blogs. Just fifteen percent said they were very or somewhat likely to use blogs. It follows, therefore, that blogs are ineffective as tools for client development, right? Of course not. The question makes no sense. No one would “use” a blog to find a lawyer, just as no one would “use” a Superbowl commercial to find a car. A blog is not a selection tool. It is not a directory. It is not somewhere anyone would go to “find” something. Kevin has it exactly right. “Rather than looking at blogs and social media as something new,” he writes, “look at blogs and social media as accelerators of relationships and your word of mouth reputation.” http://www.lawsitesblog.com/2011/03/why-the-aba-survey-gets-it-wrong-on-blogs.html

Taming Information Technology Risk: A New Framework for Boards of Directors (Oliver Wyman and NACD, March 2011) - A recent survey of 204 board members by Oliver Wyman’s Global Risk Center and the National Association of Corporate Directors (NACD) finds that nearly half (47%) of board members are dissatisfied with their boards’ ability to provide IT risk oversight. When you consider how much is riding on companies’ ability to use technology effectively, that figure is alarming. The world’s largest 500 companies lose more than $14 billion every year because of failed IT projects, according to an Oliver Wyman analysis. Therein lies an opportunity. Companies that receive valuable board direction and input on IT-related risk will have a significant competitive advantage over those that don’t. http://www.oliverwyman.com/ow/pdf_files/OW_EN_GRC_2011_PUBL_Taming_IT_Risk.pdf?elq_mid=13218&elq_cid=996107

FBI Wants Public Help Solving Encrypted Notes From Murder Mystery (Network World, 29 March 2011) - The FBI is seeking the public’s help in breaking the encrypted code found in two notes discovered on the body of a murdered man in 1999. The FBI says that officers in St. Louis, Missouri discovered the body of 41-year-old Ricky McCormick on June 30, 1999 in a field and the clues regarding the homicide were two encrypted notes found in the victim’s pants pockets. From the FBI: “The more than 30 lines of coded material use a maddening variety of letters, numbers, dashes, and parentheses. McCormick was a high school dropout, but he was able to read and write and was said to be ‘street smart.’ According to members of his family, McCormick had used such encrypted notes since he was a boy, but apparently no one in his family knows how to decipher the codes, and it’s unknown whether anyone besides McCormick could translate his secret language. Investigators believe the notes in McCormick’s pockets were written up to three days before his death.” http://www.networkworld.com/community/blog/fbi-wants-public-help-solving-encrypted-notes

Is Righthaven Harming the News Industry? (Citizen Media Law Project, 29 March 2011) - Righthaven, a copyright-enforcement entity that sues first and asks questions later, comes up a lot here at the CMLP, both on the blog and in the legal threats database. As a recent profile on CNN.com illustrates, Righthaven’s founder Steve Gibson thinks he is simply enforcing content owners’ rights within the digital landscape. In particular, Gibson thinks that fair use doesn’t cover “the kinds of reproduction that Righthaven is addressing”. Fortunately for bloggers, courts seem to be taking an increasingly critical look at Gibson’s views. Back in October, the federal court in Nevada threw out a case against a blogger who copied “only the first eight sentences of a thirty sentence news article” on fair use grounds. Just a few days ago on March 18, 2011, a different Nevada judge threw out yet another Righthaven case on fair use grounds. As Steve Green of the Las Vegas Sun reports, however, Righthaven LLC v. Center for Intercultural Organizing involved the re-posting of an entire news article. Of course, neither of these recent cases are binding legal precedent, and they may be overturned on appeal. The CMLP has written legal guides about using the works of others and fair use, which can be helpful in working through these issues. The tide may be turning against Righthaven. Indeed, as Green points out, it seems ironic that Righthaven may be undermining all newspapers’ case for copyright protection. Green’s analysis that Righthaven seems to have shot itself in the foot appears to be driving subsequent coverage, including analysis on websites from paid Content to Ars Technica. http://www.citmedialaw.org/blog/2011/righthaven-harming-news-industry

Court Rules That Instant Message Conversation Modified the Terms of a Written Contract (Goldman’s blog, 29 March 2011) - CX Digital Media, Inc. v. Smoking Everywhere, Inc., 09-62020-CIV-Altonga (S.D. Fl.; Mar. 23, 2011) - As contract cases go, this one is interesting. It’s more than interesting, it’s awesome! The court held that an instant message exchange effectively modified a written agreement which contained a “no-oral modification clause.” This resulted in a judgment in favor of a marketing agency against the seller of electronic cigarettes to the tune of $1,235,655 (along with fees, costs, and interest)! * * * It’s standard for contracts to restrict oral amendments. It’s also standard for business partners to “talk” using email, IM, text messages, Twitter @replies, comments to Facebook status reports, etc., etc. The default rules should be that all of these electronically-mediated communications qualify as writings. (But see John O’s post on an odd case from last summer). If you fear the legal effects of these communications, you could try to restrict contract amendments to terms printed on a piece of paper mutually signed in ink. But I think lawyers are fighting an uphill battle trying to denigrate the legal effect of these electronic communications. They are an integral part of the relationship, and there’s not much we as lawyers can do to change that. http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2011/03/court_rules_tha.htm

NSA to Investigate NASDAQ Hack (Wired, 30 March 2011) - The National Security Agency has been called in to help investigate recent hack attacks against the company that runs the Nasdaq stock market, according to a news report. The agency’s precise role in the investigation hasn’t been disclosed, but its involvement suggests the October 2010 attacks may have been more severe than Nasdaq OMX Group has admitted, or it could have involved a nation state, according to sources who spoke with Bloomberg News. “By bringing in the NSA, that means they think they’re either dealing with a state-sponsored attack, or it’s an extraordinarily capable criminal organization,” Joel Brenner, former head of U.S. counterintelligence in the Bush and Obama administrations, told the publication. He added that the agency rarely gets involved in investigations of company breaches. Regarding the Nasdaq breach, in addition to the Secret Service, the FBI and the NSA, unidentified foreign intelligence agencies are also reportedly assisting in the probe. The Wall Street Journal reported in February that Nasdaq OMX Group had been repeatedly breached last year. Nasdaq later confirmed the report but insisted that computers involved in its trading platform were not compromised in the attacks. The company said the attacks were limited to a web application known as Directors Desk that allows board members of Nasdaq companies to hold online meetings and exchange confidential information — data that attackers would conceivably find useful to trade on. The Directors Desk, however, may not have been the target but simply an entry point for the hackers to gain further penetration into Nasdaq OMX’s network. According to Bloomberg News, investigators have acknowledged they still have no idea how far into the network the attack reached or what data the attackers may have stolen. http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/03/nsa-investigates-nasdaq-hack/

Ninth Circuit Decides Cotterman Case, Reversing District Court on Laptop Seizure at the Border (Volokh Conspiracy, 30 March 2011) - Back in 2009, I blogged about United States v. Cotterman, a fascinating Fourth Amendment case from the District of Arizona involving a forensic search of a computer seized at the U.S./Mexico border. Ninth Circuit precedent holds that the government can search a computer at the border with no suspicion under the border search exception, just like it can search any other property. The question in Cotterman was whether the government could seize the computer, bring it to a forensic specialist 170 miles away, and have the forensic specialist search the computer there two days later. Is that still a border search? Or does the delay in time, or the change in location, mean that the border search exception doesn’t apply (or applies differently)? The District Court held that the delay in time and the moving of the computer required applying the ‘extended’ border search doctrine, which requires reasonable suspicion, instead of the traditional border search exception, which does not. As I noted here, the Government appealed but has not argued that the search was justified by reasonable suspicion. As a result, the case presents a pure legal question: Does the Fourth Amendment require reasonable suspicion in these circumstances, or is the seizure and subsequent search permitted without any cause? In a decision released this morning, United States v. Cotterman, a divided Ninth Circuit reversed and held that the seizure and search were permitted without cause. The majority opinion by Judge Tallman, joined by Judge Rawlinson, reasons that it is clear, under Ninth Circuit precedent, that the search would have been legal if it had occurred at the border without delay. The opinion reasons that Cotterman’s expectation of privacy is what matters, and that because Cotterman’s computer was taken to be searched at the border, Cotterman’s expectation of privacy is not impacted by where the computer was taken. The next question was how much delay is permitted. That is, for how long can the government hold a computer pursuant to the border search exception in order to search it? Because holding the computer was a seizure, the test was reasonableness: Specifically, whether the detention “was reasonably related in scope to the circumstances that justified the initial detention at the border.” In this case, it was: The Government proceeded quickly to bring the computer to an expert, the expert searched the computer pretty quickly, and worked through the weekend to get the search completed. Further, the fact that the computer was brought to the expert rather than the expert being brought to the computer was not only acceptable, but wise: “our common sense and experience inform us that the decision to transport the property to the laboratory, instead of transporting the laboratory to the property, resulted in a shorter deprivation.” http://volokh.com/2011/03/30/ninth-circuit-decides-cotterman-case-reversing-district-court-on-laptop-seizure-at-the-border/ http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2011/03/30/09-10139.pdf

Amazon Strong-Arms a Third-Party Kindle Service (Zittrain, 31 March 2011) - Amazon shut down Lendle, a popular Kindle service that allows users to lend their books to strangers, last week because it didn’t “serve the principal purpose of driving sales of products and services on the Amazon site.” Two days later, after customers tweeted their displeasure, Amazon informed Lendle of the specific feature that got the service blocked. That feature, Book Sync, scraped the Amazon site itself to determine which books in a user’s library were lendable (not all are). Lendle removed it and is now back up and running. Axing a company’s service to your platform without notice or an opportunity to address the issue is a severe sanction and may intimidate service providers to comply rather than publicly balking at your demands. Here, Lendle disabled the offending feature without a row. Then again, maybe the company knew all along that Book Sync violated Amazon’s policies. While Lendle could argue that Amazon shouldn’t restrict harmless features of third-party services, flagrantly violating those policies could lead Amazon to boot a service. http://futureoftheinternet.org/foi-topics-and-links-of-the-week-15

App Called “Creepy” Pinpoints People’s Location Based On Their Social Networking Activity (Boing Boing, 31 March 2011) - The creator of Creepy, Yiannis Kakavas, calls his application a “geolocation information aggregator.” It analyzes a person’s tweets, Facebook posts, and Flickr stream to generate a map of where that person is and where he or she goes. “You can enter a Twitter or Flickr username into the software’s interface, or use the in-built search utility to find users of interest. When you hit the ‘Geolocate Target’ button, Creepy goes off and uses the services’ APIs to download every photo or tweet they’ve ever published, analysing each for that critical piece of information: the user’s location at the time. While Twitter’s geolocation setting is optional, images shared on the service via sites like Twitpic and Yfrog are often taken on a smartphone - which, unbeknownst to the user, records the location information in the EXIF data of the image. Creepy finds these photos, downloads them, and extracts the location data. When the software finishes its run, it presents you with a map visualising every location that it found - and that’s when the hairs on the back of your neck go up. While the location of an individual tweet might not reveal much, visualising a user’s history on a map reveals clusters around their home, their workplace, and the areas they hang out.” http://www.boingboing.net/2011/03/31/app-called-creepy-pi.html

Federal Courts Discuss Smartphone Policies (CMLP, 1 April 2011) - The U.S. Judicial Conference, which helps set policy for federal circuit (appeals) and district (trial) courts, has issued a memo, first reported by Wired’s “Threat Level” blog, that is meant to help individual courts set policies on when and how smartphones and similar devices can be brought into and used in courthouses and in courtrooms. The memo outlines some of the issues that arise with smartphones and other electronic devices in courthouses, and informally surveys various federal courts’ existing policies regarding smartphones.

The survey found that 41 of the 94 district courts allow anyone to bring the devices into their courthouses, often with some restrictions on their use. Of these 41 courts, nearly a third prohibit the public from bringing the devices in the courtroom, while the remaining two-thirds require that devices be kept off or in silent mode without the judge’s permission. Forty-eight district courts ban devices, except for those possessed by judges, court personnel, and probation and pretrial officers, or with the express permission of a judge. Other courts ban only certain devices, such as devices that include cameras. In both types of situations, courts either check and store the devices or else simply bar individuals from entering with such a device. The memo also notes that many district courts have special policies allowing journalists to bring electronic devices into the courthouse, but also notes that only six district courts allow journalists to use these devices in courtrooms, which various restrictions. The memo notes that a consideration in adopting such a policy for journalists is “how to distinguish, if at all, between members of the traditional press and those who report solely through social media sites or other internet venues.” The memo lays out some of the arguments for and against allowing electronic devices in courthouses, including concerns about recording and broadcast of court proceedings (which the memo mistakenly states is barred in all federal district courts; more on that in this post); and the concern that “[t]hese common devices present security issues because some can be and have been converted for use as weapons, including explosives.” The Wired blog scoffs at this rationale. http://www.citmedialaw.org/blog/2011/federal-courts-discuss-smartphone-policies

Online Applications Too Risky? One Firm Takes the Plunge (ABA Journal, 1 April 2011) - Like anything new, cloud computing inspires both interest and caution in its users, and for the risk-averse legal business, even early adopters prefer to move a few applications online rather than commit entire operations to the ether. But then there’s Bradford & Barthel. Eric Hunter, director of knowledge management at the 12-office California law firm, is among the true believers. In the fall of 2009, his firm decided to move its e-mail, calendaring, document collaboration, intranets and extranets to the cloud via Google Apps for Business, and they’ve never looked back. Hunter cites “huge licensing cost savings,” Google’s relentless push for innovation and the service provider’s commitment to customer support as primary motivators for the switch, which involves a 24-month implementation period that is about halfway complete. But while the siren call of cloud computing is becoming ever more enticing, concerns about security and the loss of control over data have left much of the legal community wary of shifting computing to off-site service providers. “Think about it for a minute,” says Mike Lipps, a vice president and managing director for legal business software solutions for LexisNexis, which offers a number of cloud-based solutions for law firms. “I want you to take your most sensitive and personal data, and I want you to put it ‘out there.’ Out there on the Internet, in the cloud, in that place where scam artists rip off old ladies with wire transfers, where predators pose as kids in chat rooms, where people swap music for free until they get sued by the RIAA. “Put your data out there and I promise it will be safe, secure and there when you need it. And if you discontinue using my service, I’ll give it back to you nice and neat. What’s not to love about this concept?” http://www.abajournal.com/magazine/article/online_applications_too_risky_one_firm_takes_the_plunge?utm_source=maestro&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=tech_monthly [Editor: Wow! Sounds like an enforceable promise to me, a very, very hard one to keep. Watch for LN to walk this back, fast.]

New Yorkers Hurt All Over (Steptoe, 2 April 2011) - ... at least when it comes to online copyright infringement. New York’s highest court has ruled in Penguin Group (USA) Inc. v. American Buddha that if a New York copyright owner’s work is uploaded on the Internet without authorization, an infringement suit may be brought in New York regardless of where the uploading occurred or whether anyone in New York downloaded the infringing material. This decision could greatly expand the jurisdiction of both state and federal courts in the Empire States over Internet piracy cases brought by New York copyright holders. http://www.steptoe.com/publications-7507.html

French High Court Upholds Company’s Review of Employees’ Email (Steptoe, 2 April 2011) - France’s highest court, the Cour de Cassation, has ruled in Securitas France v. M. X. that it was permissible for a company to fire an employee based in part on emails he had exchanged with another employee, with whom he had a personal relationship, in which the two employees referred to a supervisor in offensive terms. The court’s decision broadens a bit the scope of permissible monitoring by employers of their employees’ use of company networks. Companies must still exercise caution in reviewing employees’ email in Europe, since courts there are more prone than in the U.S. to regard employees’ emails as private in many situations. http://www.steptoe.com/publications-7507.html [Editor: this continues a slow move to employer-monitoring rights in France, begun nearly 15 years ago with a flat prohibition.]

- and -

Should Companies Restrict Web Access For Employees? Maybe a Little. (ReadWriteBiz, 6 April 2011) – Earlier today I was sitting in my office and, having crossed five tasks off the sticky note affixed to my laptop, checked in on Twitter, where amidst a slew other 140-character tidbits, lead New York Times tech blogger Nick Bilton had just shared a link to a rather interesting story in the New Yorker. The article, titled In Praise of Distraction, takes a look at the proliferation of Internet-fueled, at-the-office distractions and whether or not they pose a significant problem for businesses. Intuitively, yes, having employees spend all day on Facebook, YouTube and online shopping sites is bound to cut into productivity. But as the New Yorker article points out, some recent research suggests that restricting access to non-work-related content entirely can actually impede productivity. Additionally, as the article notes, restricting Web access “creates a tyrannical work environment” which can damage morale among employees who, let’s face it, are more empowered than ever thanks to the Internet and social media. Many of these employees, it’s worth remembering, are carrying around Internet-connected smart phones that operate outside the corporate firewall. Instead, some recommend a more measured approach in which employees are allotted pockets of time for browsing the Web, not unlike a coffee or smoking break. http://www.readwriteweb.com/biz/2011/04/should-companies-restrict-web-access-for-employees.php

How Can a Law Firm Touting E-Discovery Expertise Screw Up a Litigation Hold? (Ride the Lightning, 4 April 2011) - It seems that a prominent law firm in Detroit (Honigman, Miller, Schwartz and Cohn), which touts its e-discovery expertise on its “Services” page, utterly failed to institute a proper litigation hold when it was sued by a former executive assistant who had been discharged. The firm failed to institute a litigation hold after receiving an EEOC right to sue letter - and other facts suggest the firm was preparing for the lawsuit even earlier. The firm also failed to suspend the operation of an automated e-mail deletion program when the hold should have been instituted. It never surprises me when business clients fail to take the appropriate steps - often in ignorance of litigation holds and what they require. But seeing a law firm with supposed e-discovery expertise so thoroughly “get it wrong” is disturbing. Would the firm advise its clients to act as it apparently acted? I sure hope not. http://RideTheLightning.senseient.com/2011/04/how-can-a-law-firm-touting-e-discovery-expertise-screw-up-a-litigation-hold.html

The Cronon Case: Part II (InsideHigherEd, 4 April 2011) - “Scholars and scientists pursue knowledge by way of open intellectual exchange. Without a zone of privacy within which to conduct and protect their work, scholars would not be able to produce new knowledge or make life-enhancing discoveries. Lively, even heated and acrimonious debates over policy, campus and otherwise, as well as more narrowly defined disciplinary matters are essential elements of an intellectual environment and such debates are the very definition of the Wisconsin Idea.” Biddy Martin, Chancellor of the University of Wisconsin-Madison wrote this passage in an open message on academic freedom. This message comes in response to the Freedom of Information Act request for the emails of historian Professor William Cronon who holds an exalted position on that campus. On March 21 of this year, The New York Times published an op-ed piece by Professor Cronon on the current events on-going in Wisconsin politics. In particular, Professor Cronon criticized Governor Walker for a lack of transparency in the unfolding of those events. That concept, transparency, seems to be in political ascendency these days, being deployed by both parties and virtually every position in between. So it is either in keeping with that thread in American politics, or just pure irony, that Professor Cronon has become the subject of a state Freedom of Information Act request. The University of Wisconsin legal counsel, John C. Dowling, has honored that request. I recommend to any one interested in this case, and how legal counsel operates within institutions to protect our missions, the letter. It is a model of professionalism and honor. http://www.news.wisc.edu/19196 In short, it explains the process by which the institution went about complying with the request, and in so doing separated protected categories of mail from that which was released. Educational records, intellectual property, professional correspondence and personal mail remained outside the scope. I would have intellectually enjoyed the sections of the letter where Mr. Dowling parses terms such as “union” and “recall” were the underlying matter not so serious. That, my friends, is the law in action: A public statute that allows for the request, legal counsel’s response. Chancellor Martin’s message is institutional policy at its best. http://www.insidehighered.com/blogs/law_policy_and_it/the_cronon_case_part_ii [Editor: Bravo. This is the kind of thing that makes you proud to be a lawyer.]

Cloud Computing and Personal Data, Round Two (Media Law Prof Blog, 5 April 2011) - W. Kuan Hon, Christopher Millard, and Ian Walden, all of Queen Mary University School of Law, have published Who is Responsible for ‘Personal Data’ in Cloud Computing? The Cloud of Unknowing, Part 2. Here is the abstract: “In part one of this series, we considered what information is regulated as ‘personal data’ in the cloud. In this part two, we develop further the argument made in part one that it is not appropriate for infrastructure cloud providers, many of which are based outside Europe, to become subject arbitrarily to obligations under the EU Data Protection Directive due to choices made by their users.

EU data protection responsibilities and liabilities are imposed primarily on the ‘controller,’ who may employ ‘processors’ to process data for it. We suggest, as with the concept of ‘personal data,’ the binary nature of the controller/processor distinction is no longer tenable. In today’s environment of complex chains of actors, end to end accountability should replace the binary distinction. While cloud computing service providers are commonly considered processors or controllers, this paper further argues that many infrastructure cloud computing providers are not even ‘processors,’ but simply provide facilities and/or tools for use by the controller/cloud user. Infrastructure as a Service and Platform as a Service providers, and certain Software as a Service providers, who offer no more than utility infrastructure services, will often not know whether information stored or processed through their services is ‘personal data’ or not – hence, the ‘cloud of unknowing.’ Infrastructure cloud providers are qualitatively distinct from services such as social networking websites.” http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/media_law_prof_blog/2011/04/cloud-computing-and-personal-data-round-two.html

Major Law Firms Fall Victim to Cyber Attack (Globe & Mail, 5 April 2011) - Hackers have penetrated four major Bay Street law firms in the past seven months with highly sophisticated cyber attacks designed to destroy data or to steal sensitive documents relating to impending mergers and acquisitions. Daniel Tobok, president of Toronto-based Digital Wyzdom Inc., who investigated the attacks, would not name the firms. The attacks, which he said appeared to originate from computers in China, show that Canadian law firms are a target for hackers and potentially, state-sponsored cyber espionage. They follow similar attacks on governments and major corporations in recent years. “They were harvesting information,” Mr. Tobok said of the hackers who penetrated the computers of the four Toronto law firms. He said it was hard to say if any sensitive data actually went missing, but said the attacks were at least successful at getting inside the firms’ systems. “This was probably one of the most sophisticated attacks we have seen.” David Craig, national information security practice leader for PricewaterhouseCoopers Canada, said law firms are a natural target for hackers because they are storehouses of information of interest to everyone from organized crime to spouses in marital disputes. But he said law firms tend to be extra careful about confidential information. Large firms usually have sophisticated IT staff and policies in place to try to keep data secure. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/industry-news/the-law-page/major-law-firms-fall-victim-to-cyber-attacks/article1972226/

- and -

Law Firms Under Siege (DarkReading, 6 April 2011) - Law firms are increasingly getting hit by stealthy, low-profile targeted attacks going after intelligence on their corporate clients. Forensics investigators at Mandiant are working on twice as many targeted attacks by so-called advanced persistent threat (APT) adversaries against law firms than in years past; of the commercial victims Mandiant investigated during the past 18 months or so, 10 percent were law firms. And those are only the cases Mandiant sees: Its executives say many more go unnoticed by the victim organizations. Why are law firms joining the ranks of federal government agencies, defense contractors, and technology companies, like Google and RSA, as targets for APTs? “Law firms are a means to an end: a defense contractor or utility” that they represent, for example, says Steve Surdu, vice president of professional services at Mandiant. Surdu says while he worked on just a handful of cases where law firms were hit, he now sees a dozen to 15 at once. Attackers find law firms an attractive and relatively soft target for gathering the intelligence they want on a new weapons system or software, for example. Firms that represent clients in mergers and acquisitions, or civil litigation, are getting hit, including when their clients are involved with deals involving Chinese companies. Phishing attacks against law firms are nothing new -- the FBI warned firms back in November 2009 of a massive phishing attack aimed at firms. http://www.darkreading.com/advanced-threats/167901091/security/attacks-breaches/229401089/law-firms-under-siege.html

- and -

Law Firm Loses $78K in Massive Malware Scheme That Was Disabled by Feds (ABA Journal, 14 April 2011) - Federal authorities say they have disabled, with the help of Microsoft Corp., a massive “botnet” that is believed to have been operating for a decade and infecting nearly 2 million computers in the United States alone. Believed to have been run from Russia, it has allegedly been used to steal perhaps $100 million, including $78,421 from an unidentified South Carolina law firm’s bank account, according to Bloomberg. Relying on information from the Department of Justice, court filings, an internet security analyst and an unidentified agent of the FBI, the news service says the operation to shut down the so-called Coreflood botnet is the first time federal authorities have ever taken command of the network running such a scheme and sent instructions to victim computers to disable the malware. “There has been a real legal barrier to do this because essentially you are issuing instructions to someone else’s computer,” Alex Cox of the NetWitness Corp. cyber-security firm tells the news agency. “That is very, very significant.” http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/doj_says_massive_decade-old_botnet_helped_web_thieves_steal_millions/

2010: A Record Year for Domain Name Dispute Arbitrations (NLJ, 7 April 2011) - Arbitration cases involving allegations of cybersquatting, or improper use of trademarks in Internet domain-name registrations, hit record levels last year at the two organizations that handle most of the disputes. The National Arbitration Forum reported a 24% spike in new domain name dispute filings in 2010 to 2,177, up from 1,759 cases in 2009 and up 23% from the 1,770 cases filed in 2008. Much of the spike is driven by the “sheer volumetric increase in the number of domain names being registered,” said Kristine Dorrain, the forum’s Internet legal counsel. “The fact that the number of registrations continue to grow, means the number of disputes are going to continue to grow,” Dorrain said. The World Intellectual Property Organization reported 2,696 new case filings--a 28% spike over the 2,107 cases filed in 2009. Last year’s case filings also exceeded 2008 filings by 16%. That year’s 2,329 set the previous record for new WIPO cases. http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202489436357

NLRB to Press Reuters Over Reaction to Twitter Post (NYT, 7 April 2011) - In what would be the first government case against an employer involving Twitter, the National Labor Relations Board told Thomson Reuters on Wednesday that it planned to file a civil complaint accusing the company of illegally reprimanding a reporter over a public Twitter posting she had sent criticizing management. The board asserts that the company’s Reuters news division violated the reporter’s right to discuss working conditions when her supervisor reprimanded her for posting a message on the Twitter service that said, “One way to make this the best place to work is to deal honestly with Guild members.” The author of the post, Deborah Zabarenko, the agency’s environmental reporter in Washington and the head of the Newspaper Guild at Reuters, sent that to a company Twitter address after a supervisor had invited employees to send postings about how to make Reuters the best place to work. “The next day the bureau chief called me at home,” Ms. Zabarenko said in an interview. “He told me that Reuters had a policy that we were not supposed to say something that would damage the reputation of Reuters News or Thomson Reuters. I felt kind of threatened. I thought it was some kind of intimidation.” http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/07/business/media/07twitter.html?scp=1&sq=reuters%20twitter&st=cse

Attack Sheds Light on Internet Security Holes (NYT, 7 April 2011) - The Comodo Group, an Internet security company, has been attacked in the last month by a talkative and professed patriotic Iranian hacker who infiltrated several of the company’s partners and used them to threaten the security of myriad big-name Web sites. But the case is a problem for not only Comodo, which initially believed the attack was the work of the Iranian government. It has also cast a spotlight on the global system that supposedly secures communications and commerce on the Web. The encryption used by many Web sites to prevent eavesdropping on their interactions with visitors is not very secure. This technology is in use when Web addresses start with “https” (in which “s” stands for secure) and a closed lock icon appears on Web browsers. These sites rely on third-party organizations, like Comodo, to provide “certificates” that guarantee sites’ authenticity to Web browsers. But many security experts say the problems start with the proliferation of organizations permitted to issue certificates. Browser makers like Microsoft, Mozilla, Google and Apple have authorized a large and growing number of entities around the world — both private companies and government bodies — to create them. Many private “certificate authorities” have, in turn, worked with resellers and deputized other unknown companies to issue certificates in a “chain of trust” that now involves many hundreds of players, any of which may in fact be a weak link. The Electronic Frontier Foundation, an online civil liberties group, has explored the Internet in an attempt to map this nebulous system. As of December, 676 organizations were signing certificates, it found. Other security experts suspect that the scan missed many and that the number is much higher. Making matters worse, entities that issue certificates, though required to seek authorization from site owners, can technically issue certificates for any Web site. This means that governments that control certificate authorities and hackers who break into their systems can issue certificates for any site at will. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/07/technology/07hack.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=an%20attack%20sheds%20light&st=cse

Feds Defend Twitter Dragnet On WikiLeaks Supporters (The Register, 9 April 2011) - Federal prosecutors on Friday defended their attempts to access the Twitter records of three WikiLeaks supporters, arguing their claims that the dragnet violates their constitutional rights should be rejected. In a 19-page filing in federal court, prosecutors said a ruling issued last month should be upheld despite the claims by WikiLeaks supporters Jacob Appelbaum, Birgitta Jónsdóttir, and Rop Gonggrijp that it violates their right to free speech. The filing came in an ongoing criminal investigation into Julian Assange, founder of the whistle-blower website. The March 11 order approved the government’s request for IP addresses the supporters used to access Twitter between November 2009 and last December and the email addresses they gave when registering with the micro-blogging website. US Magistrate Judge Theresa Buchanan said there were no constitutional violations because the information sought didn’t involve the content of any of the Twitter subscribers’ communications. Federal prosecutors agreed. “The subscribers’ claim that Twitter’s non-content records are subject to heightened protections under the First Amendment is baseless,” they wrote. The information demand was made in a confidential filing in December under the US Stored Communications Act. The Twitter users also argued that the secrecy of the motion violated their Fourth Amendment right protecting them from unreasonable searches and seizures. The government later agreed to make public most of the court documents filed in their demand, but withheld revealing one document that Buchanan said would reveal “sensitive nonpublic facts, including the identity of targets and witnesses.” Friday’s court filing is here. http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/04/09/twitter_dragnet_wikileaks/ [Editor: the MIRLN podcast 14.02 addresses some of this.]

Announcing DoctoredReviews.com, a Website Against Doctors’ Efforts to Squelch Online Patient Reviews (Eric Goldman, 13 April 2011) - I’m pleased to announce the launch of DoctoredReviews.com, a website that addresses Medical Justice’s form contract that seeks to restrict patients’ online reviews of doctors by taking a prospective copyright assignment in the patients’ unwritten reviews. Medical Justice’s practices have bothered me for years, but I never had the chance to organize my thoughts fully. Fortunately, last August, Jason Schultz of the Samuelson Law, Technology & Public Policy Clinic suggested that I could work with him and two Berkeley law students on this issue. After evaluating our options, we decided to pursue an advocacy website. Should the website fail to curb the bad practices, we may need to reconsider more aggressive options. I have given some recent talks about Medical Justice and the misuse of copyright law to manage online reputations. See my talk slides and my related academic paper. I’d welcome the chance to discuss these issues in more detail. http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2011/04/announcing_doct.htm

Twitter In the Courtroom (Media Law Prof Blog, 14 April 2011) - Adriana C. Cervantes, Hastings Law School, has published Will Twitter Be Following You in the Courtroom?: Why Reporters Should Be Allowed to Broadcast During Courtroom Proceedings, at 33 Hastings Communication & Entertainment Law Journal 133 (2010). Here is the abstract: “Thanks to micro-blogging and social networking tools, we no longer have to pick up a phone to call our friends and ask them what they are doing. Instead we turn to our laptop, BlackBerry, or iPhone to get instant information available to us through the Internet. Twitter is a key player in the Internet information exchange line-up. It has made its way into one of the oldest and most archaic forums: the courtroom. This article will discuss the history of prohibitions against broadcasting in the court, analyze the reasons why reporters should be allowed to use Twitter and other micro-blogging tools in the courtroom, and propose a solution for how their presence can be accounted for in order to maintain order in the court. This topic is significant because the digital era has presented new technology-in-the-court issues. People are entering courtrooms across America carrying electronic digital devices that can access blogging sites within seconds. The current law does not properly address whether reporters should be allowed to tweet, but this trend is becoming more prevalent. Twitter needs to be addressed with our current society in mind; a society wanting instant access to information. Legislatures and courts have both addressed the question of whether court proceedings should be broadcast differently. This note will examine whether broadcasting through websites like Twitter should be allowed during civil and criminal cases so that the public can have instant access to judicial proceedings.” http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/media_law_prof_blog/2011/04/twitter-in-the-courtroom.html

“I’m from the NSA, and We Don’t Get Out Much” (Lawfare, 14 April 2011) - It isn’t every day that a representative of the National Security Agency gives a public speech on the agency’s understanding of “Protecting Civil Liberties in a Cyber Age.” So I thought I would take good notes for Lawfare readers on Patrick Reynolds’ speech today at the Duke Conference. Reynolds is deputy general counsel at the NSA, and he gave a brief overview on the panel of the development of surveillance law. The panel included several other distinguished speakers, but I am focusing here only on Reynolds’ comments. It is a paraphrase, not an effort to transcribe. http://www.lawfareblog.com/2011/04/im-from-the-nsa-and-we-dont-get-out-much/ [Editor: pretty interesting, thorough, and useful historical discussion of applicable surveillance law, as against NSA’s evolving mission. Essentially serves as a counter-point to the Stanford podcast “Data Privacy - EPCA Revisited”, noted in MIRLN 14.04.]

**** NOTED PODCASTS ****
What Are the Ethics of Lawyer Review Sites Like Avvo? (ABA Journal, 4 April 2011; 20 minutes) - Some state attorney discipline agencies are heavily regulating how lawyers use rating sites for business development. But how do those rules jive with the less-stringent Communications Decency Act of 1996, which says users of such sites aren’t liable for content posted by others? ABA Journal podcast moderator Stephanie Francis Ward talks with guests to discuss, among other ethics issues, whether lawyers can/should face discipline for client-written “testimonials.” http://www.abajournal.com/news/article/podcast_monthly_episode_13/ [with Vincent Buzard, Eric Goldman, and Jamie Zysk Isani)

David Brooks: The Social Animal (TED Talk, March 2011) - Tapping into the findings of his latest book, NYTimes columnist David Brooks unpacks new insights into human nature from the cognitive sciences -- insights with massive implications for economics and politics as well as our own self-knowledge. In a talk full of humor, he shows how you can’t hope to understand humans as separate individuals making choices based on their conscious awareness. http://www.ted.com/talks/david_brooks_the_social_animal.html [Editor: what a disappointment; I used to esteem Brooks, but this is trite and sophomoric—not to mention mean-spirited in his discussion of yuppie-moms. He’s fallen such a long way – go watch instead Brooks at his best: “The Geography of American Politics”, delivered at the University of Arizona on 8 October 2003 here: http://www.law.arizona.edu/Events/McCormick/mccormick2004.cfm.]

**** RESOURCES ****
The Vault (FBI, April 2011) - The Vault is our new electronic reading room, containing more than 2,000 documents that have been scanned from paper into digital copies so you can read them in the comfort of your home or office. Included here are more than 25 new files that have been released to the public but never added to this website; dozens of records previously posted on our site but removed as requests diminished; and files from our previous electronic reading room. The Vault includes several new tools and resources for your convenience. http://vault.fbi.gov/ [Editor: pretty lame – 2000 documents? Almost sounds like an April Fools joke; one of the topic headings is “Unexplained Phenomenon”, which contains a one-page 1950 memo to the Director about 3 flying saucers recovered in New Mexico.]

**** DIFFERENT ****
Harvard Law School Exams, 1871 to 1998 (Volokh Conspiracy, 4 April 2011) - This is the time during the semester in which law professors often post old exams to help students prepare for upcoming finals. Harvard Law School has done one better: It has posted all of the law school exams at Harvard from 1871 to 1998. Pretty interesting to see how exams evolved over time. http://volokh.com/2011/04/04/harvard-law-school-exams-1871-to-1998/

**** LOOKING BACK – MIRLN 10 YEARS AGO ****
REBELS IN BLACK ROBES RECOIL AT SURVEILLANCE OF COMPUTERS (New York Times, 8 August 2001) -- A group of federal employees who believed that the monitoring of their office computers was a major violation of their privacy recently staged an insurrection, disabling the software used to check on them and suggesting that the monitoring was illegal and unethical. This was not just a random bunch of bureaucrats but a group of federal judges who are still engaged in a dispute with the office in Washington that administers the judicial branch and that had installed the software to detect downloading of music, streaming video and pornography. http://www.zdnet.com/zdnn/stories/news/0,4586,2803076,00.html?chkpt=zdnnp1tp02

TECHNOLOGY: TRAVEL WEB SITE FACES INTENSE SCRUTINY (June 3, 2001 08:17 p.m. EDT) - Officially launching on Monday, Orbitz is probably the only Internet start-up requiring employees to attend a four-hour seminar on antitrust law. The travel Web site, which is backed by $145 million in seed money from five major airlines, faces scrutiny from rivals, consumer advocates and federal authorities. The watchfulness is only going to intensify, said chief executive Jeffrey Katz, which is why “we’ve taken a lot of steps to make sure that we live within the bounds of the law.” Critics say Orbitz will reduce, if not eliminate, competition and pave the way for higher prices. Orbitz, which also lists vacation packages, hotel rooms and rental cars, denies the allegations. Katz said Orbitz will enhance competition by listing fares from all airlines without bias. http://www.nandotimes.com/technology/story/20212p-372327c.html

**** NOTES ****
MIRLN (Misc. IT Related Legal News) is a free e-newsletter published every three weeks by Vince Polley at KnowConnect PLLC. You can subscribe to the MIRLN distribution list by sending email to Vince Polley (mailto:vpolley@knowconnect.com?subject=MIRLN) with the word “MIRLN” in the subject line. Unsubscribe by sending email to Vince with the words “MIRLN REMOVAL” in the subject line.

Recent MIRLN issues are archived at www.knowconnect.com/mirln. Get supplemental information through Twitter: http://twitter.com/vpolley #mirln.

SOURCES (inter alia):
1. The Filter, a publication of the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School, http://cyber.law.harvard.edu
2. InsideHigherEd - http://www.insidehighered.com/
3. SANS Newsbites, sans@sans.org
4. NewsScan and Innovation, http://www.newsscan.com
5. BNA’s Internet Law News, http://ecommercecenter.bna.com
7. McGuire Wood’s Technology & Business Articles of Note
8. Steptoe & Johnson’s E-Commerce Law Week
9. Eric Goldman’s Technology and Marketing Law Blog, http://blog.ericgoldman.org/
10. Law.com
11. Readers’ submissions, and the editor’s discoveries.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License. To view a copy of this license, visit or send a letter to Creative Commons, 543 Howard Street, 5th Floor, San Francisco, California, 94105, USA.