Discourse.net

Lori Drew’s conviction overturned: A classic case of ugly facts but even uglier legal arguments appears to have (finally) concluded with the legally correct result.

This case mattered, because the government’s legal theory would have turned every violation of a private firm’s terms of service into a crime. Yes, that bad.

Case dismissed against woman in MySpace hoax that led to teen’s suicide

A federal judge tentatively decided today to dismiss the case against a Missouri woman who had been convicted of computer fraud stemming from an Internet hoax that prompted a teenage girl to commit suicide.

Lori Drew of Dardenne Prairie, Mo., was convicted in November of three misdemeanor counts of illegally accessing a protected computer.

The decision by U.S. District Judge George H. Wu will not become final until his written ruling is filed, probably next week. Wu said he was concerned that if Drew was found guilty of violating the terms of service in using MySpace, anyone who violated the terms could be convicted of a crime.

Congratulations to Orin Kerr, who worked pro bono for this result.

See also article at wired.com.

I’ve been keeping an eye on the online coverage (and blog postings) regarding UM’s recent offer of a public interest scholarship to students who defer a year. Little of it has been in any way enlightening (even the comments here were very uneven). But the National Law Journal has actual facts,

Law school pays students to stay away: [Incoming UM Law Dean Patricia White] would not disclose how many students the law school accepted for next fall, but said that the yield rate increased from 28% last year to 36% this year.

…

Law school applications were up overall this year, but they didn’t surge the way many had predicted. Conventional wisdom holds that more people seek out graduate programs during bad economic times to avoid a tough job market. According to the admissions council, law school applications increased nationally by 4.3%.

“We certainly haven’t seen the double-digit increases we saw in past recessions,” said Yellen, who theorized that the high cost of law school and the news of law firm layoffs might have dissuaded some people from applying.

Assuming the change in UM’s applications were somewhere near the national average (4.3%), a 28.5% increase in yield (from 28% to 36%) is indeed a monumental and unpredictable event.

Bill Henderson, Empirical Legal Studies: The End of an Era: the Bi-Modal Distribution for the Class of 2008:

Of the 22,305 law school graduates in NALP’s sample (over half of all 2008 graduates), a remarkable 23% (5,130 ‘08 grads) reported an entry-level salary of $160,000. In contrast, 42% of entry level lawyers reported salaries in the $40,000 to $65,000 range. Once again, the central tendencies are a poor guide to the distribution as a whole: whereas the mean salary is a $92,000, the median salary was $72,000. Further, the two modes ($50,000 and $160,000) are separated by $110,000.

Amidst all the layoffs, deferrals, salary cuts, and apprenticeship programs announced in 2009, it is safe to venture that the bi-modal era has peaked. Every law school class for the foreseeable future will graduate to a much different economic landscape. Although many students will regret the opportunity to earn such a big payday upon graduation, it brought with it intense billing pressure, client resentment, heavy leverage, and very little substantive training for new hires. I would argue that profession as a whole (including current and future graduating classes) is better off with a lower entry level salary.

Admittedly that is a long-term view for the profession as a whole. In the short term, current students and recent graduates are in a world of hurt.

And that hurt is spelled D-E-B-T. This has to have implications for law schools.

There’s clearly a business model here for a multi-national legal partnership willing to provide this service at commodity prices.

Tales from the encrypt: the secrets of data protection | Technology | guardian.co.uk

But what if I were killed or incapacitated before I managed to hand the passphrase over to an executor or solicitor who could use them to unlock all this stuff that will be critical to winding down my affairs – or keeping them going, in the event that I’m incapacitated? I don’t want to simply hand the passphrase over to my wife, or my lawyer. Partly that’s because the secrecy of a passphrase known only to one person and never written down is vastly superior to the secrecy of a passphrase that has been written down and stored in more than one place. Further, many countries’s laws make it difficult or impossible for a court to order you to turn over your keys; once the passphrase is known by a third party, its security from legal attack is greatly undermined, as the law generally protects your knowledge of someone else’s keys to a lesser extent than it protects your own.

…

Finally, I hit on a simple solution: I’d split the passphrase in two, and give half of it to my wife, and the other half to my parents’ lawyer in Toronto. The lawyer is out of reach of a British court order, and my wife’s half of the passphrase is useless without the lawyer’s half (and she’s out of reach of a Canadian court order). If a situation arises that demands that my lawyer get his half to my wife, he can dictate it over the phone, or encrypt it with her public key and email it to her, or just fly to London and give it to her.

As simple as this solution is, it leaves a few loose ends: first, what does my wife do to safeguard her half of the key should she perish with me? The answer is to entrust it to a second attorney in the UK (I can return the favour by sending her key to my lawyer in Toronto). Next, how do I transmit the key to the lawyer? I’ve opted for a written sheet of instructions, including the key, that I will print on my next visit to Canada and physically deliver to the lawyer.

Someone could package this. There would be some details to work out, especially how best to transport the data (internet? post? special encrypted usb sticks?), but it could be done.

I'm reluctant to upgrade to Firefox 3.5 because so many of my extentions are incompatible

Enabled Extensions: [28]

• Adblock Plus 1.0.2 - Ads were yesterday! PASS
• Auto Copy 0.9.7 - Copies selected text to the clipboard automatically. Like Linux or mIrc. 3.1
• Better Gmail 2 0.8.1 - Enhances Gmail with a compilation of useful features written by Greasemonkey user script developers. All scripts copyright their original authors. Click on the script homepage in the Help tab for more information. 3.0
• Better GReader 0.6.1 - Enhances Google Reader with a compilation of user scripts and skins. PASS
• BetterPrivacy 1.29 - "Super-Cookie Safeguard" Unclear
• CoLT 2.4.4 - Makes it easy to copy link text and locations. Unclear
• CookieSafe 3.0.5 - Control cookie permissions. PASS
• CustomizeGoogle 0.76 - Enhance Google search results and remove ads and spam. PASS
• FlashGot 1.1.9.6 - Enables single and massive ("all" and "selection") downloads using the most popular external download managers for Windows, Mac OS X, Linux and FreeBSD (dozens currently supported, see Extension's Home Page for details). FlashGot offers also a Build Gallery functionality which helps to synthetize full media galleries in one page from serial contents originally scattered on several pages, for easy and fast "download all". PASS
• Gmail Manager 0.5.7.2 - Gmail accounts management and new mail notifications. PASS
• Google Redesigned 0.3 - A complete redesign of popular Google services.PASS
• IE View Lite 1.3.4 - Cut down version of IE View by Paul Roub. PASS
• Java Console 6.0.13 Why is this still here? How do I get rid of it?
• Java Console 6.0.14 ???
• Java Quick Starter 1.0 ???
• Map This 0.3.1 - Get map for a selected address PASS
• Microsoft .NET Framework Assistant 1.1 - Adds ClickOnce support and the ability to report installed .NET Framework versions to the web server. No idea.
• MR Tech Toolkit 6.0.3.3 - MR Tech Toolkit power tools for all users. (en-US) PASS
• No Squint 1.93.2.1 - Manage site-specific full page and text zoom levels PASS
• NoScript 1.9.5 - Extra protection for your Firefox: NoScript allows JavaScript, Java (and other plugins) only for trusted domains of your choice (e.g. your home-banking web site). This whitelist based pre-emptive blocking approach prevents exploitation of security vulnerabilities (known and even unknown!) with no loss of functionality -- Experts will agree: Firefox is really safer with NoScript :-) Unclear
• Resizeable Textarea 0.1d - Resize textareas to your needs. 3.1b3
• ScrapBook 1.3.3.9 - Helps you to save Web pages and organize the collection.3.0 (Dealbreaker!)
• Searchbar Autosizer 1.4.1 - Expand the searchbox as you type 3.0
• Stealther 1.0.6 - Surf the web without leaving a trace in Firefox. 3.0
• Tab Mix Plus 0.3.6.1.080416 - Tab browsing with an added boost. 3.1b2pre (eh?)
• Targeted Advertising Cookie Opt-Out (TACO) 1.8 - Sets permanent opt-out cookies to stop behavioral advertising by 84 different advertising networks, including Google, Yahoo, Microsoft, all members of the Network Advertising Initiative, and many other companies. PASS
• Update Notifier 0.1.5.4 - Notifies you when updates are available for your extensions and themes. 3.0
• Xmarks 3.1.0 - Bookmark Sync and Web Discovery PASS

Miami Herald, FIU graduate robbed at gunpoint on campus

A recent Florida International University graduate, cramming for his Florida Bar law exam, was robbed at gunpoint of his laptop outside the school’s Green Library, FIU police said.

Derrick Storms, 28, of Miami, who graduated from the law school in May, said he was sitting outside the closed library around 4:30 a.m. Monday when one of two teens on bikes approached him.

Being robbed is not a stress that bar-studying students need. Especially if they’re so stressed that they’re studying at 4:30 am.

Columbia Journalism Review (!), L’Affaire Froomkin, as Told by Froomkin

Marcy Wheeler’s great liveblog of Jay Rosen interview wit Dan at the PDF meeting in New York (best quote, “Not offending people is not a business model.”)

U. Miami Law will offer incoming students a $5,000 public interest scholarship towards tuition to defer a year".

Our incoming Dean Patricia White just sent the following offer to all currently enrolled future 1Ls:

Every year our Admissions Office uses our past experience with acceptance rates to decide how many students to admit. In these economically troubled times past experience has turned out to be a poor guide. An unprecedented percentage of applicants admitted to the University of Miami Law School have accepted our offer. This will give us a larger than optimal first-year class. Accordingly we are offering an incentive to defer admission until Fall 2010. If you wish to take advantage of this offer you must notify us by e-mail (admissions@law.miami.edu) or facsimile (305 284 3084) by July 10, 2009.

While I would like to believe that this year's elevated acceptance rate reflects the great sense of excitement about the Law School and its future that led me to become its new Dean, I fear that some of it may be related to the shortage of jobs in the current economy. Perhaps many of you are looking to law school as a safe harbor in which you can wait out the current economic storm.

If this describes your motivation for going to law school I urge you to think hard about your plans and to consider deferring enrollment. Law school requires an enormous investment of work, energy, time, and money. It is very demanding intellectually and emotionally. Beyond this, in these uncertain and challenging times the nature of the legal profession is in great flux. It is very difficult to predict what the employment landscape for young lawyers will be in May 2012 and thereafter.

If you are choosing to join us this Fall because you are strongly committed to the study of law we welcome you with open arms and promise to do our best to provide you with an exceptional and challenging educational experience. But if you are approaching law school with ambivalence or the thought that it will be a safe haven, perhaps you should take a year to decide whether it is the best choice for you.

To encourage this we are offering incentives to admitted students to defer admission until Fall 2010. The basic idea is that we will give you a $5000 Public Interest Deferral Scholarship for the 2010-11 academic year if you defer starting law school until August 2010. There is one additional condition: performing and documenting 120 hours of public service by June 1, 2010. This requirement reflects the commitment to public service we try to instill in all our students.

The following are the benefits of taking advantage of this unique offer and deferring your enrollment to Fall 2010:

• Guaranteed $5,000 Public Interest Deferral Scholarship when completing 120 hours of public service. This scholarship would be in addition to any other scholarship award you may receive (not to exceed the cost of tuition).
• Increase your likelihood of selection for a $75,000 Miami Scholars Scholarship award ($25,000 each year for 3 years). This is a scholarship designed to encourage and reward public service.
• If qualified, be among the first group considered for all 2010 scholarships (see offer details).
• Apply your entire $300 seat deposit to Fall 2010, rather than receiving only a partial refund and forfeiting the balance.

For further important details about this offer, click here. (http://www.law.miami.edu/ps/deferral_offer_details.php)

If you would like to defer your admission to Fall 2010, please contact us by e-mail (admissions@law.miami.edu) or facsimile (305-284-3084) by July 10th. If you have questions, please contact the Office of Admissions (305-284-2527).

I am delighted that the University of Miami is your law school of choice. I am very excited about its future and hope to welcome you either this August or next.

Warm regards,

Trish White
Dean Designate

I had heard that our yield rate was way up this year. I guess it was waaay up.

I wonder what the takeup rate on this offer will be?

“Breaking News 4:05 PM ET: Norm Coleman Concedes to Al Franken in Senate Race” — NYT.

Former Senator Norman Coleman’s appeal of a court decision rejecting various challenges to Al Franken’s Senate victory has failed on all counts. The Minnesota Supreme Court ruled unanimously per curiam for Franken on every issue.

The decision does not actually order the Governor to certify the election, it just affirms the lower court decision. (The Governor not being a party to the case, it’s not clear to me that the court could have issued such an order procedurally.) In the ordinary course that should suffice — the Governor’s duty is now clear.

Update: the key language is this: “For all of the foregoing reasons, we affirm the decision of the trial court that Al Franken received the highest number of votes legally cast and is entitled under Minn. Stat. § 204C.40 (2008) to receive the certificate of election as United States Senator from the State of Minnesota.” That doesn’t leave the Governor much wiggle room unless Coleman starts trying to get a federal injunction. Which ether won’t be forthcoming or will be really, really brief.

The possibilities for obstruction now are either that the Governor will not certify the result (uncertain, but he’s suggested in the past he’d do what the state Supreme Court ordered), and an attempt to take the case to the US Supreme Court. I don’t think the Supreme Court will touch this one, but I suppose the cert petition might buy Coleman a little more time. He certainly has no shortage of funds from GOP groups trying to prevent the seating of the 60th Democratic Senator.

(Not that I place great hopes on a 60-strong Democratic contingent. There are still too many who won’t vote to break filibusters.)

A group of law librarians at Stanford Law Library have drafted a very short petition directed at the Administrative Office of the US Courts to improve PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records), and you can see it (and sign it) at Improve PACER - The Petition Site:

We ask the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts to improve PACER by enhancing the authenticity, usability and availability of the system.

We the undersigned, urge the Administrative Office of the US Courts (AO) to make the following changes to the PACER system:

For verification and reliability, the AO should digitally sign every document put into PACER using readily available technology.

PACER needs to be much more readily accessible if it is to be usable for research, education, and the practice of law. Improved accessibility includes both lowering the costs for using PACER and enhancing the web interfaces.

Depository libraries should also have free access to PACER.

This is a great idea, and deserves support.

Bob Herbert, NYT, How Long Is Long Enough?

Glenn Greenwald, NPR Ombudsman refuses interview regarding “torture”

Crooks & Liars, New Yorker Magazine Buries Major Abu Ghraib Abuse On Page 6 Of CIA Story

Judge Posner has proposed that we ban hyperlinking in order to save newspapers.

Expanding copyright law to bar online access to copyrighted materials without the copyright holder’s consent, or to bar linking to or paraphrasing copyrighted materials without the copyright holder’s consent, might be necessary to keep free riding on content financed by online newspapers from so impairing the incentive to create costly news-gathering operations that news services like Reuters and the Associated Press would become the only professional, nongovernmental sources of news and opinion.

Copyfight says that this is Proof That Even Very Smart People Can Say Very Stupid Things. Brilliant as Judge Posner most undoubtedly is, and will full respect for his many true contributions to legal thinking, this is far from the first such example he has provided us. (Recall Posner on rape, or on baby-selling.) Which, along with a certain degree of unpredictability, is why he’s not on the Supreme Court, even though most lawyers would rank him as at least one of the most brilliant legal scholars of his generation.

Washington Post Ombudsman, part II: Froomkin Departs, Leaving Angry Loyalists And Questions (“Institutionally, The Post is now responding by circling the wagons … when I was able to start querying editors yesterday, a wall of silence was erected.”)

And don’t miss the readers’ comments….

Other voices:

• Brad DeLong, Washington Post Andy Alexander Says that It Is Dan Froomkin’s Fault that Fred Hiatt and Company Fired Him
• Chris Weigant, HuffPo, Friday Talking Points [83] — Dan Froomkin’s Final WashingtonPost.com Column
• Marcy Wheeler, Firedoglake, The WaPo’s Omerta on Froomkin
• Matthew Yglesias, Think Progress, Will The Washington Post Survive?
• Bob Somerby, The Daily Howler (scroll down)
• Kevin Jon Heller, Opinio Juris, Froomkin, Lord Carlile, and US Political Journalism

But I’m not supposed to say anything.