California Business Law Update

Morgan Tovey and I will be giving an intellectual property law update at Bridgeport's California Business Law program in November. Trouble is, there's been far too much happening to hope to cover in a one hour time slot. We have some pet areas we're honing in on, but if there's anything you think we simply have to include please let me know.

Vocabulary Lesson

"Pimptorial."

An Appeal A Day

My eagle-eyed colleague Ben Shatz has been mining the 9th Circuit Web site productively lately:

• Yesterday, he spotted the fact that 9th Cir. memdispos [are] now on-line!, as Howard noted. ("Memdispo" is short for memorandum disposition: a decision without a published opinion.) This morning he sent word of the Court's reminder that these decisions remain unciteable, and are now available online simply for efficiency and convenience.

• Today, Ben also sent word of the 9th Circuit's recent posting of an updated (9/13/04) version of Tom Carter's Standards of Review guide. Sez Ben: "It's more than 470 pages long, but very useful!" Johnathan Soglin agrees.

Did anyone happen to blog Howard's presentation last night on electronic filing and the Courts of Appeals? I'd like to read that.

Finally, John at The Legal Reader highlights portions of the California Court of Appeal's (Fourth District, Division 3) recent Quest International decision I've had so much fun reading. Footnote 26 is a keeper.

"You need a Robolawyer"

So writes Mark Rasch in this month's Wired, and he's right:

What is needed - desperately - is a law robot. A browser-based automaton that could be adjusted to match your tolerance for legal mumbo jumbo. Take privacy agreements, for example: The browser could be set to share your identity only with sites that promise to use the information solely to complete your purchase, or that agree not to share it with third parties, or any of a host of options. Web site operators would use a similar query-based method to set up their privacy policies. Of course, they could write their own language, but they would then run the risk that your robolawyer wouldn't accept it.

The article is a perfect jumping off point for a session at Digital ID World, don't you think Eric and Phil? Doc's keynotes in years past have been very much in this vein, but haven't honed in on this particular issue.

The Bar Is Open

Open Bar, Inc. launched last week:

Open Bar is a not-for-profit organization founded with the goals of (i) developing clear information about the legal rights and responsibilities of software developers, legal professionals and users of software in the emerging arena of open source/free software; and (ii) educating software developers, legal professionals and the general public about the issues, rights and responsibilities associated with the development, use and distribution of open source/free software.

[...]

The demand for education and leadership from the legal community is high and increasing daily, yet until now no legal, non-political group has stepped up to stem the tide of conflicting information and lack of clarity. Open Bar seeks to fill this gap, by (i) fostering development of objective means for evaluating the strength and enforceability of the various licenses and (ii) educating legal professionals and other members of the open source and free software communities on their related rights and responsibilities.

Looks like a terrific project, and they're getting good press (I found them on the front page of the Daily Journal). EETimes has more, Firm ready to spread legal word on open source: "Open Bar plans to deal with [the business community's] unfamiliarity [with open source law] by uploading legal presentations to its Web site (www.open-bar.org), conducting seminars, running online discussion groups and steering questioners to legal experts familiar with the complexities of open-source law."