Law X.0

Twenty-five Developments That Changed the Internet

Take a walk down memory lane. See USA Today's Things That Changed the Internet. [JH]

Navigating Social Networking Tools

Check out Navigating Social Networking Tools: Blogs, Wikis, RSS Feeds and Beyond, by Elizabeth Geesey Holmes, University of Georgia School of Law. Here's the abstract:

What are “social networking” tools, and why should lawyers care about them? Wikipedia, itself built on social networking software, notes that social networking refers to a category of Internet applications to help connect friends, business partners, or other individuals together using a variety of tools. These applications, known as online social networks are becoming increasingly popular. This phenomenon is also known as Web 2.0. Jack Maness, a librarian at University of Colorado at Boulder, defines it as, "not a web of textual publication, but a web of multi-sensory communication … a matrix of dialogues, not a collection of monologues. It is a user-centered Web in ways it has not been thus far." In Web 2.0 the end user – you – is (or at least has the option to be) an integral part of the data. Some of the social networking tools you may or may not be familiar with are: Blogs, Wikis, RSS Feeds, Tagging/Bookmark sites, Podcasts and Vodcasts. I will discuss these tools, how to find them, how to use them, and their possible relevance for lawyers and for legal research.

[JH]

Using Technology to Improve Feedback on Student Writing in Law School

Daniel Barnett, Boston College Law School, has deposited Form Ever Follows Function: Using Technology to Improve Feedback on Student Writing in Law School in NELLCO. Here's the abstract:

Critiquing student writing is an important responsibility of many law professors. While the focus of a teacher's critique should be on the substance of the feedback, teachers should also consider the form of the critique to ensure that they are providing the necessary guidance to students effectively and efficiently. When choosing the critique format, teachers have a variety of options, including several electronic techniques. Unfortunately, many teachers have not considered the use of technology to comment on student writing. However, advances in technology coupled with the technological savvy and comfort level of today's student, may eventually dictate that all law teachers use some kind of electronic feedback when commenting on their students' papers.

This article is designed to encourage law professors to consider the use of technology to comment on student assignments by demonstrating that an electronic format could help many teachers be more proficient when critiquing their students' writing. To help teachers determine the best critique format for their classes, the article provides a comparison of the different commenting methods and explores the considerations teachers should use when choosing the form of feedback. The article closes with a step-by-step guide to the current technology for providing comments on student writing electronically.

[JH]

Blog Offers Law School Admissions Advice

Check out Law School Admissions Expert. Hat tip to Adjunct Law Prof Blog. [JH]

Legal Issues for Social Networking Sites and Users

Interesting article from Findlaw:

"It seems that everyone is a member of a social network these days. Whether it's your kids on MySpace and Facebook, or your colleagues on LinkedIn, people are taking advantage of these new online meeting spaces to make friends, communicate and expand business opportunities.

But what are the legal obligations that arise out of the use of social networks, both for the user and the sites themselves? The law in this area is still relatively unsettled, but some recent developments have created intriguing precedent, and legislation in motion promises to keep things interesting for the foreseeable future." 

[RJ

Trademark Doctrines in Google Search Litigation

Rutgers law prof Greg Lastowka has deposited Google's Law in the bepress Legal Repository. From the introduction:

Google has become, for the majority of Americans, the index of choice for online information. Through dynamically generated results pages keyed to a near-infinite variety of search terms, Google steers our thoughts and our learning online. It tells us what words mean, what things look like, where to buy things, and who and what is most important to us. Google’s control over “results” constitutes an awesome ability to set the course of human knowledge. As this paper will explain, fortunes are won and lost based on Google’s results pages, including the fortunes of Google itself. Because Google’s results are so significant to e-commerce activities today, they have already been the subject of substantial litigation. Today’s courtroom disputes over Google’s results are based primarily, though not exclusively, in claims about the requirements of trademark law. This paper will argue that the most powerful trademark doctrines shaping these cases, “initial interest confusion” and “trademark use,” are not up to the task they have been given, but that trademark law must continue to stay engaged with Google’s results.

[JH]