Peter Black's Freedom to Differ

Blackboard to sync with Facebook

Michael Rees has a good post on a potentially great new Blackboard tool:

This influence Facebook has over the social networking of university students across the world is undoubtedly significant and probably growing. The dominant learning management system used in universities is Blackboard. However by design Blackboard is a closed system within each institution and it would be very difficult to emulate Facebook’s global reach.

It is quite natural therefore that Blackboard should seek to link with Facebook so that students can be notified of significant Blackboard information changes within their favourite Facebook social environment. Thus we now have BBSync, a Facebook application that synchronises information changes from Blackboard. To allow institutions to control which information, if any, finds its way into the potentially public Facebook network Blackboard now provide a building block. This component also monitors and logs the use of the Facebook application.

Read more here.  From the Bb Sync official wiki:

Blackboard Sync^TM is a safe and secure student engagement tool for Facebook that keeps students continually connected to their academic studies and promotes online social learning opportunities.

COURSE UPDATES

Blackboard Sync is an application that delivers Blackboard course information and updates through the Facebook interface to keep students in touch and engaged with their academic studies. >>More

CLASSMATE NETWORK

Blackboard Sync enables students to connect with their classmates through Facebook, thus creating social learning opportunities. >>More

SAFE SYNC

Blackboard Sync offers several options for participation to give the institutions as much control as they need. >>More

Read more here.  It will be interesting to see whether universities embrace this application.  I think many students would find it useful (although some would surely prefer to keep their social space and educational space separate).  However, the bigger question is whether universities are willing effectively sanction the use of Facebook when I know many may be concerned about plagiarism issues through to the fear of sexual predators being present on the site.  I'm hopeful my institution would be willing to use this tool - after all, they let me set up an official Facebook group for first year law students this year, and we have been early adopters of Second Life, Skype and Gmail -  but I imagine we would probably want to wait and see the experience of other institutions before we adopt this tool.  Regardless I intend to let my supervisors know of this application in the next week and begin to gauge their reaction and the likelihood of early adoption.

Why Gen Y is going to change the web

ReadWriteWeb's Sarah Perez looks at why Gen Y is going to change the web:

Gen Y is taking over. The generation of young adults that's composed of the children of Boomers, Generation Jones, and even some Gen X'ers, is the biggest generation since the Baby Boomers and three times the size of Gen X. As the Boomers fade into retirement and Gen Y takes root in the workplace, we're going to see some big changes ahead, not just at work, but on the web as a whole.

There's some contention over where exactly Gen Y starts and stops - some say those born 1983-1997, others think 1982-1997. In this week's Entertainment Weekly, Gen Y is defined as "current 13 to 31 year-olds" and BusinessWeek says they can be as young as five. Regardless, we know who they are - they're the young kids of today, the most digitally active generation yet, having been born plugged in.

Read more here.  She goes on to look at how they're different: "They're Plugged In", "TV isn't King", "They Don't Care About Your Ad, They Care What Their Friends Think", "Work Isn't Their Whole World" and "They're Socially Conscious".  She then looks at Gen Y's relationship with technology: "Internet TV", "Socializing Rules ... But They Want to Control It", "Marketing Has To Change", "Work Tools Need to Mirror Web Tools", "Web Sites Will Need to Cater to Shorter Attention Spans", and "Mobile Web? Yes Please!".

The "Atomization of Conversation"

Josh Kopelman, Managing Director of First Round Capital, discusses a new phenomenon, the "atomization of conversation":

Last week I was speaking with Lawrence Hooper of Loladex and he used a phrase that's been sticking in my head.  When I asked him whether people would be willing to solicit their friends to make a local recommendations via his Facebook application -- he said how he believed his site represented the continued "atomization of conversations."

It's interesting to think about -- as more applications get connected to the social graph, conversation and dialog are being atomized.  If the current "geek" technologies go mainstream, you will no longer need to have a broad conversation about anything. 

• Why call someone and tell them you're coming to town?  They've seen it on Dopplr. 
• Want to tell someone about your recent trip to England?  Don't bother, they've seen the pictures on Flickr. 
• No need to call me and ask whether the new movie I just saw is any good -- you've seen my review on Flickster. 
• Want to know what music I'm listening to right now? -- check out iLike.
• Is someone you know suffering from an illness or injury? -- stay connected and informed (and offer support) at their Carepage.
• Did your friend just open a bottle of wine?  You can stay up to date on what they like (and don't) by following their CellarTracker reviews.
• And if that didn't cover it, don't worry, you probably saw it in my Facebook Status updates or Twitter feed.

Conversations are indeed becoming atomized and asynchronous.  No need for the "Hey, how are you doing?" discussion.  Personal dialog is being replaced by a Mini-feed.

Pro - David Levine says it best "Atomization means conversations are more powerful and real ones have more true content."

Con - There's something special and genuine about a conversation -- the anecdotes, personality and emotion don't come across the same in a 160 character SMS message.

Read it here.

First music download trial may get a do-over

At the Fordham University School of Law Conference on International Intellectual Property Law & Policy in March I participated in a panel discussion on Capitol Records v. Thomas (D. Minn. 2007) and statutory damages (Ray Beckerman has an informal preliminary transcript of that discussion here), so I am interested to read the case may have to be reheard:

A Minnesota woman ordered to pay $222,000 in the nation's first music download trial may get another chance with a jury.

The issue is whether record companies have to prove anyone else actually downloaded their copyrighted songs, or whether it's enough to argue that a defendant made copyrighted music available for copying.

The recording industry has sued thousands of people who shared music online, and has argued that all they have to prove is that the defendant made the music available. They compared it to someone displaying pirated DVDs for sale on a table.

Music-sharers have argued that the only proven downloaders of their music were investigators working for the record companies themselves.

That was the case in the trial last fall of Jammie Thomas of Brainerd. U.S. District Court Judge Michael J. Davis instructed jurors that making sound recordings available without permission violates record company copyrights "regardless of whether actual distribution has been shown."

On Thursday Davis said that may have been a mistake.

He wrote that he found a 1993 ruling from the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers Minnesota, that said infringement requires "an actual dissemination of either copies or phonorecords."

The question of how much the record companies have to prove to win their case came up just before it went to the jury on Oct. 4. Davis decided the issue from the bench, siding with the jury instruction favored by the record companies.

On Thursday, Davis wrote that neither side presented the 1993 decision to him. And he noted that one of the rulings in another case from Arizona, which the record companies used to support their side, was vacated on April 29.

Oral arguments on the question of a new trial are planned for July 1 in Duluth, where the trial was held.

...

Record companies have sued at least 30,000 people for distributing music online. Some cases have been dismissed, and many defendants settled for a few thousand dollars. Thomas, who makes $36,000 a year working for the Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe, was the first to take the record companies all the way to a trial.

Jurors ordered her to pay $222,000, which was $9,250 for each of the 24 songs record companies brought up in her trial. The original lawsuit accused her of offering 1,702 songs on the Kazaa file-sharing network.

Thomas has not yet had to pay the verdict while it has been on appeal, her attorney, Brian Toder, said on Thursday. Toder, of the Minneapolis law firm of Chestnut & Cambronne, said he's in talks with the record companies to settle the case.

Toder had asked for a new trial because he said the $222,000 verdict was unconstitutionally out of proportion to the damages against the record companies. That issue would be moot if the judge orders a new trial.

The question of how much the record companies must prove to win their lawsuits seems destined for more dates with appeals court judges.

Read more here (from SiliconValley.com).

ID fraud on social networking sites

The Age has a detailed look at identity fraud in social networking sites:

IT'S what makes you unique among the Earth's 6.65 billion humans - your identity. Your name, your date of birth, where you live, who you barrack for, even your pet's name - private details now so easily made public on social networking sites that attract 500 million users around the world.

To an identity thief, these personal details are all they need to flesh out a fake ID that can let them clean out your bank account or set up a false credit card, loan, welfare payments or even a passport.

With 200,000 Australians now on social networking sites such as Facebook, MySpace and Bebo every day, security experts and consumer groups are predicting this year will be a bumper one for ID fraud.

Security software company Symantec's global internet security report for the last six months of 2007 shows malicious attacks are now focused on trusted websites putting the attackers in our midst.

"We used to tell people not to go down the dark alleys of the internet, but that doesn't apply today," Symantec Australia chief Craig Scroggie says. "It's not the back alleys, it's the main roads like the social networking sites where the attackers are actively seeking us out."

...

Where it's happening is the most significant twist, with the latest data showing that trusted sites such as Facebook and Second Life are being infiltrated to strip individuals of their personal information.

...

The BBC's Watchdog program recently uncovered that murky truth with a Facebook experiment using a fictional character called Amba Friend. Watchdog set up a Facebook account for her and sent out messages to 100 random Facebook users asking them to be her friend. Of those, 35 strangers said yes, including 23-year-old Scott Gould. Watchdog used the personal details on Mr Gould's profile, including his date of birth, to apply for an online bank account and credit card in his name. Both were instantly approved.

Software security provider Sophos followed suit, fabricating a character called Freddi Staur, who lured 82 users into handing over their personal details, including their phone numbers.

A spokesman for the Australian Consumer Association Choice, Christopher Zinn, says there is a false sense of security online that leads people to behave more recklessly than they would in the real world.

"Would people stick personal details like pictures of themselves growing up on a lamppost outside their house or on a public bulletin board in the supermarket?" he asks.

"The exuberance and the excitement that these sites generate tend to work against the cautions. But once you give those details out, you've lost control of them forever."

Digital strategist and researcher Julian Cole did his thesis on the way young people use social networking. He says security just doesn't concern them.

"This generation is much more forward in the information they're giving over to sites like Facebook," he says. "There's no reservation in revealing date of birth, schools, football teams, even mobile phone numbers. They don't have that worry about security."

...

The Privacy Commissioner Karen Curtis says "it is likely that individuals posting information on social networking sites would be exempt from the coverage of the Privacy Act" as the act doesn't extend to individuals or organisations based overseas such as Facebook and MySpace.

In his recent report on identity crime, Federal Home Affairs Minister Bob Debus pushed for new laws against identity theft, including victim certificates issued by the courts to help undo damage done by identity thieves.

Only in South Australia and Queensland is it an offence to assume or steal another person's identity. By comparison, identity theft is a federal crime in the US with penalties of up to 15 years' jail and fines of $250,000.

AUSTRALIAN Privacy Foundation chairman Roger Clarke says that beyond companies and criminals, there's also reckless behaviour coming from individuals using social networking sites.

"We've always assumed fraud was a threat in big organisations," he says. "Now we've reached the stage where individuals are a threat to one another in handling data like disclosing photos of someone off their brain, which a boss might see before a job offer."

But Mr Clarke argues stricter laws aren't the answer.

"When somebody uses a social networking site, it's a consent-based arrangement," he says. "What we don't want to do is wreck the balance between freedom and protection."

Ultimately, he believes web users might find their own solutions. "As we get a bigger pile up of embarrassment and significant loss, we'll see a lot more use of pseudonyms, like spelling your first name in an interesting way, so that only your 'group' knows who you are."

Read more here.

Who is younger than John McCain?

Ok.  We get it.  John McCain is old:

Copyright Paradox

Over at The Volokh Conspiracy  Neil Netanel has been guest blogging on his new book Copyright's Paradox.  Here are some of his posts:

• Online Journalism versus Newspapers
• Copyright's Paradox
• How Copyright Burdens Speech
• Copyright and the First Amendment
• Blood Libel or Just Libel?

 For anyone interested in the tension between copyright law and free speech these posts are essential reading.

What to do with this blog?

Just over a week ago I began to wonder about what I should do with this blog and so I posted about it:

This week Duncan Riley announced his new blogging venture, The Inquisitr (see my post here).  However in my mind an equally significant announcement was that  Skepticlawyer (Helen Dale) from Catallaxy and Legal Eagle from The Legal Soapbox are teaming up at in a joint blog venture, Skepticlawyer.  Although they are both lawyers, they have different interests and politics, they are always thoughtful and intelligent, and I enjoy immensely reading their perspectives on law, politics and life.  I wish them both all the best in their new collaboration.

This announcement, coupled with reading one of Kim Weatherall's now rare posts at Lawfont (see here), has made me think about possibly changing the tone of this blog, or perhaps launching a new blog.  I enjoy writing this blog and I like to think it presents an eclectic mix of tech news, videos, politics and occasionally a little law.  It certainly reflects what I read and watch each day on the internet.  However, this mix has occurred by accident.  When I began blogging I envisioned creating a more traditional law blog (or blawg) - one that you might expect a (semi-serious) legal academic to write.  Instead it has become something quite different.  Perhaps if I spent less time reblogging and posting links and videos I would have more time to write the sort of quality, original posts you see from Helen, Legal Eagle and Kim.  I spend so much time "reporting" and covering what others are saying that I find that I'm not putting my own thoughts and arguments on the law and policy issues that I find significant and interesting out to the public to be tested, challenged and improved.   To do this would mean fewer posts, but longer, more thoughtful posts.  And although it may well be more time consuming, it would also likely tie in with my teaching and research more closely.  That said, I like my blog now and I enjoy putting it together.

Anyway, these are just some thoughts I've been having over the last few days.  I'd be interested to know what you think ...

And now Problogger has a list of questions to consider when working out whether you should give up on a blog:

1. What goals do I have for this blog? Are they being met? Am I getting closer to meeting them?
2. Am I Interested in the Topic?
3. Am I getting personal satisfaction from posting?
4. How Many Posts Did I write in the Last Month?
5. Do I have time to keep the blog running?
6. Is anyone reading my blog?
7. Have I given it enough time?
8. Do I still see myself writing on this blog in 18 months time?
9. Is the niche growing or dying?
10. Is the blog earning anything?
11. Is the blog growing my profile and perceived expertise?
12. Are there any other benefits from this blog?
13. Is the blog giving energy to or taking energy away from me?
14. Is the Blog’s traffic and income growing or shrinking?
15. Are readers engaging with the content?
16. If readers are commenting - what are they saying?
17. What are other bloggers writing about my blog?
18. Do I have anything original and useful to say on my topic?
19. What else could I do with the time that I spend on this blog
20. What would the impact be of me not blogging? (on readers and me)

Food for thought ...

Addressing rape on YouTube

CNN has a story on an extraordinary use for YouTube:

The video is hard to turn away from. A sobbing 16-year-old sits in her bedroom and, staring into a camera, says she has been raped.

"Hi, my name is Crystal. ... I need some help. I didn't want to do it this way, but it's the only way I know that's going to work, that someone out there in the world is gonna listen to me."

The teen, whom CNN interviewed but is not identifying by her last name, is among dozens of young people who are turning to social networking sites like Facebook and MySpace to talk about sexual assault.

For an online generation, the Web offers what traditional counseling does not. It's a chance to communicate without having to face someone or fear their judgment. Some people are seeking legal advice and medical information, and many younger victims believe that they can warn others about their accused attacker, counselors say.

There also are people like Crystal, whose case was dropped by the Orange County, Florida, state attorney's office, who feel slighted by the justice system.

"Young victims, particularly girls, turn inward. They are going to reach out and try to connect in the isolation of their dorm room or their bedrooms," said Jennifer Dritt, the director of the Florida Council Against Sexual Violence. "Most young women feel like they want somebody to know that someone did this to them."

...

"We noticed that this trend of posting details of an attack really picked up speed a few years ago," said Scott Berkowitz, RAINN's founder and president. "A rape survivor's intention may be to reach out, and we encourage that, but this is a dangerous way to do it."

Advocates worry that victims are divulging too much information. CNN found several Facebook and MySpace profiles on which young people say they have been raped. The postings include their names, photographs and hometowns. But Crystal is probably one of the few who have gone so far as to post a plea for help on YouTube.

Because anything posted on the Web is available forever through an Internet search, a rape survivor must consider how they would feel if that information were dredged up in the future, counselors said. By making themselves -- or their IP address -- available, victims open themselves to unreliable and unprofessional advice and the harsh judgment of their peers.

Perhaps worst of all, they could give their perpetrator a chance to find them again or gain more satisfaction.

Read more here.

Stephen Spielberg presents: John King

Close Encounters of the magic wall kind:

(Hat tip: Blawg Review editor.)

Enter the Twitpitch

Business Week has an intriguing post on the Twitpitch:

Forget the elevator pitch. Forget the press release. Forget the PowerPoint deck. If you were making a "Twitpitch" about your business, it would be over by now.

A what? A Twitpitch forces you to tell your company's story in 140 characters (about 20 words), the maximum length of a message on Twitter, a microblogging platform that is gaining popularity (BusinessWeek.com, 5/15/08). Social media pioneer Stowe Boyd experimented with the idea and coined the term on his blog last month when, overwhelmed by e-mails, he decided to take appointments at the Web 2.0 Expo only via Twitter.

Boyd's experiment offers a lesson for small companies that want the attention of potential investors, clients, and press: Get to the point. And it applies in almost any business setting, not just on Twitter. It's no secret that less is more in the age of information overload, no matter how you're trying to reach people. That's why Boyd also calls it the escalator pitch. "It's something you can say in 10 seconds while he's going up the escalator and you're going down the escalator," he says.

Read more here.  I wonder if the same thing applies to teaching.  Maybe I should see if I can boil down my next constitutional law lecture to 140 characters.

(Hat tip: Joey Lo.)

MySpace crimes

Two interesting pieces of news to note relating to people using MySpace for criminal purposes.  The first, is a ruling of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in Doe v. MySpace Inc that predictably held that MySpace is immune under s 230 of the Communications Decency Act from a lawsuit over the alleged sexual assault of a teenage girl by a man she met on the site.  As Howard Bashman amusingly notes at How Appealing footnote one in the ruling helpfully explains that:

The term 'blog' is a portmanteau of 'Web log' and is a term referring to an online journal or diary.

The second is a post from Brett Trout at Blawg IT on the case of Missouri Mother Lori Drew who allegedly used MySpace to cause the suicide of her 16-year old neighbor Megan Meier.  This week a federal grand jury in Los Angeles indicted Drew on one count of conspiracy and three counts of unauthorized access of protected computers to intentionally inflict emotional distress upon Meier:

Los Angeles federal prosecutors allege that back in 2006, Drew created a MySpace page for a fictitious 16-year old boy named "Josh." Drew allegedly used the MySpace account  to send numerous messages to Meier. After initially befriending Meier, "Josh" ended the relationship with a message indicating the world be a better place without Meier. Meier killed herself that same day.

After state and federal prosecutors in Missouri refused to take any action against Drew, attorneys representing the Cyber and Intellectual Property Crimes Section of the U.S. Attorneys Office in MySpace’s hometown of Los Angeles brought the indictment against Drew. As reported by Wired, federal authorities have granted alleged co-conspirator, 19-year old Ashley Grills, immunity in return for her cooperation with the investigation. If convicted on all counts, Drew could be sentenced to up to 20 years in federal prison.

The laws being enforced against Drew were originally enacted to deter and punish computer hackers. It is important to note however, that despite any underlying legislative intent, there is nothing to prevent authorities from asserting these new laws against social networkers. Even though it is unlikely that even your most offensive social networking activities amount to what federal prosecutors allege took place in the Drew case, this case should sound as a warning call to all social networkers to double check how their actions might be perceived by others. Every social networker should double-check that none of their social networking activities might be construed as deceptive, fraudulent or harassing.

Most importantly, if you suspect your child may be the victim of a cyberbully, take action immediately. For more information on how to address cyberbullying, click here for my previous post on the subject. As the Drew case demonstrates, unchecked social networking can lead to much worse things than federal prison.

Read more here.  The Wall Street Journal Law Blog also comments on the legal merits of the case:

Was Lori Drew surprised to learn that she committed a federal crime when she signed on to a social networking site using a fictitious identity? We wondered that today while reading an indictment that charges Drew — a 49 year-old resident of Missouri who registered on MySpace as “Josh Evans,” a 16 year-old boy — with violating 18 U.S.C. Section §1030, a broad statute that criminalizes computer fraud.

The backstory: As detailed in this January New Yorker article and today’s indictment, Drew — under the guise of “Josh” — struck up a flirtatious online relationship with Megan Meier, a 13-year old MySpace member, that lasted for several weeks. According to the indictment, “Josh” told Megan she was “sexi” and made other sexually suggestive overtures. Then, “Josh” told Megan he was moving away and that the world would be a better place without her. After “Josh” broke off the relationship, Megan hanged herself in her bedroom.

Here, the theory of the case seems to be that when Drew registered on MySpace she agreed to certain terms of service that required her to, among other things, provide “truthful and accurate registration information” and “refrain from promoting information that” she knew was “false or misleading.” For violating the terms of service, the feds have charged her with conspiracy to access MySpace without authorization.

“A very sympathetic set of facts,” concedes Orin Kerr, a cyberlaw prof at George Washington. “But highly dubious; a weak legal argument.” Kerr, who says he’s considering making an offer to represent Drew, told the Law Blog that there are two problems with the legal theory. First, the statute requires a conspiracy to intentionally access the site without authorization, and there’s no evidence that Drew read or knew the terms of service. Second, it needs to be a conspiracy to obtain information, and this was not. “It was a conspiracy to harass,” said Kerr, “but that’s not what the statute is about.”

He added: “It’s a dangerous theory because terms of service are violated so often, and that means there’s a choice courts must face: maybe any violation of any terms of service is a federal crime; maybe no violations are a crime; or maybe some violations are a crime. If a court allows it, then it means that if the government is looking for a criminal charge against someone, they just need to show someone violated a term of service. Do I expect the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals to allow it? No.”

Read more here.

Bill O'Reilly Flips Out - Dance Remix

Here is another video making fun of Bill O'Reilly's losing his cool when he hosted Inside Edition:

(Hat tip: Blawg Review editor.)

Social networking annoyances

PC World has put together a list of the top ten social networking annoyances.  These are some of them:

The same question people used to ask about PCs can be asked of social networks: Were our lives easier or harder, better or worse, simpler or more complex, before they came around? The answer is yes. For some folks, social networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace seem nearly as indispensable as e-mail, but creating and maintaining these virtual circles of friends turns out to be quite a bit of work, often necessarily so. Here are the ten things that bug me most about today's social networking services.

10. MySpace Kitsch

Unlike Facebook, which adheres to a relatively rigid blue-on-white, three-column design, MySpace lets you decorate your page with background images, themes, and unconventional layouts. That flexibility provides just enough rope for many MySpacers, and the results range from ugly to completely unreadable. Some MySpace pages are so poorly designed that they can crash the hardiest browser--and this alone has caused many social networkers to flee the aesthetic chaos of MySpace for the relative calm of Facebook. Thankfully, some enterprising script authors have come up with scripts that tone down the MySpace bling and clutter: One of my favorite MySpace scripts puts a button on the screen that turns custom page styles on and off with a single click.

...

8. LinkedIn Is UpTight

Almost anything goes on MySpace, but not so on LinkedIn, where the strictly-business motif discourages personal expression outside of a photo (a fairly recent innovation), a status line, and standard résumé entries. Sure, the whole point of LinkedIn is to put your most professional foot forward, but really, LinkedIn, couldn't we loosen the necktie just a little? LinkedIn may never support psychedelic backdrops or party photos, but it could do a lot more to help you project something more than an utterly antiseptic persona.

...

2. Zombies, Pirates, and Other Pointless Facebook Applications

Facebook applications allow my friends to share their movie tastes, opinions, news picks, and other items with me, but accepting these tidbits requires me to install each corresponding app in my own profile (at which point it has access to my personal information). One app informs me that a friend has just urinated on me, poked me, or vampire-bit me. An alarming number of my female friends want me to know them by their stripper names. Why my friends devote so much time to these curious little apps I haven't figured out, but I know that cumulatively they've begun to demand way too much of my time.

To make matters worse, Facebook applications promote themselves, too, trying to get in touch, and even peppering me with spam. If you're encountering the same thing, you can fight back. To make silly apps go away, open the application invitation and click on the Block [application name] link in the bottom-right part of the window. Or, you can banish all applications from your Facebook experience by installing the Facebook custom app hider Greasemonkey script.

1. Multiple Social Network Syndrome (MSNS)

With the advent of social networking, my e-mail traffic has gotten worse, not better. Here's an e-mail telling me that my brother has sent an e-mail within Facebook. Another message informs me that Susie has updated her profile at Friendster. Another announces that Bob over at FriendNet has just brushed his teeth. Another proclaims that Dave has written the latest installment of his ingenious blog at MySpace. Somebody at Facebook has just poked me. Someone else has bought some new bling. And on and on and on. To reply or act on any of these events, I'll have to bring up one of the 12 social networks I've been sucked into joining, log in, and then view the ads there. All of that, of course, necessitates a lot of extra clicks and keystrokes, and after a while, I find that I don't really like my friends anymore.

The major social networking sites are very aware of such frustrations, and are taking steps to increase their ability to interact with one another. MySpace recently announced that it will let its users push their bio information out to other sites such as eBay, Photobucket, Twitter, and Yahoo. Not to be outdone, Facebook has announced its own plans to do the same thing with partner sites.

That's all good, but I'm not holding my breath for the day when I can share data and content directly between my MySpace account and my Facebook account. Still, it's a positive sign that the big players are acknowledging that social networking is about bringing folks together online, not confining them inside large walled gardens.

Read the full list here.

Colbert defends his mentor O'Reilly

Stephen Colbert responds to the leaked footage from earlier in the week of a Bill O’Reilly meltdown:

A code for bloggers

The Guardian reports on widespread support for a code of conduct for bloggers:

Nearly half of all internet users would support a voluntary code of conduct for bloggers and online commentators, according to research.

A survey by legal firm DLA Piper said 46% of web users think bloggers should sign up to a code that reflected the laws on defamation, intellectual property and incitement, with 15% ambivalent and 4% strongly opposed.

Around 34% of bloggers opposed the idea but 32% supported it.

Three quarters of web users who have posted comment on blogs and news sites were oblivious to libel law, said the report, even though the person posting the comment, rather than the host site, would be liable for any offence.

The survey highlights the dangers created not only by self-publishing but also by more innocuous user content, such as video, photos and comment posted to media-sharing sites.

Only one in three of the web users surveyed said they had actually read the legal liabilities in the terms and conditions of the sites they use, though 14% had had material removed from a site in the past for breaching those terms.

Duncan Calow, a DLA Piper digital media law specialist, said there was a dangerous perception that user-generated content is immune to the law.

"The combination of confusion and complacency about the relationship between the law and UGC puts users at risk as they come under increasing scrutiny online," Calow added.

"It is clear that many internet users would benefit from some clearer guidance about posting comment online."

Calow said there is a difference between censorship and protection, and although a code of practice would not change the law it might help to make bloggers and web users more aware of the legal implications of what they post on the net.

Read more here.

935 Lies

From Harry Shearer's forthcoming record Songs of the Bushmen:

Building an Australasian Commons

Several of my colleagues at QUT have been working to put together this upcoming conference, Building an Australasian Commons:

CCau is pleased to announce that details for its 2008 national conference, Building an Australasian Commons, have now been finalised.

Building an Australasian Commons will be held on 24 June 2008 at the State Library of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.

The event provides an opportunity for those interested in the free internet to come together to exchange ideas, information and inspiration. It brings together experts from Australasia to discuss the latest developments and implementations of Creative Commons in the region. It aims to be an open forum where anyone can voice their thoughts on issues relating to furthering the commons worldwide.

The conference's full program can be ... downloaded here.

Attendance is free and open to all comers. However, places are limited, so if you're interested in attending please register ASAP. Registration closes 10 June. You can download the registration form here.

The conference will be followed on the day by the second CCau ccSalon, a showcase of Creative Commons music, art, film and text from Australia and the region.

Building an Australasian Commons is affiliated with Creating Value: Between Commerce and Commons, which is being run by the ARC Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation at the Brisbane Convention Centre from 25-27 June 2008. This conference showcases the latest research into enterprise and innovation along the dynamic boundary between market and non-market, cultural and economic, commercial and community. It features a range of prominent international keynotes, including Henry Jenkins, Mark Deuze and Baroness Professor Susan Greenfield. All Building an Australasian Commons participants are encouraged to attend both conferences.