Peter Black's Freedom to Differ

A must read piece on how CNN and Fox screwed up the Supreme Court Obamacare decision

SCOTUSblog's Tom Goldstein has written a fascinating piece on how the media covered the Supreme Court's decision regarding the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act:

Inside G42, the press room staff hear the Chief Justice say over the speakers that the Court will have to confront the government’s arguments under both the commerce power and also the tax power. But none of the reporters hear him; they are all gone.

The CNN and Fox producers are scanning the syllabus.  Eight lines from the bottom of page 2, they see the following language:  “Chief Justice Roberts concluded in Part III-A that the individual mandate is not a valid exercise of Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause and the Necessary and Proper Clause.”  They immediately and correctly recognize that sentence as fantastically important.  The individual mandate is the heart of the statute, and it is clear that the Court has rejected the Administration’s principal theory – indeed the only theory that was discussed at great length in the oral arguments and debated by commentators.

Into his conference call, the CNN producer says (correctly) that the Court has held that the individual mandate cannot be sustained under the Commerce Clause, and (incorrectly) that it therefore “looks like” the mandate has been struck down.  The control room asks whether they can “go with” it, and after a pause, he says yes.

The Fox producer reads the syllabus exactly the same way, and reports that the mandate has been invalidated.  Asked to confirm that the mandate has been struck down, he responds: “100%.”

Read it here.  It really is a must-read.  Andrew Sullivan describes it as a "gripping second-by-second breakdown of how the media handled the Obamacare ruling", and Jason Kottke says it is "impeccably sourced, straighforward, and surprisingly compelling".  I couldn't agree more.  Again, read it here.

 

An idea for a new blog ... Australians blogging about US politics

During the Australian federal election last year, I had a lot of fun maintaining a group blog called Election Blackout that was dedicated to the politics and policy of the campaign.  I think I managed to get a diverse group of bloggers together, who were not just the usual voices, and as a result it made a unique contribution to the Australian blogosphere leading up to that election.  When the election was over, I wondered what the future of the blog would be, but as I quietly expected would be the case, it has simply been left to die the slow death that so many blogs before it have also undergone.

However, I am nonetheless interested in starting up another group blog.  This blog wouldn't be about Australian politics at all, but it would be Australians blogging about American politics in the lead up to the 2012 Presidential election.  Judging by my Twitter feed, there are many Australians (like me), who find American politics to be far more compelling and provocative than Australian politics, and so I would be keen to get a group of Australian bloggers together to contribute a blog on American politics.

So I would be interested in getting your feedback about this idea.  Would you read such a blog?  Would you contribute to such a blog?  (If so, let me know!)  Also, what should the blog be called?

(Photo: Flags by Mugofevil CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 from Flickr)

My weekly chat with Andrew Bartlett on 4ZzZ

Every Monday morning I appear on Andrew Bartlett's 4ZzZ breakfast radio show to discuss some of the current public and political issues of the week.  This morning we discussed the week in federal Parliament (including Tony Abbott's "shit happens" remark and the Government's health deal coming out of COAG), another historic week Egypt as democracy spreads in the Middle East, more developments in online media and courts and the media in the digital era:

Controversy in the Australian political blogosphere

Over the last week there has been an unfortunate saga playing out in the Australian blogosphere surrounding the withdrawal of advertising by some businesses to the Domain, which is a loose collaboration among several Australian blogs to spread the benefits of the advertising to a broader pool of quality blogs.  The blogs that are part of the Domain include Jennifer Marohasy, John Passant, Henry Thornton, Skeptic Lawyer, HomePage DAILY, Andrew Bartlett, Club Troppo and Larvatus Prodeo,  The Domain was the idea of Graham Young from On Line Opinion.

The controversy began when Graham Young and On Line Opinion published last year a highly provocative article by Bill Muehlenberg attacking gay marriage, that also sparked some quite offensive comments.  Several advertisers, notably ANZ and IBM, apparently found this post and the comments objectionable, withdrew their advertising from the Domain, affecting not only On Line Opinion, but also all the other blogs who were part of the Domain.  Graham Young first commented publicly about this situation in December last year but it wasn't until last weekend that this fight became public, with a piece in The Australian by Christopher Pearson and a blog post by Helen Dale on Skepticlawyer.  On Tuesday Graham Young also wrote a piece for The Drum outlining the situation, ending with a plea for advertisers.

It seems the decision to go public with this dispute have upset some of the blogs that were part of the Domain, with both Larvatus Prodeo and Club Troppo announcing that they were withdrawing from the Domain.  I like and respect all of the protagonists in this situation (most notably Graham Young from On Line Opinion, Mark Bahnisch from Larvatus Prodeo and Ken Parish, Don Arthur and Nicholas Gruen from Club Troppo),  so it is a little difficult for me to comment on this situation.  Nonetheless, I do wish to make a few observations.

First, I do think it is disappointing that some advertisers opted to withdraw advertising because they disagreed Bill Muehlenberg's original piece and some of the comments made to that piece.  Of course, as private businesses they are perfectly entitled to do so (this is not in any way censorship), but On Line Opinion has always published a wide range of commentary from many different political spectrums and I would have hoped that its advertiers were not only aware of that when they begun advertising but also that they would have been prepared to show some fortitude when presented with a provocative piece they do not agree with.

Second, it seems to me that much of the controversy has focused less on the original decision to publish Bill Muehlenberg's piece, and more on the different attitudes towards comment moderation taken by some of the blogs that were part of the Domain.  In particular, both Club Troppo and Larvatus Prodeo have adopted a more robust approach to comment moderation than On Line Opinion and would have been more proactive in taking down comments that they considered to be unacceptable vilification.  My own general attitude to comment moderation aligns more closely with that of Graham Young and On Line Opinion.  I am very reluctant to remove comments from my blog unless it is clear that such comments are unlawful (such as, defamation, invasion of privacy or copyright infringement).  I take the view that rather than silencing particular points of view - no matter how upsetting or ill informed - it is better to allow the comment to stand and have others respond.

Third, it also seems to me that the decision by Larvatus Prodeo and Club Troppo to leave the Domain was at least in part as a result of the decision by Graham Young and others to take the fight public, instead of privately negotiating with the advertising agency and the aggrieved advertisers in trying to come up with an agreeable solution.  While I have no doubt that Graham Young felt he had little choice in going public with this situation and that he hoped to garner support (and maybe other advertisers) by doing so, it is clear that it has also made things understandably quite awkward for some of the other blogs in the Domain that have different political perspectives and different attitudes to comment moderation.  In this respect I understand why both Larvatus Prodeo and Club Troppo felt bound to leave the Domain and in so doing so, distance themselves from Graham Young, On Line Opinion and the original piece by Bill Muehlenberg.

Fourth, this situation highlights the relatively fragile nature of the Australian independent political blogosphere.  Outside the ABC (The Drum), Fairfax (and the National Times), News Limited (The Punch), and to a lesser degree Crikey, there are really only a handful of widely read, influential political blogs, all of which struggle to make very much money at all (which is what, in part, provoked Graham Young to set up the Domain).  If this situation damages the reputation or financial viability of any of the blogs or websites involved then that is a most unfortunate outcome indeed. 

Finally, as far as I'm concerned, On Line Opinion, Club Troppo and Larvatus Prodeo remain essential reading and will most definitely continue to be in my Google Reader.  They all make positive contributions to the political discourse in this country and I hope that these sites - and their respective online communities - continue for many years to come.  Australia needs independent political voices like these, and I hope they can find the financial support they need to continue into the future.

My weekly chat with Andrew Bartlett on 4ZzZ

Every Monday morning I appear on Andrew Bartlett's 4ZzZ breakfast radio show to discuss some of the current public and political issues of the week.  This week we discussed federal Parliament resuming this week, some issues in online media (including the launch of The Daily and the advertising boycott of some leading Australian blogs), and the ongoing protests in Egypt:

Blawg Review #285

This is the sixth time I have hosted Blawg Review from Australia (I previously hosted Blawg Review #85, #136, #178, #196 and #266). For those who don't know, the Blawg Review is a weekly round-up of posts from around the blawgosphere, and I am once again honoured to be able to host Blawg Review from the the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) in Brisbane, Australia, where I am a senior lecturer in law. 

Every other time I've hosted Blawg Review, I've usually begun with a self-serving little summary of me and my blog, but I figure that as I've done this a few times now, I can skip that and instead launch into my whip around the blawgosphere this week.  Besides, the theme of this Blawg Review is also a little more personal for me and does not fall into my usual areas of teaching, writing or blogging.  This is because today is not just Columbus Day and Thanksgiving Day in Canada, it is also National Coming Out Day:

 

As someone who understands how difficult it is for many in the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) community to come out, I wanted to focus on this day, as well as other GLBT issues, in this Blawg Review.

National Coming Out Day was founded by Robert Eichberg, a founder of The Experience workshop, and National Gay Rights Advocates head Jean O'Leary during a 1988 meeting of LGBT activists as a day to celebrate coming out. The date of October 11 was chosen to mark the anniversary of the Second National March on Washington for Lesbian and Gay Rights, which had taken place four months earlier.  National Coming Out Day is marked by events all over America, as well as in many other countries around the world, any countries, including Switzerland, Germany, Canada, Croatia, Poland, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom.  You can learn all about National Coming Out Day here, and can show your support for this cause with the Coming Out Day Facebook app and by tweeting your support with the hashtag #NCOD.  Indeed, the internet has been buzzing in soliditary all day.

If you are thinking of Coming Out, there are a range of resources online, as well as hundreds of inspirational videos, such as this one from Davey Wavey:

 

Even though Coming Out can be hard, and it is very much a personal journey, rest assured that even if there is no-one else, there is a vibrant online GLBT community that can support you no matter what you are going through.  One of the most amazing and enriching things about the internet that I have observed are the extraordinary connections and friendships that can develop online.  These connections and friendships, from likeminded people all over the world, can be from people that have never have necessarily met or will even ever meet, but they can still be there for you when you need them most, with a generosity of spirit and a sense of compassion and humour that is genuinely moving.  I know in my own journey that some of the people I met through Twitter have helped me more than some of my oldest and dearest friends.  It is easy to make fun of the web and the myriad of social networks that exist online but it can also be a source of strength and support when people need it the most.  And remember this simple message: it gets better.

 

The "It's Gets Better" message received quite a bit of attention last week (including this speech from Senior Advisor to the President Valerie Jarrett) because of a series of tragic suicides from young GLBT youth.  The most prominent of which was that of Tyler Clementi, a Rutgers University student, who jumped to his death after his college roommate used a hidden webcam to stream a sexual encounter between Clementi and another man online.  In a podcast at the May It Please The Court Weblog, J Craig Williams and guests discusses who is responsible for Clementi's death.  Simple Justice also discussed this sensitive topic in a detailed post on cyberbullying.  Elie Mystal, Scott Greenfield, Daniel Solove, Mike Cernovich and Colin Samuels also made thoughtful contributions to the discussion of this issue.

GLBT issues canvassed in the blogosphere this week include gay adoption (Adoption Approved for Gay Man in Florida), discrimination (Lawsuit of the Day: Gay Skydiving Instructor Sues Over Firing) and gay marriage (Gay Marriage).

 

(Be warned, this video is not safe for work.)

Before I go, I thought I should highlight a few excellent GLBT blawgs that post far more frequently and eloquently on this topic than I ever could:

• Gender & Sexuality Law Blog;
• Gay Rights;
• Old Gay Lawyer Ramblings;
• Sexual Orientation and the Law Blog;
• Transgender Workplace Diversity;
• buggery.org; and
• Australian Gay and Lesbian Law Blog.

And that is a wrap for Blawg Review #285.  My apologies for the abbreviated nature of Blawg Review this week but my teaching and marking commitments at the moment are extensive.  Nonetheless, I still wanted to make a small contribution to National Coming Out Day, and so I appreciate your patience. 

Finally, it has been a pleasure to host Blawg Review again for National Coming Out Day.  While we may not have reached this happy utopia yet, I am confident that our message of tolerance and understanding is spreading. 

Blawg Review has information about next week's host, and instructions how to get your blawg posts reviewed in upcoming issues.

My weekly chat with Andrew Bartlett on 4ZzZ

Every Monday morning I appear on Andrew Bartlett's 4ZzZ breakfast radio show to discuss some of the current public and political issues of the week.  This week we discussed, among other topics, the first week of Parliament, the war in Afghanistan, the outing of Grogs Gamut and cyberbullying:

Blogging the 2010 Federal Election

Regular readers of this blog, as well as followers of my Twitter stream, will know that I obsessively follow Australian federal politics.  So with the announcement today that the election will be held on 21 August, you will not be surprised to know that for the next five weeks I will closely following the election campaign.  Rather than flood this blog with election posts, I have set up a dedicated election blog, Election Blackout, to cover all the politics, policy and prognosticating of the 2010 election.  You can read that blog here.

I am also keen to involve as many different people and opinions as I can into this blog.  So if you would like to contribute a regular post, or want to get something off your chest just once during the campaign, contact administrator@electionblackout.com.

Help needed for my upcoming 2010 election blog

Sometime in the next few weeks it is likely that Julia Gillard will call the federal election.  Although I find all elections endlessly fun and fascinating, I am particularly looking forward to the looming showdown between our new Prime Minister Julia Gillard and the Tony Abbott, as well dozens of exciting local races and the likely rise of the Greens in the Senate (and maybe in one or two House of Representatives seats as well).  I plan to maintain a blog focusing the election as soon as it is called.  At the moment I hope to post to this blog:

• a daily post that highlights five must-read news/opinion pieces from the mainstream media;
• embedded YouTube videos, both party approved and otherwise;
• my own political commentary and predictions;
• the occasional podcast (maybe); and
• regular analysis of how our the parties are utilising the internet as part of their campaign (including any legal issues that may arise).

I am keen to involve as many different people and opinions as I can into this blog.  So if you would like to contribute a regular post, or just get something off your chest just once during the campaign, just let me know.

In the meantime, I have two things I need to decide and am seeking your input on.  First, what blogging platform should I use for the blog?  Here is my thinking at the moment:

• Posterous is currently my preferred platform for a few different reasons.  I am familiar with it, it handles multiple authors easily, it is free, it allows me to autopost to a variety of other services. 
• Typepad is what I currently use for this blog, so I am obviously familiar with it.  However, as I would want to use a new domain and ideally would have several authors, it would not be free.  It also isn't as customisable as Wordpress.
• A self-hosted Wordpress site would be good but I've never set one up before and I'm not sure I have the technical expertise to do so seamlessly.  It would also require me to pay for hosting.
• I've never used Squarespace but it looks like a good platform (although in the past few days I have read some negative reports) that would be easy for me to maintain and give the site a professional look.
• I guess there is also Blogger but I have never really used it either.

Let me know what you think.

Second, I also need to settle on a name and URL for this blog.  I think I've narrowed it down to these two options:

So, just to recap, let me know what blogging platform you think I should use, cast your vote for the name and URL of the blog, and let me know if you would like to be involved.

Blogging at Freedom to Differ for over four years

I was playing around with the settings on my blog today and I discovered that I started blogging here at Freedom to Differ just over four years ago (since 7 June 2006).  For a whole range of reasons, the focus of this blog has evolved over time, as has the frequency and style of posts.  But it is has always reflected what has interested and entertained me at any given in point at time.  At the moment this blog seems to be having a bit of a resurrection - I'm blogging regularly again and the hits and comments are correspondingly increasing - and hopefully that will continue for some time.

If you have read the blog regularly or even rarely over the past for years, I would like to say thank you.  I always appreciate the interest people have shown in this blog, and especially the comments (or more and more today the tweets) on the topics I have been blogging about.  Those comments have enriched my understanding and knowledge on a wide range of topics, and have made maintaining this blog so enjoyable.  I hope you have also gained something small from what I have posted here over the years.

This wasn't my first blog, and it almost certainly won't be my last, but for a variety of reasons it always be special to me.  I'm looking forward to another four years of blogging here at Freedom to Differ.

Blawg Review #267 is online now

Last week I hosted Blawg Review #266 here on Freedom to Differ.  But if you want to see what a good Blawg Review should look like, check out Blawg Review #267 at Spam Notes by Venkat Balasubramani.

You can now "like" individual posts on Freedom to Differ

For the last few weeks you have been about to take advantage of Facebook's new social plugins and "Like" this blog.  However, I have now also added the Facebook Like button to each individual post, so instead of liking the whole blog, you can now like individual posts.  So what's the difference?

Well, if you hit the blog level Facebook Like button you are essentially subscribing to my blog via Facebook and you will receive updates in your Facebook newsfeed whenever I post something new to my blog.

But if you hit the Facebook Like button at the end of a post, you are highlighting that post to your Facebook friends with an update to your own Facebook profile and a link back to the post.

Of course, you don't have to chose one or the other: you can like the blog as well as individual posts!

I need a new image for my blog banner

You may have noticed that I recently changed the image I use in my blog banner away from a picture of Burleigh Heads at the Gold Coast, to a picture of the QUT Law School.  It seemed like an appropriate picture, given that is where I work, and where I write the majority of posts for this blog.  However, I'm beginning to get the impression that not everyone likes that picture.  For a start I've had a few people ask me why I had selected such a boring, nondescript photo, but then this evening a colleague of mine at QUT (who will remain nameless) was a little more direct: "That new photo of C Block on your blog just freaked me out. It's an ugly building plus it's work." 

So I think I should select a new photo for my blog banner.  Let me know if you have any ideas by leaving a comment below, or sending me a tweet @peterjblack.

Creative Commons for "geekgirl"? I don't think so ...

There has been a minor controversy in the Australian blogosphere over the past few weeks surrounding the term "geekgirl".  Ben Grubb at ZDNet Australia posted the latest developments in a blog post today:

On 20 May, ZDNet Australia reported on IT consultant Kate Carruthers wishing to use the term "geekgirl". Problem was, when she attempted to use it, she said she was told not to.

At the article's time of publication, Carruthers said the original trademark owner, Rosie Cross, had told her to stop using "geekgirl". This turned out to be incorrect, with Carruthers retracting that statement. It was Cross' partner, Carruthers said, that had instead contacted her.

You can find Carruthers' version of events here and Cross' here.

Read the rest of the story here. 

I don't wish to comment generally on the dispute between Kate Carruthers and Rosie Cross (although I should note for the record, that Kate is a friend of mine and I have never met Rosie Cross).  But I do want to question what Cross asserted on Twitter, according to the last line of Ben's piece:

After publication of the original article, Cross tweeted that she had "been working on a Creative Commons licence for #geekgirl". Maybe this will resolve things? Here's hoping.

The problem with that statement is that a Creative Commons license is not at all the appropriate license for a term such as "geekgirl".  This is because copyright does not subsist in names or titles.  For example, these names or titles were all held to be outside the scope of copyright protection:

• "The Man Who Broke the Bank at Monte Carlo" (see Francis, Day & Hunter Ltd v Twentieth Century Fox Corp Ltd [1940] AC 112);
• "Opera in the Outback" (see Lott v JBW & Friends Pty Ltd & Endeavour Corp Design No. SCGRG-99-679 [2000] SASC 3); and
• "Exxon" (see Exxon Corp v Exxon Insurance Consultants International Ltd [1982] RPC 69).

Similarly, copyright would not be held to subsist in the term "geekgirl", which means that you could not then license the term "geekgirl" under a Creative Commons license.

Although copyright could not be used to protect the term "geekgirl", trade mark law would be able to protect the term.  This is presumably why Cross, and now Carruthers, sought to trade mark the term (in different categories, of course).  But you can not license the use of a trade mark under a Creative Commons license.

Against this legal backdrop, it seems a little disingenuous for Cross to have said that she had "been working on a Creative Commons licence for #geekgirl" because if she had indeed "been working on" such a license, she would have very quickly realised that not only was it not the appropriate license, but that it was not legally possible for her to do so.  Despite this minor confusion, I hope that Cross is still seeking to license the "geekgirl" trade mark in certain instances and that she is actively investigating trade mark licensing options.

What is important to take away from this is that although Creative Commons provides a wonderful range of options for copyright owners, Creative Commons does not cover all forms of intellectual property, and that it is important to identify precisely what category of intellectual property it is that you are claiming before you seek to license that interest.

Blawg Review #266

G'day and welcome back down under! 

This is the fifth time I have hosted Blawg Review from Australia (I previously hosted Blawg Review #85, Blawg Review #136, Blawg Review #178 and Blawg Review #196). For those who don't know, the Blawg Review is a weekly round-up of posts from around the blawgosphere, and I am once again honoured to be able to host Blawg Review from the the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) in Brisbane, Australia.

Before we begin my whip around the blawgosphere, a little about me and my blog.  As I've already indicated, I am a senior lecturer in law at the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) in Brisbane, Australia, where I teach Intellectual Property, Constitutional Law and Cyberlaw, and research within the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation. Accordingly, my blog began as a forum to discuss the legal regulation of the internet and the media.  However, just as the collaborative and interdisciplinary nature of my work at QUT has seen my teaching and research interests expand beyond traditional black-letter legal scholarship, my blog is in many ways not a proper "blawg".  Most of my posts cover developments in new media - be they technological, social, political or legal - and you are just as likely to see me embed an interesting, popular or provocative viral video as you are to see me critique a significant legal case or piece of legislation.

Anyway, given my blawg's interest in media, it seemed appropriate that I am hosting Blawg Review #266 on Quit Facebook Day.  Regular readers of this blog would be well aware of some of the privacy concerns that have dogged Facebook over the past few years, but it has really been only been in the last few months that these concerns have started to be taken seriously outside the tech blogosphere and hardcore privacy advocates.  Quit Facebook Day is a further attempt to raise mainstream awareness of the need to protect your personal information on Facebook, and to encourage people to quit Facebook and consider some of the other alternatives. 

Here are what some law bloggers have been saying about Quit Facebook Day this week:

Black Web 2.0: "I hope Facebook new policy will give users the option to opt-in to services or applications that threaten user’s privacy rather than opt-out.   Although Facebook is not required by law to do so,  it would ease user fears and threatening government oversight."

Yale Law & Technology: "Welcome to the new business model: infringe on your privacy first, ask questions later. "

Masters of Media: "Whether you quit Facebook, or not, it is great that more and more people are constructively working towards the realization of non-exploitative, interoperable open-source social network systems, that do give users proper options to control and manage their online data."

Nieman Journalism Lab: "But the new ubiquity of sharing on the web means that, increasingly, publication subsumes publicity. The two are now wrapped up in each other, implicatively; selflessness and selfishness coexist in the content we share. Which means that, for us, publishing our photos, or our updates, or our ‘likes,’ or whatever else on Facebook is not just a communal act, but also an individual one. And the content that sharing produces is not just personal, but proprietary. Something that we should be able to — yes, Mark Zuckerberg — control."

Delimiter: "In summary, Facebook doesn’t invest in Australia, won’t cooperate with our law enforcement authorities, censors online Australian political organisation at a whim and without advance notice, won’t talk to journalists, and isn’t a reliable long-term place for the Australian story to be hosted. Plus, it’s almost impossible to delete your account.  Is this a company that Australia should be supporting? Not in my book." 

But if you are going to quit Facebook and are looking around for alternative social networks, you need to be aware of fakes; at Internet Cases, Evan Brown warned that that bogus social networking profile can send you to jail.  There is also the perspective, articulated at Law and Content, using Facebook as a case study, that privacy limits utility.

However, Facebook has been a bloggable topic this week for other reasons as well.  The Invent Blog noted that the patent office is on Facebook, while the Law Firm Web Strategy Blog looked at Facebook for law firms.

From a criminal law angle, ConnectedCOPS.net considered Law Enforcement's Unfamiliar Territory, which is an analysis of social media's impact on law enforcement practices.  While on law enforcement, the Chicago Criminal Law Blog noted that Suspected Cop-Killer Paris McGee Bragged On Facebook.  Eric Goldman Technology & Marketing Law Blog also reported on the EFF Amicus Brief in Facebook v. Power Ventures.

However, not all law bloggers have been obsessing over privacy and Facebook over the past week.

At the Blog of Rights: Official Blog of the American Civil Liberties Union, there was a good post on
Reviving the Fourth Amendment and American Privacy.

The Keene Trial Consulting blog explained why an uncertain attorney may be better than a cocky one. 

The humourous blawg, Whitelocke: On Lawmanship (yes law bloggers can have a sense of humour), presented a timeline of lawmanship.

At her new Forbes Legal Blog, On The Docket, Victoria Pynchon argued that the New York Anti-Bullying law is a bad idea

There was a thoughtful piece on "deal risk" in contract drafting at the always incisive Adam's Drafting Blog.

Over at the Broadcast Law Blog, David Oxenford blogged about rewriting the Communications Act of 1934 to bring it into the 21st Century.  And while we're speaking of the 21st Century, take a look at How to Deal with Scam Listings for Your Company's Name over at the California Defamation Law Blog. 

No good deed went unpunished over at Construction Law Musings.

The Complex Litigator created a video mash up of the collision between unfair competition law and federalist society viewpoints.

Counterfeiting misery loves company at the ever-hip Counterfeit Chic.

The Las Vegas Trademark Attorney also had a delicious post on a Utah cupcake maker suing a competitor for trade dress infringement.

Finally there is a dead celebrity alert in Defacing "The Face"? at Ron Coleman's Likelihood of Confusion.

And that is a wrap for Blawg Review #266.  It has been a pleasure to host Blawg Review again this week.  Blawg Review has information about next week's host, and instructions how to get your blawg posts reviewed in upcoming issues.

Guess who is hosting Blawg Review next week?

Next week I am once again hosting Blawg Review, a weekly round-up of posts from around the blawgosphere.  This will be the fifth time I have hosted Blawg Review here on Freedom to Differ, having previously hosted Blawg Review #85 in November 2006, Blawg Review #136 in November 2007, Blawg Review #178 in September 2008, and Blawg Review #196 in January 2009.

I need your help to find the best posts from law bloggers all over the world.  If you come across an interesting, challenging, or even funny post on a legal topic this week, let me know by leaving a comment, tweeting me @peterjblack, or sending me an email pete.black@gmail.com.

And stay tuned for Blawg Review #266 on Monday 31 May 2010.

Like Freedom to Differ?

If you enjoy reading the content on this blog, Freedom to Differ, you can now take advantage of Facebook's new social plugins and "Like" this blog.  You can find the "Like" button in the right hand column of this blog.  Apart from showing to other readers that you like this blog, if you click on the "Like" button any new posts to this blog will automatically appear in your news feed on Facebook.

Thinking out loud

Back in April I blogged about how I wasn't sure what I was going to do with this humble little blog (see here), and not much has changed since.  Here I muse out loud about the future of Freedom to Differ:

I would, however, be interested in your thoughts and suggestions.  Leave a comment below and/or tweet me @PeterBlackQUT.

(Sorry for yet another self indulgent blog post.  I'm sure you are getting sick of them by now.)

Dear Lily (an open letter to Lily Allen)

Here is an open letter to Lily Allen in song format, regarding her recent campaign against filesharing and her decision to quit music.  (If this makes no sense to you, you can read the background here.)

Blogging resumes soon

Watch this space ...

What others are saying about Ice TV Pty Ltd v Nine Network Australia Pty Ltd

Yesterday the High Court of Australia handed down its decision in Ice TV Pty Ltd v Nine Network Australia Pty Ltd, bringing to an end legal proceedings that have been going on for the past three years.  (I first blogged about the case in October 2006 here.)  I had hoped to post a summary of the decision as well as some comments by this morning but unfortunately it now appears that I'm unlikely to get the time to write anything until the weekend.  However, a few other Australian blawgers have posted their thoughts on the decision:

• My QUT colleague Kylie Pappalardo has an excellent summary on her blog OctaviaNet here.
• Warwick Rothnie posted his initial thoughts at ipwars.com here before a posting a more detailed summary and analysis last night here.
• On Australian Regulatory Compliance Review David Jacobson highlights a particular interesting part of the judgment here.
• Joshua Gans comments briefly here.
• Law student Katherine Liew has also written up her reaction to the decision here.

I'll continue to update this list as more people post their thoughts on this decision ...

One aspect of the decision that hasn't really been commented on yet was the nature of the divide on the Court.  Although all six justices agreed that the appeal should be allowed, the court divided into two groups of three justices each.  One judgment was authored by French CJ, Crennan and Kiefel JJ, and the other was authored by Gummow, Hayne and Heydon JJ.  This seems to be part of ongoing trend that suggests that maybe there is a divide on the Court emerging between the more established justices (Gummow, Hayne and Heydon JJ) and the more recent appointees (French CJ, Crennan and Kiefel JJ).  In particular, I can't help but wonder if there is minor battle taking place behind the scenes of the High Court between the new Chief Justice and the longest serving member of the Court, Gummow J, for the intellectual leadership of the Court.  If my suspicisions are correct, it will be fascinating to see how it plays out.

So what is happening with this blog?

I've just realised that it has been almost two months since I posted anything to this little blog.  Unlike my previous blogging hiatus, this blogging break was not planned in any way, it just happened.  My absence from the blogosphere was not because there was nothing worth blogging about or nothing I wanted to say.  In fact there have actually been several issues and stories I have wanted to blog about over the last two months: Microsoft's Politics and Technology Forum in Canberra and Joe Trippi's visit to Brisbane; Senator Conroy's ongoing attempt to censor the internet in Australia; the Queensland State election; the High Court challenge to the Australian Government's stimulus package; the seeming convergence of Twitter and Facebook; Hilary: The Movie; and the role of the news media in the digital age ...

So why no updates?  Primarily because I have been very busy at work since the semester started in February.  The roll out of a core new constitutional law unit, that utilises a wide range of new communication technologies like podcasts and wikis, has consumed more of my time than I had anticipated when I designed the learning and technology methodology and considered the pedagogy.  However in addition to frequently being time poor, I have also been finding other forums to communicate my ideas and interests; mainly Twitter but also the traditional media.  The increasing amount of radio and print media interviews I have been doing has allowed me to express my views and passions to a wider audience than this humble little blog.

So what is happening with this blog?  The honest answer is I don't know.  I'm not going to shut it down just yet but I also don't know how viable it is moving forward.  In the second half of this year I plan to commence a PhD which means that I am only going to get busier and busier, presumably making it harder and harder to blog.  Ages ago I thought about opening it up as a group blog, but I can't really imagine anyone wanting to join this blog as part of a team of bloggers.  I might make it more of a portal to some of my other work and publications.  Or I might just keep it here as a space I can go to vent when nowhere else wants to hear what I have to say.  But I'll make that decision another day.

In the meantime, feel free to follow my mundane life on Twitter @PeterBlackQUT.

Top 250 Australian blogs

Over at Dipping into the Blogpond, Meg Tsiamis has posted a special Australia Day 2009 list of the 250 top Australian blogs.  This humble little blog, which was once in the top 100, is now sitting at 157 (that's what happens when your blogging becomes erratic, sporadic even).  If you're looking for some great Australian blogs to follow, this list is a good place to start.  You can see the list here.

Social media will apparently make you a better writer

Over the weekend I cam across two separate blog posts that made the somewhat counter intuitive argument that blogging and Twitter actually make you better writers.  In a guest post on Problogger, freelance writer Jenny Cromie outlined five ways blogging can improve your writing.  However, before she did so explained how she needed to change her attitude to blogging:

In my mind, blogging was just a socially acceptable way for bad, wannabe writers to go mainstream with their poorly written rants and diatribes about things that made no difference to anyone else but the writer, a handful of family members, and other poor captive souls who loved the bloggers enough to read all their bad prose. In fact, if someone mentioned that they had a blog, my mind would click into sleep mode like my MacBook does after 10 minutes of inactivity. I’d think: Oh, one of those self-indulgent wannabe writer types. Where’s the nearest exit?

In short, blogging just seemed like a waste of time and effort. And I guess I had a snobbish writer attitude too—the idea that real writers didn’t need to blog because their writing was good enough to get published through more legitimate, mainstream ways. In my mind, push-button publishing was for the wannabes, not the real McCoys.

Fast-forward a few years. Now, everyone who is someone seems to have a blog these days. And if you’re a freelancer and you don’t have a blog, people sometimes wonder how you can bill yourself as a professional writer. Blogs aren’t just popular among individuals anymore either. Big companies have blogs. Mothers with babies have blogs. Teenagers with pimples and braces have blogs. And I wouldn’t be surprised to find out if some dogs have blogs too.

So this past year, I finally succumbed to this thing called blogging. I decided that since I was billing myself as a serious writer and freelancer, I needed to join the blogosphere. I started writing my own blog about freelance writing. And then one thing led to another and I eventually became the editor of The Golden Pencil, a b5media blog about freelance writing and how to build a successful freelance business.

And after all that herself she discovered that blogging made her a better writer as it helped her:

1. discover her voice;
2. connect with readers;
3. get feedback;
4. get disciplined; and
5. write faster.

Read more here.

But it is not just blogging that can improve your writing.  Dave Winer explains how Twitter makes you a better writer:

Twitter forces you to write concisely, and that makes for crisper, more direct, easier to read copy.  

I was reminded of this when reading a piece written by Dan Santow at Edelman PR, who offers a list of phrases that can be replaced by single words without loss of meaning.  

I realized you never see these phrases in Twitter-talk because there's no space for flowery prose with only 140 characters to express an idea. 

Read it here.  I generally agree with both these posts.  There is no doubt in my mind that blogging and Twitter have made me both a faster and more precise writer.

Blawg Review #196

G'day and welcome back down under!  And most importantly, Happy Australia Day! 

This is the fourth time I have hosted Blawg Review from Australia (I previously hosted Blawg Review #85, Blawg Review #136 and Blawg Review #178.). For those who don't know, the Blawg Review is a weekly round-up of posts from around the blawgosphere, and today I am thrilled to have the opportunity to host Blawg Revew on Australia Day.

However, before we begin my whip around the blawgosphere, a little about me and my blog.  I am a lecturer at the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) in Brisbane, Australia, where I teach Intellectual Property, Australian Federal Constitutional Law and Legal Regulation of the Internet, and research within the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation. Accordingly, my blog began as a forum to discuss the legal regulation of the internet and the media.  However, just as the collaborative and interdisciplinary nature of my work at QUT has seen my teaching and research interests expand beyond traditional black-letter legal scholarship, my blog is in many ways not a proper "blawg".  Most of my posts cover developments in new media - be they technological, social, political or legal - and you are just as likely to see me embed an interesting, popular or provocative viral video as you are to see me critique a significant legal case or piece of legislation.

Although I blog from time to time on developments all over the world, my blog is fundamentally Australian, which makes it particularly nice to be able to host Blawg Review on Australia Day and showcase some of the best Australian blawgs.

Australia Day is celebrated on 26 January each year, which commemorates the arrival of the First Fleet in 1788 and the proclamation of British sovereignty over the eastern seaboard of Australia.  Most Australians celebrate it - as I did today - by having a barbeque, playing some beach or park cricket, and listening to Triple J's Hottest 100 or the cricket on the radio.  Thanks to the cheeky "We love our Lamb" advertising campaign over the last few years it has also become a bit of a tradition to eat lamb on Australia Day, or else risk being labelled un-Australian.  Here is Sam Kekovich's Australia Day address for 2009:

However, even Australia Day is not without its controversy.  For many Australians, especially indigenous Australia, the day symbolises the adverse effects of British settlement on Australia's indigenous people, with some referring to it as Invasion Day.  This year the Australian of the Year Mick Dodson suggested that Australia may want to consider changing the date of Australia Day to a date that is more sensitive to the heritage and backgrounds of all Australians.  Andrew Bartlett has a good post at Crikey canvassing this suggestion.  However, Australian blawgers have covered a range of issues in the past week or so.

• Ben Lehman on Duncan Bucknell's IP Think Tank asks, has the fat lady finished singing at YouTube?. 
• Warwick Rothnie considers Elwood v Cotton On and asks is copying enough to infringe Down Under?.
• Pia Waugh looks at the ICT industry in Australia and argues that antiquated ideas won’t save Australia. 
• At Illegitimis Nil Carborundum, Bozwell looks at the blame game in negligence and criminal matters.
• Mirko Bagaric on Moral Dilemma has two lessons from the Middle East hostilities.
• Peter Timmins suggests that Australia's politicians could learn a lot of Barack Obama when it comes to openness and transparency.
• Brendan Scott has the third in a series of posts on acquiring closed source software.
• David Starkoff (sort of) ponders the existence of the universe.
• And finally David Jacobson on Australian Regulatory Compliance Review reflects on 30 years of change in legal practice.

However, as I was looking at the Australian blawgosphere this week I couldn't help but notice that it has slowed down a bit in recent times: Catherine Bond has announced she is taking a break from blogging at The House of Commons, a new job has seen Dale Clapperton has slow down at Defending Scoundrels, there is only the occasional post from the team at Lawfont, and Peter Faris QC closed his blog only yesterday. This year has also seen Jeremy Gans wind up his excellent Charter Blog, although he did leave with this call to legal academics:

Quitting the blog feels a little like giving up a baby. I can’t recommend blogging highly enough to any academic whose field includes regular contemporary developments. A commitment to regular, public and comprehensive commentary forces an engagement with the subject-matter that exceeds any other academic endeavour, even a PhD. And the informality of blogging is a perfect antidote to the jargon and circuitous nature of formal academic discourse, not to mention the obsequiousness and pomposity of the law.

i find it interesting that legal blogging in Australia is yet to gain the popularity and respectability that it has the United States, but I remain hopeful that this will continue to change over time.

It has been a pleasure to host Blawg Review #196 this week.  Blawg Review has information about next week's host, and instructions how to get your blawg posts reviewed in upcoming issues

Charon QC promotes the upcoming Australia Day Blawg Review

After reading my post earlier tonight about an Australia Day Blawg Review (see here), UK blawger Charon QC was inspired to put together this little video using Xtranormal.  I don't think I've ever looked so good ...

If you want to listen to a real and somewhat serious conversation between Charon QC and myself, you can listen to a podcast we recorded a few weeks back here.

Coming soon ... an Australia Day Blawg Review

On Monday 26 January I will be hosting Blawg Review #196, a weekly round-up of posts from around the blawgosphere, for the fourth time.  I have previously hosted Blawg Review #85, Blawg Review #136 and Blawg Review #178.  Therefore I would encourage you all to let me know what interesting posts from the blawgosphere you have written or read this week.  You can do so by leaving a comment to this post or sending me a tweet @peterblackqut.  As January 26 is Australia Day, I would particularly like to showcase the best of the Australian blawgosphere, so if you write or read any Australian law blogs, please point me in that direction.

The Importance of Ideas

Check out a great new blog from Jason Whittaker, The Importance of Ideas, here.  The name of the blog comes from this quote from the legendary journalist, Edward R. Murrow:"Just once in a while let us exalt the importance of ideas and information."  I'm looking forward to reading Jason's ideas on politics, the media and popular culture - I've added it to my RSS reader and would encourage you to do the same.

Social Media Club Brisbane January

The inaugural event for the year for the Social Media Club Brisbane is next week, on Tuesday January 20, commencing at 5.30 pm, at the Melbourne Hotel in West End.  Co-hosting this event with SMC Brisbane, and generously covering venue costs and providing refreshments, is the blogger advertising network Nuffnang, established recently in Australia. Nuffnang Co-Founder, Cheo Ming Shen is flying in from Singapore that afternoon and will be at the function, explaining for 15 minutes or so how interested bloggers might be able to benefit from being part of the Nuffnang network.

If you would like to attend this event, please RSVP at the Facebook site for the event here.

Last chance to vote in the 2008 Weblog Awards

As I have blogged before (see here), this blog has been nominated for a 2008 Weblog Award in the Best Law Blog category.  There are only a few hours left before voting closes, so if you want to vote for the first or the last time, you can do so here.

The other finalists in the Best Law Blog category are:

• Overlawyered
• Above the Law
• Photo Attorney
• WSJ Law Blog
• How Appealing
• Volokh Conspiracy
• Eric Goldman's Technology & Marketing Law Blog
• Peter Black's Freedom to Differ
• Citizen Media Law Project
• MyShingle

Again, you can vote here.

A conversation with Charon QC

Earlier this evening I chatted with British blawger Charon QC for a podcast he has now posted to his blog.  On the podcast we chat about the Australian Government's plan to filter the internet, blogging, Twitter, cricket and legal education.

You can download the podcast here.

Vote in the 2008 Weblog Awards

As I've blogged before (see here), I am very excited and honoured that this blog, Peter Black's Freedom to Differ, has been nominated for a 2008 Weblog Award in the Best Law Blog category.  The other nominated blogs (or blawgs) are without doubt some of the leading blawgs in the world and are written by some first class lawyers and legal scholars, so I feel horribly out of my depth.  Nonetheless it is a real thrill to be nominated. 

Anyway, voting is now open for one week, closing on 13 January 2009.  You can vote for my blog (or one of the other finalists I suppose) here.

The other finalists in the Best Law Blog category are:

• Overlawyered
• Above the Law
• Photo Attorney
• WSJ Law Blog
• How Appealing
• Volokh Conspiracy
• Eric Goldman's Technology & Marketing Law Blog
• Peter Black's Freedom to Differ
• Citizen Media Law Project
• MyShingle

Again, you can vote here.  Please vote to help me achieve very modest goal of not coming last!  Thanks.

Anonymous defamation

The New York Daily News reports on a lawsuit against Google, as host of Blogger.com:

A Vogue cover girl is suing Google in an attempt to unmask the blogger who trashed her as a "skank" and an "old hag."

Liskula Cohen, a blond beauty who has modeled for Giorgio Armani and Versace, made headlines last year when a doorman at a Manhattan hot spot was jailed after smashing her in the face with a vodka bottle.

Now she wants to force Google to reveal who slammed her online as the "#1 skanky superstar" on a blog hosted by the search engine's subsidiary.

"It's petty, it's stupid and it's pathetic," Cohen said of the sniping. "And when I do find out who did this, at least I'll know who my enemies are."

The defamation suit, filed in Manhattan Supreme Court, seeks a court order compelling Google and its Blogger.com service to identify whoever led the vicious Internet assault against Cohen.

Her lawyer Steven Wagner conceded it's not easy to identify bloggers who lob insults anonymously, as New York courts have generally declined to force them into the light.

"We think we have a case," he said. "This is libelous, it's defamatory and you shouldn't just get away with this."

Read more here.  Ars Technica summarises in lay terms the legal hurdles presented by this case:

Since the blogger is anonymous, however, there is an extra legal hurdle between Cohen and whatever financial revenge she seeks.

That hurdle would be Google and its army of lawyers. Essentially, Cohen has to demonstrate defamation twice: once to show that she has a sufficient case that the identity of the blogger should be unmasked. At that point, the case could proceed against the actual author of the blog, at which point the defamation would have to be demonstrated all over again. None of this will be easy, as US courts generally set a high standard for defamation of public figures, and Cohen has made a name for herself in ways that go beyond modeling by getting hit in the face with a vodka bottle at a Manhattan club.

As a result, the case appears to be an uphill battle, which means both that nothing is likely to come of it and that, should something unexpected happen, the legal context makes it likely that the decision will further muddy the waters when it comes to determining the legal status of bloggers.

Read more here. 

It is interesting to consider what the legal position would be if this had occurred in Australia, as I think it would be easier for Cohen to obtain relief.  That is because Cohen would be able sue Google for defamation.  In the US, Google has immunity courtesy of s 230 of the Communications Decency Act, however no such immunity exists in Australia and Google would be unlikely to be able rely on the defence of innocent dissemination.  However, even if Cohen did not sue Google, she would be able to use the threat of a lawsuit as leverage to require Google to disclose the identity of the anonymous blogger.  And ultimately that is where these sorts of lawsuits should be fought - between the person alleging defamation and the party who posted it to the internet - without involving the intermediaries or platforms who should not be liable for what others post to that intermediary or platform.

Twitter in the courtroom

In the US, a Colorado judge recently approved the use of Twitter, as well as live-blogging, inside the courtroom to cover an infant-abuse trial:

Prosecutors and defense attorneys wanted bloggers silenced in the courtroom next week, but a Boulder judge ordered Monday that cell phones and computers won’t be banned from the child-abuse trial of Alex Midyette, the Boulder Daily Camera reports. The attorneys argued that live-blogging and Tweeting the sensational case could tip witnesses to proceedings before they testified, thus impeding a fair trial. “I think there are other manageable options and less restrictive options than shutting down the flow of information during the trial,” Boulder District Judge Lael Montgomery said.

Last week, when the attorneys filed the joint motion to keep bloggers out of the courtroom, a Kansas journalist who has pioneered new media trial coverage cried foul. “Courts are supposed to be public and this is just another way of creating public access,” Wichita Eagle reporter Ron Sylvester wrote in an e-mail to the Colorado Independent. In addition to a Tweeting trial coverage, Sylvester maintains a blog, What the Judge Ate for Breakfast, with further insight into the local courts.

“[R]eporting through live blogging is simply text descriptions, just as newspapers have been reporting on the courts for ages,” Sylvester wrote. “When I use Twitter to cover trials, there’s really very little difference in what I do with social media than what I write for the next day’s newspaper.”

Montgomery agreed in her ruling Monday, ordering witnesses to refrain from reading about the testimony of other witnesses. “The court believes that is a more appropriate way to proceed than shutting off the reporting at the front end,” the Longmont Times-Call reported.

Read more here (from the Colorado Independent).  (Hat tip: Social Media Law Student.)

Before my Australian readers get too excited about this ruling, I cannot see this ruling taking place in Australia.  The principle of open justice in Australia is very different from the US, and my feeling is that the courts here would be more likely to grant TV or radio access than Twitter or live-blogging in Australian courts - and I can't see TV cameras or microphones being regularly allowed into Australian courts any time soon.

Academic blogging

Jeremy Gans has decided to bring a halt to his Charterblog, which for the past year has followed the progress of Victoria’s Charter of Human Rights.  Although this is a loss to the Australian blawgosphere and to anyone interested in human rights and charters of rights, it is hard to fault his logic in bringing the blog to an end:

Why stop now?  I made the decision to stop the blog today back in around July.  Charterblog is, as readers will well know, a very intensive blog . I’ve managed it so far, but I’ve long known that it isn’t sustainable (especially for someone with two regular jobs.) My options were either to make the blog less intense or to make it finite. I didn’t hesitate in choosing the latter. Better an intense, temporary blog, than a perpetual and lame series of links,  one-liners and the odd meaningful post. A year-long blog makes aesthetic sense and matches the year-by-year nature of the Charter’s development too.

As well, 2009 is a big year for me in my academic job ... Finally, recently, it’s become clear that it’s probably too early for a perpetual blog charting the development of Charter jurisprudence, as the pace of that development (if, indeed, it is happening at all) is too glacial to sustain a case-by-case analysis.  The result is too many frustrated posts that begin ‘Yet again…’. If I kept this up, I might become jaded!

In wrapping his blog he also thanks his employers, including the University of Melbourne:

Blogging carries no cred with DEST and even the folks at Melbourne Uni who defined ‘knowledge transfer’ can’t seem to get their heads around the concept. And my particular blogging style and views bring political risks, not only for SARC but (as it turns out) for Melbourne Law School too. I’m fortunate indeed that neither has raised the slightest objection. That’s quite appropriate, of course, given Charter s. 15, but it’s also courageous, especially when there’s a bully on the block.

Finally, he endorses the benefits of blogging for academics:

I can’t recommend blogging highly enough to any academic whose field includes regular contemporary developments. A commitment to regular, public and comprehensive commentary forces an engagement with the subject-matter that exceeds any other academic endeavour, even a PhD. And the informality of blogging is a perfect antidote to the jargon and circuitous nature of formal academic discourse, not to mention the obsequiousness and pomposity of the law.

Read more here. 

Whenever I read statements like that, and academically rigorous blogs like Jeremy's, I always reflect on my little blog and wonder whether it is too frivolous or whether there is too much linking and pop culture and not enough original legal analysis.  However ultimately I always conclude that I like my blog the way it is - I think my mix of posts is part of what keeps it interesting to read.  And perhaps more importantly, it reflects me and what interests me, which means that I enjoy writing it.  So at least as far as my blog is concerned, I'm quite happy to be labelled as a bit of a pop academic.

Nominated for a 2008 Weblog Award

I am very excited and honoured that this blog, Peter Black's Freedom to Differ, has been nominated for a 2008 Weblog Award in the Best Law Blog category.  The other nominated blogs (or blawgs) are without doubt some of the leading blawgs in the world and are written by some first class lawyers and legal scholars, so I feel horribly out of my depth.  Nonetheless it is a real thrill to be nominated.

The nominees in the Best Law Blog category are:

• Overlawyered
• Above the Law
• Photo Attorney
• WSJ Law Blog
• How Appealing
• Volokh Conspiracy
• Eric Goldman's Technology & Marketing Law Blog
• Peter Black's Freedom to Differ
• Citizen Media Law Project
• MyShingle

Congratulations also to the blogs nominated in the Best Australian or New Zealand Blog category:

• Rusty Lime
• A.E. Brain
• KerrieJean.com.au
• The Dawn Chorus
• Tim Blair
• Screen Play
• Media Spy
• Gizmodo Australia
• Ask Bossy
• All Men Are Liars

You can view all the nominees in the various categories here.  Voting is scheduled to begin on 5 January  2009.

Freedom to Differ on your iPhone or iPod Touch

Last month I used Intersquash to "optimise" Freedom to Differ for the iPhone and iPod Touch (see here).  However based on the feedback I have received since this change, I have decided to turn it off.  So from now on, if you visit this blog on your iPhone or iPod Touch you will once again only be able to view it as a webpage.

Blogging update

Tomorrow I hop on a plane to London for a two and a bit week holiday in England and Ireland.  At this stage I have no idea as to whether I will have the time, inclination or even regular internet access to blog while I am away, so it is likely that if there is any blogging over the next few weeks it will be intermittent at best.

People's Choice Open Web Awards Winners

Mashable has announced the winners of The 2nd Annual Open Web Awards, a multilingual, international online voting competition that covers major innovations in web technology.  Through an online nominating and voting process, the Open Web Awards recognizes and honors the top achievements of websites and services in 26 categories.

Over 100 Blog Partners (including this blog) helped make this the biggest Open Web Awards to date with 50,000 total nominations, 80,000 total votes in the first round, and 90,000 votes in the final round.  The blog partners come from 25 countries and are written in 10 different languages.

There were two sections in the Open Web Awards: the People’s Choice and the Blogger’s Choice. The Blogger’s Choice winners were announced last week (see here). 

The People's Choice Winners are ...

---

Mainstream & Large Scale Social Networks

Winner: Netlog
Runner-up: Platinum Lounge

---

Embeddable Widgets

Winner: Qoof
Runner-up: Sprout

---

Blog Plugins

Winner: ShareThis
Runner-up: AddThis

---

Social News

Winner: Help a Reporter Out
Runner-up: Hubdub

---

Social Networking Applications

Winner: Artition
Runner-up: Digsby

---

Social Bookmarking

Winner: Diigo
Runner-up: ShareThis

---

Search & Social Search

Winner: Scour
Runner-up: Artiklz

---

Sports & Fitness

Winner: Gyminee
Runner-up: FitFiend

---

Photo Sharing

Winner: ipernity
Runner-up: TinyPic

---

Video Sharing

Winner: ffwd
Runner-up: YouTube

---

Start Pages

Winner: Google
Runner-up: iGoogle

---

Places & Events

Winner: Doodle
Runner-up: Muchmor

---

Travel

Winner: SpottedByLocals
Runner-up: GeckoGo

---

Music

Winner: Noisetrade
Runner-up: Last.fm

---

Social Shopping

Winner: Pikaba
Runner-up: A Full Cup

---

Fashion

Winner: Coolspotters
Runner-up: Polyvore

---

Celebrity & Gossip

Winner: Oh No They Didn’t
Runner-up: BollyScoops

---

Mobile Applications

Winner: Evernote
Runner-up: MocoSpace

---

Dating & Romance

Winner: Zoosk
Runner-up: DateHookup

---

Wiki

Winner: Encyclopedia Dramatica
Runner-up: WikiHow

---

Politics

Winner: Politics4All
Runner-up: CreateDebate

---

How-to

Winner: A Full Cup
Runner-up: College Cram

---

Environmental

Winner: Ecomii
Runner-up: Gazelle

---

Non-Profit Causes

Winner: Stop Political Calls
Runner-up: SocialVibe

---

Online Games

Winner: Playfish
Runner-up: Power Pets

---

Niche Social Networks

Winner: The Star Tracker
Runner-up: Wadja

Digital for Good

Check out a new blog by my friend Eddie Harran, Digital for Good.  This is how Eddie describes it:

"DigitalForGood" Exploring Digital Technology as force for positive social change/ The Mainfesto for Geeks Who Care/ This blog explores the emerging digital space and its cross section in business, society, and the world

So check it out here.

Blogger’s Choice Open Web Awards Winners

While voting continues until midnight Sunday to decide who is crowned the Open Web Awards "People’s Choice", Mashable has announced the winners of the Blogger’s Choice voting, as selected by the Blog Partners to the Open Web Awards (including this blog).

Over 100 Blog Partners participated in the Open Web Awards this year, with over 100,000 confirmed nominations and votes so far.  These blog blog partners come from 25 countries and are written in 10 different languages.

The Blogger’s Choice Winners are ...

---

Mainstream & Large Scale Social Networks

Winner: Twitter
Runner-up: Facebook

---

Embeddable Widgets

Winner:
Clearspring
Runner-up: Sprout

---

Blog Plugins

Winner: ShareThis
Runner-up: AddThis

---

Social News

Winner: Digg
Runner-up: Mixx

---

Social Networking Applications

Winner: Ping.fm
Runner-up: Twitterfeed

---

Social Bookmarking

Winner: Delicious
Runner-up: StumbleUpon

---

Search & Social Search

Winner: Google
Runner-up: Scour

---

Sports & Fitness

Winner: Gyminee
Runner-up: Oneseason

---

Photo Sharing

Winner: Flickr
Runner-up: Picasa

---

Video Sharing

Winner: YouTube
Runner-up: Vimeo

---

Start Pages

Winner: iGoogle
Runner-up: Netvibes

---

Places & Events

Winner: Doodle
Runner-up: Eventbrite

---

Travel

Winner: TripIt
Runner-up: GeckoGo

---

Music

Winner: Last.fm
Runner-up: Pandora

---

Social Shopping

Winner: Wishpot
Runner-up(s): Tigerbow/Pikaba (tie)

---

Fashion

Winner: Coolspotters
Runner-up: Gift Girl

---

Celebrity & Gossip

Winner: Perez Hilton
Runner-up: Popvine

---

Mobile Applications

Winner: Evernote
Runner-up: Qik

---

Dating & Romance

Winner: SpeedDate
Runner-up: OKCupid

---

Wiki

Winner: Wikipedia
Runner-up: PBWiki

---

Politics

Winner: Huffington Post
Runner-up: CreateDebate

---

How-to

Winner: eHow
Runner-up: Howcast

---

Environmental

Winner: ThinkGreen
Runner-up: SocialVibe

---

Non-Profit Causes

Winner: SocialVibe
Runner-up: Kiva

---

Online Games

Winner: Playfish
Runner-up: Kongregate

---

Niche Social Networks

Winner: Wadja
Runner-up: Lifeblob

Vote now in the Open Web Awards

Nominations are now closed and voting open for the Second Annual Open Web Awards.

The Open Web Awards is the only multilingual international online voting competition that covers major innovations in web technology.  Through an online nominating and voting process, the Open Web Awards recognizes and honors the top achievements in 26 categories.  Freedom to Differ is proud to be one of the blog partners backing Awards host Mashable for the event.

Over 43,000 verified nomination were received and the 10 most-nominated sites and services in each category (where 10th place was a draw, more than 10 nominees were allowed in that category) selected for the voting round.

The first of two voting rounds starts now, and you can vote for one company in each category per day until midnight on November 30th.  There are 26 categories.  Vote with this voting widget:

Media, Communications and Public Speech

On 20 and 21 November I'll be live blogging the 2008 Conference of the Centre for Media and Communications Law Media, Communications and Public Speech at the University of Melbourne.  Here is the Conference program.

Last call for nominations for the Open Web Awards

The nomination period for the second annual Open Web Awards is almost over.  If you haven’t nominated your favorite site or company you must do so before Sunday 16 November at 11:59 pm PST.

The Open Web Awards is the only multilingual international online voting competition that covers major innovations in web technology.  Through an online nominating and voting process, the Open Web Awards recognizes and honors the top achievements in 26 categories.  Freedom to Differ is proud to be one of the blog partners backing Awards host Mashable for the event.

Nominate your favourite site or company in a variety categories using this widget:

2008 Weblog Awards

Nominations are now open for the 2008 Weblog Awards.  You can nominate your favourite blog in 48 different categories here.  You might even want to nominate this humble blog for something ...

Freedom to Differ on your iPhone or iPod Touch

Thanks to Intersquash there is now a version of Freedom to Differ for your iPhone.  Now if you visit this blog on your iPhone or iPod Touch you will automatically be forwarded to an optimised version of this blog.

intersquash demo from jon on Vimeo.

An Australian Blawg Review

Australian Duncan Bucknell is the host of Blawg Review #185.  Read it here.

Read previous editions of Blawg Review here, including the three editions I have hosted over the past few years: Blawg Review #85, Blawg Review #136 and Blawg Review #178.

No online campaigning in Japan

Newsweek has a revealing report on how Japan has blocked online campaigning.  It is remarkable to discover that such a technologically advanced nation places such extensive restrictions on online campaigning:

Japan is one of the world's most wired countries; 60 percent of its citizens have high-speed broadband and e-commerce is thriving. More blogs are written in Japanese than any other language. Politicians do use the Web for some things—listing schedules or recounting what they had for lunch or, in Prime Minister Taro Aso's case, turgid accounts of the history of his constituency.

Try to use the Internet in an actual campaign, however, and you run into serious obstacles. The first hitch is Japan's 58-year-old election law. (Originally intended for printed matter, the law has been extended to cover virtual material as well.) Once an official campaign has started, candidates are barred from updating their home pages, launching or amending blogs—podcasts are allowed because the law applies only to text or images—posting political statements or sending text messages to mobile phones. Additional regulations prohibit donors from using credit cards online to support candidates, effectively preventing online fundraising.

...

As Kim Jung Hoon, a Keio University professor who is lobbying for liberalization of the Japanese Web, puts it, Japan "is ruled by a very stable and old political system." Kim says that "politicians, bureaucrats, the media and big business are all very tightly interconnected. Basically they want to suppress and eliminate any possibility for change. And the Internet is a major source of change."

Japan's nonconfrontational culture probably also plays a role. Despite the proliferation of blogs in the country, there is a notable lack of political polemic online—in remarkable contrast to neighboring South Korea, where the fates of heads can rise and fall on the whim of a fiery Internet culture. Even when Japanese politicians are allowed to post what they want—namely, outside campaign periods—the results are still strikingly tame. "It's so weird," says Kumi Yokoe, a political analyst and e-government expert. "Why don't Japanese politicians talk about what's going on in the [legislature]? It's always about who I met, what I ate. For that you don't need a Web site."

...

Like it or not, however, signs of change are beginning to emerge. Politicians have begun discovering the power of YouTube and similar sites as ways of generating buzz. During recent municipal elections in Tokyo and Osaka, some Web enthusiasts used video-sharing sites to post videos of candidates' speeches even during campaigning. Other Netizens updated the Wikipedia pages of certain candidates in defiance of the ban. The police sent warnings to offenders, but no arrests were made.

Internet users are also finally starting to flex their muscles. Kim is the initiator of a group called The Contents Association, which is pushing for gradual reform of the telecommunications bureaucracy to allow for greater checks and balances. He also advocates "spectrum reform," the auctioning off of space on the airwaves—much of which is now being freed up as Japanese TV broadcasters shift to fiber-optic networks—to new wireless providers as a way of bringing greater diversity to the Japanese Web. For his part, Kanda, the frustrated candidate, agrees that the pressure to reform the outdated election law is growing by the day. Given his own experience, however, he's not holding his breath.

Read more here.

Australian censorship

Many Australians are rightly outraged at the policy of their to introduce mandatory internet filtering.  This is normally I topic I would have blogged about here in great detail (the name of the blog is, after all, inspired by a US Supreme Court decision on the First Amendment) but due to a lack of time on part and the fact that so many others are already doing a superb covering this issue, my only contribution to the debate so far has been one op-ed piece (which you can read here).  So if you would like to read more about this issue I'd encourage you to visit Michael Meloni's excellent blog on censorship in Australia, Somebody Think of the Children.

Influential Australian Twitterers

ShiftedPixels - The Online Influence Agency and @Nickhac have put together a list of Australia's most influential Twitterers.  I'm currently number 59 and falling ...