|
|
- Wendy Seltzer
-
Law professor
Send Message |
Company |
Website |
Blog
- Member Since: Jul 2, 2003
- Featured Posts: 15
- Comments: 5
About: I am a Visiting Professor of Law at Brooklyn Law School and a fellow with the Berkman Center for Internet & Society at Harvard Law School. I came to Brooklyn after three years as a staff attorney with the Electronic Frontier Foundation.
I founded and developed the Chilling Effects Clearinghouse, a project to study and combat the ungrounded legal threats that chill activity on the Internet. In conjunction with the EFF and law school clinics across the country, we invite recipients and senders of cease and desist notices to submit these notices for analysis in issue-spotting FAQ-style memos and inclusion in our database. Chilling Effects offers resources for Internet users who face legal threats, and, through its collection of data, we hope to analyze the out-of-court effects of those threats to chill legitimate activity, or, conversely, the extent to which unlawful activity on the Net proves resistant to legal action. Chilling Effects has been featured in the New York Times and Boston Globe.
My work at the Berkman Center focuses on the legal issues and intellectual property questions surrounding Free Software. I helped to start and now lead the Openlaw project, an experiment bringing the methods of open source and Free Software development to legal argument in the public interest. Openlaw’s first case, Eldred v. Ashcroft was argued before the Supreme Court October 9, 2002. The Openlaw DVD forum has developed arguments in defense of 2600 Magazine’s posting of DeCSS code, arguing that technological protections for digital media must accommodate free speech and fair use. Openlaw participants filed an amicus brief in the Southern District of New York in the DeCSS case Universal v. Reimerdes, and I drafted the cryptographers’ amicus brief to the Second Circuit on appeal. Finally, I have been working with the Creative Commons project to offer the public a range of open licenses to promote sharing of creative non-software works.
Doc's post and the impending comments deadline for the next iteration of ICANN's never-ending WHOIS saga finally pushed me to write up my thoughts on the latest iteration of ICANN debate. As Doc points out, much of the current debate is very inside baseball, tied up in acronyms atop bureaucratic layers. Small wonder then that ordinary domain name registrants and Internet users haven't commented much, while the fora are dominated by INTA members turning out responses to an "urgent request" to "let ICANN know that Whois is important to the brand owners I represent"... ›››
As if there weren't enough problems with lawyers sending out improper cease-and-desists, Wired News reports that a Nevada man has pleaded guilty to impersonating a lawyer to extort domain registrants to turn over their domain names. "A Nevada man pleaded guilty Thursday to his plotting to steal domain names from their legitimate owners by impersonating a California intellectual property lawyer and send threatening letters to domain name owners in hopes of convincing them to turn over the domains to him..." ›››
After blogging about ICANN's new gTLD policy or lack thereof [also featured on CircleID], I've had several people ask me why I care so much about ICANN and new top-level domains. Domain names barely matter in a world of search and hyperlinks, I'm told, and new domains would amount to little more than a cash transfer to new registries from those trying to protect their names and brands. While I agree that type-in site-location is less and less relevant, and we haven't yet seen much end-user focused innovation in the use of domain names, I'm not ready to throw in the towel. I think ICANN is still in a position to do affirmative harm to Internet innovation. ›››
ICANN's travelling circus is meeting in San Juan, Puerto Rico this week. One of the main subjects of discussion has been the introduction of new generic Top-Level Domains (gTLDs), after a GNSO Report [PDF] proposed 19 "Recommendations" for criteria these new domain strings should meet -- including morality tests and "infringement" oppositions. ...It's important to keep ICANN from being a censor, or from straying beyond its narrow technical mandate. The thick process described in the GNSO report would be expensive, open to "hecklers' vetos," and deeply political... ICANN should aim for a "stupid core"... ›››
ICANN seems to be out to re-prove Hirschman's theories of exit, voice, and loyalty by driving all of its good people to exit rather than giving them meaningful voices. Thomas Roessler, a long-time advocate of individual users' interests on the interim ALAC now suggests it's Time to Reconsider the structure of ICANN's At-Large, as he feels compelled to promise himself not to get involved with ICANN again... ›››
More...
|
Recent Comments — by Wendy Seltzer
Most Popular — by Wendy Seltzer
ICANN on Closing Off Port 43
Dec 18, 2003 |
Comments: 2 |
Views: 10,400
WIPO Crowing Again About “Cybersquatting”
Feb 01, 2006 |
Comments: 6 |
Views: 7,937
Why WIPO Does Not Like the UDRP
Dec 05, 2003 |
Comments: 2 |
Views: 7,440
New TLDs: Can You Say .Never?
Jul 02, 2003 |
Comments: 0 |
Views: 7,267
|