Blawg Review #136

G'day and welcome back down under!  This is the second time I have hosted Blawg Review from Australia (the first being Blawg Review #85.  For those who don't know, the Blawg Review is a weekly round-up of posts from around the blawgosphere.  However, before we begin to whip around the web, a little about me and my blog.

I am a lecturer at the Queensland University of Technology (QUT) in Brisbane, Australia, where I teach Copyright, 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.  Given I consider the content of my blog to generally be fairly eclectic, I thought I would try and reflect that approach in this edition of Blawg Review.  As such, I've structured this post by relying on several YouTube videos created by James Tinniswood, a recent law graduate of the University of Queensland, who as a student was heavily involved in producing their annual Law Revue.

From Australia

Over the weekend Australian Prime Minister John Howard and the Liberal Party were defeated by Kevin Rudd and the Labor Party.  However, for the past 11 and a half years, it has seemed as though John Howard would never give up the "reigns down in Canberra":

Australian bloggers are understandably focused on this election result, with David Jacobson asking what will the new government will mean for business? and Mirko Bagaric lamenting the union background of so many Labor politicians. Peter Timmins offers this suggestion - that when it comes to openness and transparency in government the new Prime Minister Kevin Rudd needs to set the tone at the top.   However, Australian legal bloggers touched on a wide range of issues last week that were unrelated to the election:

• Australian journalist Leon Gettler considered the difficulties associated with applying real world law to virtual theft;
• Kim Weatherall wondered whether Australia should join negotiations on plurilateral anti-counterfeiting treaty;
• David Starkoff was amused by the High Court on economists and lawyers;
• Nic Suzor asked whether tasers are used for convenience rather than to stop immiment harm?;
• Dale Clapperton explained why 'ReputationDefender' is an ill-concieved scam; and
• Alex Malik outlined why indigenous communities around the world are being let down by ineffectual or poorly enforced intellectual property laws.

From law schools

I'm sure law students and professors everywhere can identify with the Law Nemesis:

Paul L Caron's TaxProf Blog posted a table of law schools that are ranked significantly lower than their parent universities.

Ed Morgan at the University of Toronto Faculty of Law Blog asks, why has Canada changed its tune on citizens facing the death penalty?

Lawrence Solum announced the posting of the final version of his article "Blogging and the Transformation of Legal Scholarship".

From law firms ...

Each law firm has its own unique firm culture:

Dan Hull explains why doing great work isn't the only thing which matters to client satisfaction.

Bruce MacEwen at Adam Smith, Esq. offers his thoughts on London from a New Yorker.

Eugene Lee provides five tips all clients should keep in mind before they pick up the phone to call a lawyer seeking to sue an employer for racial discrimination, sexual harassment, whistleblower retaliation, failure to pay the last paycheck etc.

Kevin O'Keefe asks and answers this question, can the number of law blogs reach a "saturation point", with "Well done law blogs are no more likely to reach the saturate point than social interaction with other people".   

From the rest of the legal blogosphere ...

We all enjoy some legal puns:

Daniel Solove, who has literally written the book on online reputation, has a follow-up to a fascinating and tragic story he reported earlier wherein a young teenage girl was driven to suicide by an adult neighbor using spoofed credentials in a social media site and other online tools.  This time around, it's that adult neighbor who's been exposed and pilloried online.  Daniel Solove reports on a new movie shot entirely with surveillance cameras.

At Blawg IT Brett Trout outlines the law of photography.

Techdirt's Mike Masnick thought the copyright-related questions provided to the US presidential candidates by the Copyright Alliance were a bit loaded.

Eugene Volokh debunked a BBC contention that the majority of all assaults and robberies in the US involve a handgun.

Scott Greenfield has two interesting posts from New York - first he considers what happens when judges go bad, and second he is thankful that the New York Court of Appeals, in a 6 page decision, rejected the crime of standing.   

Inspired by Michael Moore's Sicko, Eugene Lee researches the extent to which the US lags behind the rest of the world in the provision sick, medical and paternity/maternity leaves and work hours.

RiskProf reports that Hell hath no fury like a lover scorned when insurance policies make such a tempting target.

Stephen Bainbridge explains why Starbucks does not franchise.

Blawg Review will continue next week ... the march goes on:

It has been a pleasure to host Blawg Review #136 this week.  Blawg Review has information about next week's host, and instructions how to get your blawg posts reviewed in upcoming issues.

Comments

[Dan]

This is a response to the post you created about the AMA and data mining, for which they are responsible for and is a great source of income for the association. Thier vicarious submission to pending legislation about this issue is largely due to the awareness of thier involvement and encouragement in allowing this occurence to happen. Yet from a treatment paradigm, the more objective a health care provider can be, the better for the patient, instead of attempting to cloud thier judgement by questioning thier treatment regimens for the benefit of the pharma rep instead of the patient.

[Dan]

This comment is in response to the few posts you created about convenience care clinics, or what may be termed, 'urgent care light'.

Of course, others such as the AMA are conerned about the infiltration of such clinics, because of turf concerns. Most of the diagnosis determined at such locations will be comparable in accuracy as that of a primary care doctor's office. Yet the comfort level will be greater for the patient, as well as thier conversation of time. Clearly, if a serious disorder is suspected from a patient at one of these facilities, appropriate action will be taken.

[Dan]

This is a comment in response to your post about disclosure laws being considered for transparency of spending that occurs with pharma companies.

It's a good idea, and may prove to be interesting. Just the fact that the industry is concerned about this potential requirement raises a flag. Yet, I believe it would ultimately be an exercise in creative accounting from such companies.