Posts Tagged ‘SSRN’

Tatyana Dumova on the Future of Blogging

Monday, May 13th, 2013

Point Park University sealTatyana Dumova of Pittsburgh’s Point Park University has posted Social Interaction Technologies and the Future of Blogging to SSRN. It is published in Blogging in the Global Society: Cultural, Political and Geographical Aspects, pp. 249-274, T. Dumova & R. Fiordo, eds.(Information Science Reference 2012). Here is the abstract:

In an age of user-generated content, multimedia sharing sites, and customized news aggregators, an assortment of Internet-based social interaction technologies transforms the Web and its users. A quintessential embodiment of social interaction technologies, blogs are widely used by people across diverse geographies to locate information, create and share content, initiate conversations, and collaborate and interact with others in various settings. This chapter surveys the global blogosphere landscape for the latest trends and developments in order to evaluate the overall direction that blogging might take in the future. The author posits that network-based peer production and social media convergence are the driving forces behind the current transformation of blogs. The participatory and inclusive nature of social interaction technologies makes blogging a medium of choice for disseminating user-driven content and particularly suitable for bottom-up grassroots initiatives, creativity, and innovation.

Eugene Volokh: Freedom of the Press as an Industry or as a Technology?

Friday, April 22nd, 2011

UCLA's Royce Hall
(Photo: EEJ)

Eugene Volokh of the UCLA School of Law has posted to SSRN The Freedom…of the Press, from 1791 to 1868 to Now – Freedom for the Press as an Industry, or the Press as a Technology?. The cite is 160 University of Pennsylvania Law Review ___ (2011)

Here’s the abstract:

Both Justices and scholars have long debated whether the “freedom…of the press” was historically understood as securing special constitutional rights for the institutional press (newspapers, magazines, and broadcasters). This issue comes up in many fields: campaign finance law, libel law, the news gatherer’s privilege, access to government facilities for news gathering purposes, and more. Most recently, last year’s Citizens United v. FEC decision split 5-4 on this very question, and not just in relation to corporate speech rights.

This article discusses what the “freedom of the press” has likely meant with regard to this question, during (1) the decades surrounding the ratification of the First Amendment, (2) the decades surrounding the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment, and (3) the modern First Amendment era. The article focuses solely on the history, and leaves the First Amendment theory questions to others. And, with regard to the history, it offers evidence that the “freedom…of the press” has long been understood as meaning freedom for all who used the printing press as technology – and, by extension, mass communication technology more broadly – and has generally not been limited to those who belonged to the institutional press as an industry.

Lisa Di Valentino: An Annotated Bibliography of Open Access and Legal Publishing

Monday, March 28th, 2011

Lisa Di Valentino has posted to SSRN Open Access and Legal Publishing: An Annotated Bibliography. This seems to me like an enormously useful document.

Di Valentino is a research assistant and J.D. candidate at University of Western Ontario where she works with the Faculty of Information and Media Studies.

The issue is near and dear to my heart. One key question implicates blogs: whether publishing in print law journals does more or less to contribute to scholarly discourse than blogging. Di Valentino finds that “there is a theoretical approval of open access publishing for legal scholarship, but a certain amount of resistance in practice.” I’d have to agree with that.

Here’s the abstract:

Several commentators argue that the law review is well-suited to open access publishing, although it has not been embraced quite as enthusiastically as it might be. Others assert that self-publishing will signal end of the law review as we know it. Some authors express concern that the rise in blogging will have little positive effect, or indeed a detrimental effect, on the general quality of legal scholarship. These views are countered by those who believe that blogging and collaborative editing provide opportunities and benefits to students and scholars and that the new methods of communicating will give rise to new methods of evaluating works.

Other issues are brought up such as the demographics of the audience for legal writing, the responsibilities of the legal scholar, the use of open access in legal education, the benefits of university repositories, and advice for young professors who are considering publishing in open access journals.

A few of the articles were written before the open access campaign gained momentum around 2006-2007. These articles are included to demonstrate the history of and impetus behind the open access movement.

The conclusion one might draw from the following articles is that there is a theoretical approval of open access publishing for legal scholarship, but a certain amount of resistance in practice. However, open access publishing is gaining in popularity, and it is possible that the next generation of legal scholars, accustomed to finding information online, will embrace open access as the standard manner of publishing.

Keith J. Bybee: Blogs and Newspapers and the Images of Judging

Thursday, February 24th, 2011

Keith J. Bybee of Syracuse University College of Law and SU’s Maxwell School has posted to SSRN his paper, Will the Real Elena Kagan Please Stand Up? Conflicting Public Images in the Supreme Court Confirmation Process. The article will appear in the Wake Forest Journal of Law & Policy, Spring 2011.

Here is the abstract:

What images of judging did the Kagan confirmation process project?

My response to this question begins with a brief overview of existing public perceptions of the Supreme Court. I argue that a large portion of the public sees the justices as impartial arbiters who can be trusted to rule fairly. At the same time, a large portion of the public also sees the justices as political actors who are wrapped up in partisan disputes. Given these prevailing public views, we should expect the Kagan confirmation process to transmit contradictory images of judicial decision-making, with a portrait of judging as a matter of reason and principle vying for attention with a picture of judging as a political enterprise.

Second, I identify the different appearances of judicial action actually at play in the Kagan confirmation process by assessing all confirmation-related news articles, editorials, opinion pieces, and blog posts published in the Washington Post, the New York Times, and the Los Angeles Times. I find that the confirmation coverage in the three newspapers conveys a contradictory mix of images that closely corresponds to the contradictory views of the Court already held by large numbers of Americans.

Finally, I consider the significance of the Janus-faced public beliefs about the Supreme Court. I acknowledge the ways in which political perceptions can chip away at judicial legitimacy, but I also argue that the public’s competing views may ultimately have a stable co-existence. If we believe that individuals generally place contradictory demands on the courts, calling for an objectively fair system and at the same time seeking a guarantee that their own side will prevail, then a judiciary that appears at once to be governed by impartial principle and by partisan preference may cohere.

Paola Dubini and Mario Campana on Blogs as Sweatshops

Tuesday, January 4th, 2011

Paola Dubini of Bocconi University in Milan and Mario Campana have posted to SSRN a paper with the uplifting title, Blogging as Entrepreneurial Sweatshop.

Here is the abstract:

Blogging is a complex phenomenon that is hard to define. The more a blog is visible, the more it is capable to attract advertising and consequently to monetize the authors’ effort in keeping it alive and appealing. Therefore a blog can be considered as a minimalist organization, a way of doing entrepreneurship. The work is amied to explore the phenomenon of blogging as entrepreneurial sweatshops, in particular for women.

A longitudinal and comparative anlaysis has been conducted on an Italian Sample and a US sample individuating the internal and external factors that influence entrepreneurial success of blogs.

David S. Ardia on Defamation and Reputation in a Networked World

Friday, December 10th, 2010

David S. Ardia of Harvard Law School’s Berkman Center for Internet & Society has posted to SSRN his paper titled Reputation in a Networked World: Revisiting the Social Foundations of Defamation Law. The paper is forthcoming in the Harvard Civil Rights- Civil Liberties Law Review.

Here is the abstract:

It is time again to rethink defamation law. The law we know today saw its origin in feudal times, expanded to serve as a counterweight to the disruption occasioned by the printing press, and was constitutionalized in the low-participation age of broadcast and print mass media. The journalistic institutions that led the fight for constitutional reform are now in decline while online platforms optimized for high participation, such as blogs, social networks, and discussion forums, are in ascendency. In this age of the networked information economy, reputation occupies a very different role in the social order than it did even twenty years ago.

Using a recent defamation lawsuit filed by the actor Ron Livingston against a user of Wikipedia as a lens through which to examine defamation law’s operation in our increasingly networked society, this Article argues that defamation law suffers from significant doctrinal and practical limitations that preclude it from achieving its goal of protecting reputation. Cognizant of these limitations, it offers some guidelines for reforming defamation law, suggesting that existing monetary remedies should be deemphasized while alternative approaches that seek to correct inaccurate information and provide opportunities for contextualization should be pursued.

The Article concludes that we should take as our touchstone that reputation is a societal interest and devise remedies that leverage the power of communities to deal with reputational harm. Although the global communication networks that are the hallmarks of our networked society have brought new reputational challenges, they also provide novel solutions to prevent and ameliorate those harms. One solution is to enlist, through legal and social incentives, the help of online intermediaries such as content hosts and search providers. These intermediaries play a central role in community governance and are often in a position to recognize and respond to reputational harms. By harnessing the power of communities to deter and mitigate reputational harm, we will be better able to balance the protection of reputation with society’s desire to maintain an environment for speech that is conducive to public engagement and vigorous debate.

Edward M. McClure on Accelerated Cultural Awareness

Thursday, December 2nd, 2010

Edward M. McClure of the Phoenix School of Law has posted to SSRN How to Drink from a Firehose Without Drowning, or Online Current Awareness Made Less Difficult.

Here is the abstract:

Once upon a time, the law changed gently; actively keeping ahead of your students was unnecessary. Now you can have up to the minute information on your desktop. In fact, now you must have up to the minute information on your desktop, because your students are following “blawgs” and sub-scribing to “feeds” and reading “tweets”. While you are asking that elegant Socratic question, they are reading an appellate opinion that had not been published when class began. Some of your peers – and rivals – are doing the same. No matter how unnatural they seem, we must force ourselves to learn how to use the Internet tools that have accelerated current awareness to the point of seeming madness. It is difficult, confusing, frustrating – and so, so important. This paper attempts to smooth your path towards online awareness sanity in the Twenty-First Century.

Inimai Chettiar and James Scott Holladay on the Economic Benefits of Net Neutrality

Wednesday, November 24th, 2010

Inimai Chettiar of the NYU School of Law and James Scott Holladay of NYU School of Law’s Institute for Policy Integrity have posted to SSRN Free to Invest: The Economic Benefits of Preserving Net Neutrality.

Here is the abstract:

It is hard to imagine a future where the value of the Web takes a downward spiral: where less content is created, online access is less useful, and fewer people log on. Currently, thousands of new websites and applications are constantly created. The content attracts millions of new users who email, tweet, blog, and discuss the information on the Web freely. Net neutrality supports this open and entrepreneurial dynamic which helps to create billions of dollars in free value for the American public. In Free to Invest, the Institute for Policy Integrity warns of negative economic consequences if net neutrality is weakened. The report arrived at five main findings that describe the trade-offs of revoking net neutrality.

Patricia Salkin on Social Networking and Land Use Planning

Friday, November 19th, 2010

Albany Law School logo depicting school edifaceProfessor Patricia Salkin of Albany Law School has posted to SSRN Social Networking and Land Use Planning Regulation: Practical Benefits, Pitfalls and Ethical Considerations. The paper is forthcoming in the Pace Law Review.

Here is the abstract:

This article explores how social networking sites have been used or might be used in the land use context. Part I focuses on the use of social networking for land use planning and zoning. It includes a discussion of the pros and cons of the use of social networking sites to present public information and to gather public input and invite general participation in the process, as well as to provide notice to the public of forthcoming government decision-making. This section offers concrete examples of how this technology is currently being used in the land use context. Part II focuses on the professional ethical considerations of the various players in the land use game as it specifically relates to the use of social networking sites. For lawyers, the applicable Rules of Professional Conduct are examined and for Planners, the Code of Ethics of the American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) is explored for guidance. The article concludes with a warning that that although there are benefits to the use of social networking tools for land use planning and zoning initiatives, attorneys, government agencies, planners and others should use caution when employing these tools, being certain to weigh ethics and professionalism implications, social justice goals and public participation mandates and aspirations against the advantages of these tools, and the uncertainty of how courts might apply myriad legal mandates in cyberspace.

Rebecca Tushnet on Regulation of Commercial Speech and User-Generated Ads

Wednesday, November 10th, 2010

Professor Rebecca Tushnet of the Georgetown University Law Center has posted to SSRN Attention Must Be Paid: Commercial Speech, User-Generated Ads, and the Challenge of Regulation on SSRN. The paper is being published by the Buffalo Law Review. Cite: 58 Buffalo Law Review 721 (2010)

Here is the abstract:

This Article examines the dynamics that drive advertisers to push into new formats, and the law’s ability to regulate them. I argue that it will remain possible, and constitutional, to identify advertising and subject it to prohibitions on false and misleading claims, even for ads in unconventional formats. The article also addresses the ways in which regulators were caught off-guard by these new formats. In particular, Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which frees online service providers and users from liability for content generated by other users, poses some unanticipated barriers to regulating advertising. Yet despite section 230’s provisions, regulators retain flexibility in many situations. The Article considers the Federal Trade Commission’s (“FTC”) recent revisions of its guides on testimonials and endorsements. The guidelines apply to bloggers and others who receive substantial benefits from advertisers in return for their endorsements. After exploring the First Amendment challenges posed by such situations, including questions that go to the heart of the justification for regulating commercial speech, I contend that neither section 230 nor sound policy require the FTC to ignore these new forms of communicating with potential purchasers.

Jacqueline D. Lipton: Moral Rights and Supernatural Fiction

Friday, September 17th, 2010

Jacqueline D. Lipton of the Case Western Reserve University School of Law has posted a paper to SSRN titled Moral Rights and Supernatural Fiction: Authorial Dignity and the New Moral Rights Agendas. The paper is slated to appear in the Fordham Intellectual Property, Media & Entertainment Law Journal in December 2010.

Here is the abstract:

In recent years, several scholars have revisited the question of moral rights protections for creators of copyright works in the United States. Their scholarship has focused on defining a moral rights agenda that comports with American constitutional values, as well as being practically suited to current copyright business practices. Much of this scholarship has prioritized a right of attribution over other moral rights, such as the right of integrity. This article evaluates some of these recent moral rights models in light of a sample of comments made by American supernatural fiction authors about their works. The author questions whether the kinds of moral rights models being advocated in modern discourse effectively fill the gaps between authors’ stated interests in their works and the protections currently available under copyright law. The author also questions the extent to which authors’ rights should be elevated against others’ rights to enjoy and adapt their works.

Professor Lipton explains her focus:

Supernatural fiction authors are chosen for examination because they tend to be very articulate in the blogosphere and often maintain active dialogue with their fans about preferred downstream uses of their works.

The working-paper citation is Case Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2010-27. A copy can be downloaded from SSRN.