Belle Lettre, the pseudonymous blogger at Law & Letters, has posted a very thoughtful and interesting review of my book, The Future of Reputation: Gossip, Rumor, and Privacy on the Internet. It is unlike most reviews that typically summarize ideas in the book and quickly react; Belle Lettre has really engaged the issues and arguments of the book at an intellectual and personal level. She also has interesting musings about blogging pseudonymously, shaming, privacy, sharing personal information, and more. From the review:
How to Get a Free Copy of The Future of Reputation
Are you a blogger?
Are you interested in the issues of Internet gossip, rumor, privacy, anonymity, and free speech?
Are you interested in writing a short book review?
If so, I’m offering you a free review copy of my new book, The Future of Reputation: Gossip, Rumor, and Privacy on the Internet.
Reactions to The Future of Reputation in the Blogosphere and Elsewhere
Here are a few reviews and discussions of The Future of Reputation: Gossip, Rumor, and Privacy on the Internet:
Who, Exactly, Is a Journalist?
Is Howard Bashman a journalist? Bashman is the author of How Appealing, a very popular legal blog that many readers here read — and that anybody who wants to keep informed about new cases and legal developments should be reading. Bashman frequently posts or links to court decisions when they are released online, and a recent set of events raised the question of whether he should be considered to be a journalist.
The Boy Who Cried “National Security”: The Need for Greater Skepticism About Government Secrecy
I just blogged about an incident where the 2nd Circuit sought to have Howard Bashman remove an unredacted judicial decision from his site and replace it with a redacted version. Apparently, the redacted version attempted to remove information about a rather dicey interrogation technique the FBI used. According to Tony Mauro of the Legal Times:
My Absolute Favorite Item for Sale on Amazon.com
From the annals of the weird comes my absolute favorite item for sale on Amazon.com.
What is it?
I’m sure you think it might be my new book, but nope, it’s not. So what is it then?
Well, it is quite expensive, but it also is one of the most well-reviewed products on Amazon.com — it has 163 reviews and counting.
Should Courts Issue Unpublished Opinions?
NOTICE: This is an unpublished blog post. It may not be cited by any court or any party to any litigation.
A common practice for many courts is to issue unpublished opinions that may not be cited as precedent. These opinions are often short and consist of a few paragraphs. They are generally supposed to be limited to cases that can be resolved by clearly-established legal rules. According to one news article: “California courts of appeal issued 11,852 opinions during the 2004-2005 fiscal year. Of these, only 1,047 were published. About one-third of federal appellate-court decisions reviewed in 2002 came in unpublished opinions.” These statistics are staggering. Are there really so many cases that do not warrant having precedential value?
Michael Sullivan’s Legal Pragmatism: Community, Rights, and Democracy
It seems as though books are the theme of my blogging this week, so I thought I’d recommend another great new book: Professor Michael Sullivan’s Legal Pragmatism: Community, Rights, and Democracy (Indiana Univ. Press 2007). From the book jacket:
The Future of Reputation: Gossip, Rumor, and Privacy on the Internet
I‘m very excited to announce that my new book, The Future of Reputation: Gossip, Rumor, and Privacy, is now hot off the presses! Copies are now in stock and available on Amazon.com and Barnes & Noble’s website. Copies will hit bookstores in a few weeks.
Judge Strikes Down Part of USA Patriot Act
In Mayfield v. United States, U.S. District Judge Ann Aiken (District of Oregon) held that parts of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) of 1978, which were altered by the USA Patriot Act in 2001, are unconstitutional. The case was brought by Brandon Mayfield, a who was put under extensive surveillance and then detained for two weeks because the FBI suspected him of involvement in the Madrid train bombing of 2004. The FBI thought Mayfield’s fingerprint was at the scene of the bombing, but it was gravely mistaken. According to the AP: