A slew of posts that caught my eye over the past week (or so) - they probably each deserve a post of their own, but being a bit mired in the practice I'll quickly note them:

1. A law.com article that left me scratching my head: "Web Behavioral Advertising Goes to Court" - this article makes it seem like there's something controversial about the run-of-the-mill practice of using cookies to collect user information and build networks.  While this model may be struggling from a business standpoint, there is little risk to companies that engage in this practice (provided disclosures are adequate).  "Deep packet inspection" - which is referenced at length in the article is totally different.  "Deep packet inspection" is to using cookies to build networks what taking a hit out on someone is to killing someone in self defense.  The two are completely different, and as far as I know there are no legal bases to mount a significant challenge against the latter.

2. Another law.com article that left me scratching my head:  "In Down Economy, Interest Grows in Internet Assets" - this article talks about how websites and domain names are increasingly becoming the target of creditors.  Fair enough.  But then it goes on to cite at length Network Solutions Inc. v. Umbro International Inc., a decision I'm fairly certain will not be favorably cited by any court in rejecting a debtor's challenge to execute against a domain name.  (See sex.com; cf. "Domain Names: Contract Right or Something More".)

3. Twitter!:  I came across a great article that analogized Twitter to the CB-radio.  (It's odd to think about how all modes of communication have changed and/or become antiquated.)  Anyway, the article is pay-access only, but I came across an alternative that offers a funny description (a little heavy on the adjectives and the NSFW text), but here's the relevant bit:

For all the connectivity Twitter supposedly offers, it offers no genuine connections at all. Everything is passive. You send out a “tweet” into the universe with no idea or clue that anyone will answer. You have no idea if anyone heard you. You have no indication that anyone cares. It’s just a firehose of the pointless flotsam and jetsam of cultural minutiae and lifestyle effluvium, delivered in a lightly distracting, OM NOM NOM-style all-you-can-eat infotainment/ego-casting stream to whatever millennial-enabled wireless device you’re willing to hook into it.

I'm ambivalent about Twitter.  It's odd to see how people (on both sides) get so charged up about something so inconsequential.

4. Why Email Starts Fights:  a great, simple 5 min. video explanation.

5. The Bachelor Emails Released!  Heavy stuff, and definitely worth checking out at the Death by Email blog.

6. On Post-Secret Tour, a WoW Confession:  cNet.  Why isn't anyone raising a hue and cry about Post Secret's privacy policy??  [kidding]

7. Board's Emails Violated Open Meeting Law:  Bob Ambrogi posts on this topic here. 

8. Twitter Boosts Public Access to Federal Courtrooms:  AP news.  Not really, following a trial on Twitter is deathly boring.  (That said, props to the reporter who is pushing this.)

9. Someone Added me to Their Blogroll!  Do people still do that these days?  I have to admit, it seems like the practice of "maintaining blogrolls" has lost its luster lately.  But Randazza is a prolific blogger who has a must read blog (I love the tone, the content, everything).  I'm pretty excited that he added me to the roll.  It's also nice to be in such August company.  (While I'm on the topic, let me also ask how does Eric Goldman crank out the content he does?  He's probably the Judge Posner of one sector of the blogosphere (from the reading the blog, you can easily tell that his ability to suck down, crunch, and present information is amazing).  His is one of the few blogs I would pay to access.)

10. Facebook Rant:  I have a company Facebook page (for a non-law related hobby/business I run).  I have to admit Facebook has made it about as user-unfriendly as possible to maintain this page.  I guess you can't complain when you are not paying any money, but still.  I don't think they could have made it harder to understand how to set up a page and manage preferences.  All I want to do is to make the page accessible (without a log-in button) to non-Facebook users! 

Happy Friday!