I’d like to share a new website we soft-launched today for our client Jonathan Rosenfeld. As you can probably guess from the URL, the site is US-based and provides State-by-State collections of Nursing Home injury laws.
Our approach to this website was a bit different than we normally take. Right from the outset, we considered it a collection rather than simply another lawyer website. On the design side, the interface is very browse-centric, with a map graphic driving the homepage navigation. Once you drill down into the State pages (See Illinois as an example), the site identifies negligence and wrongful death laws, and whether there is an applicable Statue of Limitations or Damages Cap for each State. These pages also include links to State laws, general resource links, and any related posts from Jonathan’s blog.
This is project we’ve been working on for a few months now, and stemmed from Jonathan’s wanting to do “something different”. He already had a blog, along with one of our FAQ collections, and wanted to carry forward with a similar approach. As many Slaw readers can guess, personal injury law can be a very difficult practise to market. Especially when the goal is to avoid digital ‘ambulance chasing’, and to promote oneself in a professional manner.
Like most websites, this offering will continue to be a work in progress. If you have feedback on features or content that might be added, I’m happy to hear suggestions.
Nada Khirdaji has an interesting piece on her transition from legal research skills in law school to research skills in practice in CCH’s law student monthly,
Law school helped me to think like a lawyer, but it was only in practice that I began to appreciate the essential role of legal research. In fact, much to my chagrin, I remember derisively dismissing an optional course in advanced legal research on the assumption that it would be of little use to me.
I am now a research lawyer. Everything that I know about legal research I learned in practice. I am a generalist (with a growing specialization in class actions) and I provide legal advice in all areas of my firm’s practice. I write opinions, memoranda and facta, among other things. I am constantly asked to provide answers in areas of law that I know virtually nothing about.
Her tips are pretty useful, considering how quickly students and recent grads turn to databases and resources that are not always the most cost-effective or efficient. The implications of a more streamlined research work process is better service for the client, and less stress on the young associate.
You’ll find the relevant documents from the United Nations, as well as those from the various and lesser-known (here) regional organizations, such as the Economic Community of West African States and the South Asian Association for Regional Co-Operation.
The Center also offers student research assistance to judges confronting issues of gender-based violence, though whether the offer would extend to judges outside the United States is unclear.
If one has a weak password for one’s web-based personal information, is it reasonable to conclude that one has a reduced expectation of privacy with respect to that information?
(Here’s an English list (from 2006) of the 10 most common password and a list of the 500 worst ones, from the point of view of security.)
If someone uses “password” as his or her password, should he or she really be able to claim some privacy interest in the information behind it?
What about file sharing? If one has files or folders or most of one’s computer accessible to peer-to-peer sharing, does one still have some expectation of privacy in the contents somewhere?
Does it matter that unauthorized use of computer resources is illegal? In a prosecution for that offence, one cannot claim authority because of a weak password. After all, it is illegal to trespass on property if there’s a plain, non-threatening sign saying ‘do not trespass’ or ‘keep off’, even without a fence. (For that matter, many trespass laws bar trespass if the trespasser ought to have known the property was private, even without a sign or fence.) Is trespass a good analogy for privacy infringement?
Presumably one does not sacrifice one’s privacy by using P2P just because some uses of P2P may violate copyright (and some don’t).
Enough speculation: do you know of any case law or privacy officer decisions based on such reasoning? I don’t, but maybe I haven’t looked hard enough.
I know that the various governors of the legal profession (law societies, bar associations etc) tend to say that use of email generally or even unencrypted email does not waive any expectation of privacy, and, more important (perhaps), does not negate any privilege in the documents communicated by this method. Lawyers are advised to discuss communications security with their clients (and the subtle advisors warn that the clients may not be very knowledgeable about that topic, and one can’t hide behind that ignorance to establish a permission); but the general rule is that ordinary, unencrypted email is OK. VPNs and Extranets are generally considered OK too — which takes us back to the first question: does it matter how secure the password protection is for such networks?
Any relevant case law on the legal profession’s share of the question?
A shocking school slaying rendered sterile in court
Christie Blatchford, who should know better, complained that the Crown’s opening statement “managed to render murder dull.” She wrote:
This is modern Canadian justice, where even such a shocking killing is rendered sterile, the poor victim barely given a nod, all in the name, presumably, of a prosecution so measured that no one will ever again be wrongfully convicted – or at least not because a Crown attorney thundered inappropriately and inflamed a jury.
and
Against all odds, the real-life principals of Law & Order Canada, undoubtedly following all the correct legal principles to the letter, have managed to render murder dull.
“Presumably” to avoid wrongful conviction? “Sterile”? Sterile for whom? The judge? The jury? Certainly not for the judge. Ms. Blatchford might have had a point if her purpose was to suggest that that the opening was so dull that it might have resulted in the jury not paying attention. However, there’s no reason to believe that was her point. If it was, she didn’t say that. As such, I think it correct to conclude that she didn’t mean “so dull that the judge and jury missed the point”.
Would Ms. Blatchford have complained in the manner she did if the victim of the killing was an admitted serial killer?
With all due respect to Ms. Blatchford, trials should be dull (in the entertainment sense) and even more so trials for murder. The purpose the “Law & Order” TV franchise is entertainment not truth. The purpose of the real criminal law & order franchise – the justice system – is truth.
It seems to me that, rather than complaining, the Globe & Mail and Ms. Blatchford ought to have commended the Crown for avoiding sensationalism, for honoring the standards of proper prosecutorial conduct in the pursuit of justice even if the result was that the Crown’s opening statement was, for her “dull”.
The comments about the article, on the Globe website, make the same points, albeit more pointedly and in fewer words. There are 5 shown under the “latest comments” heading.
Jurriaan de Reu recently mentioned the implications of Google Social Search for SEO. The new Google feature will provide higher results based on the reviews and commentary of your friends on various social media platforms.
Essentially this is the same concept as the traditional word-of-mouth marketing, but conducted online instead. When someone mentions their experience with a specific product, brand or service (including lawyers) on a social media platform, their contacts will get those informal reviews at the top of their searches when looking for similar topics.
The feature will only work if you are logged into your Google Profile account, but as the company increasingly becomes the one-stop shop for everything, including e-mail, calendar, video, maps and more, that will almost become standard practice.
De Reu concludes,
The new Google feature will therefore not only have a great impact on SEO itself, but also on a company’s online reputation. Connections on social media platforms will be even more influential in the information we use to make decisions as whether to book a flight with airline A or B, or to trust our savings with bank C or D. Yet another reason to start listening what these contacts are saying online and built relationships that help to give them the best online customer experience you can offer.
Updates
The Wall Street Journal reports that Google might be getting into the social media game directly:
Google Inc. is taking a swipe at Facebook Inc. with a new feature that makes it easier and faster for users of Gmail to view media and status updates shared by their friends.
Google could announce the new Gmail feature as soon as this week, said people familiar with the matter. A Google spokeswoman declined to comment.
Two weeks ago, while watching the NFL playoffs, I upgraded the OS on my home laptop (a Lenovo T60p) to Windows 7 Professional from Vista Business.
The upgrade went quickly, smoothly, and without a hitch. I haven’t had a problem since. The screen image from the instructional video – which I have yet to need – was captured with the Windows 7 native screen capture tool, called the “Snipping Tool”. It’s very easy to use.
When will I recommend that move at the office, where all of our machines run on Windows XP? Where the common core of all of our Microsfot software does not yet include any flavour of Office 2007 software? Not tomorrow, anyway, but that’s nothing more than a current “don’t fix what ain’t broke” premise when there’s, as yet, no need to begin.
In that vein, the two new laptops I ordered both have Win XP installed and the word processing software will be the Office 2003 suite. Bear in mind that we do not have internal IT support – other than yours truly who’d prefer not to.
Even assuming one’s (computer) hardware is sufficient to run the Win 7 OS effectively, one of the current “inconveniences” in moving from Win XP to Win 7 is that it requires what is called a “clean install”. You can’t just install Win 7 over Win XP, with the installation process saving all of your existing settings. The installation process essentially wipes out what you had so that you will have to reinstall everything: applications and data.
That issue may well be the killer for many firms (law and otherwise) who do not have to upgrade, immediately, on a firm wide basis. This link is to an ABA Journal article that discusses some of the issues involved in the decision to upgrade. The article’s conclusion is:
With Windows 7 there are many positives, but I suspect the compelling reasons for a move (and they are important) will be the end of life of an aging XP and transition away from or avoidance of Vista.
If you plan to stay in the world of Windows, Windows 7 will likely be in your future sooner than later. You will want to do your homework, make a realistic plan and create an environment where success is likely.
When will you do so if technology is part of your mandate, your office runs on a Microsoft platform and the time comes to update?
Now for the relevance of the “truth in blogging (not)” part of the title to this post. Consider this recent review of the ABA article on a ”law marketing” blog whose proprietor asserts the sort of claims about successful advice that one would expect from a “law marketing” blog, successful or not. The caption for the post is “Why Windows 7 Will Bomb In Law Firms”. The second reason the blogger provides, including a quotation from the ABA Journal article is:
There is no compelling reason to get Windows 7. “As I researched this article, I actually found it difficult to put together a list of compelling features that might motivate someone to pay money and move,” Kennedy wrote
(emphasis in original)
Now let’s see what Mr. Kennedy wrote, which puts that quotation in context.
However, for most people, Windows XP just worked. There was simply no compelling reason to move, and to this day it is difficult to point to specific features in Vista that would motivate the average user to move from XP.
This “lack of compelling feature” issue might also prove to be a problem for Windows 7. As I researched this article, I actually found it difficult to put together a list of compelling features that might motivate someone to pay money and move.
On the other hand, Windows XP, released in 2001, is nearing its end of life. It’s quite old in operating system years, and it has its own set of issues. For example, instead of getting a cup of coffee the next time you start up XP, take a stopwatch and see how long it takes to fully boot up.
I suggest you read the ABA article for yourself. As to the “law marketing” blogger, well, maybe he is as successful as he claims to be. I have no idea. And less interest in finding out.
Those who aren’t Apple iPad“icolytes” will enjoy this YouTube video and probably agree with this article. Those who are the former should, too, even if they don’t agree.
Ahem, Steve: the idea is to go smaller, not bigger. You can call me when you develop a folding iPad, like this or better, like this.
My view, for now? The iPad is too big to play “closies” with, even if I could find another adult who remembers how to play the game. And a paper matches book is a cheaper and better solution for a wobbly restaurant table leg.
Addendum: On the third hand, is the iPad proof that Moties exist? Is Apple hiding a caste of Motie “Engineers” or “Watchmakers”?
I guess it was just a matter of time. IT World posted an article today by Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols (sjvn@vna1.com) entitled: “Can you trust Chinese computer equipment?”
While this may seem like the musings of a hyper-active Homeland Security Department, it is based on MI5’s report in The Times Online “China bugs and burgles Britain” that the Chinese Government has given British executives equipment with security holes.
The Times Online article contains a chilling paragraph in discussing a report on these incidents:
Written by MI5’s Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure, the 14-page “restricted” report describes how China has attacked UK defence, energy, communications and manufacturing companies in a concerted hacking campaign.
It claims China has also gone much further, targeting the computer networks and email accounts of public relations companies and international law firms. “Any UK company might be at risk if it holds information which would benefit the Chinese,” the report says.
It would seem that there is no reason to suspect that if this behaviour is going on, that it would be restricted to UK companies and executives.
The Times further states:
In 2007 Jonathan Evans, the director-general of MI5, had written privately to 300 chief executives of banks and other businesses warning them that their IT systems were under attack from “Chinese state organisations”.
There have been unconfirmed reports that China has tried to hack into computers belonging to the Foreign Office, nine other Whitehall departments and parliament.
Well – instead of trying to hack your way in, what better way to get into sensitive data than by placing the trojans directly into the computer equipment being manufactured in China? That is the thrust of the IT World article.
For anyone who handles confidential data, and here I am speaking of lawyers in particular, (such as those who handle proposed mergers and acquisitions, sensitive patents and other commercially-valuable transactions) the thought that we may be using equipment that allows a foreign government to read the secrets of our clients is a real threat to client confidentiality and commercial activity. Our clients may have first-class computer security surrounding their sensitive commercial information, but can they rely on their lawyers to have equally robust security systems?
Most people would scoff at this, stating that international companies would not build such trojans and back-doors into their hardware.
But that’s not the most serious misuse of a telecommunications surveillance infrastructure. In Greece, between June 2004 and March 2005, someone wiretapped more than 100 cell phones belonging to members of the Greek government — the prime minister and the ministers of defense, foreign affairs and justice.
Ericsson built this wiretapping capability into Vodafone’s products, and enabled it only for governments that requested it. Greece wasn’t one of those governments, but someone still unknown — a rival political party? organized crime? — figured out how to surreptitiously turn the feature on.
I don’t know about you – but something don’t feel right..I just might be paranoid.
One of the great funny men of all time, in my opinion, was George Carlin — he’s famous for his Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television, the “hippie-dippie weatherman,” and many trenchant routines satirizing the powers that be.
Towards the end of his life he had a routine about being “a modern man, a man for the millennium.” It consisted of a lengthy string of clichés delivered at a machine-gun pace from memory without a slip, a true tour de force.
Here’s the video, followed by a transcript so that you, too, can practice telling the world who/what/how you are.
I’m a modern man, a man for the millennium. Digital and smoke free. A diversified multi-cultural, post-modern deconstruction that is anatomically and ecologically incorrect. I’ve been up linked and downloaded, I’ve been inputted and outsourced, I know the upside of downsizing, I know the downside of upgrading. I’m a high-tech low-life. A cutting edge, state-of-the-art bi-coastal multi-tasker and I can give you a gigabyte in a nanosecond!
I’m new wave, but I’m old school and my inner child is outward bound. I’m a hot-wired, heat seeking, warm-hearted cool customer, voice activated and bio-degradable. I interface with my database, my database is in cyberspace, so I’m interactive, I’m hyperactive and from time to time I’m radioactive.
Behind the eight ball, ahead of the curve, ridin the wave, dodgin the bullet and pushin the envelope. I’m on-point, on-task, on-message and off drugs. I’ve got no need for coke and speed. I’ve got no urge to binge and purge. I’m in-the-moment, on-the-edge, over-the-top and under-the-radar. A high-concept, low-profile, medium-range ballistic missionary. A street-wise smart bomb. A top-gun bottom feeder. I wear power ties, I tell power lies, I take power naps and run victory laps. I’m a totally ongoing big-foot, slam-dunk, rainmaker with a pro-active outreach. A raging workaholic. A working rageaholic. Out of rehab and in denial!
I’ve got a personal trainer, a personal shopper, a personal assistant and a personal agenda. You can’t shut me up. You can’t dumb me down because I’m tireless and I’m wireless, I’m an alpha male on beta-blockers.
I’m a non-believer and an over-achiever, laid-back but fashion-forward. Up-front, down-home, low-rent, high-maintenance. Super-sized, long-lasting, high-definition, fast-acting, oven-ready and built-to-last! I’m a hands-on, foot-loose, knee-jerk head case pretty maturely post-traumatic and I’ve got a love-child that sends me hate mail.
But, I’m feeling, I’m caring, I’m healing, I’m sharing– a supportive, bonding, nurturing primary care-giver. My output is down, but my income is up. I took a short position on the long bond and my revenue stream has its own cash-flow. I read junk mail, I eat junk food, I buy junk bonds and I watch trash sports! I’m gender specific, capital intensive, user-friendly and lactose intolerant.
I like rough sex. I like tough love. I use the “F” word in my emails and the software on my hard-drive is hardcore–no soft porn.
I bought a microwave at a mini-mall; I bought a mini-van at a mega-store. I eat fast-food in the slow lane. I’m toll-free, bite-sized, ready-to-wear and I come in all sizes. A fully-equipped, factory-authorized, hospital-tested, clinically-proven, scientifically- formulated medical miracle. I’ve been pre-wash, pre-cooked, pre-heated, pre-screened, pre-approved, pre-packaged, post-dated, freeze-dried, double-wrapped, vacuum-packed and, I have an unlimited broadband capacity.
I’m a rude dude, but I’m the real deal. Lean and mean! Cocked, locked and ready-to-rock. Rough, tough and hard to bluff. I take it slow, I go with the flow, I ride with the tide. I’ve got glide in my stride. Drivin and movin, sailin and spinin, jiving and groovin, wailin and winnin. I don’t snooze, so I don’t lose. I keep the pedal to the metal and the rubber on the road. I party hearty and lunch time is crunch time. I’m hangin in, there ain’t no doubt and I’m hangin tough, over and out!
An English court has refused an injunction against the publication of the story of an alleged affair between a well-known football player and a teammate’s girlfriend: Terry v. Persons Unknown[2010] EWHC 119 (QB).
English law has recently given a good deal of protection to the privacy of celebrities, so some people have wondered if that protection is being reduced by this decision. Out-law.com says No.
One of the reasons (among several) for refusing the injunction in this case was that the application appeared to aim at protecting the player’s commercial sponsorships, rather than in protecting his feelings (which are described as ‘robust’). The court distinguished between protecting privacy, which is OK because mentioned in the European Convention on Human Rights, and protecting reputation, which was not entitled to the same deference.
Given PIPEDA’s focus on commercial use of personal information, is this a distinction that would prevail in Canada? Does it make sense anyway?
And should the court have cared about the privacy or reputation of the other party to the alleged affair, though she was not a party to the application for an injunction?
A Times-Colonist report reveals the outdated, inconsistently applied, and sometimes mis-applied access to court records policy in a number of BC courts. It seems BC is way behind the curve on this, as compared to the rest of Canada. Today’s article is only the first of a four-part series. The article includes a link to an interactive Googlemap.
From the people who brought you Hovercards before Twitter — indeed, before they even had a name — now comes “Save as PDF.” We’ve added a small link below each post in the “Share:” section that invites you to download that post as a PDF file. Now you can collect all of your favourites in a format that lets you file them, search them, make them larger or smaller, and generally enjoy the heck out of them offline. And notice, we placed it before the “Print” button — because we like saving trees.
Hovercards? Well, in case you hadn’t noticed: if you run your cursor over the name of a Slaw author, you’ll see a mini-bio pop up. We want you to know who’s who, and this way you don’t even have to remember. Seems Twitter had the same idea. Oh well.
If we’re at all edgy here at Slaw, it’s likely to be at the lip of the technology cliff that we’re writing. But a small piece in today’s Globe and Mail sent me hareing off to the edge of the known world of rights. The article referred to the fact that Switzerland had recently changed its constitution to protect the dignity of plant life, which, if true, would take the already difficult business of rights one step beyond Lemmings’ Leap.
What’s put the Swiss Republic into the news this time is an upcoming popular referendum (March 7) on whether domesticated animals should have legal representation under certain circumstances. I’ve been unable to find the wording of the initiative, but you can read the Swiss federal government arguments against it [PDF]. Laws aimed at bettering the condition of animals are nothing new, of course, though it is said that the current Swiss laws already go beyond what is usual in Western countries. Indeed, the canton of Zurich has appointed an “animal advocate.” Antoine F. Goetschel has a general practice, only part of which consists of looking after the rights of fauna.
Princeton philosopher Peter Singer has been arguing for animal rights for decades, his most influential work being Animal Liberation. A utilitarian, Singer maintains that animals should be included with human beings when considering what is the greatest good for the greatest number. Unsurprisingly, his views have been challenged, particularly by those in law, because, although his view of rights is not the same as that used by lawyers, the focus in law on the rights of individual human beings makes his views difficult, certainly at the extremes. It’s well worth it to go back to 2001 and look at the Singer / Richard Posner debates in Slate Magazine, in which Posner had the last word, literally:
I wish to end by recording my high personal and professional regard for you. I admire the clarity of your thought and your intellectual courage in pursuing the logic of your philosophy all the way—to its unacceptable conclusions.
Plants, however, are another matter. After you’ve become a vegetarian, there’s nowhere else to go. Or is there? And what, exactly, does the Swiss constitution say about plants?
Article 120 concerns itself with “Non-human gene technology” (so it turns out to be the techcliff we teeter on, after all), and it says in full:
1 Human beings and their environment shall be protected against the misuse of gene technology.
2 The Confederation shall legislate on the use of reproductive and genetic material from animals, plants and other organisms. In doing so, it shall take account of the dignity of living beings as well as the safety of human beings, animals and the environment, and shall protect the genetic diversity of animal and plant species.
It is the “dignity of living beings” passage, given the rest of the paragraph, that has been interpreted as being inclusive of plants. Me, I’m not so sure that’s the right interpretation, though English is not an official language, so I’m looking at a translation. The original German, French, and Italia of the key phrase are as follows: Würde der Kreatur; l’intégrité des organismes vivants; dignità della creatura (the Rumantsch version appears not to be available online).
But I’m also not as “scandalized” as I might have supposed I would be by the notion that plants have, or should have, “dignity.” (The Swiss federal constitution, by the way, repays reading, particularly the lengthy portion on rights.) To get a sense of where the tree huggers are coming from — or going, I suppose — take a look at The Dignity of Living Beings With Regard to Plants: Moral Consideration of Plants for their Own Sake [PDF], by the Federal Ethics Committee on Non-Human Biotechnics. This is a remarkable document, clear, rational and thought-provoking.
The image below is the “decision tree,” meant, as the document says, to be an aid to understanding the structure of the discussion in the Swiss publication. (Click on it to see an enlarged version.)
Some of the unanimous or majority conclusions reached by The Committee are as follows:
1. Arbitrariness: The Committee members unanimously consider an arbitrary harm caused to plants to be morally impermissible. This kind of treatment would include, e.g. decapitation of wild flowers at the roadside without rational reason. . . .
3. Ownership of plants: For the majority . . . plants – as a collective,asaspecies, or as individuals – are excluded for moral reasons from absolute ownership. . . .
5. Patenting: For the majority the ethical justification of patenting plants is a qustion of social ethics. It is not one involving the consideration of plants for their own sake and therefeore not the object of this discussion. . . .
7. Proportionality: A majority considers any action with or towards plants that serves the self-preservation of humans to be morally justified, as long as it is appropriate and follows the principle of precaution. . . .
For the record, I don’t intend to buy one. At least, not for a few more years and not until the inevitable upgrades, improvements, fixes, and content distribution changes have run their course. But well before the iPad 3.o arrives, the original version will have had a serious impact on the computer industry, on the [...]
Iceland's meltdown made headlines; the remarkable stability of Canada's banks, not so much.Yet as the world’s attention shifts from financial rescue to financial reform, the quiet success stories deserve at least as much attention as the spectacular failures. We need to learn from those countries that evidently did it right. And leading that list is our neighbor to the north. Right now, Canada is a very important role model.
What you're seeing in the industry's reaction to the iPad is nothing less than future shock. For years we've all held to the belief that computing had to be made simpler for the 'average person'. I find it difficult to come to any conclusion other than that we have totally failed in this effort.
the device is clearly built for media consumption. Movies, music, books, news -- the bread and butter content that keeps iTunes humming. That's good for Apple, obviously, but it also creates an interesting opportunity for publishers. They've got a new distribution mechanism and a new canvas.
"[I]n the history of the discussion over whether or not the drone strikes in Pakistan are a good idea, I don't think I have ever heard anyone ask where the CIA or the president get the authority for them. Now, reports Spencer Ackerman, the ACLU is asking . . ."
It is time the rules governing prorogation changed. Canada's Parliament has shown itself vulnerable to an excessive concentration of power, and hence is hampered in fulfilling its role as the “ultimate sovereign body.” The prorogation of 2008 has now been followed by another, this time simply for partisan tactical convenience. The Prime Minister is misusing the power to shut down Parliament, and in the process destabilizing Canada's democracy. For that reason, prorogation should be made subject to legislative controls.
"Today, without planning to, I visited the Google home page, then also Yahoo and Bing. They don’t look like each other at all. I think, first of all, that Yahoo is the past, Google the present, Bing the future. And second, that it doesn’t matter much."
(Jan. 19/10) For 53 years Duthies has provided a good book service to the city, championed BC and Canadian books, encouraged the public to read local writers, and helped to create a knowledgeable reading public...Everybody knows that Independent bookstores have been under pressure from the 'big box' operations for many years now and it is clear that it is not going to get any better; the likes of Chapters, and Amazon are ruthless in their drive for market share and we cannot compete on price anymore.
The Canadian Research Knowledge Network, which has 73 academic institutions as members, has completed three-year license agreements worth $140 million with 14 scholarly publishers. It is estimated that over $40 million was saved compared to institutional licenses for comparable content.
(Jan. 12/10) Like many other well-known organizations, we face cyber attacks of varying degrees on a regular basis. In mid-December, we detected a highly sophisticated and targeted attack on our corporate infrastructure originating from China that resulted in the theft of intellectual property from Google. However, it soon became clear that what at first appeared to be solely a security incident--albeit a significant one--was something quite different.
(Jan. 13/10) Google’s declaration that it would stop cooperating with Chinese Internet censorship and consider shutting down its operations in China ricocheted around the world on Wednesday. But in China itself, the news was heavily censored.
