One way to describe my life is as a slow movement from strict prescriptivist to not entirely relaxed descriptivist. I’m talking about, well, talking—and even more about writing. Although I still will say to myself that it’s wrong to say “between you and I,” and “presently” doesn’t mean “now,” I have managed to contain those judgments for the most part and damn near don’t even wince anymore. I long ago let go of “hopefully,” and have come to use the third person plural as a means of obscuring gender.

A little like law, English changes and it does so balancing . . . [more]

Info, info everywhere, nor any place to shelve. (With apologies to Samuel Taylor Coleridge and The Rime of the Ancient Mariner.)

In a library, information overload can mean a physical overload as well as mental. Reporting series, annual statutes, conference papers all take up shelf room; how do you know what to keep and what can safely be turfed? One of my colleagues recently called and asked if I kept a particular item on my shelves. No, I didn’t, since it was officially available online. After all, shelves do eventually fill up, and if some other organization is willing . . . [more]

Bill C-32, the Act to amend the Copyright Act, has a lot of provisions, mostly aimed at balancing the interests of creators of copyrightable content with those who consume (or work with) that content.

Probably the most controversial provision involves ‘digital locks’, i.e. technical protection measures that are designed to prevent people from using the works in ways that the owner does not want. The Act makes it an offence to ‘break’ those locks for any purpose at all.

Some of the attacks on the locks rule have been a bit exaggerated, claiming that there should be no protection — . . . [more]

This is an early take on today’s Supreme Court of Canada decision in Ontario (Public Safety and Security) v. Criminal Lawyers’ Association.

The Court unanimously held that the Ontario Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act does not violate section 2(b) of the Charter for its failure to offer a “public interest override” of the law enforcement and solicitor-client privilege exemptions to the public right of access to government information. This is the narrowest finding in a judgement that could give the public a new means of accessing government information.

FIPPA gives the public a presumptive right of . . . [more]

Aspiring authors with an interest in digital self-publishing would be wise to review this June 3rd article from the Wall Street Journal: ‘Vanity’ Press Goes Digital. One of the big factors driving the viability of self-publication is this month’s changed revenue split with Authors by Amazon – rising from 35% to 70% for e-books priced from $2.99 to $9.99.

The article breaks down a lot of the economics involved, especially for authors with a smaller fan base:

“Some people will be tempted by the 70% royalty at Amazon,” Mr. Nash says. “If they already have a loyal fan base,

The following is the text of a Fraud Alert sent by LAWPRO to Ontario Lawyers today June 17, 2010. Lawyers in Saskatchewan were the targets of this same fraud in May, and I expect lawyers in other provinces are being targeted as well.

Several lawyers have contacted LAWPRO over the last few weeks to advise us they have been the targets of a spousal support collection scam involving a collaborative family law agreement. One Ontario lawyer was successfully duped by this fraud.

We decided to send a warning to the profession as this fraud appears to be targeting many lawyers . . . [more]

The United States Supreme Court released its judgment in City Of Ontario, California, et al. v. Quon et al. today, deciding that when police officer Quon’s employers examined his pager records, they did not violate his Fourth Amendment rights, because although he had a reasonable expectation of privacy, as the jury determined the employer’s examination was for the legitimate, work-related purpose of deciding whether the current character limit in the contract with the provider was adequate.

An interesting excerpt from the judgment of the court, delivered by Kennedy J., which I have not had the time to digest:

The Court

Google Docs has introduced a three-level system of privacy for documents stored in its cloud. Sensibly, the default level is “private,” which means only the account holder can get access to the document.

The next level is “anyone with a link.” This is the novelty, allowing you to share your Google document by sending a link; the system it replaced required you to email formal invitations to particular recipients. Now, as the label indicates, anyone who knows the link can see your document. Google analogizes this to an unlisted phone number, which relies on secrecy for security. Here is where . . . [more]

I am standing at a terminal in the Alberta Law Libraries Legal Research and Training Centre in the Edmonton Courthouse, listening as 40 articling students are given a tour of the facility. They are fresh faced and eager to begin their legal career, even after sitting through lectures on legislation this morning.

The lesson from this year’s Head Start program is that it is good to have a contingency plan.

The first activated contingency plan took place yesterday when we were bumped from the courtroom that we traditionally use was scooped up by the trial coordinator. Imagine, using a courtroom . . . [more]

Monday’s release of the Queen’s Birthday Honours List in Canberra splendidly elevates Graham Greenleaf to membership in the Order of Australia (General Division). See the Commonwealth Gazette No. S 84, Monday, 14 June 2010

The official announcement cites that it is: “For service to the law through the development of free electronic access to legal information, and as a leader in the protection of privacy.”

Since we neglected to recognize Austlii’s first place showing in the Australia and New Zealand Internet Best Practice Awards, sponsored by auDA and InternetNZ, the Internet domain name administrators for Australia and New . . . [more]

Iceland’s venerable parliament, the Althing, has just passed a law that Wikileaks helped craft. The law creates the Modern Media Initiative and alters a whole set of legal duties and rights in order to encourage freedom of the press, transparency in government and corporate dealings, and reward with a prize akin to the Nobel Prize

. . . those who, through their actions in the past 12 months have most advanced humanity through courageous acts of free expression. It is envisaged that the prize would primarily be awarded to journalists, whistleblowers, human rights activists and publishers.

The aim is . . . [more]