Notes from Saturday August 18, 2007's BarCampBlock sessions in Palo Alto CA.

Danny O'Brian ring-leads this talk

EFF originally started as fund to defend geeks being sued.

Changed now to:

1. Clearinghouse for people needing internet savvy lawyers

2. Friend of the Court briefs in appeals and Supremes

3. Public impact litigation (change precedent)

Example Case Warshak v USA:

• Federal law protected email while on server
• But email's shifted from SMTP to web-based systems
• GMail scans email for content-related advertisments, does this ("sharing content with a third party") erode 4th Amendment protections?
• An earlier precedent was that bank records were not protected from search because they were shared with the bank.
• First Class mail has constitutional protections

Ask Danny for more info.

1. Prefer cases where litigants are motivated, and willing to go to the High Court

2. A Carthage-like result, destroying the opponent and sowing their fields with salt, may not be what be in the best interest of the client; thus the EFF's lawyers, serving the client's best interests, may advise and accept a settlement.

Priests and Cats -- the ideal plaintiff would be someone whose computer would bear scrutiny without revealing anything embarrassing or incriminating, such as a priest or a cat. Or, conversely, a plaintiff so motivated by the need for public vindication that they will pursue a case to a precedent-setting legal judgment.