Not Quite a Blog

I did.

Deadline is Tuesday (2/2):

This past Thursday, EFF hosted a Pub Quiz event where teams were asked 8 rounds of questions related to cyberlaw. Our team, from the Berkeley Clinic, was called Notice and TAKEDOWN.

We tied for third place with the Stanford CIS/Fair Use Project Team. Team Google, with Derek Slater, Tim Wu and Harlan Yu, scored second and Keker & Van Nest made first place -- with heavyweights Joe Gratz and Mark Lemley. More pictures here:

I’m here this morning to warn that, whatever gloss might be put on it, the so-called “compromise” on immunity for phone companies that broke the law is anything but a compromise, and that Congress appears poised to needlessly toss the rule of law out the window and deprive these millions of ordinary Americans of their day in court. My one simple message is that no matter how they spin it, this is still immunity, period.

Indeed, there’s an easy litmus test that everyone can use when evaluating this proposal or any other: does it allow the court to rule on the legality of the surveillance? That is, does it allow the plaintiffs to obtain a public decision on whether the companies broke the law, and if they did, to get an injunction to stop them from breaking the law again? If the answer is “no”, then it’s still immunity, plain and simple.

The EFF's Kevin Bankston in a prepared statement. (emphasis mine)

(Press Release: EFF Speaks Out Against Telecom Immunity Deal)