<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>CyberLaw Lately</title>
	<atom:link href="http://cyberlawlately.com/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://cyberlawlately.com</link>
	<description>What&#039;s been going on in Internet Law ... lately.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Feb 2010 19:50:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
<cloud domain='cyberlawlately.com' port='80' path='/?rsscloud=notify' registerProcedure='' protocol='http-post' />

	<atom:link rel="search" type="application/opensearchdescription+xml" href="http://cyberlawlately.com/osd.xml" title="CyberLaw Lately" />
	<atom:link rel='hub' href='http://cyberlawlately.com/?pushpress=hub'/>
		<item>
		<title>Guilty or Not Guilty: The New Facebook In-Trial Juror Poll</title>
		<link>http://cyberlawlately.com/2010/02/19/guilty-or-not-guilty-tweet/</link>
		<comments>http://cyberlawlately.com/2010/02/19/guilty-or-not-guilty-tweet/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 19 Feb 2010 15:54:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>T.C. Johnston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Internet Law Bits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Facebook]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[jury]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[social media]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[texting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[tweeting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Judicial Conference]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cyberlawlately.com/?p=420</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In the not-at-all-similar vein of my last post 2/12/10 regarding inclusiveness in language, I now find myself continuing in a downward spiral toward misanthropy.  Citizen Media Law Project files a cogent report on the U.S. Judicial Conference&#8217;s suggested federal jury instructions regarding using social media: You, as jurors, must decide this case based solely on [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=cyberlawlately.com&blog=10917271&post=420&subd=cyberlawlately&ref=&feed=1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://cyberlawlately.com/2010/02/19/guilty-or-not-guilty-tweet/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/bdb654d7e2fafaa6b6df9727ccc84f80?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=PG" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">tcjohnston</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>So I Should Have Sexted that Minor Rather Than Sent a Letter?</title>
		<link>http://cyberlawlately.com/2010/02/12/ok-to-sext-minors-in-mass/</link>
		<comments>http://cyberlawlately.com/2010/02/12/ok-to-sext-minors-in-mass/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Feb 2010 21:49:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>T.C. Johnston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Internet Law Bits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[including]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sexting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SJC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[statutory construction]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[texting]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cyberlawlately.com/?p=387</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Boston Globe reports that Massachusetts&#8217; highest court — the Supreme Justice Court (SJC) recently ruled that it is not illegal to send lewd messages to minors, as long as it&#8217;s done online — overturning the convictions of a dude who sent explicitly sexual text messages to a cop thinking she was a 13 year-old [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=cyberlawlately.com&blog=10917271&post=387&subd=cyberlawlately&ref=&feed=1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://cyberlawlately.com/2010/02/12/ok-to-sext-minors-in-mass/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/bdb654d7e2fafaa6b6df9727ccc84f80?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=PG" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">tcjohnston</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Ahh, but the US Govt is an Equal Opportunity Illegal Eavesdropper . . .</title>
		<link>http://cyberlawlately.com/2010/01/28/us-warrentless-wiretap/</link>
		<comments>http://cyberlawlately.com/2010/01/28/us-warrentless-wiretap/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 22:20:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>T.C. Johnston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Internet Law Bits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology Bytes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[privacy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EFF]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Electronic Frontier Foundation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AT&T]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NSA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[wiretapping]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[standing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spying]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cyberlawlately.com/?p=301</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[That&#8217;s right.  The NSA has been illegally monitoring Internet and telephone communications of millions of Americans.  That&#8217;s right &#8211; your phone may be bugged and your rantings logged.  That&#8217;s right, AT&#38;T is immune for helping the good ol&#8217; USofA spy on us. And the best bit? You ain&#8217;t got standing to sue unless you were [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=cyberlawlately.com&blog=10917271&post=301&subd=cyberlawlately&ref=&feed=1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://cyberlawlately.com/2010/01/28/us-warrentless-wiretap/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/bdb654d7e2fafaa6b6df9727ccc84f80?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=PG" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">tcjohnston</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Don&#8217;t Wanna Chuck Your Cell Phone in the Bay in Protest? Sue AT&amp;T for Taxing your Internet!</title>
		<link>http://cyberlawlately.com/2010/01/23/att-internet-tax/</link>
		<comments>http://cyberlawlately.com/2010/01/23/att-internet-tax/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 23 Jan 2010 22:41:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>T.C. Johnston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Internet Law Bits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AT&T]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[class action]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tax Freedom Act]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cyberlawlately.com/?p=289</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve been sitting on this blip in the Chicago Sun-Times about a guy who wants to sue AT&#38;T for taxing his Internet access in violation of the federal Tax Freedom Act.   Stories on people who want to sue people are &#8230; um, only interesting afterward, if at all. Then looky what I found: Lawsuits: AT&#38;T [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=cyberlawlately.com&blog=10917271&post=289&subd=cyberlawlately&ref=&feed=1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://cyberlawlately.com/2010/01/23/att-internet-tax/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/bdb654d7e2fafaa6b6df9727ccc84f80?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=PG" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">tcjohnston</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Make Money Stuffing Virtual Envelopes! (Google Don&#8217;t Think So)</title>
		<link>http://cyberlawlately.com/2010/01/07/google-scam/</link>
		<comments>http://cyberlawlately.com/2010/01/07/google-scam/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 07 Jan 2010 22:45:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>T.C. Johnston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Internet Law Bits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Google]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[rebilling]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[scam]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[spam]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cyberlawlately.com/?p=180</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When I was a young, largely unsuccessful entrepreneurial kid looking to make my own buck, I always eyed those classified ads saying:  &#8220;Make $x a week stuffing envelopes at home!  Our kit shows you how!&#8221;   Never sent them the $20 because I suspected they&#8217;d send me a booklet that said to run classified ads saying [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=cyberlawlately.com&blog=10917271&post=180&subd=cyberlawlately&ref=&feed=1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://cyberlawlately.com/2010/01/07/google-scam/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/bdb654d7e2fafaa6b6df9727ccc84f80?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=PG" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">tcjohnston</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Moosehead and/or Moose Head = Concussion Repercussion</title>
		<link>http://cyberlawlately.com/2010/01/04/falling-moosehead/</link>
		<comments>http://cyberlawlately.com/2010/01/04/falling-moosehead/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2010 05:42:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>T.C. Johnston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Random Hertz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[moose head]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Moosehead]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Negligence]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cyberlawlately.com/?p=184</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hence the category &#8220;Random Hertz.&#8221;  The only thing related to the Internet here is that the victim was an Internet Design Consultant.  And the Moosehead was an actually actual moose head, in a NYC establishment.  And it fell on the Internet Design Consultant&#8217;s apparently nonplussed nonmoose head. Kumra is seeking unspecified damages from the eatery [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=cyberlawlately.com&blog=10917271&post=184&subd=cyberlawlately&ref=&feed=1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://cyberlawlately.com/2010/01/04/falling-moosehead/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/bdb654d7e2fafaa6b6df9727ccc84f80?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=PG" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">tcjohnston</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Signing out of 2009 with CNN&#8217;s Top 10 Tech Fails</title>
		<link>http://cyberlawlately.com/2009/12/31/top-10-tech-fails/</link>
		<comments>http://cyberlawlately.com/2009/12/31/top-10-tech-fails/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Dec 2009 23:59:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>T.C. Johnston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Technology Bytes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[data]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[redundant backup]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Spaceballs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[T-Mobile]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cyberlawlately.com/?p=146</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[OK, technology sometimes don&#8217;t work as expected.  Remember Rick Moranis as Dark Helmet in Spaceballs?  &#8220;Out of order? F#%&#38;! Even in the future, nothing works!&#8221; I think about that line a lot — as we constantly stumble over our own future. My favorite failure this year wound up on CNN&#8217;s list.  T-Mobile lost most of [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=cyberlawlately.com&blog=10917271&post=146&subd=cyberlawlately&ref=&feed=1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://cyberlawlately.com/2009/12/31/top-10-tech-fails/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/bdb654d7e2fafaa6b6df9727ccc84f80?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=PG" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">tcjohnston</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>FCC Moves Toward Net Neutrality Rules &#8211; PC World</title>
		<link>http://cyberlawlately.com/2009/12/30/fcc-moves-toward-net-neutrality-rules-pc-world/</link>
		<comments>http://cyberlawlately.com/2009/12/30/fcc-moves-toward-net-neutrality-rules-pc-world/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Dec 2009 06:27:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>T.C. Johnston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Internet Law Bits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[data discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FCC]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cyberlawlately.com/?p=170</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Here&#8217;s a nice followup to yesterday&#8217;s post. ↓ (Down there) Gives more details about what the FCC is up to to combat data discrimination. Dang that term makes me laugh. FCC Moves Toward Net Neutrality Rules &#8211; PC World.<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=cyberlawlately.com&blog=10917271&post=170&subd=cyberlawlately&ref=&feed=1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://cyberlawlately.com/2009/12/30/fcc-moves-toward-net-neutrality-rules-pc-world/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/bdb654d7e2fafaa6b6df9727ccc84f80?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=PG" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">tcjohnston</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hey, BitTorrenters are People Too!</title>
		<link>http://cyberlawlately.com/2009/12/29/comcast-data-discrimination/</link>
		<comments>http://cyberlawlately.com/2009/12/29/comcast-data-discrimination/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Dec 2009 18:47:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>T.C. Johnston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Internet Law Bits]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BitTorrent]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[class action]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Comcast]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[data discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FCC]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[net neutrality]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[P2P]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cyberlawlately.com/?p=148</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[FirstAmendmentCenter.org has been following an AP Story on the class action suit against Comcast for data discrimination(!)  Seems Comcast didn&#8217;t like those bandwidth hogs using P2P networks like BitTorrent to download huge files; so it delayed or aborted their data transfers.  Seems the FCC thought that kinda flew in the face of its policy guaranteeing [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=cyberlawlately.com&blog=10917271&post=148&subd=cyberlawlately&ref=&feed=1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://cyberlawlately.com/2009/12/29/comcast-data-discrimination/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/bdb654d7e2fafaa6b6df9727ccc84f80?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=PG" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">tcjohnston</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Microsoft Continues to be EU&#8217;s Punching Bag</title>
		<link>http://cyberlawlately.com/2009/12/24/microsoft-continues-to-be-eus-punching-bag/</link>
		<comments>http://cyberlawlately.com/2009/12/24/microsoft-continues-to-be-eus-punching-bag/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Dec 2009 21:51:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>T.C. Johnston</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Technology Bytes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[antitrust]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[browsers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[EU]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[European Union]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[IE]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet Explorer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Microsoft]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Windows]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://cyberlawlately.com/?p=131</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&#8230; this time over browsers.  And Microsoft settles.   Wired.com reports on the European Commission&#8217;s investigation — offspring of the antitrust wars with Microsoft in the early aughts — that this time focused on the bundling of Internet Explorer (IE) with Microsoft&#8217;s Windows Operating System (OS). The recent settlement with the EC requires Microsoft to give users [...]<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=cyberlawlately.com&blog=10917271&post=131&subd=cyberlawlately&ref=&feed=1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://cyberlawlately.com/2009/12/24/microsoft-continues-to-be-eus-punching-bag/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/bdb654d7e2fafaa6b6df9727ccc84f80?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=PG" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">tcjohnston</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>