This posting is going to be more of an opinion based on the idea of online law schools.
I believe that online law schools are a good idea and they are more price conscious, but I do not think that ones that are not associated with an accredited school should be credible or be allowed. The concept of moving everything online is becoming more of a our everyday lives and school should be no exception. I have taken about four online classes and had very positive responses for three out of four of them. Everyone has different schedules and the idea about making things available for people on their time is very convenient. But the online law schools that offer a degree from a bogus name website aren't really teaching the material the way that out legal profession is constructed in this country. Courts are set up in the United States for a prosecution and a defense. Both sides must argue the case physically in front a jury and the fate lies in their hands to deliberate about. This whole process is completed in person. How can one experience how to perform legal responsibilities online, when people will be responsible for the real life experience? Can this be taught online? I guess we will have to see
Also, there was a topic of practicing for prosecution and defense, mock trials, in law schools and someone raised the point that law school students are not required to participate in them except through moot court. This is wrong. My friend had to perform a series of practice situations in front of other classmates and the professor, for a grade, to gain knowledge on how to approach a court and the judges, as well as how to present cases to the jury defending or supporting their positions. I just wanted to clear that up.
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Disturbing
Since I was away last weekend I did not get back to Massachusetts until after midnight so I was unable to make a blog entry. I will make two postings this week to substitute for that.
After reading the suggested articles for this week, the Nirenberg files website controversy has me very confused and disturbed. I discussed this case with a friend of mine who is a practicing lawyer. She told me that the legal aspect of what they are doing on the website is considered legal. I agree, but I feel that the site should be forced to be shut down much like the YouTube website postings. The site is making the names of doctors who perform abortions public and also publishing their home address names and numbers for which they live and practice. This is a form of harassment and despite my personal feelings on the abortion issue, no one should have to be displayed like this across the world for performing a job with which they get paid for. Would people who are tree lovers and feel that trees are depleting faster than they are being replenished make a list of all the carpenters who work to make a living, post their names on a website and try to perform horrible acts of violence on them? I think not. They are just trying to make a living just like everyone else.
Yes there is a certain human element connected to this case but if the saying goes "it's just business" then why not let is be.
After reading the suggested articles for this week, the Nirenberg files website controversy has me very confused and disturbed. I discussed this case with a friend of mine who is a practicing lawyer. She told me that the legal aspect of what they are doing on the website is considered legal. I agree, but I feel that the site should be forced to be shut down much like the YouTube website postings. The site is making the names of doctors who perform abortions public and also publishing their home address names and numbers for which they live and practice. This is a form of harassment and despite my personal feelings on the abortion issue, no one should have to be displayed like this across the world for performing a job with which they get paid for. Would people who are tree lovers and feel that trees are depleting faster than they are being replenished make a list of all the carpenters who work to make a living, post their names on a website and try to perform horrible acts of violence on them? I think not. They are just trying to make a living just like everyone else.
Yes there is a certain human element connected to this case but if the saying goes "it's just business" then why not let is be.
Sunday, April 15, 2007
labels for adult websites
A bold move this week by members of the Senate in an effort to make access to adult websites more difficult for users is causing a lot of controversy. The proposed movement by the some members of the Senate have suggested that the adult explicit material websites should be forced to change their sites to a registered adult web site tag or they could face serious fines from the government. Some members in favor of this policy agree that this is an attempt to clean up the Internet for children.
There are many violated constitutional rights that would limit the proposal to pass in the Senate. If every company engaged in the industry would go along with the proposal willingly, there would be much less tension converting everything in the industry over. The largest problem that causes much controversy seems to be the volunteer part of the actions. If there is a mandated government requirement many people suggest that there is a violation of the freedom of speech right.
Other ideas have surfaced to come to terms with this racy subject such as labeling websites material, much like the rating that television shows that appear on TV. However, there has not been much success with this idea because the large time burden this would place on web providers as well as the issue of who would mandate it.
I believe that this is a troublesome issue and I am not sure of a solid solution to it. The Internet was created for communication between computers. Users of the computers should be given the right to access any material that they feel they want. However, when it comes to many people in the United States, they are very conscious of what they believe that their children should be allowed to view. This society has been a very controlling one since its inception and this is another example of how the government would like to control what the web can offer to people. Many countries in Europe do not feel that it is too racy for naked women to be broadcast their bodies on late night television. America has always felt a need to censor everything. If the country were to take more of an open minded approach then maybe a better outcome could arise. I am not saying that it should be alright for eleven year old children to be downloading porn, but I am saying that if they really what to, they will figure out a way to anyway.
There are many violated constitutional rights that would limit the proposal to pass in the Senate. If every company engaged in the industry would go along with the proposal willingly, there would be much less tension converting everything in the industry over. The largest problem that causes much controversy seems to be the volunteer part of the actions. If there is a mandated government requirement many people suggest that there is a violation of the freedom of speech right.
Other ideas have surfaced to come to terms with this racy subject such as labeling websites material, much like the rating that television shows that appear on TV. However, there has not been much success with this idea because the large time burden this would place on web providers as well as the issue of who would mandate it.
I believe that this is a troublesome issue and I am not sure of a solid solution to it. The Internet was created for communication between computers. Users of the computers should be given the right to access any material that they feel they want. However, when it comes to many people in the United States, they are very conscious of what they believe that their children should be allowed to view. This society has been a very controlling one since its inception and this is another example of how the government would like to control what the web can offer to people. Many countries in Europe do not feel that it is too racy for naked women to be broadcast their bodies on late night television. America has always felt a need to censor everything. If the country were to take more of an open minded approach then maybe a better outcome could arise. I am not saying that it should be alright for eleven year old children to be downloading porn, but I am saying that if they really what to, they will figure out a way to anyway.
Sunday, April 8, 2007
Thailand
A few of the class discussions have included the YouTube website and the case of Thailand and the Google owned site is no different regarding inappropriate videos.
Thailand's government announced that the YouTube site contained multiple postings of insulting pictures and videos about the Thai king. Google has taken down many videos per request from its website and this case should be no different. However, Google has refused to take the offensive postings down as per the country's request. Thailand has decided to block access to the YouTube website.
This brings up many political and legal issues about this situation. Should a government be given the right to block certain websites in a country? I guess that depends on the country. However, there is no written law in Thailand, or the United States, that limits the use surrounding the Internet. I believe that this sort of censoring in the US can never occur because of the founding principles the country lives by. Censoring could be deemed a violation of our freedom of speech right given to US citizens. Also, there are many disrespectful things discussed publicly about our president every day. Should all of these comments be censored? I think not.
Thailand's government announced that the YouTube site contained multiple postings of insulting pictures and videos about the Thai king. Google has taken down many videos per request from its website and this case should be no different. However, Google has refused to take the offensive postings down as per the country's request. Thailand has decided to block access to the YouTube website.
This brings up many political and legal issues about this situation. Should a government be given the right to block certain websites in a country? I guess that depends on the country. However, there is no written law in Thailand, or the United States, that limits the use surrounding the Internet. I believe that this sort of censoring in the US can never occur because of the founding principles the country lives by. Censoring could be deemed a violation of our freedom of speech right given to US citizens. Also, there are many disrespectful things discussed publicly about our president every day. Should all of these comments be censored? I think not.
Sunday, April 1, 2007
Online legal services
Unfortunately due to a problem with my vehicle this week, I was unable to attend the class and with no response from the e-mail I sent to the professor about what was discussed, I am forced to discuss an issue from the syllabus for this week.
Many of the customer service jobs that used to be in the United States are now overseas. The wave of legal service jobs could unfortunately also take the same path as them. It is very easy to teach the laws of the US in another country and pay individuals a lower rate to conduct legal research in a different country. Selling a service to someone over the Internet is cheaper than a telephone call these days, and people are willing to save the money on one end versus the other end. Some law firms are conducting legal advice now via the www and these services are done at a lower cost to the lawyer which could in turn make it cheaper for customers of legal advise in the future. With the ever increasing amount of people that are on the web every day, advertising a legal service via the www is possible to reach more people all over the world than a television spot would ten years ago. A lot of this talk is somewhat in the future but some of it has precedence today.
A few posing questions that comes to mind concerning this topic is if legal advise over the Internet is allocated the same time and energy as a regular client service would be conducted in person? Also, the customer is only dealing with a virtual person through a website and e-mail, so how is the customer assured that the work is being done by a real accredited person? Also, is the billing cheaper for the end customer because of the cheaper Internet transaction costs, and can the customer call the lawyer for more technical questions and answers and will this be billed differently?
The future will help answer some of these questions, but for now they are interesting to think about. More to come later.
Many of the customer service jobs that used to be in the United States are now overseas. The wave of legal service jobs could unfortunately also take the same path as them. It is very easy to teach the laws of the US in another country and pay individuals a lower rate to conduct legal research in a different country. Selling a service to someone over the Internet is cheaper than a telephone call these days, and people are willing to save the money on one end versus the other end. Some law firms are conducting legal advice now via the www and these services are done at a lower cost to the lawyer which could in turn make it cheaper for customers of legal advise in the future. With the ever increasing amount of people that are on the web every day, advertising a legal service via the www is possible to reach more people all over the world than a television spot would ten years ago. A lot of this talk is somewhat in the future but some of it has precedence today.
A few posing questions that comes to mind concerning this topic is if legal advise over the Internet is allocated the same time and energy as a regular client service would be conducted in person? Also, the customer is only dealing with a virtual person through a website and e-mail, so how is the customer assured that the work is being done by a real accredited person? Also, is the billing cheaper for the end customer because of the cheaper Internet transaction costs, and can the customer call the lawyer for more technical questions and answers and will this be billed differently?
The future will help answer some of these questions, but for now they are interesting to think about. More to come later.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)