Second Life Bar Association Meeting TranscriptSeptember 15, 2007
Benjamin Noble: Okay... we're still working out the teleport issues (as you might have noticed coming in, you go directly to the lobby -- I'll ask the building owner about that) but I want to welcome everybody to the first meeting we've been able to have in our own space.
Benjamin Noble: I could not be happier with this build, and I want to thank Beathan Vale for donating this amazing space to us. I also want to point out the designer [and builder] - Mizou Vavoom - who just did an incredible job on the space.
Benjamin Noble: The space is open to members to use as you want to. A member suggested some kind of sign-up system for conference rooms, which seems like a good idea, so I'll talk to Henri DeCuir about that.
Benjamin Noble: But basically, feel free to use them if you want to.
Benjamin Noble: And come back (or change the sun setting) to see the sunset. It's pretty great - nice views. :)
Benjamin Noble: The furniture is all owned by us, so we can do a lot of different things with the interior in the long run, but I'm really excited with the initial set up.
Benjamin Noble: If anybody wants to do something else, I suggest a forum thread - there are a lot of possibilities, of course.
Benjamin Noble: FYI - Henri (our VP of Communications) can't be here today, but he's also starting work on some technology for us to incorporate here, including a member contact board and a screen for the front here... for presentations, etc. We've had all of this on hold because the tiny plot of land I had us on before didn't have any available prims.
Benjamin Noble: So, welcome! It beats holding meetings in the Congress building. ;)
Benjamin Noble: Also, welcome to Gwyneth [Llewelyn], who will be talking briefly later on about the e-Justice center (the Portugal ADR project) and will be doing a longer presentation for interested members that we'll schedule separately.
Benjamin Noble: It's a big agenda today, so I'll try to keep things moving. It is a beautiful Saturday (here) and I suspect we'd all like to enjoy the weekend a bit.
Benjamin Noble: First, membership update - 189 people have signed up for the organization since its inception, and 149 of those have signed in to Second Life within the last sixty days. Just metrics, for the curious.
Benjamin Noble: Second, I'd like to open the floor for discussion on a social event.
Benjamin Noble: We've previously talked about inviting groups like Second Life Business Communicators, Metanomics, and other professional groups to a reception here to introduce our new space, followed by something fun, like skiing.
Benjamin Noble: I'd like to put a final plan together here and pick a date.
Alexei Skjellerup: Nice idea, Mr. President.
Benjamin Noble: How does everybody feel about doing a weeknight rather than a Saturday for this?
Benjamin Noble: It makes it late for the EU people is the problem.
Benjamin Noble: But I hate killing saturdays more than once a month.
Benjamin Noble: Credit others with that idea - I'm just presenting it as chair. Solomon had the fun-event part of the idea specifically, which I think is a really good plan.
James Bringholf: I think EU participation is important
Lina Olaria: you'd have to hold it fairly early in the evening if you didn't want to exclude the eu folks
Benjamin Noble: I do too. What about fairly early in the evening then? It means that US west coast people have to log in from work, but I've done that. After all, it is legit business development.
Alexei Skjellerup: As an "EU folk" myself, of course I'd rather have it on saturdays than any weeknight...
Benjamin Noble: I hear you Alexei. We might just have to stick with Saturdays, since we are really a worldwide organization.
Alexei Skjellerup: Nevertheless, there is always the meeting transcripts, and we wouldn't like to determine everyone's time-schedule...
Benjamin Noble: For this, though we really are targetting maxiumum participation.
Mitchell Stransky: Where will the meeting transcripts be archived?
Benjamin Noble: I think Alexei's instinct is right.
Benjamin Noble: Mitchell - all are on http://www.slba.info
Mitchell Stransky: Thank you.
Benjamin Noble: I think most are in the forums, and since Aug. 11, they're on the front page.
Alexei Skjellerup: They are, indeed.
Theophan Paine: What about a bit later on Saturdays does that work?
Benjamin Noble: Doesn't really matter to me. I do this time so that it leaves more of Saturday left afterward.
Jamie Palisades: Seems harsh taking EU's Saturday nights, though, as well. Hm - are there a constellation of active Asian-Pacific time zone members?
Benjamin Noble: One possibility is that we do it immediately following the next SLBA meeting, in a month, which means only one Saturday.
Theophan Paine: Well for us in ET this cuts the day in two.
Benjamin Noble: Not all that many, Jamie, not last time I polled on this anyway.
Benjamin Noble: And yeah, we could make every other meeting a few hours later.
Theophan Paine: Combining meeting and social is not a bad idea.
Gwyneth Llewelyn: :)
Solomon Cortes: Personally, I'm pretty easy - keen to join in whenever I can, but in order of preference for me, it would be later on a weekday by a couple of hours, or now or slightly earlier on a Saturday. Later on a Saturday would kill my evening!
Alexei Skjellerup: I've got the same problem...
Jamie Palisades: Maybe it's the SLBA mtg time and not the social event time that needs work - and rotation - shrug
Lina Olaria: /i don't really have a preference - it's just one day
Benjamin Noble: We can go an hour earlier, but not much more than that or we hit 9 AM on the US west coast.
James Bringholf: I don't have a preference either
Legal Writer: Ia mflexible.
Theophan Paine: Any time is really fine, what ever gets the maximum participation.
Jessica Holyoke: we can always try a time and see who shows up
Mitchell Stransky: I have no preference: I'll show up to what I can.
Solomon Cortes: But in any event, whatever time we choose, I'd like to thank our US based members for being willing to be accommodating!
Benjamin Noble: Okay, how about this - we set the next SLBA meeting one hour earlier, on Sat. the 20th of October. And follow it with the social event.
Jamie Palisades: hm - how many West Coast late risers do you think you have, Ben (speaking as one heh heh)?
Alexei Skjellerup: Once in a month we all can make a sacrifice, so...
Benjamin Noble rubs eyes ... So it'll be 9:00 AM SLT, for the meeting...
Alexei Skjellerup: 6pm for us, not bad...
Benjamin Noble: Then coffee and donuts here for a half hour, then something fun.
Jamie Palisades: I run a lot of EU-heavy telemeetings from a Silicon Valley HQ and we find we MUST be flexible, not California-centric, to get global input. FWIW
Theophan Paine: If someone can't make a meeting but has an opinion on an agenda issue can they participate?
Alexei Skjellerup: And we appreciate it, Mr. Palisades...
Benjamin Noble: That is exactly riht, Jamie - ask me about having a client with offices in Munich and Singapore sometime. ;)
Jessica Holyoke: I'm sure you could still note card it and send to somebody to "read"
Benjamin Noble: Theophan, somebody could always send me or another member something to post to the record on their behalf, or could weigh in via the forums.
Jessica Holyoke: especially since we aren't voice oriented
Benjamin Noble: Exactly.
Benjamin Noble: Okay. So I'll make that the plan for the next meeting if there's no objection.
Benjamin Noble: As for the social event...
Theophan Paine: Yes, Ben, maybe we can mke that clear to memebers that they can input without being "present".
Benjamin Noble nods. Noted, Theo. I'll start putting that in the announcements.
Benjamin Noble: Social event...
Benjamin Noble: I've not really done much "fun" stuff here.
Benjamin Noble: Any ideas -- skiing sounded cool, if someone has done it and knows of a place.
Jessica Holyoke: there's sailing, scuba diving, surfing
Jessica Holyoke: ice skating
Jessica Holyoke: hockey?
James Bringholf: Dance parties in SL are always good
Lina Olaria: /live music
Alexei Skjellerup: Uff... I'm quite a bad dancer...
Benjamin Noble: All sound good to me.
Solomon Cortes: I suggested skiing (actually snowboarding) and know a place. I may also be able to arrange some motor racing.
Solomon Cortes: But I'd need to know numbers!
Benjamin Noble: Snowboarding. Sorry. Solomon is so much cooler than I am. ;)
Jamie Palisades: Not in SL you're not, Alexei
Solomon Cortes: The band they had at Al Andalus was good, too!
Benjamin Noble: I'd expect a fairly large turn out, though it depends on how many other orgs we invite, I suspect.
Benjamin Noble: I'd like to do something other than music/dancing just because a lot of groups do it.
Benjamin Noble: What is scalable?
Wendell Holmer: I was just involved in a fashion show followed by a party, which was a huge success.
Wendell Holmer: Business fashions, suits, that kind of thing.
Benjamin Noble: Well... how about we toss the actual event into the forums, and some of us can check a few things out between now and when we announce it (which will be a few weeks anyway).
Benjamin Noble: And then decide based on that.
Benjamin Noble: Anybody want to volunteer to check a few things out with me?
Alexei Skjellerup: Sure, Mr. President.
Solomon Cortes: Ditto
Benjamin Noble: Thanks.
Benjamin Noble: I'll find a time we can do it, anybody else too, of course.
Benjamin Noble: Just shoot me a note, and we'll go on a safari. Maybe I can get Headburro Antfarm to show us some things - he has some good guids and has trekked over more of SL than just about anyone.
Alexei Skjellerup: That would be interesting...
Benjamin Noble: Okay. Next item is voluntary credential verification.
Benjamin Noble: We've been discussing a voluntary verification service for quite a while and I would like to put it to a vote at this meeting, after discussion. My initial instinct was that it would not be necessary in light of Linden Lab's plan to allow voluntary self-verification and the details we've gotten on that, but members of the Executive Board convinced me that it may well still have relevance, so I'm going to propose it and we can, potentially vote on it today.
Benjamin Noble: I'll cover what has come out of discussions with members both in world and in the forums, and then we can talk about it. Ultimately, I'd like to make a decision about this in the near future.
Jamie Palisades: when it's a good time for it, I have a Q about the voting Ben
Mitchell Stransky: Benjamin, for those of us who are newbies, can you tell us a bit about the LL plan?
Benjamin Noble: Yes. Let me take Jamie's question first here.
Jamie Palisades: thx
Jamie Palisades: strikes me you have both "whoever is here" options, and "'group poll" options. Which is better for such a big and political issue?
Alexei Skjellerup: In the meanwhile, nice offices...
Jamie Palisades: (My bias is inclusiveness, but maybe your rules direct something)
Jessica Holyoke: brb
Benjamin Noble: We've not confronted that before except that when I put together bylaws, we set it up so that votes occurr at meetings, and there is a fairly comprehensive (forums, email to forum members, and group notice) system to announce meetings and agendas.
Benjamin Noble: The bylaws can be amended, and I'm very much open to changing this to some other method, via that device.
Benjamin Noble: Or a motion here could direct the organization to handle the vote on this in a particular way.
Jamie Palisades: hm well - in such a case where the vote's highly consequential to elig )and feelings run high), how solid is the assumption that all who care will know to show up today (or at any mtg)?
Mitchell Stransky: Benjmain, I'll move that the decision about the VCV proposal be put to a vote on the forums, not here.
Benjamin Noble: That's a fair question. What I suggest, to create a way to discuss that, is that you move to either table this pending discussion of that, and then post in the forum about it.
Benjamin Noble: Or else make a motion about this vote particularly.
Benjamin Noble: We're crossing, sorry. Okay. Mitchell has a motion.
Benjamin Noble: Is there a second?
Mitchell Stransky: Oh well.
James Bringholf: Where do we find the forum?
Theophan Paine: I second it.
Jamie Palisades: :)
Benjamin Noble: There's a second, so we can discuss that.
Jamie Palisades: discussion?
Benjamin Noble: James - forum is linked off of slba.info
Jamie Palisades: I have a bit :)
James Bringholf: thx
Benjamin Noble: Jamie - you have the floor.
Jessica Holyoke: I think any mention of voting on the forums should include using the group voting tools we already have
Jamie Palisades: Speaking tentatively against the motion- Forums as a class often tend to be ALSO a habituation thing - why those and not the Groups polling device which EVERY member by definition can access and receives notice
Mitchell Stransky: May I offer an amendment to my motion?
Benjamin Noble: What about a longer voting time than just at a meeting then, but in world?
Benjamin Noble: Yes.
Jamie Palisades: yes - my pt's same as Jessica's. Discussion of forums, fine, but use the SL tool not the web-based thingie for the vote. Would the mover & 2nder accept that as a friendly amend?
Benjamin Noble: You can amend your own motion at any point, though you'll need a second.
Mitchell Stransky: I didn't know that we had voting tools that were generally accessible.
Benjamin Noble: Henri DeCuir coded one for our election that worked very well.
Benjamin Noble: I'm sure he could adapt it.
Mitchell Stransky: I'd like to amend my motion to be that the voting should be conducted in a way that maximizes the opportunity for members to vote asynchronously.
Theophan Paine: I second the amendment.
Benjamin Noble: Mitchell and Theophan - will you accept the friendly amendment by Jaime to use SL tools, and I will add to that, to do so in a way that allows voting over at least a one-week period?
Mitchell Stransky: Thank you, Theo.
Mitchell Stransky: I will. Theo?
Theophan Paine: Can you restate the whole motion Mitchell?
Theophan Paine: Yes Ben.
Benjamin Noble: Mitchell - can you restate it as you see it, with amendments?
Mitchell Stransky: I move that voting on the VCV proposal be conducted asynchronously, using SL tools, over a one-week period.
Mitchell Stransky: Good?
Benjamin Noble nods. Theophan, second?
Theophan Paine: Can we make it ten days Mitchell?
Mitchell Stransky: Indeed, more time is better, within limits.
Theophan Paine: OK, I second with the amendments including a ten day voting period
Benjamin Noble: Okay. I'm not hearing much opposition to this so far, and I agree, personally. If someone wants to "call the question" we will vote on it.
Jessica Holyoke: call
Mitchell Stransky: Call the question.
Mitchell Stransky: I'll second Jessica.
Benjamin Noble: I'll take a voice vote on this one. All in favor say "aye" - all opposed say "nay" - we'll give it about a clock minute.
Mitchell Stransky: Aye.
Legal Writer: Aye.
Alexei Skjellerup: Aye
Jamie Palisades: aye
Theophan Paine: aye.
Jessica Holyoke: aye
Patroklus Murakami: abstain. my first time here :)
Lina Olaria: same here, abstain
Jai Baxter: abstain
Solomon Cortes: aye
Benjamin Noble: Chair abstains. Motion carries.
Benjamin Noble: Okay. I'd like to have a bit of discussion on this today though, particularly for new members.
Benjamin Noble: Verification is a pretty sensitive issues, so anyone who disagrees with the way I'm casting it, I am very happy to share the floor.
Benjamin Noble: But the earlier question was about what Linden Lab is doing.
Jessica Holyoke: Do you want to discuss that Ben?
Alexei Skjellerup: I thought your proposal was already fixed and accepted...
Benjamin Noble: My understanding is that they are hiring a 3rd party company to match identity information provided by avatars (RL identity information) with an international database, and make sure that the data is consistent.
Jessica Holyoke: IDV not VCB
Jessica Holyoke: er vcv
Mitchell Stransky: Will LL include credendials?
Benjamin Noble: Alexei - I think that we just agreed to put it to a vote via in-world tools. Since we've got a fair number of new people, I thought I'd cover it briefly.
Benjamin Noble: Just for discussion.
Benjamin Noble: No, Mitchell, and that is where this comes in.
Alexei Skjellerup: Of course, sorry for the interruption...
Mitchell Stransky: That's what I thought.
Benjamin Noble: The idea, essentially, is to let members associate their professional credentials with their avatar.
Benjamin Noble: This has been posted before, and it's a fairly simple system, but I'll paste the steps in here so we have them in the transcript.
Benjamin Noble: 1) Someone who wants to be verified tells the SLBA Executive Board his or her real life name and real-life Bar Association number, in-world.
Benjamin Noble: 2) Two members (for cross-checking purposes) will independently call the telephone number that the state or federal bar has associated with that name and bar number (for example, you can get my phone number by searching my name at http://calbar.ca.gov -- most jurisdictions work like this, because attorneys need to keep public contact information on file with regulatory agencies).
Mitchell Stransky: Will SLBA stick with bar memberships and bar certifications, or will we include, e.g., mediator or arbitrator qualifications?
Benjamin Noble: 3) Speaking to the member by voice at the telephone number listed via the real-life bar association site, the member(s) in charge of verification would confirm the tie between the avatar and the real-life attorney.
Benjamin Noble: 4) The real-life attorney would also execute a paper affidavit attesting to the connection between the avatar and the attorney, and stating what jurisidictions he or she is authorized to practice in. This would also state that the member will keep the SLBA updated as to any changes in status or admissions.
Kit Meredith accepted your inventory offer.
Benjamin Noble: Mitchell - I'd see no reason we couldn't do others, thogh there may be arbitration associations that I'm not familar with that would be better at it. As long as there is a public database of contact information, this works.
Mitchell Stransky: I haven't been able to find an ADR organization in SL.
Benjamin Noble: So one thing that has come up in the details is charging something for this, as there will be a time sink for members, and there will be long distance, potentially international charges.
James Bringholf: How widely adopted is Skype among this potential group?
Benjamin Noble: Can't do Skype, as it defeats the RL verification. :)
Benjamin Noble: Have to associate somebody with a phone number, address, published independently.
Lina Olaria: why? you can still call landlines with skype?
Benjamin Noble: Ah... that works. Yes, for outgoing.
Mitchell Stransky: There is an alternate way of proceeding: just have each memeber submit a letter from their bar association stating that they are in good standing, and the affidavit. One advantage of this is that this letter will only be sent to the SLBA member's address on file with their RL bar association.
Lina Olaria: /makes sense and less time consuming
Benjamin Noble: Can you explain that a bit, Mitchell? Basically, you ask your RL bar for a letter, and they will send it to you, but only to your RL address...
Theophan Paine: They don't do that here in NYS, we can only get a "certificate of good standing" and it does not have our address on it.
Alexei Skjellerup: I couldn't ask my Bar for that kind of letter...
Alexei Skjellerup: The laughs could be heard in NY...
Benjamin Noble: If it doesn't work across jurisdictions, that won't work. Sadly. It sounded easier.
Theophan Paine: However we, like California have a an online database.
Mitchell Stransky: Sure. In Florida, if you want to take a federal bar exam, the FL Bar will send you a letter saying you're in good standing.
Mitchell Stransky: We have one also. But this letter would be rather more official, and because it's got to be mailed to the bar member's official address, there's a bit more verification that the SLBA member is really the RL bar member.
Benjamin Noble: THeophan - would the certificate have to be mailed to your address?
Lina Olaria: in ky, usa, you can request online
Jamie Palisades: ahem
Mitchell Stransky: But Theophan, don't they mail it only to your office address on file with the Bar?
Jamie Palisades is thinking of some deeper governance Qs here. Is this the time?
Benjamin Noble: I think most US jurisdiction (all I checked) have online databases. And many non-US do as well.
Theophan Paine: No you have to go and pick it up.
Mitchell Stransky: Oh. Hm.
Theophan Paine: The certficate makes no reference to identity more than name.
Mitchell Stransky: Well, can't we make that certificate an option?
Benjamin Noble: Jamie - it is an open discussion, but I will end it fairly soon just to keep the agenda moving (and we'll just move it to the forums, or continue informally after the meeting).
Jamie Palisades mutters , I practiced in NYC for a while. The very thought of getting that out of Albany - the mind boggles ...
Jamie Palisades: ok then
Jamie Palisades: high-level
Jamie Palisades: Ben, I think there are 2 things not clear from your summary. One is whether SLBA will *require* verif for come class of activity (all members, voting members, Ex Board, whatever). Is this really the rule-enforcement of a social more? The other is, are we thereby a lawyer referral service? (Also a regulated activity in some places.) Now, there are some operational probs was well - like the absence of web-base verif of bar ID in many jurisdictions, the "out of jurisdiction practice" and "solitication ban" issues associated with all this, which vary by locale, and the liability of SLBA w/r/t authentication - but I assume all the wise lawyers have, or can, work those out, e.g. on the Forums. So let me focus on my political governance Q. Mandated? For who?
Legal Writer: Also, the member needs toprove to SLBA that he/she is a member of a bar. A certificate going to the member still doesn't reach the SLBA.
Mitchell Stransky: Anyone can claim to be John Smith, Esq., member of the... Texas Bar.
Benjamin Noble: What I prefer is the simplicty of just contacting members via their public information. If I say "Benjamin Noble" is "Benjamin Duranske" and then you call the phone # for Benjamin Duranske on the CA Bar's web page, he either will or will not confirm it.
Mitchell Stransky: This is true.
Benjamin Noble: That, with an affidavit also, seems to do it.
Benjamin Noble: I'd be happy to add the idea that you send a copy of your bar card.
Benjamin Noble: But I'd rather not rely on it exculsively.
Mitchell Stransky: Sending a copy of the Bar card works also.
Benjamin Noble: Jamie - high level conversation on this is fine, so feel free.
Legal Writer: Any in-wallet credential can be stolen/borrowed/etc.
Mitchell Stransky: Also true.
Benjamin Noble: I'll run this open forum style for a few more minutes, but then we'll move on, so that we don't keep Gwyn here all day.
Lina Olaria: /i'm new, but i second jaimie's questions - what is the purpose for the verification?
Gwyneth Llewelyn: haha that's all right — as some of you know, I'm quite interested in the way 'verification' is done too
Jessica Holyoke: well part of the purpose of VCV is the ability to refer potential clients to attorneys
Benjamin Noble: For me, I've been telling lawyers to be very careful about not practicing out of their jurisdiction, the flip side of that is that clients who contact attorenys in world will benefit from knowing that they a) really are lawyers and b) are able to practice in certain jurisdictions -- and not others.
Jamie Palisades: via assurances from SLBA?
Lina Olaria: /well . . there are some liability issues associated with lawyer referral . . . .
Win Writer: If an ABA Member email to a SLBA officer the real name and number of the membership I thonk that would be an easy way to verify that the sender is what he/she says it is
Alexei Skjellerup: Any clients should be addressed to RL individuals...
Benjamin Noble: In essence, it's a service for members who want to use Second Life as an outpost for their firm, to meet clients, etc.
Jessica Holyoke: I could pick a name on my Bar rolls and fake it too
Win Writer: But you have to pĂck the name and the number also
Benjamin Noble: That's right, Lina -- part of the affidavit would need to address that.
Legal Writer: But if a call is placed by SLBA members to the member on the folls, and the member says he or she did not authorize it, the SLBA can catch the fake.
Benjamin Noble: And we'd be careful, in our description, to explain the process.
Theophan Paine: Why not make this the same as any internet attorney-client relationship, I get clients from the internet, they do due dilligence on me and I on them.
Alexei Skjellerup: I absolutely agree...
Jamie Palisades: Let me try a few short focused Qs to chop up this complex topic into managebale bits :) To SLBA Forum recidivists: does the plan (as you seem to have it formulated) require verification, or merely provide an optonal channel for it, such as a different 'verified' class of SLBA membership?
Alexei Skjellerup: The client must confirm that he's talking with an attorney...
Alexei Skjellerup: Not us...
Jessica Holyoke: Jamie, credential verification is only for those who want to solicit business here. For instance, I wouldn't offer my credentials because I'm not providing my name
Jamie Palisades: ah - so - no deprecation to your ability to work within SLBA then
Jessica Holyoke: but if you want to use the SLBA to solicit business, which has happened, then having a list of people we can say, yes they are who they say they are and yes they are attorneys would be helpful
Jamie Palisades: thx
Lina Olaria: ah
Benjamin Noble: One of my concerns is that we get a lot of referral requests -- members have seen these I'm sure. I pass them on to the group as a whole, but I'd be much more comfortable being able to tell people that there is a list of members in the office, some of whom have listed their jurisdiction and established, with us, that they're autorized to practice.
Benjamin Noble: People could still go with whoever they wanted, but I'd rather we were making some effort to provide that information.
Theophan Paine: Maybe we can do it like a bulliten board so we get that ISP protection, we are not doing anything to verify credentials, just allowing people to post indentifying info somewhere, if they want.
Jamie Palisades thinks outloud - OK, Phil Linden uses age ID hoping to ward off the morals regulators, and SLBA piggybacks on it to deflect being an accessory to unauthorized practice ... sensible if (heh) your global "referral-regulation" exposure otherwise is covered
Benjamin Noble: My biggest concern is what Theophan is getting at -- and Jaime -- which is potentia liability.
Lina Olaria: yes
Mitchell Stransky: Theophan, I don't think that safe-harbor provision would apply to what might be an attoeney-referral service.
Alexei Skjellerup: That is why we should not assure nothing to clients. Just insist in their getting the attorney's contact info...
Benjamin Noble: It has been proposed that we make it very clear what the process we use is, and we also require anyone who submits information to agree to update it yearly, etc. And require that part of the signed statement indemnify us.
Mitchell Stransky: So the affidavit includes an indemnification agreement?
Benjamin Noble: Yes.
Mitchell Stransky: Hm.
Theophan Paine: It would not be a referral service, just a bulletin board, any SLBA could post there.
Mitchell Stransky: But if someone, for instance, is pretending to be a lawyer, then that indemnification is worthless.
Benjamin Noble: I think that's a good idea, but it is a different one. I'm wondering if we can do this in a way that sufficiently minimizes the risk.
Theophan Paine: But if someone is "practicing law without a license" aren't there criminal law implications?
Lina Olaria: /how about asking for submission of the first page of the atty's malpractice insurance
Legal Writer: Some real bar members have no insurance.
Benjamin Noble: I'd almost rather not get that far into it, Lina. If we are just verifiying that Avatar X is Attorney Y, and that Attorney Y is in good standing as of the date printed, that's ll we're saying.
Lina Olaria: /slba shouldn't be referrering to lawyers with no malpractice insurance
Lina Olaria: /even on a bulletin board
Lina Olaria: /because people who use it will think they are getting someone reliable
Lina Olaria: /regardless of he disclaimers
Lina Olaria: /the*
Mitchell Stransky: Lina, so no insurance = unreliable?
Theophan Paine: Martindale Hubell lists lawyers without liablility insurance?
Theophan Paine: Sorry, no question mark, I know that for a fact.
Lina Olaria: /i think yes
Alexei Skjellerup: And the list at Galileo's law directory...
Lina Olaria: /i would not refer somone to an atty with no malpractice insurance
Jamie Palisades: Er, Indemnity? Signed by lawyers? Or sending their E&o/MalP certifs to an Internet cartyoon? Heh. In jurisdictions like Texas in the US that have specializing certifs? Many of the best real estate (for example) lawyers do not bother with the RE certif, because of the added hassle. You might want to go very lightweight and very "caveat emptor" here.
Win Writer: Is the California Law Ass. liable to anybody if one of its members have used faked papers to become a member of it?
Solomon Cortes: Ben, BTW< on a point of substance, and a point of detail, (1) I think this is a useful service that we should offer, and (2) I don't think we should quite say that "Avatar X" is "Attorney Y", but that we have taken certain steps (that we will describe) to determine so far as we are able that X is Y - ie, not guaranteed, just good faith efforts.
Benjamin Noble nods. I think Solomon is right, on the language.
Benjamin Noble: Absolutely right on the language. Basically, we've takesn these steps, and this is what happened. Factual.
Alexei Skjellerup: I agree with the first point, and with half of the second...
Benjamin Noble: Wim - a parallel is a non-exclusive bar, like the Silicon Valley Bar Association. But this is one of those situations that really is unique to virtual worlds, because at a Silicon Valley Bar Meeting, I know the guy I'm talking to matches his name badge.
Jai Baxter: @Jaime: Yes, even if it's a very *handsome* cartoon, Ben . @Solomon. I agree with #1. If it can be SAFE for the assn by being very lightweight.
Benjamin Noble: Okay.
Benjamin Noble: I am going to move this to the forums, where we can work out the final details. Please, everybody who has ideas here --- both at this meeting and reading the transcript --- weigh in. I'd like to put a formal propsal up for a vote based on the previous motion in a couple of weeks. So lets keep the discussion going.
Mitchell Stransky: I must admit, this discussion has done a good job of bringing the issues involved forward. I had thought I knew what my opinion was, but now I'm undecided.
Mitchell Stransky: If not confused.
Benjamin Noble: Hopefully, it will continue in the forums.
Benjamin Noble: Next on the agenda is the possibility of an educational event, and I know Jessica has something she wants to propose.
Benjamin Noble: So I'll turn the podium over to one of the members of the executive board, Jessica Holyoke.
Jessica Holyoke: Thanks Benjamin
Jessica Holyoke: and not quite what I planned for movement
Alexei Skjellerup appreciates the nice jumping...
Jessica Holyoke: I have a prepared statement, so if you don't mind holding questions to until the end
Jessica Holyoke: On September 5th, I posted a comment on the Second Life Herald. www.secondlifeherald.com in pertinent part: Why does anyone believe that Chinese dissidents *would* be more protected in SL or *should* be more protected in SL? If someone were to break other laws of their own country, there's no resident saying that the Lindens should not turn over that information. For example, no one that I read stated that the German players involved in the ageplay scandal should not have been turned over to the German authorities. And in the aftermath of "Broadly Offensive", the Lindens, through both Robin and Philip, have made it clear that they don't want to be in a dissident divulging position, and Robin specifically alluded to fighting a government's requests for disclosure of a resident dissident's identity. But if disclosure was for the good of SL as a whole, then the Labs would disclose the information. http://www.secondlifeherald.com/slh/2007/09/the-re-inventio.html#comment-81736633
Jessica Holyoke: A simple enough comment, but one that made a huge uproar from people concerned that I was equating sexualized ageplay with dissident activity in a totalitarian government, to one person attacking my analysis of the situation.
Jessica Holyoke: Prokofy Neva wrote many words to attack my position which boils down to this statement; Any dissident that is arrested by the Chinese government is not “breaking the law” but is rather the victim of a crime. Any support of helping the Chinese government in that activity is both immoral and illegal. By refusing the Chinese government’s requests for dissident information, you are thereby not aiding in an illegal act and supporting the activity of activists everywhere. A company simply needs to stand up to the Chinese Government, and due to the negative publicity attached by their request for a dissident’s identifying information, the Chinese government will stand down and there will be no consequences to the company that refuses to turn over information.
Jessica Holyoke: ((and maybe give a shout if I'm going too fast))
Jessica Holyoke: I find this statement naïve. Xiaoning et al. v. Yahoo Inc et al is in San Francisco federal court right now. The wife of a dissident whose information Yahoo turned over to the Chinese government is suing Yahoo under the Alien Tort claims act and the Torture Victim Prevention Act. In Yahoo’s answer, it discusses the criminal and civil penalties that would have been levied against Yahoo and its personnel if they did not comply with the Chinese Government’s request.
Benjamin Noble: Jessica - can you clarify something from that - was the position given there yours, or presented against you (I have to admit, I haven't read this).
Jessica Holyoke: I'm cutting and pasting so it took a bit to back track
Jessica Holyoke: which position Ben specifically?
Jessica Holyoke: the ageplay deal?
Benjamin Noble: "any words to attack my position which boils down to this statement; Any dissident that is arrested by the Chinese govern..." - is that your position, or Prokofy's (again, sorry, I just haven't read this and I want to make sure people understand what you're saying here).
Jessica Holyoke: well, many words
Jessica Holyoke: That's prokofy's position what I was reiterating
Jessica Holyoke: or that was my summary of his position
Benjamin Noble: Okay. Sorry, go on.
Jessica Holyoke looks out to see if she's bored the audience
Jessica Holyoke: ok
Jessica Holyoke: China is a totalitarian government with 1.3 billion people. The government goes to great lengths to show its people that they are in control. And while there is a section of the PRC Constitution that says that free speech rights are important, there is also sections saying that anti-social speech is not allowed either. A recent UC Davis study showed how the great firewall of China can be penetrated and that it’s the appearance rather than the actual control that is important. Due to that public relation issue, the likelihood of a government backing down and to show weakness to a small technology company seems slim.
Jamie Palisades: Not at all, Jess.
Gwyneth Llewelyn is just holding her breath in fascination, this is a most interesting case, Jessica!
Jessica Holyoke: The SLBA has been looking for what Pro Bono means in an international forum. What I propose is a symposium, sponsored at least in part by the SLBA, describing what to expect and what a company can do if they are confronted with a request from a totalitarian government for information on a dissident. The end result being what to do if China comes calling, but perhaps an objective lesson from smaller, less powerful nations would be helpful as well.
Jessica Holyoke: The reason why I am bringing this to the SLBA and not to Amnesty International or the ACLU in SL is that we are not activists. Organizations like Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch argue from an absolute. There is no grey or other option to them. What I would like to see us present are choices. In the Yahoo situation, they could have refused to turn over the information, but they would have faced other penalties, including the possible arrest of their employees then in Hong Kong. By turning over the information, Yahoo is now fighting a law suit in California. They also face global disdain due to their acquiescence to China’s demands. To them, cooperation was better than defiance. To Linden Research, it may be that they access the Chinese population or allow Hipipihi to dominate in addition to other consequences.
Jai Baxter: (Sorry to interrupt but, later, can I get the URI or ref to the UC Davis article?)
Mitchell Stransky: Likewise.
Jessica Holyoke: Many times I’ve told clients that lawyers are the wet blankets on their plans. We tell them the bad news on what the client hopes to do. I would like to present both sides, what can happen if you comply and what can happen if you do not by people more in tune with what is actually occurring.
Benjamin Noble: I'll find the reference. You can keep discussing.
Jessica Holyoke: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/6990842.stm
Jessica Holyoke: that's where I read it
Jai Baxter: thx
Jessica Holyoke: Additionally, the SLBA is uniquely situated in this due to our own skills in wide spread networking. We know people and it would be easy to demonstrate not only the worthiness of the forum, but the utility of holding it here in Second Life.
Jessica Holyoke: so in conclusion, I would like to put it out to the membership if this is how we want our pro bono to appear, through symposia, and whether this is something we should be getting involved in
Jessica Holyoke puts hands together in conclusion
Benjamin Noble: Thanks. Will you take some questions from people, Jessica?
Jessica Holyoke: that's what I was standing around for
Alexei Skjellerup claps at Jessica.
Jessica Holyoke: its hard to see what people are thinking from up here
Benjamin Noble smiles.
Patroklus Murakami applauds
Benjamin Noble: Okay. Open floor is okay here I think.
Patroklus Murakami: sounds fascinating
Alexei Skjellerup: It is a very interesting subject, however quite political...
Jessica Holyoke: Does anyone have a negative thought about the proposal? If its something we shouldn't be doing
Jessica Holyoke: I think it is political Alexei, I had to face Prok over it
Alexei Skjellerup: Are we going to discuss governments' policies?
Jessica Holyoke: but it also serves a very wide reaching practical purpose
Solomon Cortes: Not really negative: I think this is great in principle.
Jessica Holyoke: I don't think that's germaine
Solomon Cortes: But I have a couple of comments / questions....
Jessica Holyoke: only because it doesn't help in what can a company do and what does it face when its in that situation
Jessica Holyoke: go ahead solomon
Solomon Cortes: First, I think we should do this, but I'm not quite sure how we should describe it.
Alexei Skjellerup: I like the idea of the SLBA fostering debates, but not stating positions.
Solomon Cortes: References to 'what to do when *totalitarian* governments come calling' puts us in the difficult position of being seen to have pre-judged which governments are or are not in that category. Somehow, I think we need a less inflammatory (maybe?) description...
Jessica Holyoke: I don't think we should state a position either Alexei, only to present the options in a neutral way
Alexei Skjellerup: Then, let's get rid of the "totalitarian" adjective.
Jessica Holyoke: granted, using totalitarian is inflammatory, but not referencing the goals could also be seen as political and appeasing
Alexei Skjellerup: We have interests in China...
Jessica Holyoke: that's the goals of the laws being inforced
Jessica Holyoke: enforced
Solomon Cortes: Also, once we've dealt with that, I think we should not just be talking about how to deal with disclosure requests in respect of 'dissidents'. This is a core group, but there are others, too - who may be threatened by such a disclosure request, but are not strictly speaking dissidents.
Alexei Skjellerup: Which laws?
Jessica Holyoke: China has a number of societal maintenence speech laws
Jessica Holyoke: there are a number of instances where countries use libel prosecutions to quell government dissent
Benjamin Noble nods. I suspect members come down in a lot of different positions here -- this is a controversial issue, and it is political -- but we can agree that discussing the ramifications of complying with government requests is a topic worth discussing.
Jai Baxter: I'd like to compliment Jessica on her energy, Agree that a symposium should be held, but disagree that it's about "repressive" governments. All gov'ts are thought of that way by some people at some time. Better a maybe a topic like this: "When is gov't inquiry into personal activity appropriate? How to cooperate, how to resist ..."
Alexei Skjellerup: I agree, Ben.
Mitchell Stransky: I have to excuse myself. Jessica, excellent idea: I look forward to reading more about this proposal in the transcript and in the forums.
Jai Baxter: (hmm maybe "when" not "how")
Lina Olaria: maybe just "govt inquiry into personal activity" and leave it at that - then do the forum of views
Jessica Holyoke: thank you Mitchell
Gwyneth Llewelyn: yes, thank you Jessica, for the very provoking discussion!
Legal Writer: You could phrase the program title to be about privacy and individual rights.
Solomon Cortes: Agree with Jai and Mitchell: excellent idea and in favour of Jai's suggested topic description
Jessica Holyoke: my focus on China was due to the focus of the reporter's comments in the link I provided above
Jamie Palisades: ta Mitchell
Alexei Skjellerup: Indeed. Thank you, Jessica.
Jessica Holyoke: and in relation to Xiaoning v. Yahoo
Benjamin Noble: How about a motion, with a topic title, and a proposed format...?
Benjamin Noble: (panel, perhaps?)
Jamie Palisades: :) But next week it will be Bush AG v. Holyoke maybe? Jessica what do you think of the "not just China" idea?
Jessica Holyoke starts all over for Jamie
Jessica Holyoke: I think that it could come up in a variety of situations, for instance if there was a pro-Hamas group in SL, and the US DOJ wants information on them
Jessica Holyoke: but then again, people would not be so eager to protect them as opposed to people who's views they support
Jessica Holyoke: or argue that a US company should not comply with a US court order
Alexei Skjellerup: ((I'm sorry to leave now, but... Bye to all!))
Jessica Holyoke: bye Alexei
Benjamin Noble: I think that's a good question, Jamie - and I think it implies the correct format. I like Jai's proposed topic.
Lina Olaria: cu
Jamie Palisades: tsk :) sounds like we are on the same page. If not the same politics. Sorry if I'm dense, Jessica. Does someone have a broader formulation of the topic in a motion for Ben?
Jessica Holyoke: I think Jai's topic of what to do if the government inquires about personal activity is a start
Jessica Holyoke: or when rahter
Jessica Holyoke: rather
Benjamin Noble: It lets the debate be open, and acknowledged different viewpoints on this.
Lina Olaria: sorry - need to leave
Jessica Holyoke: bye Lina
Jai Baxter: Bye Lina. OK, Ben, I so move. Needs restatement?
Jessica Holyoke: I make a motion to develop on the forums the SLBA's first pro bono symposia "what to do when a government asks for the information of a resident's acitvities"
Jessica Holyoke: with appropriate spell checkign
Jessica Holyoke: checking
Jessica Holyoke: activities
Benjamin Noble: Friendly amendment, that SLBA Symposia be a panel discussion of no fewer than three.
Benjamin Noble: Will you accept that, before second?
Jai Baxter: that'll do :) "second"
Jessica Holyoke: at least three
Jai Baxter: ha ha either way
Benjamin Noble: Right. At least. I'd rather have more.
Benjamin Noble: Okay. So we have a motion, and a second.
Benjamin Noble: Specifically, this will cause me to create a forum topic for symposia, and we'll nail down the details there, but plan to host something based on that title.
Benjamin Noble: We've had a fair bit of discussion, so if someone calls the question, we can vote on this.
Jessica Holyoke: call
Jessica Holyoke: If I can do that
Benjamin Noble: I'm not sure, to be honest.
Benjamin Noble: It's your motion and I am about 80% good at parliamentary procedure. ;)
Benjamin Noble: How about anyone else.
Benjamin Noble makes note to find a parliamentarian.
Jai Baxter: Sub to time avail, as discussion, if this passes, I would like to volunteer to assist, with a focus on maintianing catholicity of national viewpoints
Legal Writer: Sorry, I have to leave too. Bye all.
Jessica Holyoke: bye legal
Jessica Holyoke: still need to find someone to call the question
Kit Meredith: It will the the first thing I've said all meeting, but I'll call for a vote on the pending motion
Benjamin Noble smiles.
Benjamin Noble: Welcome Kit. I hate to say this, given that it is the first comment, and your first meeting, but you can't because you're not a member yet. :) But welcome! And I hope you become one.
Kit Meredith: So much for trying to help out...
Theophan Paine: I'll call the question.
Benjamin Noble grins.
Benjamin Noble: Next meeting, Kit.
Benjamin Noble: Okay. The question has been called.
Benjamin Noble: Let's do a simple vote this time. Any objections, please stand.
Benjamin Noble: Motion carries.
Benjamin Noble: Okay. Thanks, Jessica.
Jessica Holyoke: thank you everyone
Theophan Paine: I have to leave at the top of the hour, Ben.
Benjamin Noble: (For the record, motion carries without objection.)
Benjamin Noble: Sorry about the time on this one, folks.
Benjamin Noble: We're to the highlight, and we've pushed it off so far that I'm afraid we've lost part of your audience, Gwyneth, but thank you for coming, and I'll turn over the podium to you now. Gwyneth, of course, is a noted metaverse commentator, and I'm very happy to welcome her to the SLBA>
Gwyneth Llewelyn: ah thank you
Gwyneth Llewelyn: I was actually wondering if I shouldn't do this at your next meeting :)
Gwyneth Llewelyn: what do you think?
Benjamin Noble nods.
Benjamin Noble: Given the time, that's probably a very good idea.
Gwyneth Llewelyn: yes :)
Gwyneth Llewelyn: It's certainly fine for me...
Patroklus Murakami: first item of next meeting perhaps?
Benjamin Noble: I apologize, Gwyneth. I really appreciate you coming over for this, and we'll look forward to it.
Gwyneth Llewelyn: :)
Benjamin Noble: First item, next meeting.
Gwyneth Llewelyn: Oh that's ok, Benjamin :)
Gwyneth Llewelyn: It was a fascinating meeting for me too!
Benjamin Noble: We're lawyers... we do like to talk.
Gwyneth Llewelyn: hehe
Benjamin Noble: Thanks for coming, and I'm glad you found it interesting.
Gwyneth Llewelyn is a loudmouth and loves to talk even *more* ;)
Benjamin Noble grins.
Jessica Holyoke smiles
Benjamin Noble: Okay. Thanks again to Gwyneth for being patient with us. And thanks to everybody for another good meeting.
Benjamin Noble: Tell Mizou Vavoom how much you like the space, and shoot me any notes for decorating (any designers out there who want to do something in particular?)
Benjamin Noble: Is there a motion to adjourn?
Jessica Holyoke: motion to adjourn
Benjamin Noble: Second?
Jai Baxter: Shoud we also thank Beathan?
Benjamin Noble: Yes, we should. I did that at the top, but it bears repeating.
Theophan Paine: I'll second.
Benjamin Noble: Beathan Vale has donated this space -- and space for all of these prims -- and the build is just turning out fantastic. Take a look at it from the outside when you go too, it's nice.
Benjamin Noble: Thanks to Beathan, we're no longer in my cruddy brick pre-build.
Benjamin Noble: Any objection to the motion to adjourn, please stand.
Benjamin Noble: Without objection, motion carries.
Benjamin Noble: We're adjourned.