Dozier Internet Law, by John W. Dozier

[admin]

Blogger Busted By FBI, by John W. Dozier

June 27, 2009

John W Dozier Jr just completed final editing of "Google Bomb", a book about online attacks and just the sort of thing that precipitated the arrest by the FBI of a blogger for what he said on his blog. Paul Alan Levy, the internet lawyer with Public Citizen who is no stranger to attacking judges with words and imploring his netizen constituency to online action against his adversaries, was the apparent "go to" guy to put this alleged misconduct in perspective. So it was a bit odd to see Levy offering his impliedly unbiased opinion to journalists. He stated that with respect to the comments from the blogger about specific federal Judges...."The question is, 'Is it a threat, or is it advocacy'." Well, given the facts internet lawyer Levy had available, let's see if this could possibly be simply idle chatter from a well intentioned and likely vehement follower of Levy's propaganda. This is what the FBI and Department of Justice allege Mr. Hal Turner said in threatening Federal Judges after they decided a case:

1) "These Judges deserve to be killed."

2) "Apparently, the 7th Circuit court didn't get the hint after those killings (more on this below). It appears another lesson is needed."

3) "Judges official public work addresses and a map of the area are below. Their home addresses and maps will follow soon."

4) A photo of the Federal Courthouse in Chicago modified with arrows and a label noting the "anti-truck bomb barriers".

The reference to the other murders in number two? When the same Circuit Court decided to allow stand a conviction of an individual for soliciting murder of another federal judge in Chicago, that federal judge's mother and her husband were murdered in their home.

Now, I am all for offering up balanced perspectives to all of the online netizens who look to a real Internet Lawyer to help them understand appropriate conduct and where the lines are drawn. And we need vigorous advocacy by Internet lawyer types on both sides of these issues. But Levy is an extremist, and legitimate journalists need to stop relying upon him as an objective, fair or balanced source. Here's what I would like to have heard Paul Alan Levy say. Maybe he can learn that the message of the value of free speech can be protected without assuming extreme positions that will influence the ignorant and make him look foolish when he is challenged on it. Here, if Paul Alan Levy could learn to exercise discretion and judgment, is what he could have said:

"From a moral standpoint, respect and protection of our judicial system is essential. This situation is a lesson for the hundreds of millions of uninformed netizens relying upon us as their moral compass. If these allegations are true, and Hal Turner meant what he was saying, there is no place for such misconduct. His words erode the moral fabric of online society and put at risk the right to free speech we all enjoy. There are legal issues with respect to whether the government has to prove an imminent threat to physical harm, which is almost always the defense raised in cases in which threats are made to public officials, and other free speech matters may arise in the course of this case. But no matter what the legal outcome, we cannot condone in any way attacks on Judges, their families, or the administration of justice. Our justice system is not perfect, and we'll continue to work everyday to point out the problems and offer solutions, but it is the best in the world. And we must all be ever vigilant to preserve, protect and defend the Judiciary."

So, I have to wonder-at what point is Paul Alan Levy and Public Citizen just no longer relevant in today's debates about online rights and speech? I think they still deserve to be at the table. Just so far out on the left of center that while they are accorded a plate-setting, their voice is barely decipherable. The term "extremist" understates what Public Citizen is doing to the moral fiber of the online world. And you'll hear much more about internet lawyer Paul Alan Levy and Public Citizen in "Google Bomb", the book. Much more.

[admin]

Top Tips To Find The Right Internet Lawyer, by John W. Dozier

June 27, 2009

At Traverse Internet Law we are sought after to offer our guidance and advice on a wide range of issues from people and businesses all over the world. Many of the questions we field from prospective clients are great questions, and through those it has become clear that many people might appreciate some assistance in guiding them through the process of selecting the right Internet lawyer. So we have launched a blog as a resource for the many people facing an Internet law problem and searching for legal help. The blog posts on Internet lawyer are there to provide guidance and advice. We encourage you to offer your own comments and thoughts.

Hiring an Internet lawyer can be a very scary process. What might look good online could lead to a very unpleasant and unsatisfactory reality. Internet lawyers at Traverse Internet Law are experts in internet law issues. Contact one of our Internet Law attorneys today to see if Traverse Internet Law is a good fit.

[admin]

Affiliate Marketers Terminated Over State Sales Tax, by John W. Dozier

July 02, 2009

John W Dozier Jr commented extensively on the New York affiliate tax law. Predicting that other states would follow suit, and over time there would become a sort of "tax haven" that one or two states would foster by taking a hands off approach to trying to create sales tax liability for purchases connected a state's "in-state" affiliate marketers, Mr. Dozier laid out a rather bleak forecast for affiliate marketers. Now, things are moving in the direction Mr. Dozier anticipated.

Amazon has fired all of its affiliate marketers in Rhode Island and North Carolina. Overstock.com has done them two better, and just announced the termination of affiliates in North Carolina, Rhode Island, Hawaii, and California in response to taxation issues.

Here at Traverse Internet Law, we continue to see this trend evolving at a quicker pace. What state will step up and offer refuge? Just goes to show that state (legislative) intervention into the business of the web is a huge problem with far reaching unintended consequences.

[admin]

"Twitter Twomb" Replacing "Google Bomb"?, by John W. Dozier

July 06, 2009

Defamation lawyers now have a new tool to confront and consider. It's the Twitter version of the Google Bomb: the Twitter Twomb. Cute name for what will become a new weapon of attacking you, your loved ones, and businesses online.

And any online defamation lawyer needs to take notice. While Google (and its Google Bomb) is without dispute the reputation leader, and the Google Bomb is not going away any time soon, the search engine is indexing Twitter, and the scope and depth of organic search results for social networking and micro-blogging sites continues to grow.

Twitterers have been bombing the hashmarks and taking over the top listing in Twitter Trends for "GorillaPenis" with a graphic inlay over the Twitter logo as the top result. It's another example of social networking powerplays driven by an anonymous "vote" of netizens. Of course, this use appears to be relatively harmless. The test run has unfortunately worked well. What's next for the Twitter Twomb? Will it be used like the Google Bomb to attack the reputation and good names of those unable to defend themselves?

Sue Scheff and John W Dozier, Jr have a new book, Google Bomb, coming out September first. Yes, it is all about online attacks written by a victim fighting back and John W Dozier Jr offering a defamation lawyer perspective.

Initial independent feedback from some early reviews...exceptional and scary book.

Initial independent advice from some early reviews...Don't read it right before you go to bed.

[admin]

Dismissal of MySpace Criminal Case, by John W. Dozier

July 12, 2009

Last week, the Judge in the MySpace criminal case indicated he found the statute, as applied in the case, to be unconstitutional and is preparing a detailed opinion on the matter. It's a case that every Internet lawyer should be following, and that seems likely with all the commentary from Internet lawyer types weighing in on the case. The primary objection, again, according to the trial judge, is that if the statute is applied as it was in this case, vast numbers of MySpace members would be at risk of criminal prosecution. The debate will rage on, and at Traverse Internet Law our Internet lawyers are monitoring this decision and case.

Our Internet lawyers see this as another example of the need to draft specific laws addressing malicious actions. Congress and state legislatures need to pass a law that will make this type of conduct a criminal offense. We suspect there are civil lawsuits to come against the perpetrators. While every Internet lawyer waits to see how this will play out, and whether this Judge's interpretation will be adopted by other courts, none of whom it is binding upon, the legislative branches need to act.

Even the most jaded free speech fanatic cannot help but wonder how we find ourselves, 15 years after the Internet took off commercially and moved into the public conscience, without adequate criminal laws to cover this type of misconduct.

[admin]

DEFCON Spinning Out of Control?, by John W. Dozier

July 27, 2009



As Internet lawyers, we deal with h*ckers all the time. Usually chasing them, to be totally frank. We had a chance to pick the brain of some exceptionally talented and knowledgeable government security types recently, and both were in complete praise of the Black Hat conference immediately prior to DEFCON. And both refuse to attend DEFCON because they are ridiculed and harassed by young adults acting like kids. You'll recall the chase video on YouTube in which attendees "out" a reporter in a most inappropriate and threatening way.

As DEFCON starts its conference this week, the rallying cries of those trying to defend the annual "conference for h*ckers" grows louder. Last year, the Dozier Internet Law website came under attack during the conference. You may also recall the Dozier Internet Law 2008 Defcon blog posting. Out of the blue, defenders of DEFCON's "business expensed" veritable fantasyfest in Vegas chimed in, pointing out that the vast majority of attendees are information security professionals. Of course, that's like saying that almost all of the attendees at a bomb making workshop are not terrorists. Great. As an Internet lawyer, We'll never run into the "vast majority" of the attendees. How about the "others", though?

Here is an excerpt from the official description of a featured program from this year:

"Over the years there have been tons of Oracle exploits, SQL Injection vulnerabilities, and post exploitation tricks and tools that had no order, methodology, or standardization, mainly just random .sql files. In this presentation we are going to present an Oracle Pentesting Methodology and give you all the tools to break the 'unbreakable' Oracle as Metasploit auxiliary modules."

In other words, they have pulled together public and not so public hacks and are organizing them under one tent for ease of access and use for hacking into Oracle databases. Now, there are two ways this can go. The information security attendees can use this information to identify risks and implement fixes for security holes. And the other way? Attendees learn how to more easily h*ck into databases and steal information and identities. And at the same time create catastrophic loss to a business even if the h*cker just accesses the data and looks around.

The good news is that anyone with US $120 can attend. No real names, please. Just use your moniker. Anonymity is paramount. There is even an annual game for embarrassing the federal authorities in attendance. Rooms are $109 per night, but no more than four in a room, please.

This conference has a long history of problems: Anyone can attend, unless, as real life experience tells us, you are a SPEAKER arrested by the Feds, a REPORTER "outed" by the Conference management and pursued by a mob of attendees, or a registrant intercepted at our border before getting into the US. Couple that with the session last year on how to hack a Boston public transit system and get "free fares for life", and the MSBlast Worm and Virus fiasco of several years ago where the Department of Homeland Security had to issue a global alert the day before the conference, and the many, many other incidents that are recorded for posterity online. And then lay on top of that the Electronic Frontier Foundation's prominent and high profile attendance and involvement at the conference attacking our computer crime laws as "absurd"...laws passed and strengthened post 9/11 by the US Congress.

Is there a Free Speech right, protected by our First Amendment, to describe in detail ways to hack into computer systems when it is a federal and state crime to h*ck into a protected computer? At Traverse Internet Law, we know this issue is yet to be fleshed out fully but we expect that criminal conspiracy laws could come into play at some point. It wouldn't matter, though, if someone would use some basic common sense and get rid of the 15 year old using an assumed name and learning the finer points of how to h*ck. A conference for security professionals? This is not found anywhere on the DEFCON website. And while it clearly meets that definition to some, and likely most, attendees...that's not good enough.

Here are some suggestions: Tighten up the rules of admission, use real names, bar convicted felons and known "black hat" h*ckers, and stop intimidating the legal authorities and reporters. Maybe then you'll become legitimate and not an unacceptable risk to society. Oh, and get your head out of the sand. It may be all fun and games, but trust me: The wolves in sheep's clothing are there. You either don't know how to spot them, or you don't care.

DEFCON, if you don't change, you need to be shut down.

[admin]

$675,000 Copyright Infringement Judgment, by John W. Dozier

August 04, 2009

A jury in Boston awarded $675,000 to the Recording Industry Association of America for copyright infringement after a Harvard Law School professor representing the defendant, a Boston University graduate student (Joel Tenenbaum), called upon the jury to "send a message" to the music industry by awarding minimal damages. As Internet lawyers, We are not surprised by the jury's response to this request...they actually sent 675,000 messages out! It can be tough coming down from the Ivory Towers of an out of touch liberal institution intent upon defending the scofflaws of the web. So, to the professor turned Internet lawyer for the day, and co-founder of the Berkman Center, a far left wing, liberal, free speech expansionist Harvard institution, welcome to the real world, Charles Neeson. Thank goodness for a jury of our peers. And Mr. Neeson, there is a big difference between teaching law at Harvard and actually trying cases to a jury of everyday people. We suspect you will return to Harvard, be patted on your back, be told how unfair the judge and jury were, and refer your client to a bankruptcy lawyer. Jurors, unlike students, bite back. In this case, 675,000 times.

[admin]

Google Bomb Book Review, by John W. Dozier

August 05, 2009

Traverse Internet Law is pleased to provide the latest reviews about Google Bomb, set to be released September 1, 2009: “I haven’t been this affected by a book in a long time. I went from a shaking rage to knots in my stomach to tears and finally to cheers. What happened to Sue could happen to any of us, and Google Bomb’s practical guidance makes this a highly profound and useful book that the world needs to read.” -Michele Borba, Ed.D., Author of The Big Book of Parenting Solutions, Parenting Expert and Today Show Contributor Google Bomb will likely ship out from Amazon within the next 10 days, and be on your favorite bookstore's shelves by September 1, 2009.

[admin]

Senator's Review: "Google Bomb is a Great Book!", by John W. Dozier

August 06, 2009

Google Bomb is out of printing and shipping this week! What is the response from reviewers who got an early peek at the advanced readers copy? And how is Google Bomb being received by the legislative branch...? Here's a recent review:

“Google Bomb is a great book! The Constitution protects free speech, but slander is not free speech. We should be able to hold slanderers accountable, and Google Bomb helps readers do that.”

-Senator Walter G. “Skip” Campbell, Jr.

[admin]

Google Bomb Book Available on Amazon, by John W. Dozier

August 16, 2009

Dozier announces today that Google Bomb (click the link to go to the Amazon book page) is available for immediate purchase on Amazon. John W Dozier Jr, an Internet lawyer and Founder and President of the Dozier law firm, leads the reader through the world of online attacks and arms you with the tools, tactics and strategies to protect yourself and your loved ones.

The Goole Bomb Community has launched. It supplements the advice and guidance in the Google Bomb Book with the latest developments. You can get the late breaking news by chapter from a top Internet lawyer while you read the book. So join our community dedicated to providing support, guidance and advice on an ongoing basis. Membership is free.