LAWYERSCHILE EL MUNDO INTERNACIONAL DEL ABOGADO

Rodrigo González Fernández y un grupo de egresados de la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad la Republica en Chile ha decidido poner al alcance de todo el mundo de la profesion legal importantes materias en Ingles para ir practicando el trabajo en materia de Tratados internacionales y que nuestra profesión estará en primera linea. Invitamos a todos a opinar, debatir, participar activamente.Es el primer blog legal en inglés de latinoamerica.

Wednesday, March 12, 2008

[Posible SPAM] Fed Hopes to Ease Strain on Economic Activity

Fed Hopes to Ease Strain on Economic Activity

Sign In to E-Mail or Save This
Print
Single Page
Reprints
Share
- Digg
- Facebook
- Mixx
- Yahoo! Buzz
- Permalink

By EDMUND L. ANDREWS

Published: March 12, 2008

WASHINGTON — Impelled to take extraordinary measures for the second time in less than a week, the Federal Reserve moved on Tuesday to subdue the deepening crisis in credit markets by stepping up as lender of last resort.

Skip to next paragraph

The New York Times

Multimedia

Graphic

Reaching Into the Fed's Bag of Tricks

Dow Climbs 416.66 for Its Biggest Gain in Over 5 Years (March 12, 2008)

In an action that sent stock prices soaring, the central bank offered to let the biggest investment banks on Wall Street borrow up to $200 billion in Treasury securities in exchange for hard-to-sell mortgage-backed securities as collateral. And the Fed made clear that it was prepared to do more as needed.

The move, which was coordinated with central banks in Europe and Canada, came on the heels of two similar actions on Friday, in which the Fed offered up to $200 billion in 28-day cash loans to banks and big financial institutions.

But where investors were unimpressed by last week's efforts, which took place as the government announced that the number of jobs was falling, they were jubilant on Tuesday. The Dow Jones industrial average soared 416 points, or 3.6 percent, in its biggest increase in points in more than five years. The dollar enjoyed at least a momentary reprieve from its protracted plunge against other major currencies.

The Federal Reserve, in effect, is trying to ease an acute credit squeeze by agreeing to hold large volumes of mortgage-backed bonds that Wall Street firms are struggling to sell and providing them with either cash or Treasury securities that they can immediately convert to cash.

Fed officials are increasingly convinced that the United States is sliding into a recession, and they worry that the deepening credit squeeze will aggravate the problem by making it even harder for consumers and businesses to borrow money for houses, new equipment or new factories.

The Fed's hope is to relieve some of the pressure on institutions to sell at fire-sale prices, easing the strains on economic activity and making the credit markets feel more comfortable in buying mortgage bonds again.

Despite the staggering sums being offered by the Fed over the past week, some analysts warned that the new infusion of money might not be enough to fill the hole caused by the losses on ill-conceived mortgages during the housing bubble.

"They are essentially creating a $300 billion bank out of nothing," said Lou Crandall, chief economist at Wrightson ICAP, a financial research firm.

But while the Fed's moves may relieve short-term cash problems, Mr. Crandall said, "it doesn't solve the fundamental issue, which is the decline of capital in the banking system."

Indeed, some analysts warned that the central bank might make things worse in the long run by postponing the repricing of mortgage assets that financial institutions are holding, or by further weakening the value of the dollar and aggravating inflation.

"The Fed is saying if you don't want those mortgages, then give them to us," said Peter D. Schiff, president of Euro Pacific Capital, an investment firm in Darien, Conn. "The Fed thinks that inflation is the way to solve our problems, but all this does is create bigger problems."

Senior Fed officials said on Tuesday that the other concerns pale compared with the need to stabilize credit markets — particularly markets for mortgages — that have become increasingly trapped in a self-perpetuating downward spiral.

That spiral, which began last summer when defaults on subprime mortgages began to soar, has led to falling prices for almost all kinds of debt securities. The falling prices have forced selling by major institutional investors and lenders, partly to make up for other losses, and has spread to a much broader array of seemingly safe securities.

In its move on Tuesday, the central bank said that it would lend up to $200 billion in Treasury securities to a select list of top investment banks, known as primary dealers, that regularly trade with the Federal Reserve in its open-market operations.

The new twist is that the investment banks will be allowed to pledge as collateral a wide variety of securities that include hard-to-sell, privately issued mortgage-backed securities.

Opinen, escriban y ganen premios.
Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
DIPLOMADO EN RESPONSABILIDAD
SOCIAL EMPRESARIAL DE LA ONU
www.Consultajuridicachile.blogspot.com
www.lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
www.el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
www.biocombustibles.blogspot.com
Renato Sánchez 3586
teléfono: 5839786
e-mail rogofe47@mi.cl
Santiago-Chile

Soliciten nuestros cursos de capacitación y asesorías en Responsabilidad social empresarial y LOBBY eficaz a nivel internacional y están disponibles para OTEC Y OTIC en Chile

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Two Lawyers, Two Troubling Mysteries

FROM LEGAL BLOG WATCH

Two Lawyers, Two Troubling Mysteries

Two tragic but unconnected stories of missing lawyers making the news.

In Plantation, Fla., the body of missing lawyer Melissa Britt Lewis was found floating in a canal Friday just a few miles from her house. Lewis, 39, a labor and employment partner with the Fort Lauderdale firm Rothstein Rosenfeldt Adler, was last seen alive Wednesday evening, leaving a local supermarket. Her firm is offering a $250,000 reward for information leading to the arrest of anyone involved with her death. Speculation is that the attack resulted from a random robbery gone awry, but local blogger Bob Norman says that seems unlikely and believes the murder may have followed a planned abduction. "But that's just speculation," he adds.

Meanwhile, authorities remain baffled by the disappearance in South Carolina of Savannah, Ga., lawyer Elizabeth Calvert, a partner with the law firm Hunter Maclean. She and her husband disappeared a week ago from Hilton Head, where they live part-time on their yacht. On Friday, searchers found the couple's car and were searching it for clues. On Friday, her law partners spoke out about the mystery, with partner John Tatum telling a reporter, "Everyone is hoping and praying for a miraculously happy ending, but that would be a miracle." Calvert joined Hunter Maclean just five months ago, after 14 years in-house at UPS in Atlanta, where she rose to become a vice president.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Robert J. Ambrogi on March 10, 2008 at 10:06 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Judge to Former Lawyer: Shovel Snow

When a former lawyer appeared last week before a Maine judge to explain why he had paid just $50 of $219,000 in court-ordered restitution, the judge told him to get a job, even if it is shoveling snow off roofs. The Sun Journal reports that the former lawyer, John Frankenfield, represented himself in the hearing over whether he had violated a condition of probation stemming from his conviction for skimming assets from the estate of his grandfather. Judge Thomas Delahanty II, after hearing that Frankenfield was jobless and had significant other debts, gave him a month to find work. "When you come back here ... I want you to have a proposal of payments," Judge Delahanty told him. "In the meantime, I expect you to find a job somewhere. There are a lot of roofs out there to be shoveled."

File under: Ways lawyers can use their shoveling skills.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Robert J. Ambrogi on March 10, 2008 at 09:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Lawyerly Lingo: Witnesseth Brevity

Blogger Mister Thorne at Set in Style points us to to an article in the Georgetown (Kentucky) News-Graphic, Pleaseth Updateth Thy Language, in which the newspaper's intrepid copy editor lives to tell about multiple encounters with archaic legalese in the deed books of the local county courthouse. Here is one example Daniel Kelley cites in his piece:

I, Karen Boehm, Clerk of the Scott Circuit Court, do hereby certify that the foregoing Deed of Conveyance from Carolyn Carroway, Master Commissioner of the Scott Circuit Court, to Federal National Mortgage Association, was this day produced and was by her acknowledged to be her act and deed, and this deed having been examined and endorsed by the judge of the Scott Circuit Court and ordered to be certified to the Clerk of the Scott County Court for record, same is now done accordingly.

Queries Kelley, why not just say, "I, Scott Circuit Court Clerk Karen Boehm, confirm that this deed was made today"? After stumbling over the word "witnesseth" at least 100 times in the deed books, Kelley wonders why the legal system persists "in using indecipherable language simply because it's the way Thurgood Marshall did, the way Oliver Wendell Holmes did, the way John Marshall did, the way John Jay did. Those men were all great legal minds, but they were not supposed to have set (and continue) a template for our legal language for all eternity."

When it comes to language, clinging to antiquity is hardly the legal profession's only vice: Witnesseth wordiness. U.S. District Judge John G. Koeltl witnesses it daily. "Enough!" he declares in his essay, "The Virtue of Brevity," the most recent entry in the ABA Section of Litigation's "Tips from the Trenches" series. "Too many lawyers write too much too often. Some lawyers are even known to talk too much."

From where Koeltl sits in New York's southern district, the legal profession's wordiness is tangible, in the form of needless motions, unnecessarily lengthy motions, and briefs that circumvent page limits. Such verbal excesses are counterproductive, he writes, because they raise questions about the lawyer's credibility and convolute the lawyer's arguments.

The most effective lawyers know how to make the salient points and then sit down while maintaining the interest of the court. The truly impressive arguments are those in which it is plain that the lawyers thought about the issues, understood the truly critical points that make a difference, and are prepared to address those points succinctly.

The jurist concludes by offering the bar a bargain: "If they submit briefer and more focused motions, I will issue briefer opinions, neither too long nor too short -- opinions that are just long enough." Acknowledged, endorsed and certified as a fair deal, but one that begs the question, "Just long enough for what?"

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Robert J. Ambrogi on March 10, 2008 at 09:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Do GCs Use Legal Directories?

John Wallbillich at Wired GC and Kevin O'Keefe at Real Lawyers Have Blogs are among the bloggers commenting on the article in the U.K. periodical Legal Week, "Corporate Counsel: Information Overload?" In it, writer Michelle Madsen considers whether corporate counsel view legal directories as valuable sources of information or wastes of lawyers' time and money. The question is fair game, she notes, having been raised by the directories themselves, with publisher Chambers and Partners producing a report last year, "Do Clients Use Chambers?" laden with testimonials from U.S. general counsel. But Madsen finds less enthusiasm for directories among GC in the U.K. Shell London legal head Richard Wiseman tells her:

I use them very, very rarely. I have the luxury of being able to consult with colleagues on the question of which outside counsel to speak to. I am horrified by the amount of money that firms spend on preparing submissions to these directories. I cannot imagine who they think is naive enough to use a directory in any other way than they would use the Yellow Pages.

Their one value, other GC tell Madsen, is as a reference point for entering a new market or "if you are completely stuck."

Madsen's findings are at odds with a recent Martindale-Hubbell survey reported Feb. 25 on the company's blog by John Lipsey, vice president for corporate counsel services. When he asked corporate counsel to rank, in order of importance, the resources they leverage when hiring outside counsel, more than 90 percent ranked personal referrals as first. Next on the list was Martindale-Hubbell, ranked as important by 42 percent of corporate counsel. That speaks well of Martindale, Lipsey suggests, given that only 18 percent cited Google as a resource and even fewer listed Best Lawyers, Chambers, SuperLawyers, Law Dragon or Avvo.

Blogger O'Keefe suggests that the Martindale survey lacks credibility as self-serving "and done to argue that Martindale remains relevant in the age of the internet." From his perspective, the Wired GC's Wallbillich sees these various directories as having some purpose, "but their influence is more like a citation from a Louisiana state court in a legal brief. It's better than nothing, but in my experience only in limited cases (such as a foreign jurisdiction or a minor matter for local counsel)." From my own conversations with corporate counsel, my sense is that they rely heavily on word-of-mouth referrals and references, but that legal directories provide corroboration and affirmation, as do other sources -- including blogs.

What do you think? Do legal directories serve a useful role in hiring?

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Robert J. Ambrogi on March 10, 2008 at 09:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Air Force Lawyers Fire Strike at YouTube

A Reed Smith lawyer, acting on behalf of the U.S. Air Force, has sent YouTube a DMCA take-down notice demanding the removal of a 30-second recruiting video produced to promote its new Cyber Command, an operation aimed at gaining military dominance in cyberspace. But the letter raises the question: Is there any legal basis for it?

Kevin Poulsen first reported the take-down letter (PDF) Friday at Wired's Threat Level blog, which covers online privacy, security and crime. It was Poulsen who originally posted the video in February, after it was sent to him by the Air Force's head of marketing Keith Lebling. Notwithstanding Lebling's marketing efforts, Reed Smith associate Meredith D. Pikser certifies "under penalty of perjury" in her letter to YouTube that posting the video "infringes the U.S. Air Force's copyrights in this work."

But does it? U.S. government works cannot be copyrighted, Poulsen writes, and he cites Electronic Frontier Foundation lawyer Kurt Opsahl for pointing him to the Air Force's own privacy policy, which says: "Information presented on the Air Force Recruiting website is considered public information and may be distributed or copied." Yes and no, says IP law professor Wendy Seltzer at her blog Legal Tags, if the government created the video, then the DMCA claim is improper. However, the law allows the government to receive copyright assignments, so if an independent contractor created the video, the government may meet the technical requirements of the DMCA. That said, she continues:

Even if the Air Force's DMCA claim is truthful, however, it's still a policy overreach. Wired posted the video in order to report on government recruiting efforts; the video's dissemination is part of that First-Amendment protected discussion, whether it happens on or off government websites. The DMCA makes it too easy to takedown first, think later.

So it appears that as the Air Force seeks military dominance in cyberspace, the question remains whether it will prevail in the virtual battlefield of the law. Copyright experts out there: What say you?

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Robert J. Ambrogi on March 10, 2008 at 05:56 AM | Permalink

Soliciten nuestros cursos de capacitación y asesorías en Responsabilidad social empresarial y LOBBY eficaz a nivel internacional y están disponibles para OTEC Y OTIC en Chile

'Ecuador: Natural Forces Threatening the Country'

'Ecuador: Natural Forces Threatening the Country'
by Milton Ramirez

Picture by MennoGuy licensed under Creative Commons

The recent diplomatic crisis with its neighbor to the north, Colombia may have took most of the media spotlight off the effects of the heavy rains in Ecuador, but many are still suffering due to these natural disasters. The above picture corresponds to a Ecuadorian locality called Tosagua in the province of Manabi, which was one of at least 15 other provinces affected by heavy floodings. The crisis in this country is such that the President himself has said that for this type of natural events that the government is not well prepared, and what is worse, it has no money. Losses as consequence of the flooding are measured in millions of dollars and it is estimated that it will cost 1 billion dollars for the reconstruction of flooding zones. Crops and livestock have been lost, and it has also claimed 23 lives. To make things worse and more tragic, it is now feared that epidemics, such as dengue will affect the flooded areas.

The Spanish government and the Pope were the first to bring humanitarian aid to the most affected, according to Ecuadorian media. In Guayas and the rest of the Ecuadorian coast, water treatment plants are going to be installed to alleviate some of the possible intestinal problems of the residents of these areas. People from the government, such as Minister of Economic and Social Inclusion (MIES), Jeanneth Sanchez said that 'this is not an emergency, it is a national tragedy' and invited others to join in the Campaign "Return The Happiness" with the purpose of collecting food and clothes for the victims. In this crusade, Megamaxi, Diners Club International, the National Institute for Children and Families (INNFA), MIES have joined.

The truth is that public safety is threatened in Ecuador not only by floodings, but by other natural forces such as the eruptions of the Volcano Tungurahua and has been reported by El Blog de Palulo [es] with pictures. He is not only using microblogging (Twitter) to keep Ecuador updated, but his last post about the volcano says it's calming down:

Genial! fue lo primero que dije al ver al Tungurahua lleno de nieve en su cúspide y con una fumarola saliendo de su cráter. Cuando niño era normal verlo con nieve hasta las faldas, pero ahora, con un proceso eruptivo en curso, imágenes como estas son impresionantes.

Great! It was the first thing I said when I saw the Tungurahua full of snow at its top and a fumes out of its crater. When I was a child, it was normal to see it with snow skirts, but now, with a current eruptive process in progress, images as these pictures are impressive.

Ecuador Periodístico [es] writes about the Vice-President's campaign to get Ecuadorians' spirits high, makes up an history:

No es que la idea sea mala, sino que ¡qué oportuna!, me pregunto si la agencia de publicidad podrá adaptar unos nuevos artes en los que se vea a la gente de la Costa con el agua en el cuello, ¡pero sonriendo…! eso sí sería bueno, serían unos tipazos de positivos. Estamos en emergencia, 15 provincias inundadas, 22 muertos, 100 mil damnificados y... ahora hay que sonreír. Otro arte alterno podría ser aquel de las faldas del Tungurahua llenas de ceniza y las vacas sonriendo, genial no… unas vacas positivas, que le ríen a la adversidad.

Not that the idea is bad, but how timely!, I wonder if the advertising agency may adapt some new advertisement techniques in which the people of the Coast are shown with water up to their neck, but… smiling! So it would be such a great man of positive thinking. We are in an emergency, 15 flooded provinces, 22 dead, 100 thousand injured and . .. Now we have to smile. Another alternative could it be the sides of Tungurahua filled with ash and cows smiling, cool, right?… some positive cows, which will laugh at adversity.

Flooding is still expected to continue for at least one more month along the Ecuadorian coast and major newspapers as El Comercio, La Hora and El Universo confirmed this information. And now these people will suffer from illnesses as a result of the accumulation of mosquitoes bringing malaria and dengue fever due to the accumulation of water. Don Xavier [es] is thoughful about what is expected to be done by national media, which he says is not informing and instead putting on a soap opera:

No sería más útil que se informe por los canales de televisión, que tienen mayor cobertura, donde se puede asistir para buscar refugio o mostraran vías de evacuación y zonas de impacto o por lo menos donde ir para poder abastecerse de alimentos, no he visto en ningún noticiero que estando la gente con el agua hasta el cuello, algún reportero ayudara a esta gente y no me digan que eso no es parte de su trabajo, creo que eso es simplemente HUMANIDAD, que porque puedo decir que no lo hacen, fácil ninguno lo ha mostrado y ya sabemos que por ganar rating cualquier cosa vale, menos informar imparcialmente y con claridad.

Wouldn't it be more useful to report on the television channels, which have greater coverage, where anyone can see where to look for refuge, escape routes, areas of impact, or at least know where to go in order to stock up on food. I have seen no broadcast news that when coming across people with water up to their neck, where the reporter helps these people and don't come and tell me that this is not part of their work, I think this is simply HUMANITY, that why I can say they are not doing it; it is quite easy, nobody has yet to show it and we all know that to win ratings, anything counts, but at least inform impartially and clearly.

Ecuador needs help now, government will import 45 thousand tons of rice to recover the loss in production and with unemployment on the rise the situations calls for international assistance. If netizens can help it is time to do so and if the friendly governments can help, their help will be most welcome.

Soliciten nuestros cursos de capacitación y asesorías en Responsabilidad social empresarial y LOBBY eficaz a nivel internacional y están disponibles para OTEC Y OTIC en Chile

Saturday, March 08, 2008

The Lobbyist Effect

Representatives of scientific interests may not be representative

BY ALEX LAVOIE AND RICHARD KELLEY

The art of lobbying is under reexamination. In recent months campaign reform issues, congressional ethics scandals, and criminal lobbyists like Jack Abramoff have brought a practice with which most Americans are unfamiliar to the forefront of the public eye. The goal of lobbying is to convince the government in a legal manner to adopt policies supported by a particular interest group. Scientific lobbying in particular is a rising star among many prominent lobbying firms and the groups they represent. Scientists rely on lobbying to gain funding for important studies and support for laws that aid their cause. In fact, biological research and health policy lobbyists, who serve as middlemen between scientific experts and legislators, may do more to shape federal health policies than any other group. Though the lobbying process is an important way to educate Congress about scientific issues and engage in dialogue about national priorities, lobbyists may not always fairly represent the needs and desires of the country.

What's going on in Congress?

Over the past decade, the power of lobbyists has been on the rise. Over $2 billion a year is spent by special interests ranging from oil companies to orchestras. From 1999 to 2004, the amount spent on federal lobbying increased by 40 percent and the number of federal lobbyists has grown from 16,000 in 2000 to over 35,000 in 2005. This means that last year there were about 65 lobbyists for every one member of Congress.

Lobbying in science is no exception. Medical industries have designated lobbyists for nurses, cancer research, AIDS, stem cell research, and pharmaceuticals, among other things. Almost any scientific field one can imagine has someone fighting for them on Capitol Hill. In an interview with the HPR, Rep. Lois Capps (D-Calif.), a nurse herself before running for Congress, stated her belief that this increase in lobbying is for good reason: "Lobbying can have a positive impact in persuading Congress to provide additional funding for research." While most would agree that the goals of scientific interest groups are important, questions remain about which research gets funded and at what expense.

Doctor's Orders

Perhaps the most publicized special interest in science is the pharmaceutical industry. The Pharmaceutical Researchers and Manufacturers of America employs a large lobbying staff, makes generous political contributions, and filters enormous funds into public advertising campaigns. As of 2004, the pharmaceutical industry employed 1,291 lobbyists in Washington, DC, more than any other industry. In 2002, Bristol-Myers Squibb, a major innovator in cancer drugs and other medications, donated over $1.5 million dollars of pharmaceutical industry money to political candidates. With so much money changing hands, it is no surprise that accusations arise that such companies influence policies at the expense of consumers. In recent years the pharmaceutical industry has lobbied for the prescription drug benefit law that barred negotiations of drug prices that might have lowered prices, and spent $128 million in 2004 to advocate for tax breaks. Pharmaceutical interests have also recently lobbied to weaken FDA enforcement and strengthen patent protections.

It is the stem cell research lobby that has arguably caused the greatest controversy. The federal government budgeted $38 million this year for embryonic stem cell research, and an even greater amount to adult and animal stem cell research. This, however, was a decrease Continued from Page 9

in funding from previous years, indicative perhaps of strong convictions against embryonic stem cell research within the Bush administration. Dale Carleson, chief communications officer for the California Institute of Regenerative Medicine, said in an interview with that HPR that "a change in federal policy severely limits stem cell research," giving scientists a strong incentive to try to influence the policy-making process. Carleson's California Institute of Regenerative Medicine is the state government agency responsible for managing the three billion dollar investment in stem cell research, a result of Proposition 71, passed by the California Legislature in 2004 after heavy lobbying from interest groups. Government funding is, according to Carleson, "essential, especially to basic and preclinical research. Between the government and private foundations, most of them devoted to a specific disease, that's the life blood of stem cell research." Without funding from the government, stem cell research would suffer greatly, and without information and encouragement from lobbyists, the government might never support research in the first place.

Voice of the People?

The great costs of engaging professional lobbyists are prohibitive to many non-profit or low-profit interests who want to express their voice in Congress. Consequently, the lobbying industry skews representation of the public interest towards those industries that can pay. Capps agreed with this assessment, saying that, "unfortunately, [the lobbying] process can be abused when certain lobbyists… are given exclusive access to elected officials and their staffs while other stakeholders, such as unpaid citizen activists, are excluded." Additionally, most powerful lobbying groups contribute large amounts of money to Political Action Committees, a practice that many organizations simply cannot afford.

Even for members of Congress who wish to remain fair, the lobbyist landscape in Washington is difficult to navigate. Not only is it difficult for members to resist the temptation of financially supportive interest groups, but members must also balance national interest against that of their own constituents. Speaking to the HPR, former Senator David Durenberger (R-Minn.), described this lobbying dilemma: "It is often difficult to sort out the national interest from the constituent interest, the latter usually not being as well-informed or as `invested' as I need to be as a policy-maker." And with lobbyists giving congressmen much of their scientific information, unbiased advice is hard to come by.

Lobbying is and will continue to be a major force in disseminating crucial information from the scientific community to members of Congress. While this role cannot be underestimated in the legislative process, the privatization of the process comes at the cost of fairly representing the true views of society. While the system is imperfect, the tradeoff may be necessary one for the continued success of medicine and biological research in the United States.

Posted on Thursday, January 18, 2007 at 11:16AM by

HPR |

Post a Comme

MORE INFORMATION:

http://hprsite.squarespace.com/the-lobbyist-effect-012007/2007/1/18/the-lobbyist-effect.html

Soliciten nuestros cursos de capacitación y asesorías en Responsabilidad social empresarial y LOBBY eficaz a nivel internacional y están disponibles para OTEC Y OTIC en Chile

'Venezuela: Agreement Reached in Santo Domingo'

'Venezuela: Agreement Reached in Santo Domingo'
by Luis Carlos Díaz

Editor's Note: Kira Kariakin and Laura Vidal contributed to this article.

The gathering of Latin American presidents from the Rio Summit, which took place in the capital city of the Dominican Republic, has become one of the most impactful meetings for the integration of the continent. The previous agenda was not followed because three countries were in conflict. Instead of important discussions regarding energy and petroleum, cooperation and poverty and other issues typical of these meetings, the eyes and voices of the continent was in charge of stopping the escalation of a regional conflict with an unpredictable end.

The three countries, Colombia, Ecuador and Venezuela had three political and military actions during the week and with three presidents with different personalities and objectives. What was once a single republic between 1819 and 1831 and founded by Simón Bolívar is now divided into three, and with territories in a more cultural, rather than administrative sense.

The debate in Santo Domingo was long, filled with emotion, and conducted well by the leaders of the region in attendance. The primary topic, which took precedence over any other topic on each president's agenda: peace is needed in Colombia in order to construct peace in South America.

Ecuador reclaimed its sovereignty. Colombia reclaimed its right to defend its people from insurgent, armed and narcotrafficking groups that have been attacking them for decades. And Venezuela is counting on negogiating the release of those kidnapped by the FARC through political means, and not through arms, as well as an end to an internal war that has not been resolved for 60 years in Colombia. That is why Chávez felt attacked by the assasination of the guerrilla leader Raúl Reyes, who acted as negotiator for these deals.

Santo Domingo served as a stage to present positions and create compromises for governability and unite forces for the construction of peace in the region. The blogosphere also served as a stage for Venezuelan bloggers to express their thoughts on the brewing conflict.

The prospect of war with neighboring Colombia was not very appealing and Liberal Venezolano [es] writes:

Venezuela no está en condiciones, ni militares ni económicas, para enfrentar un conflicto bélico con Colombia, ni con nadie más si a ver vamos. Con una economía que no es capaz, bajo el peso del yugo socialista chavecista, de proveerse internamente de manera decente, no hace falta ser un genio para concluir que una confrontación bélica, incluso de escala moderada, sería catastrófica para Venezuela y más bien podría causar la caída del propio Chávez, derribado por quienes hasta ahora han sido sus mejores aliados: los más pobres, quienes están descontentos ya de por sí con la situación económica actual.

Venezuela is in no position, neither in militarily, nor economically, to face a bellicose conflict with Colombia, not even with anyone else. With an incapable economy, under the weight of the Chavista socialist yoke, it doesn't take a genius to conlude that a confrontation, even a moderate one, would be catastrophic for Venezuela and could even cause the fall of Chávez himself, caused by those who have been his strongest supporters: the poorest, who are discontent already with the current economic situation.

Slave to the PC [es] agrees:

Hugo Rafael no quiero tu guerra, primero y ante todo porque no es mía, este país que tanto amo llamado Venezuela no ha sido atacado por nadie, ni violada su soberanía, nuestro líderes no han sufrido atentado alguno y nuestra independencia como nación autónoma sigue intacta, por lo tanto no tengo razón alguna para participar en un enfrentamiento armado donde no se han medido las consecuencias para el continente, los pueblos afectados directamente y sus modos de vida. ¿Cuál es el empeño de inmiscuirse en asuntos colombianos constantemente?, ¿Qué se busca con los insultos hacia el presidente colombiano Álvaro Uribe?,¿Cuál es la hipocresía de andar hablando de violaciones de soberanía, cuando Venezuela y Ecuador son oasis para los guerrilleros colombianos?, ¿Qué se persigue con un estado de guerra en nuestro país?, la situación es critica mis querido amigos, estamos a las puertas de un conflicto que costaría muy caro a los países implicados, sensatez es el
nombre del juego.

Hugo Rafael, I don't want your war, first and above all, because it is not my war. This country called Venezuela, which I love, was not attacked by anybody or its sovereignty was violated. Our leaders did not suffer an attack and our indpedence as autonomous nation remains intact. Because of that I have no reason to participate in armed conflict in which the consequences for the continent, the people direcly affected and their lifestyle have not been measured. What is the insistence in constantly meddling in the affairs of Colombia? What do you hope to acheive with the insults towards the Colombian president Álvaro Uribe? What is the hypocrisy when speaking about violations of sovereignty, when Venezuela and Ecuador are an oasis for the Colombian guerrillas? Why are you seeking a state of war in our country? The situation is critical, my dear friends, we are close to a conflict that will be very costly for the countries involved. Common sense is the name of the game.

Rom Rod [es] does not understand the support for the FARC by the Venezuelan government.

Pero siguen en pie preguntas que parece que nadie en nuestro gobierno quiere responder. El para que es la movilización militar. Que es lo que realmente se pretende con ella. El por que si nuestro gobierno está claramente apoyando a un grupo con tenebrosos antecedentes como las FARC, pasando por encima del pueblo colombiano que eligió a Uribe...Me parece algo sencillamente siniestro apoyar a un grupo insurgente de otro país simplemente porque no me gusta su gobierno.

The questions remain, which no one in our government want to respond. What is the reason for the military mobilization? What is really accomplished with it? Our government is clearly supporting a group like the FARC, with a sinister record, overstepping the Colombian people tht elected Uribe...It is sinister to support an insurgent group from another country simply because one doesn't like their government.

Explíkme [es] wonders about how the relations between the two countries might be affected.

Nuestro gobierno no tiene idea del daño político, democrático, comercial y económico que nos está ocasionando, Venezuela tiene un alto número de Colombianos residentes que contribuyen a nuestro desarrollo, además de todo el intercambio comercial a través de convenios y el que se hace en la frontera, que ya ha empezado a paralizarse y que le puede costar al aparato productivo binacional una gran pérdida que puede llegar a ser irrecuperable.

Our government has no idea of the political, democratic, commerical and economic damage that they are causing. Venezuela has a large number of Colombian residents that contribute to our evelopment, and above all, the commercial exchange through agreements and what takes place on the border has begun to stop and it could cost the bi-national productive apparatus a large economic lost, which could be irretrievable.

Other bloggers think that the Venezuelan government should be concentrating on other things, such as internal issues. Manuel Miranda writes [es]:

Hugo Chávez y sus seguidores andan agitando los tambores de la guerra con Colombia, cuando la verdadera guerra es interna, el implacable enemigo se llama inflación y el gobierno está perdiendo todas las batallas en este frente desde que tengo uso de la memoria...El Banco Central de Venezuela publicó ayer el IPC del mes de febrero (la medida preferida de inflación del BCV), el cual vino 2,3% más alto que en enero y ya acumula una variación de 5,8% en lo que va de año. Por estas mismas fechas el año pasado, la inflación acumulada era de 3,4%; lo cual es un mal augurio para la fantasiosa meta inflacionaria del gobierno... La verdadera guerra es contra la inflación... Y la estamos perdiendo

Hugo Chávez and his followers are banging the drums of war with Colomba, when the real war is internal. The relentless enemy is called inflation and the government is losing all of the battles on this front, and it has been this way as far back as I can remember...Yesterday, the Central Bank of Venezuela published the IPC for the month of February (the preferred measure of inflation from the CBV) and it was 2.3% higher than January and already has risen 5.8% since the beginning of the year. This time, last year, the inflation was at 3.4%, which is a bad sign for the fantasy goal of inflation of the government.... The real war is against inflation ... and we are losing.

Finally, some bloggers like Carla Mariela of ICARO [es] wanted to send messages to the people of the three countries involved in this tension.

Amigo colombiano, ecuatoriano y venezolano:
Vamos a demostrar que los lazos que unen a nuestros pueblos de Ecuador, Colombia y Venezuela son más fuertes que los egos de nuestros gobernantes.
Vamos a demostrar que condenamos el terrorismo y respetamos la soberanía
Vamos a demostrar que ningún gobierno nos va obligar a dispararle a un hermano de nuestros países.
Vamos a demostrar que somos más, muchos más los que no concebimos a Latinoamérica en guerra
Vamos a demostrar que pese a la historia, no estamos condenados a ella
Vamos a demostrar que nuestras diferencias son nuestro valor, que nuestra diversidad es nuestra riqueza
Vamos a demostrar que hoy germina una generación que anhela crecer en paz
"Pasa la voz, pasa la bola"
Sugerimos que si quieres multiplicar el poder de este mensaje, puedes copiarlo en tu blog, reenviarlo por Facebook y a través de mensajes de correo electrónico

Colombian, Ecuadoran and Venezuelan Friends:
Let's show that the bonds that unite the people of Ecuador, Colombia and Venezuela are stronger than the egos of our leaders.
Let's show that we condemn terrorism and respect sovereignty
Let's show that no government will force us to shoot another countryman of our countries.
Let's show that we are more, many more of us that don't imagine a Latin America in war
Let's show that in spite of history, we are not condemned to it
Let's show that our differences are valuable, and that our diversity is our treasure
Let's show that today a generation blooms, that longs to grow up in peace
"Pass the ball, pass your voice"
We suggest that if you wish to multiply the power of this message, copy it in your blog, forward it on at Facebbok, and through emails.

You may view the latest post at
http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/2008/03/08/venezuela-agreement-reached-in-santo-domingo/

Soliciten nuestros cursos de capacitación y asesorías en Responsabilidad social empresarial y LOBBY eficaz a nivel internacional y están disponibles para OTEC Y OTIC en Chile

'Brazil: Colombia, Equador, Venezuela and the besieged Latin America'

'Brazil: Colombia, Equador, Venezuela and the besieged Latin America'
by Daniel Duende

There was a lot of talk about the 'Border Crisis in Latin America' on the Brazilian blogosphere in the last few days. Brazilian people suffer from an endemic form of 'know-it-all syndrom' and, thus, many of us were talking -- a lot -- and taking sides about the impending conflict. Fortunately the whole issue came, apparently, to a reasonable solution. But many of us, know-it-all as we are, think that's not the whole point. Some say that Chavez should be expelled or 'neutralized' somehow for being 'dangerous' to the peace on Latin America. Others say that the US and Uribe, their Colombian host, are the real villains of the Latin soap opera. Among the radical speeches and the media echoing, we could find some very reasonable voices in the Brazilian blogosphere shedding some welcome light on the entire matter.

Andre Deak blogs about an article he wrote to Agência Brasil[PT] back in 2006, about the US military bases at Ecuador and Colombia, titled "Geopolitics of the Siege", and makes some considerations[PT]...:
"A maior base norte-americana na América Latina, a base de Manta, fica no país governado por Rafael Correa. Presidente que publicamente é contra a política dos EUA para a região, e disse que não renovará o acordo para manter essa base."
"The biggest North-American military base in Latin America, the Manta base, stands in the country ruled by Rafael Correa. The president that publicly stood against the US policy for the region, and declared that he will not renew the treaty to keep that base."
... and quotations in his blog post about the conflict and it's unspoken background:
" 'A partir de 2002, Colin Powell garantiu uma verba adicional de 731 milhões de dólares para financiar a participação do Equador, Bolívia e Peru no Plano Colômbia. O papel do Equador era central, principalmente porque os Estados Unidos utilizavam a estrutura da Base de Manta, com capacidade de controlar o espaço aéreo da região Amazônica, do Canal do Panamá e da América Central. A eleição do presidente Rafael Correa interrompeu o apoio do Equador ao Plano Colômbia, já que uma de suas principais medidas foi anunciar que não renovaria o acordo com os Estados Unidos para o controle da Base de Manta', conta Maria Luisa Mendonça.

[...]

Outra leitura interessante vem do Beto Almeida, no texto Colômbia: Israel sul-americano?: o assassinato de 'Raul Reyes, conhecido por sua característica de exímio negociador político, também deve ser entendido como um alerta ao governo de Sarkosy para que não se meta em negociações que contrariem a linha estadunidense de militarização da região amazônica'."
" 'Since 2002, Colin Powell has guaranteed an additional funding of 731 million US Dollars to pay for the participation of Ecuador, Bolivia and Peru on the Plan Colombia. Ecuador played a central role, mainly because the United States used the resources of the Manta Base, capable of controling the entire Amazon, Panama channel and the Central America's airspace. The election of the president Rafael Correa interrupted the Ecuador support to the Plan Colombia, once one of [the president's] first measures was to announce that the treaty that gave to the US the control of Manta Base was not to be renewed', says Maria Luisa Mendonça. [...] Another interesting view [on the situation] comes from Beto Almeida, in his text Colombia: South-American Israel?: 'the murder of Raul Reyes, known for his caracteristic of being a great political negotiator, may be understood as an alert to the Sarkozy government, that it shouldn't meddle with negotiations that are contrary to the US line of
action of militarizing the Amazon region'."
João Vergilio writes, in an article[PT] sent by Luis Nassif to the blog Projeto.br[PT], about the connection between this crisis and the hipocrisy surrounding War on Drugs and the drug traffic issue:
"Insisto: enquanto não pusermos sobre a mesa a questão do narcotráfico, todas as discussões ficam sem lastro. É em torno do tráfico e da política antidrogas americana que todas as questões desse conflito estão articuladas. Sem essa insana War on Drugs patrocinada pelos EUA, não haveria as Farc, nem Uribe. E Chávez não passaria de um reformador social um pouco voluntarista e desastrado."
"I insist: until we don't agree on discussing the drug traffic issue, all the other debates become meaningless and unrooted. All the issues on this conflict are wrapped around the drug traffic and the US anti-drugs policy. If it weren't for the insane War on Drugs sponsored by the US, there would be no FARC or Uribe. And Chavez would be nothing more than a somewhat blunderous and a-little-too-willful social reformer."
In the same article, Hugo Albuquerque is rather pessimistic about the motivations and the resolution of the conflict, and calls our atention to the possible US plans for Colombia in the near future:
"Não creio que a situação acaba por aí.

A Colômbia, que dos anos de 90 pra cá se tornou o cavalo de tróia dos EUA na região, fez essa ação para intimidar a Venezuela, não o Equador.

Isso é o indicativo de que se os EUA tentarem algo contra a Venezuela isso se dará via Colômbia do mesmo modo que o Iraque foi usado nos anos 80 para combater o Irã."
"I don't believe the situation is really over. Colombia, that in the nineties became the 'trojan horse' of the US in the region, took this line of action to intimidate Venezuela, not Ecuador. That is indicative that if the US will try anything against Venezuela, that would be made using Colombia as a proxy in the same way the Iraq was used [by the US] in the eighties to fight against Iran."
Pedro Doria considers the complexity of the situation and of the world, and stands in a certain neutrality, criticizing both sides with almost the same severity[PT]:
"Enquanto o mundo anda mais complicado do que jamais foi, esquerda e direita abraçam velhos conceitos. Não importa a evidente violência com que agem as Farc, tampouco o fato de que a sociedade colombiana está exausta delas. Se é uma guerrilha, ainda mais com discurso de esquerda, há de ser bom. Não é. São só golpistas assassinos, torturadores. Uma gente que prende outras por anos a fio. Já passamos desta fase na América Latina. Seria bizarro o suficiente se não houvesse pelo mundo gente à direita que jura combater um comunismo inexistente e que, além de se embaralhar na bandeira religiosa, age com um anti-cientificismo grosseiro."
"As the world becomes more complex than ever before, left and right embrace old concepts. It's doesn't matter how evidently violent are the FARCs, or how tired have the Colombian society grown of them. If it's a guerrilla and, better yet, a guerilla with a leftist speech, then it must be good. It's not. They're only scheming murderers and torturers. People that kidnap and imprision others for many years long. We're all over this phase in Latin America. That would already be bizarre enough, if there wasn't in this world so many people at the right that swear to God they're fighting a communism that doesn't exist, entangling themselves into religious flags and acting with a gross anti-scientificism."
Considering that there are no easy, maniqueistic, answers in these times, Doria stands against illegality and power abuse and, thus, views both sides with suspicion:
"Não é difícil ter problemas com Uribe e com Chávez ao mesmo tempo. Basta não achar que qualquer ilegalidade é justificada para combater o outro lado."
"It's not that hard to have qualms about Chaves and Uribe at the same time. It's just a matter of not thinking that any illegal measure is justified to fight against the other side."
This is, indeed, a very complex world living very complex times. Although many are still pursuing and repeating easy answers and shallow judgements about the situation, it's becoming clear that we must make a deep reflection before saying anything or taking sides. There is a lot of misinformation trickling along the unnending lines of political lies and media supported babble. I think Andre Deak says it all when he closes his above quoted post remarking that...:
"O momento não pode ser lido apenas pelo que contam os jornais. A primeira vítima desse conflito, como em todos, é a verdade."
"This moment can't be read only by what the newspapers are saying. The first victim of this conflict, like in any other, is the truth."
What should we do when we can't be sure about what is happening around us? Maybe the solution is listening to as many voices as possible, be it thunderous and loud like the voices of governments and big media outlets or whispered like the voices of common people, and try to make out who, and why, is trying to fool us. This is as close to the truth we can get. That is why Global Voices Online exists. We're listening. Are you?

You may view the latest post at
http://www.globalvoicesonline.org/2008/03/08/brazil-colombia-equador-venezuela-and-the-besieged-latin-america/

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Soliciten nuestros cursos de capacitación y asesorías en Responsabilidad social empresarial y LOBBY eficaz a nivel internacional y están disponibles para OTEC Y OTIC en Chile

Are Law Libraries Becoming Obsolete?

FROM LEGAL WATCH BLOG

Are Law Libraries Becoming Obsolete?

Are law firm libraries going the way of the dinosaur (or the typewriter)? Perhaps not just yet. As the Birmingham Business Journal describes, with the proliferation of electronic research, law firms are downsizing their libraries -- but they're not eliminating them entirely.

According to the article, law libraries will always serve a purpose. As attorney Mark Ayers explains, many times books are more efficient for legal research than a computer. Moreover, not every legal document is available online, so libraries may have access to documents that can't be found on the computer.

But the library also serves other non-research related purposes. Another lawyer quoted in the article, John Bolus says:

[t]echnology makes research more convenient, but it also takes attorneys out of a library atmosphere where they can focus solely on reading case law, rather than at a desk where they may have other distractions, such as a telephone or e-mail.

And believe it or not, some potential hires and clients are still impressed by the presence of a handsome, well-stocked law library.

Is your firm's library becoming an endangered species?

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Carolyn Elefant on March 7, 2008 at 10:28 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

The British (IPOs) Are Coming

The British are coming, the British are coming -- or at least, the British IPOs are coming. Today's New York Times Dealbook reports that Lyceum Capital, a private equity house, is preparing itself for the changes implemented by Britain's Legal Services Act, which, among other things, will allow law firms to sell themselves to private equity or other investors beginning in 2011. Lyceum has hired a high profile team of advisers and created a 255 million pound ($512.17 million) fund for potential investment targets.

Currently, professional ethics rules don't allow for non-lawyers to hold interests in law firms. So it will be interesting to watch the impact of deregulation of the legal services in Britain on the U.S. firms that have set up outposts in London. Will British IPOs, like the British Redcoats, arrive on U.S. shores sooner than we think?

For previous coverage of law firm IPOs, see posts here, here and here.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Carolyn Elefant on March 7, 2008 at 10:04 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Can Female Lawyers Go Home Again?

They say that you can't go home again, but a few female lawyers are proving otherwise. As this story, "Law Firms Opening Up to the Idea of Attorney Re-Entry" reports, some women who left their firms to raise children are now discovering that they can return to the fold, even after as much as a decade of absence.

Shari Solomon, now an associate at Wolf, Block, Schorr and Solis-Cohen is one example. She left her firm in 1995 following the birth of her third child. Ten years later, when she felt ready to re-enter the work force, she contacted a Wolf Block partner with whom she'd kept in touch, which eventually resulted in an offer to return to the firm.

Still, how common is it for law firms to welcome female lawyers after they've been gone for a while? My guess is that these reunions are fairly infrequent and somewhat ad hoc. Indeed, the article mentions just one firm -- Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom -- that has institutionalized a revolving door option for women. Skadden's Sidebar program allows lawyers to take a leave of absence for up to three years and return to the firm thereafter. All of the other programs mentioned discussed leave time of six months which, while generous, hardly qualifies as extended time off (especially where women pop back in for meetings and conference calls during their leave).

In addition, it's not clear whether most women actually want to leave their firm for extended periods, or simply prefer more flexibility that would enable them to balance work and family. According to this post at the ABA Journal news site, a recent study by the Georgia Association for Women Lawyers found that 86 percent of women are interested in flexible and part time arrangements. So it's not clear how many women would avail themselves of a formal re-entry program even if firms were to offer it. In short, even if women could go home (to their firms) again, it's not clear how many women want to leave their firms for home in the first place.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Carolyn Elefant on March 7, 2008 at 04:27 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Soliciten nuestros cursos de capacitación y asesorías en Responsabilidad social empresarial y LOBBY eficaz a nivel internacional y están disponibles para OTEC Y OTIC en Chile

Wednesday, March 05, 2008

New York Times: Big Wins for Clinton in Texas and Ohio; McCain Clinches Race as Foe Concedes

Big Wins for Clinton in Texas and Ohio; McCain Clinches Race as Foe Concedes

Todd Heisler/The New York Times

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton in Columbus, Ohio, on Tuesday. More Photos >

Sign In to E-Mail or Save This
Print
Single Page
Reprints
Share
- Del.icio.us
- Digg
- Facebook
- Newsvine
- Permalink

By ADAM NAGOURNEY

Published: March 5, 2008

Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton defeated Senator Barack Obama in Ohio and Texas on Tuesday, ending a string of defeats and allowing her to soldier on in a Democratic presidential nomination race that now seems unlikely to end any time soon.

Skip to next paragraph

Democratic Results Map

Republican Results Map

Polling Place Photo Project

Capture, post and share photographs of the voting in Texas, Ohio, Rhode Island and Vermont.

Post a Photo »

Multimedia

Interactive Feature

Voices of the Voters

Slide Show

Election Day in Key States

Slide Show

Off to the Polls

The Caucus

The latest political news from around the nation. Join the discussion.

Candidate Topic Pages

More Politics News

Enlarge This Image

Eric Thayer/Getty Images

A polling place in Chillicothe, Ohio. More Photos »

Mrs. Clinton also won Rhode Island, while Mr. Obama won in Vermont. But the results mean that Mrs. Clinton won the two states she most needed to keep her candidacy alive.

Her victory in Texas was razor thin and came only after most Americans had gone to bed. But by winning decisively in Ohio earlier in the evening, Mrs. Clinton was able to deliver a televised victory speech in time for the late-night news. And the result there allowed her to cast Tuesday as the beginning of a comeback even though she stood a good chance of gaining no ground against Mr. Obama in the hunt for delegates.

"No candidate in recent history — Democratic or Republican — has won the White House without winning the Ohio primary," Mrs. Clinton, of New York, said at a rally in Columbus, Ohio. "We all know that if we want a Democratic president, we need a Democratic nominee who can win Democratic states just like Ohio."

On the Republican side, Senator John McCain swept to victory in Ohio, Rhode Island, Texas and Vermont and claimed his party's nomination, capping a remarkable comeback in his second bid for the presidency.

Mr. McCain's main remaining rival, Mike Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas, announced he was dropping out minutes after the polls closed and pledged his cooperation to Mr. McCain. Aides to Mr. McCain said he would head Wednesday morning to Washington to go to the White House and accept the endorsement of President Bush, his one-time foe, and begin gathering his party around him.

Mr. McCain, of Arizona, delivered his victory speech in subdued tones to a boisterous crowd of supporters in Dallas.

"Now, we begin the most important part of our campaign," he said, "to make a respectful, determined and convincing case to the American people that our campaign and my election as president, given the alternatives presented by our friends in the other party, are in the best interests of the country we love."

Mr. McCain proceeded to offer a preview of attacks for his Democratic rival. "I will leave it to my opponent to propose returning to the failed, big-government mandates of the '60s and '70s to address problems such as the lack of health care insurance for some Americans," he said. "I will campaign to make health care more accessible to more Americans with reforms that will bring down costs in the health care industry without ruining the quality of the world's best medical care."

Mrs. Clinton's twin victories in Ohio and Texas gave her, at the least, a psychological boost after a tough month in which she watched Mr. Obama, of Illinois, roll up victory after victory and build a lead in delegates. There was virtually no chance that Mrs. Clinton could have survived had she lost Ohio and Texas; her husband, former President Bill Clinton, said last month that his wife needed to win both states.

Mrs. Clinton was already planning ways to capitalize on her performance; she was scheduled to appear Wednesday on all the morning news programs. But she will continue to find herself in a difficult position mathematically. Given the way the Democratic party allocates delegates, it remained unclear whether Mrs. Clinton would close Mr. Obama's lead on that front.

Even before the polls closed, Mr. Obama's aides said that given their lead in delegates over Mrs. Clinton, it was not possible for her to catch up in the few remaining contests.

Mr. Obama came out shortly before midnight to speak to a crowd in San Antonio, and laid out the argument his campaign would make in the days ahead.

"No matter what happens tonight," he said, "we have nearly the same delegate lead that we did this morning, and we are on our way to winning this nomination."

But Mrs. Clinton's supporters, exultant over the victory, tried to cast the results in Ohio and Texas as a turning point.

Mrs. Clinton took the stage in Columbus before a sea of waving white-and-blue "Hillary" signs and immediately portrayed her victory in Ohio as an indication of her electability in a general election. And she reprised a line of criticism against Mr. Obama that appeared to have gained her some traction in this contest.

"Americans don't need more promises," she said. "They've heard plenty of speeches. They deserve solutions, and they deserve them now."

As she spoke, the crowd responded with chants of "Yes, she will!" — apparently an orchestrated response to Mr. Obama's trademark "Yes, we can!"

Turning one of Mr. Obama's themes against him, she said, "Together, we will turn promises into action, words into solutions and hope into reality."

Marjorie Connelly and Megan Thee contributed reporting from New York, and John M. Broder from Columbus, Ohio.

Saludos
Rodrigo González Fernández
DIPLOMADO EN RSE DE LA ONU
www.Consultajuridicachile.blogspot.com
www.lobbyingchile.blogspot.com
www.el-observatorio-politico.blogspot.com
Renato Sánchez 3586
teléfono: 5839786
e-mail rogofe47@mi.cl
Santiago-Chile

Soliciten nuestros cursos de capacitación y asesorías a nivel internacional en lobby y están disponibles para OTEC Y OTIC en Chile

Above the Law's David Lat Booted From Facebook

from legal watch blog

Above the Law's David Lat Booted From Facebook

Everyone in the blawgosphere knows that David Lat is Above the Law. Everyone, that is, except Facebook, which apparently has its own laws that even a blogger of Lat's stature can't transcend. Facebook recently banished David Lat from its site, without explanation, according to Daniel Solove at Concurring Opinions. Fortunately, the suspension didn't last long -- as of this afternoon, Lat reports that Facebook responded to Lat's appeal and reinstated his account.

Lat's sudden suspension has triggered a discussion among legal bloggers over what type of process is due customers of Facebook prior to ejection from the site. This isn't the first time that a user's expulsion from a Web site has generated controversy. Last year, a Second Life user challenged the site's suspension of his account, with the judge invalidating the Terms of Service as an unconscionable contract of adhesion. But given Lat's status as an A-list law blogger, his experience has attracted more discussion from the legal blogosphere.

Dan Solove frames the issue this way:

As more of our lives become dependent on Web 2.0 technologies, should we have some sort of rights or consumer protection? Is Facebook the digital equivalent to the company town?

Solove notes that currently, Facebook does not have any obligation to even explain why it terminated Lat under its Terms of Use. On the one hand, Solove recognizes that Facebook owns the site, and it can set the rules. But on the other hand, he argues that people put "a lot of labor and work into their profiles on the site" and that it takes time and effort to build and maintain a network of friends. Moreover, Facebook encourages people to use its service in this manner and reaps the financial benefits of extensive use. Thus, Solove wonders whether Facebook users "should be granted any kind of rights or protections" when they use the site.

Professor Larry Ribstein says asking private businesses to act like public utilities is asking for trouble. Ribstein believes that contract law and the free market adequately protect Facebook users -- and that if Facebook wants to attract and retain customers, it will grant them rights "up to the point that they are profit-maximizing for Facebook." Ribstein also suggests that Facebook's knee-jerk expulsions may be the result of Facebook's increased liability exposure caused by the actions of its users.

As a David Lat fan, I hate the fact that Facebook kicked him out, albeit temporarily. And as a Facebook user myself, I don't relish the thought that my account and all of my contacts could be expunged without notice and for no apparent reason.

At the same time, what I hate more than any of this is the potential regulation of Web 2.0 applications that even in Internet years, are still in their infancy. Eventually, I think we'll see these services evolve, with the emergence of high-end sites geared exclusively for professionals, that will likely offer the kind of extensive procedural and privacy protections that more sophisticated users will demand. Like Professor Ribstein, I'm confident that the market will eventually address the issue of consumer protection if we give it a chance. It's just unfortunate that one of the growing pains had to be the suspension of David Lat.

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Carolyn Elefant on March 3, 2008 at 12:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Why Not Web 2.0 Reviews for Law Schools?

Avvo, once considered an upstart lawyer-ranking service, is gaining traction with more established law firms. Two weeks ago, Avvo announced that international law firm Davis Wright Tremaine had claimed Avvo profiles for its Washington attorneys. And in this week's Internet Law & Strategy, Joseph Campos, marketing partner and chair of the corporate/securities law group at mid-size Seattle firm, Stanislaw Ashbaugh takes a new look at client input systems like Avvo.

Campos writes that Web 2.0 business models have created a new paradigm: clients and lawyers rating lawyers for the benefits of clients and lawyers. While Campos sees risks in the paradigm, he also identifies opportunities that can come through embracing what clients have to say. (As an aside, not all lawyers are sold on Avvo. For example, today New York Personal Injury Lawyer Eric Turkewitz voiced an objection to what he characterizes as the service's onerous terms of use).

But leaving aside the controversies over Avvo, could the model of Web 2.0 evaluations work in other contexts... law school rankings, for example? I pondered that thought after reading this post by Nate Oman at Concurring Opinions which proposes an alternative to U.S. News law school rankings. Oman's post got me thinking about another alternative: a Web 2.0 ranking system for law schools. Each school and its respective professors would have a profile -- and students and alumni could register and offer rankings. Professors could also evaluate each other, thereby ensuring a good mix of expert peer review and student feedback. A Web 2.0 system would also force law schools to maintain good relations with alumni to prevent a disgruntled grad from trashing the school or a particular professor five or ten years down the road.

So, if any of you law professors or students are reading, what's your opinion of "Avvo for Law Schools?"

Sphere: Related Content

Posted by Carolyn Elefant on March 3, 2008 at 11:24 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Soliciten nuestros cursos de capacitación y asesorías a nivel internacional y están disponibles para OTEC Y OTIC en Chile