Here's a concept that does not offend me: pay a fair price for a copyrighted work, freely and effortlessly use what you paid for. If I'm reading Eric Norlin correctly (here, here -- great observations about collisions and mediation -- and here), he thinks Palladium, coupled with a foolproof, secure and sufficiently privacy conscious identity system (a pipe dream? I hope to be able to make more educated guesses about that soon), might accomplish this. Doc has concerns but does not think Eric's necessarily wrong. Microsoft itself says, "'Palladium'-enabled DRM systems can overcome the overly restrictive and sometimes consumer-unfriendly mechanisms that are creeping into closed, captive devices (such as some consumer electronic devices and cell phones), by providing a broad, interoperable and open platform for content. Unlike closed, captive platforms, 'Palladium' allows any provider or even individual to build a trustworthy interoperable mechanism that is not in the exclusive control of a single entity." (Palladium Technical Initiative FAQ). There will be lots more on this (and with any luck less esoteric phraseology) at Digital ID World. I understand and appreciate Ernie's storm trooper analogy, but from what I can tell the Empire already has Stricken Back, and the troopers already are here. I don't know enough (correction: jack) about the technology to judge whether Palladium and digital identity stand poised to actually tame them. I don't know if commercial enterprises and the market (see Dr. Weinberger's thoughts) can make this all work as it should. (Note, though, that in addition to the sign of Microsoft cluefulness Doc mentions -- he's being flown to speak there after Digital ID World -- there's another recent development worth mentioning: Microsoft appears to have put out Service Release 1 to Office X for the Mac in part in response to pressure from frustrated users who wanted to run more than one copy on a home network. See Microsoft Security Bulletin MS02-002.) But I'm wondering: what sensible alternatives are left? I'm leery of what legislation might "accomplish," for example.

I'll be interviewing all day tomorrow at Loyola Law School for my firm's 2003 summer associate class. (Hey, unrelated, but check out Loyola's Symposium on "Eldred v. Ashcroft, Intellectual Property, Congressional Power And The Constitution.") In case any of the candidates I may meet are readers of this blog (or become readers when they look up my bio on the firm's site), here's a bit of friendly advice about the interview process. ~ Do visit the Web sites of the firms with whom you are interviewing, familiarize yourself with their practice areas, and, if possible, your interviewers. It's pretty apparent when a candidate has done no homework, and it doesn't score you any points. ~ Try to relax and be yourself (a toughie, I know). We don't need a litany of your accomplishments, presumably your resume sums all that up. Who are you? What excites, upsets, intrigues you? We want to know all this, within reason -- by which I mean, try to be an enthusiastic but polite conversationalist. The best interviews are those with a good deal of give and take. ~ Talk about your real life experiences that are pertinent to how you will fare as a lawyer, and they don't have to be professional ones (in fact, at this point it may be better if they're not). How have you responded to challenges? What has helped you keep your head? ~ Don't burn the bottoms of the chocolate brownies with halvah cheesecake topping you're bringing with you. (Kidding, folks at NALP.) ~ Have fun. I and my co-interviewer Carrie Hemphill are borderline cool (at least we remember what cool looked like), and hey -- you could be sitting in Tax.

Ornah Levy, co-counsel with her brother Allonn for Matthew Pavlovich, stopped by and commented on my September 7 entry about the argument, and mentioned some additional highlights from the morning's events. You can scroll down and click the comment link for that post, or go here to read her thoughts. Thanks again, Ornah!

The premier issue of Appeal Magazine just arrived in my inbox (not about appeals, but "legal lifestyle;" what's the emoticon for the beginnings of a cringe?). Scarcely any of the content is available online (just summaries of certain of the articles), so not much to point to or talk about, unfortunately.

No time, but wanted to point out: Chuck Hartley's newly gussied up site; Kevin Marks'/ProSUA's Cafe Press offerings and pointer to Rafael Quezada's Letter to A.G. Ashcroft; and Two blawgs spotted (via the Blawg Ring): law student Matt, out of Concord, NH, and Oregon juvenile law lawyer Timothy Travis. --Later: Oh, and JCA and Ernie have some provocative posts about legal research (I know, sounds like a contradiction in terms, but trust me on this one). Wish I had my camera; this fire just northwest of downtown L.A. looks huge.