Law
When American Kids Learn About Our Constitution
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Sat, 05/15/2010 - 14:37This morning as I was doing my regular rounds of assorted blogs, I found a blog post about an effort in Seymour by students to have school policies changed to allow the wearing of flip-flops at school. The author seemed outraged that the students would have the audacity to disapprove of school authorities’ rules. I have a very different perspective. Personally, I don’t have a strong opinion about whether or not students where flip-flops to school. However, I do think it is very important for high school students to learn the appropriate way to petition for a governmental redress of grievances; a right guaranteed us in the First Amendment.
I wrote a comment to the blog post, but the author appears to have not accepted my comment, so I am sharing it here. What do you think? What are the best ways for students to learn the proper method of challenging rules that they disagree with? Is petitioning the Board of Education appropriate? Is getting media coverage of the issue appropriate? Is civil disobedience appropriate? Should people mindlessly follow rules that others create? Are there other ideas?
Here’s my comment:
It sounds to me as if it was a very beneficial educational experience and I hope the teachers and educators are making the most of it. At least based on the article presented, I don’t see any example of students ‘bucking the law’ or administrators ‘hunching down, possibly bailing from fear of ejection’.
Instead, I see students following the law, and learning about fundamental American freedoms. The U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to petition for a governmental redress of grievances. This is what they are doing. The article describes how the petition is aimed at the appropriate governing board, the town Board of Education. The Board of Education appears to be making an appropriate consideration of the petition, balancing the desires of students with issues of safety.
While it might be more desirable if students were seeking to redress a grievance of national importance, it is good that they don’t feel that there is an issue of that importance to address. Tuition is not an issue in a public school, and while the issue of what students can wear on their feet seems minor, it may well seem to them to be about unfair treatment by the school administration. As noted in the article, students in neighboring schools have the right to wear flip-flops to school.
Yet what is important is that this is an opportunity for students to learn and experience the proper method of redressing a grievance, instead of bucking the law. How will the Board of Education respond? What other lessons can the students, as well as other citizens of our country learn? We will have to wait and see on this, but personally, independent of my view about footwear choices, I applaud the students, as well as any educators or parents that are assisting them, in exploring this fundamental American right of petition for a governmental redress of grievances.
Understanding Public Information
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Tue, 04/27/2010 - 14:49Whatever else people might say about Susan Bysiewicz’s campaign for Attorney General here in Connecticut, it certainly is raising some interesting questions. First and foremost in many people’s minds are questions about the qualifications to become Attorney General. On the one hand, there are the legal requirements and on the other there are the requirements of the voters. The courts are currently considering the first, and depending on their decision, the voters may or may not get a chance to express their own opinions at the polls.
The other question is about what information is public information and how that information can or should be used. The Friends of Susan 2010 campaign filed a Freedom of Information request with the Secretary of State’s office to retrieve her contact management database and allegedly used that information for emailing potential supporters. This is also being investigated and much has been written about it.
New Government Meets New Media
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Wed, 03/10/2010 - 15:23One of the interesting discussions at Gov 2.0 Camp New England last weekend was about New Government meeting New Media. How do the two inter-relate? How should people in government use new media to more effectively serve the community? How should people in government relate to bloggers, citizen journalists and others in New Media?
Drawing the Line
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Thu, 02/18/2010 - 17:38When does ‘off campus’ speech become ‘on campus’ speech? This is a question that the defense in the Doninger trial has been trying to blur. A key argument in the case is that when Avery Doninger wrote her infamous blog entry criticizing the school administration, she posted it on the Internet, and anything on the Internet has the potential to be brought on campus, and should be considered on campus speech.
However, if the Doninger case is about blurring a line, a new case is about obliterating the line between home and school. Outside of Philadelphia, a suit has been filed against the Lower Merion School District for allegedly activating the webcams on laptops provided by the school without students' knowledge or permission while the students were at home.
Let’s just hope that the school didn’t capture recordings of students calling the folks at the central office douchebags.
The Great International Open Source Conspiracy
Submitted by Aldon Hynes on Mon, 02/15/2010 - 13:55“Russian immigrant” Sergey Aleynikov was indicted for “theft of trade secrets, transporting stolen property in foreign commerce and unauthorized computer access” according to a story in Friday’s New York Times. The article goes on to say that:
Prosecutors also asserted that Mr. Aleynikov, during time he was at Goldman, transferred thousands of files of computer code related to Goldman’s proprietary trading program to his home computers.
In a Bloomberg article from last summer it was reported that Mr. Aleynikov copied source code to Xp-dev.com, a website run by London resident Roopinder Singh utilizing servers in Germany. The website was providing a source code control system popular among open source developers. It is common for open source developers to share software around the world.
I do not know what software Mr. Aleynikov copied to the server in Germany or whether or not he unintentionally copied more software than he should have. However, there are several issues that come up.
Back in July, I wrote about Sergey Aleynikov and Open Source software. There, I listed a couple open source projects he had been involved with. Other articles report that Mr. Aleynikov was working on Erlang, an open source general purpose concurrent programming language. Erlang is covered by the Erlang Public License which requires that you provide copies of covered software that you modify. It is worth noting that this is covered by Swedish Law. This is a common feature of many open source projects.
Without knowing what code Mr. Aleynikov intentionally copied, we cannot know whether he was breaking U.S. law or simply fulfilling his legal requirements of Swedish law. Since Erlang and some of the related software is open source software from Europe, it does make some of the ‘foreign commerce’ issues sound a bit more dubious.
Of additional concern is the allegation that the code was ‘related’ to Goldman’s proprietary trading program. If any of Goldman’s proprietary trading program was written in Erlang, than the source code for Erlang, which law requires to be transported to foreign companies is ‘related’ to Goldman’s proprietary trading program. Goldman Sachs could be inadvertently forcing their employees to violate their own confidentiality agreements and U.S. law.
Companies get great benefits by using open source software. However, they need to understand what they are doing and their requirements about sharing changes they make to the open source software with the broader open source community. If Goldman Sachs and the United States Attorney’s Office is going after Mr. Aleynikov for fulfilling his obligations to the open source community, then they are doing a disservice to everyone who benefits from open source software, including themselves.