We need to figure out some key questions out to really move forward.
Is this going to be a co-educational event?
The legal community learning from technologists and technologists learning from the legal community.
We think the answer is yes - we need to check this
Then what kind of process would we use at the event. I would like at least 1/2 of it to use Open Space to facilitate deeper dialogue and understanding then typically provided.
Where are we going to have the event:
- Bay Area or DC Area all both potential locations that have
- Then after that what venue(s)
What dates for the event work:
- January - February but when in that time frame
Who do we want at the event:
- We have done some scoping on this but need to get clearer.
- We need to invite some more key people into our group like Mary Rundle and Jane Winn
Jeff Hodges is not able to be the steward right now for the group. I am up for hearing who would like to volunteer for this role. It means you are on the board of Identity Commons, you review other groups to see if they are in alignment with the purpose and principles, help manage common assets. You need to be on the community/stewards mailing list & it is good to attend the once a month stewards call.
Present: Daniel Perry, Judi Clark
Several problems with the above agenda. As posed, why would a lawyer want to join this conversation? Many (most?) are employed by companies who would likely oppose this conversation. Basic premise that e-signature laws and laws generally have created tension and frustration--true? to whom? Every state has e-signature legislation. Lawyers have acclimated to this. Not same as digital signature, which has to do with PKI and certificate, a different value proposition. Many court cases where contracts have e-signatures are upheld.
Better focus: 1) identify why we want to get lawyers involved, 2) outline/define what problem we are trying to solve (e.g., patent laws, free legal advice, etc.).
Suggest we have conference in Hawaii, seconded.
Technology is forward looking, law lags (not backward looking). Judges are naturally slower about technology than tech developers.
Premise: would be proper to educate: we're moving so far ahead, it would be good to bring lawyers along with us. Where do we go, how to accomplish this?
Models of conversations:
- http://itc.conversationsnetwork.org/ IT Conversations with Phil Windley
- http://legaltalknetwork.com/ Lawyer to Lawyer talk with Robert Ambrogi
Daniel: encourage lawyers who are already tech- and identity-savvy to be interviewed on these shows. Exploit podcasting to generate buzz. Realistically, Jan-Feb time frame for an in-person conference isn't likely to happen. No familiarity developed with people, issues, conversations!
Would be useful to do interviews with lawyers to get their take on evolving tech. Interesting to lawyers, would generate a lot of buzz. Would also help technologists develop perspectives on where the law is now and how to position their work to co-evolve.
Also strong support for a specific track at next IIW (in November): suggest blocking off a track for specific legal-related discussions and speakers. (inside-tech/organizational lawyers to help organize this to ensure that conversations are relevant to legal field)
All of the people in this group (ID-Legal) have blogs. How about developing a badge or widget to cross-connect our community? opt-in mailing list for further discussion?
Friend of Daniel's, Stephen Mason, an attorney in UK, wrote a book on electronic signatures and law. Our conversation includes this topic, let's ask for experts to join us, write short blog posts that cover some of the issues we're talking about. See his website at http://www.stephenmason.eu/e-signatures/