This guy has been an amazing over the last 10 years. He's a Constitutional Law attorney, currently teaching at Stanford. A strong advocace of open culture and open technology, he has done a lot to educate people and highlight fairly serious problems.

In that vein, his law classes are open as are his works.

After 10 years, with some success and some failures, he has decided to move higher up, closer to the root of many problems: Corruption.

It is corruption that empowers bad law. Deal with that, and a lot of other things work themselves out in a sane fashion. I like it, and am eager to see where he goes.

http://lessig.org/blog/2007/06/required_reading_the_next_10_y.html


"That the real problem here was (what I will call a "corruption" of) the political process. That our government can't understand basic facts when strong interests have an interest in its misunderstanding."

This is an issue shared by all of us, and is why I'm linking to this guy now. The only people, who will not benefit from following where this guy goes, are those currently benefitting from this problem. The rest of us stand to gain.

Given what he did for IP (which does not exist), free culture, net neutrality, etc.... I expect to learn a ton and see some significant change.

This guy has one razor sharp mind. It's going to take him 10 years to figure out what we already know.

I wonder if he'll focus on Harry Reid's three sons taking money as lobbyists and Dingy Harry actually believing we think he's operating in the countries best interest rather than his families.

Or, if he'll notice that Tom Daschle's wife was a highly paid lobbyist for the airline industry.

Or, if he'll discover that Nancy Polosi has a husband in a business that she favored with legislation.

No, rather I think he'll slobber at the Al Gore trough and that as usual, the libs can do no wrong and the conservatives can do no right. Maybe he can star in a Michael Moore movie.

Quick, shoot the messenger.

He will be systemic, after a fairly intense and lengthly analysis. This is exactly what he did for copyright / culture issues. Go read "CODE" sometime. Not only will you get a solid education on what software means in terms of policy and democracy, but you will also get an excellent primer on law and it's impact on us, general weakness in the face of social norms, physical realities and money as well.

Take a look at how corruption is being framed:

"The answer is a kind of corruption of the political process. Or better, a "corruption" of the political process. I don't mean corruption in the simple sense of bribery. I mean "corruption" in the sense that the system is so queered by the influence of money that it can't even get an issue as simple and clear as term extension right. Politicians are starved for the resources concentrated interests can provide. In the US, listening to money is the only way to secure reelection. And so an economy of influence bends public policy away from sense, always to dollars.

The point of course is not new. Indeed, the fear of factions is as old as the Republic. "

This idea expanded upon here:

http://lessig.org/blog/2007/06/disclosure_statement_and_state.html

In particular, give the NC (Non Corruption) principle a quick read, then as with so many things Lessig writes, think on it for a good long time.

Socially, he's liberal. No doubt. Where the law is concerned, he's fairly conservative, going back to the framers for context.

Our general failure to do this, lies at the root of this corruption work. I know he's gonna say money is speech. Put that in the context of the framers intent and that's really where the efforts will start.

Examples, of a local (in temporal terms) and partisan corruption (as in bribery), will serve to highlight greater and systemic examples where speech is inhibited, or distorted resulting in bad law and policy for society in general.

Again, this will not be a partisan thing. It's an American thing and a problem that needs some solutions. That's what has me motivated to entertain Lessig for another go around.

Missing, there is no doubt he is correct. I think he framed it well in the quote you provided.

Unfortunately, our system encourages this corruption. Campaigning is so costly these days that all politicians become indebted to all kinds of special interests just to have the money to get elected, not to mention those who are just plain dirty.

The purpose of my post was to emphasize once again that it isn't a Republican or Democrat problem, all are guilty. I understand Fred Thompson's sons are lobbyists, same as Harry Reid's. This may be legal, but I think it is wrong. As a matter of fact, I think the whole lobbying process is wrong.

Lessing's premise is correct, but I'd like to see him keep politics out of it and bring attention to the problem. I wish there were a way to put this problem on the front burner. If the media wanted to do something useful, they'd head down this path instead of wasting their time belittling one party or the other.

"If the media wanted to do something useful, they'd head down this path instead of wasting their time belittling one party or the other."

BING0!!

I think we are all on the same page.

If his efforts on software / creative works are any indicator, what's gonna happen will be an analysis of how we got here, key legal decisions and their implications both intended and not. This will be supported by some practical reasoning tools, elements of law necessary to properly understand the problem.

(I like that part a lot)

From there, cases will be studied.

After that, comes activism, search for solutions, learn by doing. (This guy once put his Stanford tenure at risk on a solution to spam!) That phase will feature a lot of very open discussion and activism. (like that part too)

All I know is that I do agree all are guilty. In the near term, I'm more or less obligated to follow the lesser evil and that does not include the GOP. Longer term, the people focus Deane has mentioned is gonna become important.

Can't wait for the stress that might put on the parties! (too sweet, IMHO.)

>>>"I'm more or less obligated to follow the lesser evil and that does not include the GOP."

This is at the root of the problem in finding solutions. Everyone wants to think it's the other guys ox than needs goring more than their own.

First of all, its nearly impossible to get a conses on what corruption is. Out right bribary is definatly corruption. But then you get into special interest groups and cases such as Supreme Court Justice Ginsberg was a counsel for the ACLU, so should she recuse herself from any case involvint it. Other members have been members of the NAACP and have friends and relatives that are members, should they recuse themselves.

Should former Senators Bob kerr and Huey Long have recused themselves from legislation involving the oil industry?

The bottom line is every senator and representative is evaluated at the polls, and if they arent performing to their constituants standards they are "fired".

Deane, the two are not mutually exclusive. Supporting greater solutions has zero to do with making the best of the choices we have right now.

Given what we've seen so far, the GOP is not gonna do us any favors. That needs to run it's course. Frankly, if they do get spanked huge over the mess they've made, we might actually see some serious discussion from those that are left!

There are problems on all sides. No disagreement there. However, the damage done by the GOP is an order of magnitude higher than that we've seen prior. This cycle has been very bad for us as Americans, generally speaking. My biggest worry is that we will not actually apply the pressure that needs to be applied to correct the abuses of law and process that have happened. The rest of it can be characterized as bad decisions and just remedied.

We cannot allow the "King George" and "King Cheney" bit to stand. They did not honor their social contract with us and need to show some accountability for that period.

Consider many of you on the GOP side saw the same thing in the Democrats right? That's how come you got control right? Ok, so what happened with that control? Did we see some correction?

I think the case for that, given one agrees with the efforts made in the courts and some policy, is a yes. But, said correction brought with it, and was done in violation of the law.

So, we end up with two wrongs don't make a right. That's a strike for the GOP, next batter up please!

That's why I'm not gonna support anybody from the party right now period.

So long as we are playing the tit for tat, anything goes bit, I'm perfectly happy with leveraging the fuck ups and getting the Democrats in for some corrective action. I see zero reason to do otherwise, given how things currently are going.

During this mess, exploring the corruption idea, defining where fixes can occur, etc... is all good, but it's gonna take a while to be realized.

Again, during that time, the GOP has lowered the bar to "anyting goes", so we dig in, fight hard, dirty and keep things as sane as is possible. You know, just following the excellent example laid out for us.

If that sucks, well I would agree! But, that's just not my problem, now is it? I didn't vote for the asses, but am having to deal with a seriously damaged democracy right now too.

You, yourself, taught me the value of thinking that way. Frankly, it makes a lot of sense. Thanks, and no hostility intended here at all. Just rational thought applied to a very ugly scene.


Nwokie: Lessig defined it, see above. It's a process thing, as in addressing problems inherent in the process that is causing us grief. Specific things, such as one person taking money from another to pass law, or something else are symptoms.