<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>electric counterpoint &#187; The world</title>
	<atom:link href="http://danray.org/category/professional/the-world/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://danray.org</link>
	<description>dan ray lives here</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 May 2012 09:20:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Texas bar sponsors international law competition</title>
		<link>http://danray.org/2009/02/14/texas-bar-sponsors-international-law-competition/</link>
		<comments>http://danray.org/2009/02/14/texas-bar-sponsors-international-law-competition/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 14 Feb 2009 05:25:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Asides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The world]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://danray.org/2009/02/14/texas-bar-sponsors-international-law-competition/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Well, this is incongruous.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, <a href="http://legalwritingcompetitions.blogspot.com/2009/02/international-law-state-bar-of-texas.html">this</a> is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medellin_v._Texas">incongruous</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://danray.org/2009/02/14/texas-bar-sponsors-international-law-competition/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Iceland gets the first day of summer off</title>
		<link>http://danray.org/2008/04/24/iceland-gets-the-first-day-of-summer-off/</link>
		<comments>http://danray.org/2008/04/24/iceland-gets-the-first-day-of-summer-off/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 24 Apr 2008 15:43:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Asides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The world]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://danray.org/?p=418</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Iceland’s certainly got its head on straight when it comes to holidays: what a great day to have off.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Iceland’s certainly got its head on straight when it comes to holidays: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_First_Day_of_Summer">what a great day to have off</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://danray.org/2008/04/24/iceland-gets-the-first-day-of-summer-off/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Supreme Court decides Medellin</title>
		<link>http://danray.org/2008/03/25/supreme-court-decides-medellin/</link>
		<comments>http://danray.org/2008/03/25/supreme-court-decides-medellin/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Mar 2008 15:44:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Asides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The world]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://danray.org/2008/03/25/supreme-court-decides-medellin/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Supreme Court has just decided Medellin v. Texas. Quick scorecard: Texas won, as did the Bush Administration specifically, the &#8220;foreign entanglements&#8221; set, and, by most of its definitions, federalism. On the losing side: the fifty-one foreign inmates who claimed personal rights under the VCCR, presidential power generally, and (at least at first blush) US [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The Supreme Court has just decided <em><a href="http://www.scotuswiki.com/index.php?title=Medellin_v._Texas">Medellin v. Texas</a></em>. Quick scorecard: Texas won, as did the Bush Administration specifically, the &#8220;<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_non-interventionism">foreign entanglements</a>&#8221; set, and, by most of its definitions, federalism. On the losing side: the fifty-one foreign inmates who claimed personal rights under the <a href="http://fletcher.tufts.edu/multi/texts/BH444.txt">VCCR</a>, presidential power generally, and (at least at first blush) US participation in IGOs with the power to bind.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://danray.org/2008/03/25/supreme-court-decides-medellin/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Promusicae v. Telefónica: EU must balance IP with privacy</title>
		<link>http://danray.org/2008/01/31/promusicae-v-telefonica-eu-must-balance-ip-with-privacy/</link>
		<comments>http://danray.org/2008/01/31/promusicae-v-telefonica-eu-must-balance-ip-with-privacy/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jan 2008 18:52:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The world]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://danray.org/2008/01/31/promusicae-v-telefonica-eu-must-balance-ip-with-privacy/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[My analysis of Tuesday&#8217;s ECJ ruling in Promusicae v. Telefónica is up on the JOLT digest: The court held that European law does not require Internet service providers (ISPs) to disclose their subscribers’ identities to trade organizations for the purpose of civil litigation against them, but that European law also does not prohibit member states [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>My <a href="http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/copyright/promusicae-v-telefonica">analysis</a> of Tuesday&#8217;s ECJ ruling in <em>Promusicae v. Telefónica</em> is up on the <acronym class="uttAcronym" title="Harvard&#039;s Journal of Law and Technology">JOLT</acronym> digest:</p>
<blockquote><p>The court held that European law does not require Internet service providers (ISPs) to disclose their subscribers’ identities to trade organizations for the purpose of civil litigation against them, but that European law also does not prohibit member states from imposing such requirements if the legislation sufficiently balances IP and privacy rights. <a href="http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/copyright/promusicae-v-telefonica">. . .</a></p></blockquote>
<p>I have to agree with the <a href="http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/01/eu-law-does-not-require">EFF&#8217;s analysis</a>: if this is a victory for file sharers, it won&#8217;t last long. Europe&#8217;s content lobby, if it succeeds in passing either EU-wide criminal penalties or intermediary liability for users&#8217; infringement, will effectively make an end run around the obstacle introduced this week. Nevertheless, it&#8217;s good to see some concrete effects of Europe&#8217;s well-developed privacy protections vis-à-vis the United States&#8217;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://danray.org/2008/01/31/promusicae-v-telefonica-eu-must-balance-ip-with-privacy/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>ECJ ruling in Promusicae v. Telefónica</title>
		<link>http://danray.org/2008/01/29/ecj-ruling-in-promusicae-v-telefonica/</link>
		<comments>http://danray.org/2008/01/29/ecj-ruling-in-promusicae-v-telefonica/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:42:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Asides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The world]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://danray.org/2008/01/30/ecj-ruling-in-promusicae-v-telefonica/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Just a heads up — the ECJ has ruled on Promusicae v. Telefónica, holding that ISPs need not divulge subscribers&#8217; identities to litigious industry groups — but it&#8217;s a little more complicated than that. I&#8217;ll have something on the JOLT Digest soon.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Just a heads up — <a href="http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5htjb6mFar30Vw6kQQyUtL9zqWFYAD8UFJFBO0">the ECJ has ruled</a> on <a href="http://curia.europa.eu/jurisp/cgi-bin/gettext.pl?where=&amp;lang=en&amp;num=79919870C19060275&amp;doc=T&amp;ouvert=T&amp;seance=ARRET"><em>Promusicae v. Telefónica</em></a>, holding that ISPs need not divulge subscribers&#8217; identities to litigious industry groups — but it&#8217;s a little more complicated than that. I&#8217;ll have something on the <a href="http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/digest/"><acronym class="uttAcronym" title="Harvard&#039;s Journal of Law and Technology">JOLT</acronym> Digest</a> soon.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://danray.org/2008/01/29/ecj-ruling-in-promusicae-v-telefonica/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Polar law LL.M?</title>
		<link>http://danray.org/2008/01/25/polar-law-llm/</link>
		<comments>http://danray.org/2008/01/25/polar-law-llm/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Jan 2008 04:06:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Asides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The world]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://danray.org/2008/01/25/polar-law-llm/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve always wanted to visit Iceland&#8230; (via Boing Boing)]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.polarlaw.com/forsida/">I&#8217;ve always wanted to visit Iceland&#8230;</a> (via <a href="http://www.boingboing.net/2008/01/25/cash-in-on-global-wa.html">Boing Boing</a>)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://danray.org/2008/01/25/polar-law-llm/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>One page sums up the internet governance debacle</title>
		<link>http://danray.org/2007/12/05/one-page-sums-up-the-internet-governance-debacle/</link>
		<comments>http://danray.org/2007/12/05/one-page-sums-up-the-internet-governance-debacle/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2007 20:56:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Asides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The world]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://danray.org/2007/12/05/one-page-sums-up-the-internet-governance-debacle/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Not even the IGF is free from spam. A fairly nice metaphor for the sad state of the IGF, from what I can tell. For a much more helpful impression of what went down in Rio de Janeiro, see Robert Faris&#8217; account.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://intgovforum.org/forum/index.php?board=19.0">Not even the <acronym title="Internet Governance Forum">IGF</acronym> is free from spam</a>. A fairly nice metaphor for the sad state of the IGF, from what I can tell. For a much more helpful impression of what went down in Rio de Janeiro, see <a href="http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/home/filter?wid=379&amp;func=viewSubmission&amp;sid=3071">Robert Faris&#8217; account</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://danray.org/2007/12/05/one-page-sums-up-the-internet-governance-debacle/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Pentagon discovers soft power</title>
		<link>http://danray.org/2007/12/02/the-pentagon-discovers-soft-power/</link>
		<comments>http://danray.org/2007/12/02/the-pentagon-discovers-soft-power/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 02 Dec 2007 23:57:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Asides]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The world]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://danray.org/2007/12/02/the-pentagon-discovers-soft-power/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sure enough — Defense Secretary Gates is requesting  more funding for the State Department, and referring to &#8220;soft power&#8221; by name and on the record. Of course, that probably just means that he&#8217;s already out of Bush&#8217;s inner circle, but it&#8217;s still nice to hear. (via)]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.defenselink.mil/speeches/speech.aspx?speechid=1199">Sure enough</a> — Defense Secretary Gates is requesting  more funding for the State Department, and referring to &#8220;soft power&#8221; by name and on the record. Of course, that probably just means that he&#8217;s already out of Bush&#8217;s inner circle, but it&#8217;s still nice to hear. (<a href="http://www.danieldrezner.com/archives/003606.html">via</a>)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://danray.org/2007/12/02/the-pentagon-discovers-soft-power/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Can Article III courts accede to treaties?</title>
		<link>http://danray.org/2007/11/11/can-article-iii-courts-accede-to-treaties/</link>
		<comments>http://danray.org/2007/11/11/can-article-iii-courts-accede-to-treaties/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 11 Nov 2007 15:48:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The world]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://danray.org/2007/11/11/can-article-iii-courts-accede-to-treaties/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The debate over foreign law&#8217;s role Supreme Court jurisprudence is well-known. But this was new to me: the Court, in United States v. Reliable Transfer Co., 421 U.S. 397, 403–04 (1975), based its decision to overturn the divided damages rule in maritime collisions in part on the fact that the US was, at the time, [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The debate over foreign law&#8217;s role Supreme Court jurisprudence is <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruth_Bader_Ginsburg#Dispute_over_relevance_of_international_law">well-known</a>. But this was new to me: the Court, in <em>United States v. Reliable Transfer Co.</em>, <a href="http://supreme.justia.com/us/421/397/case.html">421 U.S. 397, 403–04 (1975)</a>, based its decision to overturn the divided damages rule in maritime collisions in part on the fact that the US was, at the time, &#8220;virtually alone among the world&#8217;s major maritime nations in not adhering&#8221; to the Brussels Collision Liability Convention of 1910. What makes this different from the foreign death penalty practices cited in <em>Roper v. Simmons</em>, of course, is that the Convention was expressly open to the United States to join. Of course, the Supreme Court can&#8217;t go so far as to formally accede, but it&#8217;s interesting that it would self-consciously impel informal compliance with the treaty.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://danray.org/2007/11/11/can-article-iii-courts-accede-to-treaties/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What golden ages are we in, right now?</title>
		<link>http://danray.org/2007/10/16/what-golden-ages-are-we-in-right-now/</link>
		<comments>http://danray.org/2007/10/16/what-golden-ages-are-we-in-right-now/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 17 Oct 2007 04:17:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Dan</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Food]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Internet]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Law]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Music]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Personal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Politics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Tech]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[The world]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://danray.org/2007/10/16/what-golden-ages-are-we-in-right-now/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I finally had a chance to post to AskMeFi a question that had been on my mind for a few weeks: What &#8220;golden ages&#8221; are we as a society in, right now? I tried to gussy my post up with a little armchair philosophy to avoid deletion (Ask Metafilter has a policy against open-ended, chatty [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I finally had a chance to post to <a href="http://ask.metafilter.com">AskMeFi</a> a question that had been on my mind for a few weeks: <a href="http://ask.metafilter.com/73670/What-golden-ages-are-we-in-right-now">What &#8220;golden ages&#8221; are we as a society in, right now</a>? I tried to gussy my post up with a little armchair philosophy to avoid deletion (Ask Metafilter has a policy against open-ended, chatty questions), but really I was most curious about everyone&#8217;s idea of what we should be enjoying right now, knowing that it&#8217;s about as good as it&#8217;s going to get.</p>
<p>What I didn&#8217;t really think about, going in, was that the idea of a golden age is ultimately a little depressing. As much as I might like to imagine how nice it would be to live at the peak of, say, the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beatles">Beatles</a> or <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN">postwar internationalism</a>, it would be a heavy burden to know that the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Let_It_Be_%28album%29">decline</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War">fall</a> was just around the corner. Fortunately, predicting the future is free of any buzz-kills like verifiability or precise dates. Nevertheless, I&#8217;d bet some of these golden ages are coming to an end sooner rather than later: <span id="more-335"></span></p>
<ul style="-moz-column-count: 2; -moz-column-gap: 20px">
<li>Airline travel, cross-country road trips (I&#8217;d have said this golden age ended with the first fuel crisis), and other petroleum-heavy activities</li>
<li>American television (The only new-ish shows I&#8217;ve been following at all are Lost and 30 Rock. I realize I&#8217;m missing out&#8230;)</li>
<li>Seafood (Out of  everything, this  might be  most likely)</li>
<li>Readily-available pornography</li>
<li>The Web, as such
<ul>
<li>Specifically, &#8220;free online video&#8221; (I&#8217;d demur — we can do a lot better than hyper-compressed YouTube videos)</li>
</ul>
</li>
<li>Availability of gourmet food (but not necessarily the food itself)</li>
<li> The social standing of nerds (good point!)</li>
<li>Disposable products (I hope this one&#8217;s accurate)</li>
<li>Boston sports (note that this response was entered before the ALCS began&#8230;)</li>
<li>Free water</li>
<li>Cellphones (couldn&#8217;t disagree more)</li>
<li>The American dollar (at best, as the commenter points out, we&#8217;re at the tail end)</li>
<li>Physics as we know it</li>
<li>Traditional manufacturing (to be supplanted by nanotechnology, if not the oil crunch)</li>
<li>Punditry (yeah, I can see this one being true)</li>
<li>Laptop DJ&#8217;ing (had a good run for a few years)</li>
<li>Cheap high fashion</li>
<li>Media piracy (I can&#8217;t imagine this going away any time soon)</li>
<li>Money in politics (let&#8217;s hope!)</li>
<li>Craft brewing, and beer in general</li>
<li>Philanthropy (to some degree, as <a href="http://robertreich.blogspot.com/2007/10/why-charity-doesnt-begin-at-home.html">Robert Reich would say</a>)</li>
<li>The American middle class (at least to hear Lou Dobbs tell it)</li>
<li>America&#8217;s National Parks (I&#8217;d date the end of this age to the start of Bush&#8217;s presidency)</li>
<li>Leveraged finance</li>
<li>Zombies not eating our brains (gotta love Metafilter)</li>
<li>Plentiful energy in general</li>
</ul>
<p>One closing thought: it&#8217;s pretty plain to see that a lot of these responses divide themselves handily into just one category: scarcity. What&#8217;s free today, I guess, probably won&#8217;t be free forever. This isn&#8217;t news, of course — we know that some resources are diminishing (oil) and others are being spread ever thinner (fresh water) — but it&#8217;s still provocative (to my non-economist&#8217;s mind, at least) to occasionally get one&#8217;s bearings on the problems of the world by reflecting that so many of them all have the same basic root. Huh.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://danray.org/2007/10/16/what-golden-ages-are-we-in-right-now/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

