6 ms·

Thank you for a great submission. Can anyone clarify how this lawyer system works in regard to the involvement of fields they are not intimately familiar? I me

by MrJagil 12y ago

Thank you for a great submission. Can anyone clarify how this lawyer system works in regard to the involvement of fields they are not intimately familiar? I mean, I know certain lawyers specialises in tech or corporate matters, but it is entirely unrealistic for someone to both be knee-deep in matters of the law and technology (or any other matter they are not necessarily trained in). Do they consult with tech experts? Study up? Guess their way through? I'm just reminded of what i see as totally botched lawmaking in fields where it seems a certain level of education in that field would be required to make sound decisions on it's behalf. Might be of other reasons than education (i.e. privacy vs government power), but watching this I can't help but feel there's a correlation. I assume the chasm is only getting greater the more layers of abstraction we add to our technology stack. We're already seeing situations where the only one who can discuss a given case properly, is the accused himself.

thathonkey 12y ago
It doesn't work in that regard.
x0x0 12y ago
I tend to agree, but I also think industries -- particularly tech -- have a working definition of totally botched lawmaking that means lawmaking the industry doesn't like. eg the lawsuits against Napster, that was attempting to build a business facilitating bulk copyright infringement with vanishingly few non-infringing uses.
- stinkytaco 12y ago
  I think this is true of almost any industry, but it does seem especially prevalent it tech (which also seems to attract a greater number than average of the "I'm smarter than most" crowd). You can always claim that lawmakers don't understand [insert your industry here], but I suspect many understand it better than we think, but still disagree.
  - colechristensen 12y ago
    It's fairly obvious that disturbingly many senators and congressmen in important positions (relating to tech) have only faint ideas of things necessary to properly make voting decisions. There is a difference between the common incompetence of elected officials and the existence of competent lawyers in high profile cases.
ghaff 12y ago
Among other things, complex cases also have stacks of (expensively created) expert reports on both sides of the case created by experts--as guided by lawyers to establish certain things that are relevant to legal arguments/points of law. I actually did work related to this sort of matter a number of years back. I was admittedly working with top-level lawyers but my impression was that they were very sharp and understood the basic issues pretty well.

by MrJagil 12y ago

thathonkey 12y ago

It doesn't work in that regard.

x0x0 12y ago

I tend to agree, but I also think industries -- particularly tech -- have a working definition of totally botched lawmaking that means lawmaking the industry doesn't like. eg the lawsuits against Napster, that was attempting to build a business facilitating bulk copyright infringement with vanishingly few non-infringing uses.

stinkytaco 12y ago
I think this is true of almost any industry, but it does seem especially prevalent it tech (which also seems to attract a greater number than average of the "I'm smarter than most" crowd). You can always claim that lawmakers don't understand [insert your industry here], but I suspect many understand it better than we think, but still disagree.
- colechristensen 12y ago
  It's fairly obvious that disturbingly many senators and congressmen in important positions (relating to tech) have only faint ideas of things necessary to properly make voting decisions. There is a difference between the common incompetence of elected officials and the existence of competent lawyers in high profile cases.

ghaff 12y ago

Among other things, complex cases also have stacks of (expensively created) expert reports on both sides of the case created by experts--as guided by lawyers to establish certain things that are relevant to legal arguments/points of law. I actually did work related to this sort of matter a number of years back. I was admittedly working with top-level lawyers but my impression was that they were very sharp and understood the basic issues pretty well.