<div>Hi All, </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Here are a few reflections on the conference:</div>
<div> </div>
<div>1) As a legal academic writing about the internet, my main points of reference have been liberals and libertarians. I've tried to justify minimalist reforms proposed by the former against the "markets <em>uber alles</em>" rhetoric of the latter. This conference convinced me that engagement with libertarianism is stale. There is a vibrant intellectual community among economic sociologists and researchers in the critical internet studies field. Neither of these groups gets much attention in law reviews now; I hope to remedy that deficiency.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>2) As you might expect from a lawyer, I've had a bit of trouble digesting the "play" side of the conference. At first some of the interventions reminded me of the bizarre juxtaposition of activism, appropriationism, and absurdity in this Seether video: </div>
<div> </div>
<div><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTjDbTOmic8">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTjDbTOmic8</a></div>
<div> </div>
<div>But on the other hand, the same style works to brilliant effect on this ACLU "Demand Your Dot Rights" campaign: </div>
<div> </div>
<div><a href="http://www.dotrights.org/education">http://www.dotrights.org/education</a></div>
<div> </div>
<div>And I imagine it's about the only way to get people to think about topics like the ones Sheldon Wolin discusses in <u>Democracy Incorporated: Managed Democracy and the Specter of Inverted Totalitarianism</u> (at <a href="http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8606.html">http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8606.html</a>). Both Laura Denardis and Jonathan Zittrain also showed how small, pragmatic steps can advance freedom and equality online.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>3) The best part of the conference for me was the constant reference to two great scandals of our time: a) 2.7 billion or so people live on less than $2 per day and together consume less than 2% of global product, and b) crony capitalism shifts ever more power and resources to finance capital. Whatever we think about the future of the internet, this inequality should be in the foreground. Exploitation we usually associate with LDCs is creeping into the "overdeveloped" world via the internet. As <u>Sleep Dealer</u> showed, connectivity can just as easily be turned to dehumanizing ends as it is to emancipatory ones. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>I loved Brian Holmes's mention of Veblen and James K. Galbraith (elaborated on here <a href="http://brianholmes.wordpress.com/2009/11/06/is-it-written-in-the-stars/#more-1431">http://brianholmes.wordpress.com/2009/11/06/is-it-written-in-the-stars/#more-1431</a>); I've been grappling with <u>The Predator State</u> for some time. I also thought that Jonathan Beller's screening of part of Khavn de la Cruz's Squatterpunk was an impressive linkage of theory and practice. After viewing that clip, I'll always associate "playbor" with some forms of child labor.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>4) As for future directions: My presentation led me to think about a pretty simple dichotomy: the extent to which online companies' profits derive from their productivity, or their power. (My slides are here: <a href="http://www.slideshare.net/FrankPasq/pasquale-distributive-justice-online">http://www.slideshare.net/FrankPasq/pasquale-distributive-justice-online</a>.)</div>
<div>I think that basic distinction should play a larger role in an ethical evaluation of internet platforms. I look forward to sharing with the list exemplary instances of real value-creation--and parasitic exploitation--online. (For one intriguing example, see this post on Farmville: <a href="http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/10/31/scamville-the-social-gaming-ecosystem-of-hell/">http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/10/31/scamville-the-social-gaming-ecosystem-of-hell/</a>.)</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I'll also be reading David Stark's new book, which compares "a machine-tool company in late and postcommunist Hungary, a new-media startup in New York during and after the collapse of the Internet bubble, and a Wall Street investment bank"--all of which experience the "friction of competing criteria of worth" (see <a href="http://press.princeton.edu/titles/9070.html">http://press.princeton.edu/titles/9070.html</a>). </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Sincerely,</div>
<div>--Frank</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Frank A. Pasquale<br>Professor of Law, Seton Hall Law School<br>One Newark Center<br>Newark, NJ 07102<br>(973)-642-8485 (w)<br>(201)-988-5774 (c)</div>