I think that one of the issues that David Galbally, QC and other lawyers of his ilk is that because they don’t understand social media, they don’t understand where it’s going.

So calls to turn Facebook off in Victoria or to insist Facebook removes photots and videos and material relating to alleged suspects is niave at best. Irrespective what the courts say.

Everyone had an opinion on what I should’ve said during the 7 minute piece in which I got about 3 minutes :P   Including: people can bypass with proxies, they will use other services and so on.

But it occurred to me last night while doing a podcast with Ben Grubb and Peter Black QUT that what I could’ve done before is shown this:

david-galbally-google

1,200 returns on search for David Galbally

These figures are very low for someone who is Australia’s top lawyer, and the son of a famous lawyer. But quite high for someone of his generation.

In 2005 when you googled “laurel papworth” you got about 25 links to me. Most were traditional media including a newspaper article in Dutch from when I was working in Amsterdam. And a few old Usenet (now Google groups) links back to 1991-ish. But what about today? Remember, you’ve heard of me, but the majority of the world hasn’t. I’m not a top lawyer or doctor, I’m not even a social media expert – just a plain ol’ social network strategist. :P

laurel-papworth-google2005 – about 20 returns on search. 2008 – 88,000 returns on search.

Why? Why is it that David Galbally QC who is invited regularly onto show’s like the Einstein Factor, and me, who gets invited to free drinks at social networking events have such different returns on Google searches?  He should really be 10x or 20x higher than anything I can get right? I mean, his links are traditional media, or important law sites. Mine are just you lot :P

And that’s the problem. You lot.

laurel-papworth-identitiesI might create a few profiles. On Facebook and Twitter, but ignore Bebo and MySpace. I might be on YouTube but you are on Metacafe. I’m on Flickr you are on Photobucket.

And – God forbid – I ever end up in court with an injunction or gag order (me? gagged? o.O) Because removing 80k of links, photos, videos, slideshows that might or might not reveal personal information will make some lawyer very rich. I wonder if they do bulk billing?

How many links will I have in another 3 years? A million? And what about the upcoming generation? Removing their baby photos, graduation videos whenever they end up in court? The photos their relatives and friends and strangers have taken? Even if YOU don’t use Facebook, someone in your social network does – betcha they have a birthday party photo with you in it.

Do my advice is: don’t do anything. Three years ago, YouTube, MySpace, Facebook were barely a blip on the horizon. Now they have 100′s of millions of members.  In a couple of years, it will be so obvious, and so many people will have so much content online, that even the journo’s won’t have a gag order.

 

EDIT: Added The Channel 7  Sunrise Video: Thanks Ben Novakovic for uploading to YouTube (@bmn) Note the 5 min mark – did he really say shut down internet services in Victoria when a court case is on? Just Facebook or all internet social sites? All court cases or just some? Or did I misunderstand – it really threw me at the time. I’m guesting on the Sunrise program on Channel 7 Australia tomorrow morning. Apparently with Mike Munroe and Mel someone? Not Kochie Anyway the show is about vigilantism (think: naming and shaming the alleged arsonist of the Victorian bushfires)  Continue Reading…

 

.. so what is a “social media proprietor”? And how is s/he different from a blogger? Dunno, don’t ask me. Google it…. uh oh, we are both in trouble. The only response from Google on “social media proprietor(s)” are MY presentations. So either they don’t exist, have another name or … I’m the first one to document them. heh. Moving right along… Social media proprietors focus on a number of things that bloggers may not: advertising – display, banner, those little boxy things. classifieds – jobs is popular, the rivers of gold running to social media. merchandising – any old Continue Reading…

 

One more sleep: Arthur Artinian, Lawyer, Blake DawsonNick Bolton, Head of Sales and Marketing, ViocorpKate Carruthers, Former, Digital Business Manager, WestfieldTrevor Cook, Independant Consultant,Ross Dawson, Chairman, Future Exploration NetworkFoad Fadaghi, Technology Editor, BRWTony Faure, CEO, ninemsnGary Hayes, Head of Virtual Worlds, The Project FactoryRobbie Hills, Managing Director, 24/7 Real MediaLee Hopkins, Director of Buzz, Better Communication ResultsWarren Lee, CEO, APN OnlineJack Matthews, CEO, Fairfax DigitalSteven Noble, Director, Digital, Hill & KnowltonTim Parsons, Founder, Mobile MondaysCameron Reilly, CEO, The PodCast NetworkDamian Smith, General Manager – Digital Media, Network 10Louise van Rooyen, Managing Director, Pan Pacific InteractiveJennifer Wilson, Principal, Lean ForwardTennille Wong, Continue Reading…

 

Naughty agencies *sighs* what are we to do with ‘em? Tom Cruise sues Naked SYDNEY: Naked Communications has received an email from Tom Cruise’s publicist, Rogers and Cowan in New York, demanding its “Tom Cruise works at Naked Communications” video be removed from YouTube. The email, sent yesterday to Naked’s Sydney office, claims the video constitutes an infringement of the 1968 Australian Copyright Act. “The unauthorized use of the likeness of my client Mr. Cruise, and the copying and distributing via the internet of the aforementioned material without express permission, constitutes an infringement and violation of the Australian Copyright act Continue Reading…

 

I’ve got a thing about lawyers. I don’t know what it is.. brainy? glasses? I think they were the original geeks, before technology came along. Anyway, I am downloading this right now as we speak. (from social customer manifesto) Social Networking for Business and the Law: A Podcast (iTunes) (MP3) Ok, that was fun. Had a chance to chat last week regarding social networking with a bunch of great folks, including: Kara Swisher, co-executive editor of All Things Digital Law.com bloggers and co-hosts, J. Craig Williams and Robert Ambrogi Eric Goldman, Director of the High Tech Law Institute at Santa Continue Reading…

 

I need an excuse to show you that very funny clip (hat tip: Lee Hopkins). So here goes: Penn Masala are an a capella group from University of Pennsylvania. I like the fact that they took a Brand (Facebook) and an associated Topical Point (stalking online) and wrote a song, scripted, acted, directed and edited a video and then became their own marketing channel (YouTube). 10-15 years ago, how would a University choir have done it? If they could’ve talked the creative arts department into helping out, how would the audio/video have been distributed? If a University Choir gets hold Continue Reading…

 

Now that I have your attention: ‘Internet addict’ dismissal case a cause for thoughtReports that IBM is being sued by a man fired by the company for visiting an adult chat room while at work have triggered some predictable responses.James Pacenza, who operated chip-making machines, claims stress during the Vietnam War resulted in him becoming addicted to sex and later the internet. Most bloggers’ comments seem to be along the lines of taking personal responsibility and that he shouldn’t have been visiting chat rooms during working hours. But is it really that simple? Apparently Pacenza’s work involved short but fairly Continue Reading…

 

I don’t think that anyone has really realised how much the web 2.0 stuff is going to affect law and the courts and judgements on defamation and privacy. If web 1.0 was bad enough – html savvy pissed off punters creating a page that a handful of people could find and view, what do we think the limits are of everyone from 11 year olds up creating anti-marketing, anti-advertising, anti-privacy campaigns? From the SMH: A Brazilian judge has ordered YouTube to find a way to stop Brazilians from viewing steamy footage of supermodel Daniela Cicarelli and her boyfriend on the Continue Reading…

 

I was looking at the court case between Nintendo vs Sony/Every Technology Company In the World regarding motion sensor devices, and noticed that Nintendo said that their little hand held console device that looks like a TV remote has… well, guess how many patents? It looks like a TV remote and has a handful of buttons on it. One patent? 5? 10? 25? Nope, he said 50 to 55 patents. What chance does the little guy (me!) have when we can barely afford one patent to protect our IP? Which is why when court cases like NTP vs RIM (Blackberry) Continue Reading…

 

Matrix Chambers with digitalTMW went live today with MatrixLaw:The system (Persephone) can publish news, press releases and partners’ or members’ CVs to the general public, while allowing for more restricted dissemination of sensitive information, such as for minutes of senior management committee meetings, or a community set up for a particular legal case.The system can publish news, press releases and partners’ or members’ CVs to the general public, while allowing for more restricted dissemination of sensitive information, such as for minutes of senior management committee meetings, or a community set up for a particular legal case.The chambers will also be Continue Reading…

© 2011 Laurel Papworth Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha