For me, studying copyright law seemed like quite a treadmil; the more I learned, the more complicated it got.  I’m pleased to know I was not alone in this, because a recent High Court judgement found even the Copyright Tribunal were a bit confused as to what they were supposed to be doing.  The press coverage is here, and the case report here.

Next, the recent edition of New Scientist looks at statistics quoted when considering DNA evidence.

The DNA analyst who testified in Smith’s trial said the chances of the DNA coming from someone other than Jackson were 1 in 95,000. But both the prosecution and the analyst’s supervisor said the odds were more like 1 in 47. A later review of the evidence suggested that the chances of the second person’s DNA coming from someone other than Jackson were closer to 1 in 13, while a different statistical method said the chance of seeing this evidence if the DNA came from Jackson is only twice that of the chance of seeing it if it came from someone else

Take a look at the full article here.

A survey by Sailpoint found that departing employees are now quite likely to pilfer client data, and our US cousins are slightly more inclined to do this than us.  23% of polled UK employees said they would take customer lists with them.    The initial report is here, and there is more discussion at The Register.

On a personal note, I learned today that I do not have the right sort of personality to work for the government.  I think I’m quite proud of that.

Maybe I was too quick to dismiss medical negligence..?

I will never do the tale justice, so I suggest you head over to the Jack of Kent’s blog for a summary of the case.  I’m sure the last instalment will be posted tomorrow as their tide of celebration recedes.

Also, it seems the Jack of Kent is just five followers away from the 6,000 he aspires to – if you are not yet a groupie, go to http://twitter.com/jackofkent and follow him!

The phrase “Act of  God” is an infamous get-out clause.  However, this article lists some US cases where God is being replaced by the infinitely more attractive litigation target of energy companies.  Very briefly, I think the argument goes something like: “Katrina destroyed my house, Katrina was caused by green-house gases, you release green-house gases, therefore you destroyed my house.”  I would imagine they are going to be testing causation to extreme with that.  (Hat-tip US site Legal Geekery)

To complete my stateside round-up, news that erroneously gripping iPhone users have cleared the first hurdle in their class action against Apple.

*This site is often blocked by corporate firewalls in the UK, I think because of their literal stance on the second amendment to the US Constitution.

As a law student, I have a pretty high tolerance for reading nonsense, but I confess that I am often guilty of a thoughtless “click here to show you have read and agree to our terms and conditions” when I have (at best) scanned the headings.  Apparently, I am not alone – it seems the Financial Services Authority agrees with my approach.

‘Emails are as private as postcards’ – trite but sound advice.  Or should that be ‘fully search-able postcards that will later be used as evidence against you’?  Surely the thousands of emails that go back and forth everyday within organisations make it impossible to use email as a practical investigative tool, right?  Not if you know what phrases to look for, as the former CEO of Lehman Brothers discovered.

http://pinktape.co.uk/2010/05/27/lightning-fast-lawyers/

http://pinktape.co.uk/2010/05/24/shut-your-facebook/

Having told everyone who would listen during my law degree that I never want to do family law, I confess it feels like it is drawing me in.  The above blog is written by a family law barrister based in Bristol and is a mixture of tales from work, comment on family law stories in the media and reviews of big issues facing family law.  Also, having clung to London like a limpet for most of my life, the idea of practising in the West Country also sounds very nice.  Do I like the blog, or am I my subconsciously incredibly envious of the author?  Probably both.  Anyway,  I always enjoy reading it, do take a look.

See you soon!

UPDATE: It seems to have survived…

UPDATE 2: – I thought I had fixed a problem with comments a few months ago, but it appears not.  I have shut off the offending plug-in, I hope that resolves the problem!

“£44M SCANDAL OF JAIL JUNKIES- TAXPAYERS are forking out more than £44million a year to maintain the drug habits of thousands of prisoners”.

There is an issue here that merits discussion.  Crime and drug use are greatly intertwined, and if we are arresting addicts, giving them custodial sentences during which their addiction in maintained rather than treated, and then they are released with the same dependence they were arrested with, clearly something has failed.  However, the Daily Express doesn’t bother with analysis, as it’s too busy inventing numbers.  The “£44m” from the headline is the what the Daily Express claim the Integrated Drug Treatment System (IDTS) will cost in 2010/2011.  This much does become clear in the article; the headline’s implication that inmates are shooting though £44m of methadone is accidental I’m sure.  However, The Daily Mail say IDTS will cost £109m (also note the posed photo of the ‘prisoner’ who seems to have access to quite a garden from his cell).  This is quite a leap from the £23.9m that clinical services, INCLUDING IDTS cost in 2008/2009 according to answers to Parliamentary questions compiled by this blog.

Also,  this quote:

Shocking figures out yesterday show that every day the state pays for one in six of the entire prison population to be given methadone or other heroin ­substitutes.

The report by independent think-tank Policy Exchange warned that by next year 73,000 prisoners will be receiving the medication

The UK prison population last week was 85,147 (Home Office Bulletin) so where does “one in six” come from?  Also, the report they refer to makes no such warning, as it would mean that 85% of the prison population would be given methadone!

Is it laziness, or just writing the story they want to see?  It will come as no surprise that both articles soon get around to blaming the Human Rights Act, and their devoted followers use the comments section to suggest the reintroduction of the death penalty as a solution.  The Guardian attempts something a little more balanced, but comes awfully close to suggesting that it’s all the prison staff’s fault.

The best solution is to read the original report from the Policy Exchange and have your own sensible thoughts on this problem – the media certainly won’t be providing any.

So, what has happened in month I’ve been missing? Well, a change of government, maybe even a change of weather and quite a bit of legal news is out there to catch up on. I have promised myself a brief moratorium on law books or stories for at least a week post-exams, although I guess it is a positive sign that I’m struggling to keep to this.

As proper law (if there was ever any to be found here) is absent, permit me a brief spot of self promotion by pointing out this blog was mentioned along with a host of other new law-type blogs by Law Actually. He says:

Bleak Flat Legal Blog (BFLB) sports a clean and polished interface, with posts of more or less the perfect length. If his posting frequency stepped up a notch, he’d likely be vying for the ‘best newcomer’ award in Minxy’s blawgies.

Well, this is the kindest (and indeed only) reference to Bleak Flat since UK Godfather of blogging, Charon QC said Bleak Flat was “a rather good name for a law blog”, so many thanks for the mention. Hopefully the lack of a degree, or quite frankly anything else to do should see posting increase. That post also contains some of my regular reads, and some that are new to me, so I’ll enjoy looking those up next week.

It is a slight embarrassment that I did not spot this kind reference earlier, but Law Actually’s blog had remained unread in my Reader as I’ve been mostly checking in on my phone and wanted to see what the strange graphic was in the post that followed the blog reviews. It was worth the wait as it’s probably the best graphic about personal injury ever. I especially love how it’s written in the first person (or first animal I suppose?).

To conclude (and gosh I’ve written that a few times recently) thanks, sorry, more to follow!