International trade agreements rarely make front page news, and even then only when the agreements are signed, binding the signatory countries to them. Because of this, the standard practice for negotiating these trade agreements is extraordinarily opaque due to press disinterest and the lack of the same open-government laws that many nations have regulating how legislation is negotiated.

The ACTA negotiations are much, much more secretive than this standard, and yet will effect virtually every person who uses the internet on the entire planet. It is imperative that the entirety of this information becomes public before the agreement is finalized and becomes law.

Over the last several months, the ACTA veil of secrecy has been lifted a tiny bit, with a few documents leaking out. These documents show that ACTA does very little to police counterfeit good trafficking, but does expand and enhance copyright policing, drastically alter the burden of proof in copyright cases, and limits or eliminates judicial oversight. It is clear that the very few trade groups or corporations invited to sit on an advisory committee (MPAA, RIAA, Verizon, Monsanto, etc., etc.) have made ACTA a wish-list of proposals that would be nearly impossible to push through the standard legislative process in most countries, especially the United States.

These leaked ACTA documents show that the agreement includes the following provisions:

• Force all Internet Service Providers to provide information about suspected copyright infringers without a warrant. This information can be used to disconnect a user from the internet without judicial due process.

• Eliminate the “Safe Harbor” that ISPs currently have under the DMCA, and hold them responsible for each and every subscriber’s actions, forcing the ISP to comply without the judicial due process that is proscribed by the DMCA.

• Required, random searches without probable cause at all international borders of laptops, MP3 players, and mobile phones for music and movies.

This trade agreement gives police and judicial powers to trade groups, creates an international culture of surveillance, and has already enshrined into law the laughable idea that copyright enforcement has a serious national security component. The requests for disclosure from the EFF, Doctors without Borders, The Consumers Union, and many others have all been met with stonewalling due to these same ludicrous national security interests.

Please go to the EFF action page and share your thoughts on this trade agreement with your Senators before it is too late.  Senators Bernie Sanders and Sherrod Brown are spearheading a move to force the United States Trade Representative to make the ACTA text public, and additional support from your Senator will do nothing but help. Time is of the essence, because the final version of the text is due to be written in January 2010, and by then it will be too late.

The Journal of the American Medical Association has recently published a study on Medical School student’s use of social networking that gives a general warning about social networking that all professionals should heed. The study found that 60% of medical students used social networking unprofessionally, including unprofessional language, suggestive photos, or discriminatory language. There is little real information available regarding the repercussions of acting unprofessionally online, and in the information age, sullying your personal brand may have larger and longer effects than we can currently envision.

This warning should not necessarily mean shunning social networks, but instead give all social network users an opportunity to create and foster an online reputation strategy. Treating social networks as an opportunity to put your best foot forward should serve you very well in building goodwill and demonstrating your value and expertise. Social networks are valuable because they are a two-way street; by giving the best parts of you, you will get that and more from the people in your networks. I have created a few guidelines that I have used to navigate the world of social networking, and hopefully give you a roadmap to managing your own online reputation.

First, and most importantly, you must be cognizant of your professional life, and understand that what you put online is viewable by everyone in the world, including your employer and future employers. This idea seems to be lost on too many people, who think that the sheer number of people online somehow shields them from view. It is obvious that to stumble onto a specific one of over 300 million Facebook profiles would be very difficult, however it is very easy to find someone if you are looking for them. No matter what your profession or status, people will be looking for you, and what they find will be a major help or hindrance if you let it.

How you show up in a simple Google search is probably your most important way to impact how people get to know you online. Setting up a Google profile and a blog under your name is the most effective way to “own” your name online. Google guarantees your profile page will show up on the first page of searches for your name, and this page can link to as much other information online as you choose. A blog will let you develop your expertise in your chosen line of work, and show off what makes you a unique and interesting person. It is important to realize that this information is your “public face” that you are putting out into the world with no restrictions, the internet equivalent of a gigantic billboard, so only put your best foot forward and be honest and sincere in depicting who you are and what you have to offer.

Social networks can be a a great tool for you if you use them properly. For myself, I currently use Twitter and LinkedIn professionally and Facebook for friends and family.

Twitter has a very active community in almost any profession, and gives you an opportunity to learn in real time what news and developments will affect you. In the legal arena, there are thousands of practice-specific users and hundreds of jurisdiction-specific users. Picking the right users to follow out of these will give you a broad view of what is important and current in your field. Additionally, there are millions of users that are sharing information about gadgets, shopping, or any other hobby under the sun. Following a broad scope of users that reflect your interests and goals will quickly put you right into the thick of new developments most relevant to you. Because of the sheer amount of users on twitter, I recommend following blogs that you already know and are interested in, non-profits in your profession, and stay away from the mundane yammering that can make Twitter seem useless. Often, users recommend to their followers new people to follow, and you will soon develop a unique and useful list of people that will funnel you the most timely and interesting news and information. Finally, I recommend not being a Twitter wallflower. Let people know when you find interesting and informative news, and be as much news maker as a consumer. Remember: your Twitter feed is public, and should only reflect the person you want to be seen as professionally.

LinkedIn is a networking too that I use to aggregate my professional network. Keeping in touch with professional contacts, especially with the current bout of layoffs, job changes, and the like, is a daunting task, but LinkedIn makes it easy. It is often said that it is not what you know, but who you know that makes the difference, and being able to quickly and easily contact the right person may make all of the difference in the world. Too often, a business card is the end of a professional contact, but with LinkedIn, you can keep these professional contacts in the loop about your projects and status, and they may be able to secure you new clients, contacts, or employers. There are also many profession, alumni, and location related groups, many of which offer opportunities to meet and network with other members in real life. These contacts could prove invaluable to your professional development and career growth.

Facebook is where I keep my personal friends and family abreast of what I am doing and news in my life. It is an extraordinarily effective method of letting the people you care about know a bit about how you are doing. Obviously, we all have friends and relatives that we don’t talk to often enough, haven’t seen in years, or lost their contact information with no way of getting it back. With a more mobile society, it is hard to keep track of friends that have moved halfway around the globe, changed careers, or just simply lost touch with. Hearing about these people’s babies, birthdays, and trials and tribulations make you realize why they were so important to you and gives you an opportunity to send them a note or give them a call. It has honestly amazed me how many friends I have reacquainted with over Facebook, friends that without Facebook, I may have never seen or talked to again. Facebook is a great arena to let your personal life shine through your professional life, but be warned that there still are many professional considerations. I strongly discourage friending anyone that you are not a friend with in real life. Facebook is not necessarily the proper venue to meet strangers or socialize with supervisors. By having an alternate network, such as Twitter or LinkedIn for these interactions, you can more tightly control how individual people can view and interact with you.

This incident brings up a few very interesting questions regarding ownership, privacy, and censorship. I don’t pretend to know the answers to these questions, but these questions can and will influence the direction and growth of society for at least the next century.

• Do you own the media (like a physical book/CD/etc.) with the accompanying rights that ownership entails, such as the right of first sale, the right to read it as many times as you’d like?
• Is the content provider (Amazon/Apple/Google) aware and using the information regarding usage, such as times read/listened?  Can you refuse this use?
• Most importantly, is government able to use this technology to ban books or profile readers? There is statutory and case law regarding the government using/obtaining library information, is this law relevant to the more accessible digital information? Can a book that is published digitally and then subsequently removed from every reader/computer/Kindle/phone ever be proved to exist?