INTERNET LAW FINAL EXAM
FALL 1999
8-hour OPEN BOOK TAKE HOME
Mr. Froomkin

Please read these instructions carefully.

This is a 8-hour take-home book examination, with length limits on the answers. Certain special rules about citation apply if you rely on, or make reference to, materials other than the class materials.

VERY IMPORTANT: Remember to use your blind grading number on the exam and to put it on the first page of each answer.

"Open book," defined. This exam is "open world": you may consult any reference source except other human beings. The exam has, however, been designed in the hope that full and excellent answers can be crafted without reference to any source other than the class materials. Your instructor believes that reference to external sources is unnecessary, and bordering on unwise (if only as a waste of your limited time). For obvious reasons, you are expected to refrain from discussing the contents of the exam with anyone from the time you pick up the exam until the end of the examination period (it is possible some people may be taking the exam late).

Citation rules. Citation to cases and materials in the assigned reading may be in any short form that is understandable, e.g. Overton Park. In citing materials other than cases, clarity is usually achieved by including a page reference as part of the citation (e.g. Unit II, page 6).
While you are free to consult other materials, it is neither necessary nor recommended. if you do so, and if you rely on those materials for any material part of your answer, you are required to provide a full citation to the source, just as if you were writing an academic paper (no penalties for improper Blue Book style will be levied). This rule applies whether or not you are quoting from the source. Failure to give proper citations will, if detected, be considered a serious Honor Code violation.

Length Limits. Each question on this exam has a length limit. I will not read beyond the length limit. The length limits are not supposed to be generous; on the contrary they are designed to make you organize your thoughts and express them as clearly and concisely as possible. if you type (please type!), the following safe harbor rule will apply: each typed page with 1" margins on all four sides, which is printed in Courier 10cpi, Times Roman l2pt or Helvetica l2pt, with double-spaced text, will be presumed to have 250 words so long as there are no excessive textual footnotes.

If you do not type your exam, please retain a copy and turn in an identical typed copy as soon as reasonably possible.


Please answer TWO of the following questions. Each answer should be no more than 1000 words (four standard typed pages).
Read the questions carefully and think about your answer before beginning to write. Organization will count in your favor; unreadable writing will count against you -- if I can't read it or follow it, I can't give credit for it. Don't forget to explain why you reject seemingly sensible options as well as why you select them.
 

Question 1

Select one of the following:
  • an article in the assigned or optional reading that was published in a law review or other `dead tree' scholarly journal;
  • any Froomkin writing in the assigned or optional reading;
  • any Roger Clarke writing in the assigned reading; or
  • any Paul Resnick writing in the assigned reading.

    • Explain how the author got a major point of his or her argument wrong.
    Note: if you choose this question, be sure to choose another question below which does not involve substantial topic duplication with your answer to question one.
     

    Question 2

    "Digital signature technology may be loved to death [by legislators] before it ever gets to really take off." Discuss. Be specific (examples are nice).
     

    Question 3

    "The expected benefit from National ID cards well exceeds the expected harms (if any)." Discuss. Be specific (examples are nice).
     

    Question 4

    "The online industry has demonstrated that it cannot be trusted to respect user privacy. Therefore the US government should adopt privacy rules substantially similar to the European Data Protection Directive." Discuss. Be specific (examples are nice).
     

    Question 5

    Consider this argument:
    People who argue that registrants of domain names need a direct voice in ICANN are wrong for four related sets of reasons. First, market forces will protect registrants, as registrars in the newly competitive environment scramble for customers. Second, most if not all of ICANN's work will be technical; for all practical purposes, users have never had a voice in technical standard setting in the past, and there's no reason why that should change now. Third, organizing the worldwide community of registrants is impractical. Fourth, non-registrant users of the Internet have as big a stake in the successful functioning of the DNS as do registrants, so any system which gives representation to registrants but leaves out other users is flawed anyway; but including everyone just makes the third problem worse.
    Do you agree? Why or why not (be specific....)?
     

    Question 6

    Briefly describe and lengthily justify the smallest set of changes to COPA required to make it constitutional while still achieving the same results, or as much of the same results as is constitutionally possible. (If you think COPA is constitutional as it is, then the smallest set of changes required is "none".)