prescription for lexapro buy generic lexapro cheapest lexapro buy cheap lexapro buy lexapro online buy lexapro tablets buy lexapro uk generic lexapro online buy lexapro without prescription buying lexapro buying lexapro online can i order lexapro online can lexapro be bought can you buy lexapro where can i buy lexapro cheap lexapro no rx cheaper lexapro cheaper way to buy lexapro drug called lexapro cheapest buy lexapro cheapest place to buy lexapro how to get lexapro without prescription cheapest lexapro on the net usage lexapro discount lexapro price doctor lexapro drug called lexapro drug lexapro buy lexapro no prescription buy lexapro no prescription usage lexapro buying lexapro get lexapro lexapro network herbal lexapro how to buy lexapro how to get lexapro without prescription is lexapro generic lowest priced lexapro mail order lexapro herbal lexapro lexapro withdrawal obtain lexapro online pharmacy lexapro online prescription lexapro order lexapro order lexapro no prescription ordering lexapro overnight lexapro paypal lexapro

As we begin a New Year, let me propose five resolutions that we should all consider embracing. I’ll call them the “Ficsor” principles in honor of an Hungarian legal icon who equates, quite correctly in my opinion, the online dialogue practices of today’s fringe activist groups with his homeland’s repressive police state under communism:

1) Oppression: I resolve not to abuse our rights in free speech. I will be vigilant in guarding the rights of others to voice their opinions and disagree, but will never hide behind protected free speech in order to punish others for voicing their opinions.

2) Suppression: I resolve to reject the use of the mobosphere attack or Streisand Effect to influence, undermine or control online dialogue from dissenters.

3) Anonymity: I resolve to never publish anonymous and pseudonomous comments or posts that are derogatory towards someone.

4) Persecution: I resolve to voice my opinion vigorously and openly with utmost respect for the free speech rights of those with whom I disagree, and to discourage and condemn any attempts at coordinating the persecution of my online adversaries.

5) Intellectual Integrity: I resolve to only comment upon what I know after reasonably acquiring a fair, informed and balanced understanding of the issue.

These are our New Year’s resolutions at Dozier Internet Law. Will you put them into practice and spread the word? Please reference them as the “Fiscor Principles”.

By the way, here is Dr. Mihaly Ficsor’s perspective (edited for brevity):

I … truly do not want to deal with this weird quarrel anymore. It is completely useless to present arguments against heated ideological discourse and sheer hatred campaigns trying to suppress any contrary views. I am immune against it, … [i]n the decades through which we were constrained to live under a communist regime, this was so customary; everybody who did not agree with the collectivist ideology, there was no discussion about it; he simply became enemy and the agent of the “imperialist forces.” There were no blogs at that time; there were only newspapers and radio, but the style was the same as in these “digital activist” blogs; even the words and expressions are so familiar… [w]e who have suffered a lot – I too as a child and adolescent as a member of a family which, together with many others, was a victim of serious persecution because my uncle bravely spoke out against the communist ideology – have become resistant. Nevertheless, at the same time, we are sensitive to those phenomena where some people try to settle disputes in the style of those “glorious” years, and we may … use at least the wisdom of the saying: “Experience is a wonderful thing; it helps us to recognize our mistakes when we commit them again.”

Google Bomb has been named as one of the most important information technology policy books of 2009. We made the Honorable Mention list…not bad considering our book is not a pure technology policy play.

Google Bomb also made the grade for “The Digital Decade’s Definitive Reading List”…90 influential books from 2000-2009 that deal with the future of the Internet and the impact the Digital Revolution is having on lives, culture and economy.

If you want to pick up a copy for yourself or a friend, you can do it here: Dozier Internet Law.

On December 4, 2009 your ability to identify the impact of negative organic search results on Google went away in great part. Google has implemented “personalized search” for all users. So let’s consider the impact to maintaining your online reputation:

Historically (pre-Dec. 4) if you searched on key terms for your business names (business, product, service, key executives) or your personal name you would generally see the search results for your business just like everyone else except for some minor local search nuances. So what you were seeing was pretty much what everyone else was seeing. We used this approach at Dozier Internet Law to monitor and evaluate the impact of defamatory attacks and intellectual property infringements. It was good for you personally to check up on your online reputation and sound the alarms if a negative or defamatory result showed up on the coveted first page of organic results. You could check out pretty much what everyone else was seeing when they checked you out.

Now the huge change. With Google’s personalized search, the results are custom tailored for each individual. The data captured by Google when you were signed in to one of its accounts is being used to customize your personal results and genericized data is being used to drive the personalization feature if you are not logged into Google. So the bottom line is that you cannot accurately see the results others are getting when you, your company, your loved ones, etc. are searched.

Remember that Google is the reputation engine for the web. And with this change, a major roadblock has been thrown up. The ability to gauge the impact of defamatory or false posts, or even direct attacks against you or yours, is seriously undermined, not to mention the fact that the primary guage of the importance of trademark infringements and copyright infringements is lost. You really never know what is being returned in searches anymore.

And whether by design or happenstance, Google has opened a loophole for those to attack others with impunity behind a virtual smokescreen. Bad results are concealed, non-obvious, obscured, screened, and buried. Covert attacks will occur more often and be detected infrequently. No more doing a search on your name to check out the results everyone is seeing.

Here is the link to Google’s statement on the matter: Google Personalized Search.

Of course, she was also convicted of the more serious crimes related to murder. But in Italy, defamation is a criminal offense. And Amanda Knox claimed Patrick Diya Lumumba, a pub owner, was responsible. So the police added a defamation charge, and the Jury convicted her of that also.

Obviously the problem of online defamation may not be unique to us in the US, but it must be a rare occurrence in Italy and a number of other countries in which defamation can land you in jail. Big problems in the US are not so big problems elsewhere because the laws are ahead of the curve. A greater appreciation by the legislatures and courts of the threat to US businesses and citizens would be nice. A threat, obviously, that does not exist in the same way in Italy.