Techdirt

Welcome to the last podcast episode of 2015! For the whole year (and since long before that) Techdirt has been speaking out against surveillance and government invasion of privacy, to the point where it might seem like we give no consideration to the legitimacy of any kind of surveillance. But that's not necessarily true, so this week we're approaching things from the other side and discussing the limits of reasonable and acceptable surveillance.

There's been a lot of back-and-forth recently over Mark Zuckerberg's announcement of the Chan-Zuckerberg Initiative, combining widespread praise with a lot of disappointment in the details and the fact that he isn't really "giving away" $45 billion. There's a lot to be said on both sides of this question, and this week we're discussing the new initiative and the wide variety of reactions to it.

Last week, we spoke with Daphne Keller of Stanford's Center For Internet And Society about the collision between privacy and free speech in the EU. Much of this discussion involves the question of "intermediary liability" — how and when service providers are held liable for the actions of their users. This week, Daphne is back for a broader look at intermediary liability, and why it's one of the most important questions for the future of the internet.

Privacy and free speech aren't fundamentally opposed, but they do have a tendency to come into conflict — and recent developments in Europe surrounding the right to be forgotten have brought this conflict into focus. This week, we're joined by Daphne Keller of Stanford's Center For Internet And Society to discuss the collision between these two important principles.

Ever since the bubble and bust of the 90s, Silicon Valley observers have been wondering if and when history will repeat. Lately, some have been pointing to the trend of "unicorn" companies as evidence that we might be heading down that road again, while others have made the case that the fear is overhyped. This week, we discuss the elusive unicorn and what it means for the future of the tech industry.

Fifty episodes! Having skipped just two weeks in the past, this marks one whole year of the Techdirt Podcast! In honor of that, we're taking on a very relevant topic that we haven't yet discussed: the medium of podcasting itself.

Today, we've got something a little different: a podcast crossover podcast with the folks from the a16z. Last week, Mike joined Julie Samuels from Engine on the a16z Podcast hosted by Sonal Chokshi to discuss a long list of important policy issues related to technology and innovation, and for those of you who aren't already following that podcast, we're cross-posting the episode here as part of the Techdirt Podcast as well. Enjoy!

If you're a Techdirt regular, you probably know that there are some serious problems with the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act. Drafted in 1986 with extremely broad language, the CFAA has grown into an easily abused law that lets prosecutors go after people for minor activities that don't meet any reasonable definition of hacking or computer fraud. This week, we discuss the utter mess that our hacking laws have become, and look into ways they might be fixed.

Trademark law often gets lumped in with patents and copyright under the "intellectual property" banner, but in fact it's a different kind of law with an entirely different heritage. That said, it's not without its dangers, so this week we're discussing the intent and extent of trademark law and its impacts both positive and negative.

Over the past 15+ years, Techdirt and its team has made plenty of predictions and prognoses about various aspects of the world of tech — which means we've made plenty of mistakes. This week, our podcast is dedicated to discussing some of those poor predictions and figuring out what we can learn from them.