That said, here are six of my current favorites:

Around this date in the past… – Widget Edition
By Joan Junyent Tarrida
This little plugin gives you a widget that shows posts from, well, around this date in the past. It’s quite useful to help “bubble up” articles you’ve written previously and that may otherwise be lost in the past.

AutoThumb
By Mathias Geat
AutoThumb incorporates phpThumb into your site in a simple, yet powerful, fashion. It automatically pipes images through phpThumb, resizing them based on the attributes you apply to the img tag. These smaller images are then delivered to browsers, as well as being cached for future redelivery. (The original images can be hosted locally or remotely.)

Free CDN
By Phoenixheart
Free CDN automatically rewrites the URLs in your site (images and more, depending on what you select in the options) so that they are delivered to your visitors via CoralCDN. CoralCDN is a free content-delivery service that, while not necessarily speeding up delivery of content, does reduce the bandwidth and load required by your server. This makes it ideal for limited hosting providers or for hosting your blog at home.

fw-post-image
By Myriam Faulkner
This simple little plugin builds on the thumbnail feature included with WordPress 2.9. Once you have this plugin installed, if you do not explicitly set a thumbnail, WordPress will scan the images you put into your posts and use the first one it finds as the thumbnail (note: it favors local images over remote ones, but supports both).

Simple Facebook Connect
By Otto
This plugin adds a series of smaller plugins, that let you add Facebook Connect features to your blog. Most useful, I think, is the support it adds for visitors to login to your comment system using their Facebook identities.

WP Smush.it
By Dialect
WP Smush.it takes advantage of Yahoo’s Smush.it service to automatically reduce image file sizes and improve performance when you upload images into WordPress.

Six more of the best WordPress plugins is from in propria persona, © 2010 by Kristopher Nelson. Want to republish? Get permission. Want to quote? That's fair use.

The future of reading blurs reading and writing. The future of reading is the networking of readers, writers, content, comments, and metadata, all in one continuous-on mash.

via The iPad is the future of the past of books.

Extending this thought into the realm of the university, Jim Milles questions scholars’ desire for Weinberger’s vision of the future:

Apart from a small subset of blogger/scholars, that doesn’t seem to be happening at all.  Perhaps it’s due to the training that most law faculty receive now–not just the J.D., but the long, perfection-oriented dissertation process–but in my experience, law professors and other sociolegal scholars are extremely reluctant (if not phobic) about releasing to the public anything other than a fully fleshed-out article.

via The Future of Reading, or Do Scholars Really Want “Social Scholarship”? « Buffalo Wings and Toasted Ravioli.

As a budding scholar of law and history, I second Milles’ observations. There are, as he points out, some bloggers who discuss their scholarship and work online, in an open fashion, but by far the vast majority of scholars I know and work with do not do this. Some in-progress scholarship makes it into SSRN in a draft form. Even more makes it online once it is actually published, although most of it remains behind subscription walls and is inaccessible except to other scholars (or dedicated readers who seek it out). But neither SSRN nor online journals encourage or facilitate the back-and-forth sharing of Weinberger’s vision of the future of reading as social.

The relatively few scholars who post to blogs or other online systems that might facilitate “social scholarship” tend to post material of a more informal sort, including initial reactions to current events or hot topics of current discussion. Very few blog posts develop research or concepts in detail, and even fewer do so in a fashion that does not react to something current.

In a sense, the social scholarship that does exist tends to be more like a cocktail party than a colloquium or even a conference presentation.

Personally, this tends to be how I blog as well. The material I put online via my blog sometimes informs my larger research projects, but mostly I am focused on snippets of thoughts, initial reactions, and concepts I wish to capture for later.

Partly this may be due to the form of blogging, or of reading online: shorter tends to work better, and hot and trending topics tend to attract more broad interest. (The down side of “crowd sourcing“?)

I like to more fully develop, research, and think about my scholarship before I share it, and when I do share it, I tend to have a different, more specialized audience in mind. My online writing tends to consist of more assertions and fewer citations; my scholarship is the opposite.

Is this just a “natural” consequence of different mediums? Would scholars be better off publishing in a more “social” (technologically social, that is) fashion? Is one way better than the other? And if social reading is the future — or should be the future — is the iPad a step in the wrong direction?

Is the future of scholarship social? Should it be? is from in propria persona, © 2010 by Kristopher Nelson. Want to republish? Get permission. Want to quote? That's fair use.

Reflecting on Avvo‘s Internet marketing conference for lawyers, Kevin O’Keefe of LexBlog writes:

I started on the Internet at AOL. I answered people’s injury, medical malpractice, and worker’s comp questions. The more questions I answered, the more work our firm got and the more successful we became. The more I listened to others and the more engaged I became, the more I enjoyed myself and the more people who contacted me to help them.

I discovered that Internet marketing was not all about me. It was about what I, as a lawyer, could do to help other people. Rather than buying cheesy yellow page ads and running expensive TV ads, I could get good legal work by helping people.

via For lawyers is the world really all about Google rankings? : Real Lawyers Have Blogs.

The lesson that good connections with people — arising from providing good quality content on a blog, helpful commentary in forums, useful information and replies on Twitter, to name just three examples — is the core of effective marketing is often lost.

You might call this “un-marketing” or “non-marketing” to distinguish it from frantic SEO, blaring billboards, or extravagant banner ad purchases. It’s deceptively simple: go out and help people, and clients will find you.

Taking this kind of approach does not mean foregoing an online presence. How can you put yourself out there and be helpful if you don’t join Twitter, don’t blog, and don’t contribute to forums? And once you start seeking out people to help, how can they and others find you later if you aren’t on LinkedIn or don’t have your own Web site?

Whatever you call it, the core message is to be helpful and do good, and the clients and customers will seek you out in return.

As a do-gooder, SEO, ad buys, and similar strategies should be done to be helpful. That is, such strategies should make it easier for people to find you, and for you to be helpful in return. They are secondary strategies, not primary ones.

For a do-gooder, primary strategies involve getting out there and providing utility to others: answering questions, being a resource, advocating positions you believe in, sharing your experiences and knowledge.

Doing good and being helpful isn’t a new marketing strategy. It’s just an old way of showing the world your worth, updated for new mediums. It takes Google’s “don’t be evil” and goes one better: go do good, and the clients will come (just don’t forget to make it easy for them!). It takes “add value” and takes it further: go be helpful!

Has this kind approach worked for you? Have better ideas? Think it’s crazy? Let me know in the comments.

Want clients? Be helpful and do good is from in propria persona, © 2010 by Kristopher Nelson. Want to republish? Get permission. Want to quote? That's fair use.

I don’t believe there are any bad intentions at work, but I do think it’s not always clear to people what their obligations are when using Creative Commons licensed images in their blog. (My focus is on the attribution aspect of the licenses, not those pertaining to commercial use, sharing, etc. I am also relying on version 3.0 of the license, but this discussion should be applicable to all the versions.)

So how can we do better?

We can do better by making sure the images we use are properly licensed. For Creative Commons licensed images, this means putting in proper attribution that meets the standards of the license. I plan to do this going forward, and I also plan to spend time going back over images in my old posts to make sure they meet licensing requirements as well.

The Key Provisions in the Creative Commons Licenses

There are two key provisions of all the Creative Commons licenses that are critical for proper use of images in a blog. First, section 4(a) requires that a copy of the license or a link to the license be included with the work. Second, section 4(b) requires that you provide the name of the owner (or who they designate), the title of the image, and a link to the work (but make sure you don’t suggest they are endorsing you).

So What Does this Mean for Bloggers?

As a blogger you should provide the following information along with the image you are using in your article:

• the name (or screen name) of the creator (or who they designate);
• the title of the image, if there is one;
• the specific Creative Commons license and version under which the image is licensed;
• alternatively, if the creator of the work requests you attribute it in a specific way, you should do as they ask.

Ideally, you should link as many of these items to either the original source, or to their canonical location online. While section 4(b) implies that you must provide the URI of the CC license, in practical terms naming the license should be enough (the Creative Commons FAQ says, “it is nice if the license citation links to the license on the CC website”). This is, I think, especially true if you link to the location where the image originates and where the original copyright and license terms are explained (for example, linking to the Flickr page for a CC licensed photo stored on Flickr — actually, this is mandatory for Flickr images if the image is hosted by Flickr).

In practical terms, I think the following example is the kind of attribution that is appropriate under the license:  ”Agatha on the porch” by Flickr user Kristopher Nelson, used under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.0 license. This citation includes (1) the title of the picture, (2) where it comes from, (3) who created it, and (4) what license applies.

Captions with WordPress

In WordPress, you can put this information in as a caption in the popup image add/modify box.

Because the WordPress caption is styled with CSS (via the “wp-caption” class that WordPress puts in), you may make it appear in a variety of creative ways. You can even “filter” the code produced by WordPress if you want the HTML to appear differently.

Captions with HTML & CSS

If you do not use WordPress, you could use HTML and CSS similar to the following (courtesy of the W3C site):

[sourcecode language="html"]
<div class=”figure”>
<p><img src=”eiffel.jpg” width=”136″ height=”200″ alt=”Eiffel tower”></p>
<p>Scale model of the Eiffel tower in Parc Mini-France</p>
</div>
[/sourcecode]

And some CSS:

[sourcecode language="css"]
div.figure {
float: right;
width: 25%;
border: thin silver solid;
margin: 0.5em;
padding: 0.5em;
}
div.figure p {
text-align: center;
font-style: italic;
font-size: smaller;
text-indent: 0;
}
[/sourcecode]

(For more about this, including additional discussion and examples, see Figures & Captions at the W3C site.)

Rollover Image Captions with jQuery

Another approach would be to use jQuery and a plugin such as jCaption or Captify, which will automatically generate sophisticated rollover captions. These look very nice and keep your site design clean, while providing all the required information.

Using the Title Attribute of the Image Tag

If you choose, you may instead put all the information into the title attribute of the <img> tag, along with linking the image to the source page, like this:

[sourcecode lang="html"]
<a href=”http://www.flickr.com/photos/krisnelson/4213915751/”><img title=”&quot;Agatha on the porch&quot; by Flickr user Kristopher Nelson, used under a Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 2.0 license.” src=”http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2677/4213915751_050a74b704_s.jpg” /></a>
[/sourcecode]

Like jQuery-based approaches, this has the benefit of making the information fully available (although you cannot insert links, so make sure the image itself links to the source page). It also keeps your page design uncluttered. It doesn’t look as nice as the rollover approach, but it is simple to implement on any site.

Use Zemanta

Zemanta allows you to easily select and insert images into your posts (along with related links and more). It takes care of adding appropriate captions and links so you don’t have to. It’s image selection is good, but I like to pick my own images generally, and to style them my way. Nonetheless, it’s an excellent tool that I recommend highly.

Or Just Put it at the End

Finally, you could also add a simple attributional note to the bottom of your posts. This is a straightforward and easy approach, allows complete information and full links.

Conclusions

Creative Commons licensed images are a wonderful resource for bloggers. Use of such images is free and easy — provided you follow a few requirements that primarily serve to acknowledge the creator of the work. If you, like me, didn’t always do the best job of this, take some time to go back over your posts and make sure everything is in order. And remember, whether you use CC licensed images, pay for stock photos, use your own, or rely on the public domain, photographers and authors will always like to hear from you if you like their work, so let them know.

So just remember to check to make sure the images you want to use are licensed properly, and that you’re meeting the terms of the license, and enjoy!

More Resources

• Five sources of free images for your blog
• How do I properly attribute a Creative Commons licensed work? – from Creative Commons
• Best Practices for Creative Commons attributions – how to attribute works you reuse under a Creative Commons license
• Creative Commons Search – easily find CC licensed images

How to write attributions for the Creative Commons licensed images you use on your blog is from in propria persona, © 2010 by Kristopher Nelson. Want to republish? Get permission. Want to quote? That's fair use.

As part of this, the TSA issued subpoenas duces tecum (legal orders requiring that documents or information be produced) that sought to compel the two bloggers to reveal their sources. After a public outcry, the TSA “canceled the legal action and apologized for the strong-arm tactics agents used.”

Normally, subpoenas are issued by a court clerk or, more commonly, by attorneys working on a case who issue such subpoenas under the authority of the supervising court. The goal is to compel witnesses to either come to court or produce documents or information to be used in court. Enforcement is not automatic, but is instead sought through the court supervising the case, which has the power to punish someone who refuses to obey a subpoena without sufficient cause (as determined by the court).

The subpoenas (or “subpenas”) in this situation, however, were not issued or supervised directly by a court, according to the text of the document provided by Chris Elliot, one of the targeted bloggers. Instead, they were issued by the TSA under authority granted to it by Congress in 49 U.S.C. 46104. (This authority is similar to that granted to District Attorneys for conducting investigations.) It grants the authority to the TSA to:

subpena witnesses and records related to a matter involved in the hearing or investigation from any place in the United States to the designated place of the hearing or investigation

The law does not grant to the TSA the authority to enforce subpoenas directly. Instead, the TSA must “petition a court of the United States to enforce the subpena.” The court then conducts a hearing, and may impose penalties (including imprisonment).

One can object to subpoenas on a variety of grounds. (Note that one of those grounds is not the Fourth Amendment, since this is not considered a “search” or a “seizure.”) The order may be overly broad or burdensome (although the court may simple require you be reimbursed for your expenses in that case) or may request confidential information protected by privilege (attorney-client privilege, or doctor-patient, for example). Some states protect a journalist’s right to protect an anonymous source — but there is no equivalent federal “shield law.”

This is why the TSA felt it could indeed demand information from the bloggers, and why it is very possible they could have succeeded in penalizing the two bloggers in court if they did not turn over the information they had. (Of course, there may have been other arguments that a lawyer experienced in this area could have wielded — so if you are subpoenaed and would prefer not to comply, consult an attorney.)

For more on subpoenas generally, and how to respond to them, see: Responding to Subpoenas by the Citizen Media Law Project. The Project also has a good guide to protecting sources and source material more generally. I wrote about this previously in Journalist Shield Laws and Bloggers.

Why can the TSA subpoena bloggers to get at their sources? is from in propria persona, © 2010 by Kristopher Nelson. Want to republish? Get permission. Want to quote? That's fair use.

Image via Wikipedia

I’ve been giving a lot of thought over the weekend to the problem of finding good content buried amidst all the noise on the Internet, especially when it comes to blog articles from lesser-known sources. (This is true for readers looking for quality content, but it’s also true for authors seeking readers.) Although I’ve been struggling with this problem for a while, this recent post from Louis Gray really resonated with me:

In essence, the incentives, for the most part, do not tilt in favor of writing unique stories or doing the required research necessary to get a full story, to get quotes from a source, or find data points that back up analysis.

There are going to be pockets of the Web that harbor original ideas, a focus on quality and data, and there are going to be other places where copying, scraping, and shortcuts are going to rule the day.

via louisgray.com: Growing Grumblings on Tech News Don’t Address Incentives.

I run into this problem when, as a researcher, I seek useful analysis on topics I am investigating. Google tends to turn up sources with high “PageRank,” which reflects a certain “wisdom of the crowds” when it comes to breaking stories, but stumbles when looking for more specific content, or insightful analysis. I often have to wade through what Mike Arrington of TechCrunch calls “fast-food content” from content mills of various sorts (including, often, well-known blogs).

As a result, I turn to sources I know (like SSRN or blogs I already know who are not quite on target) and spend inordinate amounts of time painstakingly, manually finding decent sources of information (which usually means big blogs). Usually I miss the odd, insightful posts from “little guy” blogs.

Note that turning up top blogs in niche is not too hard (Alltop is a good place to start). Many of them are quite good (the crowd is good for something), especially for getting the pulse of a niche.

But what happens when you want something beyond the latest and greatest happenings? What about all those little blogs out there that occasionally produce brilliant content, but are never going to compete (and probably aren’t trying to) with TechCrunch (or even louisgray.com)?

Regular journalism (Salon, for example) can be good for this (especially in politics), although the lack of links to sources makes it difficult to use such pieces as launching points for more research. (More academic articles are better for this, but can be long, complex, and specialized.)

Some ideas, thoughts, and sources:

• I encourage well-known bloggers and big blogs to link to lesser-known, but insightful posts on blogs — even if the small guy is not an up-and-coming, next-big-thing discovery. (It would be great if journalists could do the same, but since traditional news outlets seem unable to move forward to embrace the Web, I don’t hold out much hope for this.)
• Digg and Reddit can sometimes turn up good content, but this is another case of crowdsourcing not always producing good results. Content that rises tends to fall into certain patterns and appeal to a certain demographic or mindset. Good, but uninteresting-to-the-masses articles tend to get classified with spam.
• StumbleUpon can be better than Reddit or Digg at allowing niche content, but because it tends to feel random, it’s use for specific research is limited — I’ve never had much luck searching it for useful content.
• Google (and its competitors) should consider finding a way to “de-rank” content mills in some fashion. (Yes, I know they provide a good deal of revenue via advertising, so perhaps this will never happen.) Meanwhile, Google Blog Search and Google Scholar are useful, if imperfect, tools.
• Web tools like AllTop and PostRank are useful tools, although both tend to highlight top blogs in a niche, not top posts (which is still very useful).
• “Bog rolls” are still useful sources, even if their use is dying off, but again tend to turn up niche blogs, not specific content.
• Academic sources like SSRN, or PubMed, are useful for certain kinds of specific research, but they can be too specialized and too in-depth.

Any other ideas? I’m still looking.

Finding the diamonds in the rough in the "blogosphere" is from in propria persona, © 2010 by Kristopher Nelson. Want to republish? Get permission. Want to quote? That's fair use.

Law school’s pedagogical approach does not necessarily reflect this ultimately practical goal, though, and its focus on the so-called “Socratic method” and on appellate case law is, many argue, an ineffective means of training effective lawyers:

Martha Minow, the new dean of Harvard Law School, where the Langdellian method of teaching from appellate opinions was developed, has called for “another case method” closer to the one used in business and public-policy schools, and consistent with W and L’s approach and Carnegie.

PrawfsBlawg: What’s happening in legal education?.

In contrast, graduate school is eminently suited to its goal of training new academics. We read other academics, write like academics, and teach and grade like the teachers we expect to be. Very disconnected from the “real world,” perhaps, and often overly bound up with theory — but still, if one is aiming to work in this area, the training is, in a very real sense, practical.

Law school, though, while pushing the practical, does not teach it. At most, one might argue that it teaches a kind of thinking — a very critical kind of thinking — but it does not teach students to practice law (nor to teach it, for that matter).

I’m curious to see how my reflections on law school education change as I pursue my PhD — I expect I might feel more positive about it as more time passes. We shall see.

Law school vs. graduate school is from in propria persona, © 2010 by Kristopher Nelson. Want to republish? Get permission. Want to quote? That's fair use.

2. SexyBookmarks — sure, there are many ways to add lists of sharing icons and links to your posts — but this one is pretty.

3. wp-Typography — easily improve the typography on your site, em and en dashes, hyphenation, and much more.

4. WP Greet Box — give a simple little welcome message to visitors coming via various referrers, like Stumbleupon or Digg.

5. WP Minify — compress CSS and Javascript to speed up page loads. It can be a little tricky — I find I have to specifically exclude all 3rd-party scripts and stylesheets — but it’s highly effective.

Five lesser-known — but great — WordPress plugins is from in propria persona, © 2010 by Kristopher Nelson. Want to republish? Get permission. Want to quote? That's fair use.

Jim Calloway points out a troublesome issue for traveling attorneys:

The Department of Homeland Security recently clarified its position to restate that if you cross the border, any of your digital information devices can be seized and searched without the government giving you any reason whatsoever. They did promise to try to return them in a more timely manner. This includes everything from a laptop to an iPod to a USB flash drive. (Wow, wonder how many flash drives are in the pockets of my laptop bag now?)

via Jim Calloway’s Law Practice Tips Blog: The Digital Lawyer Crosses the Border.

He goes on to provide the following advice to any lawyer who may cross the U.S. border with a laptop potentially full of confidential client files:

That laptop probably can no longer travel across the U.S.border with you. Whether top military grade encryption protects your information from the Department of Homeland security or just presents a professional challenge for them is for you to decide.

via Jim Calloway’s Law Practice Tips Blog: The Digital Lawyer Crosses the Border.

There has always been an exception to search and seizure law at border crossings. In theory, this is nothing new — attorneys traveling with confidential paper files could also have them searched. But the ease of carrying vast numbers of confidential documents in electronic form raises the bar on this.

And, as Calloway also points out, encryption may or may not be sufficient to protect your data from the U.S. government. It might be better to limit what confidential data you have on your laptop at all — Calloway recommends “temporary” netbooks for the job instead of your regular notebook. I think that’s not a bad idea at all.

But I still think you should encrypt any laptop with confidential data too.

Related articles by Zemanta

• PCWorld: DHS Clarifies Laptop Border Crossing Rules (trishussey.com)
• ACLU files lawsuit on border laptop searches (infoworld.com)
• Homeland Security Changes Laptop Search Policy (yro.slashdot.org)

Lawyers should leave their laptops at home when traveling abroad is from in propria persona, © 2010 by Kristopher Nelson. Want to republish? Get permission. Want to quote? That's fair use.

I’m excited to announce that starting today, Google Books will offer free downloads of these and more than one million more public domain books in an additional format, EPUB. By adding support for EPUB downloads, we’re hoping to make these books more accessible by helping people around the world to find and read them in more places. More people are turning to new reading devices to access digital books, and many such phones, netbooks, and e-ink readers have smaller screens that don’t readily render image-based PDF versions of the books we’ve scanned. EPUB is a lightweight text-based digital book format that allows the text to automatically conform (or “reflow”) to these smaller screens. And because EPUB is a free, open standard supported by a growing ecosystem of digital reading devices, works you download from Google Books as EPUBs won’t be tied to or locked into a particular device.

via Inside Google Books: Download Over a Million Public Domain Books from Google Books in the Open EPUB Format.

This kind of access shows some of the potential of the public domain to allow for innovation and reuse. Thank Google — and Google advertisers, of course — for making it free. (They could legally sell public-domain works — there is no legal requirement that such access be free and open.)

Related articles by Zemanta

• Does Copyright Foster or Hinder Innovation? (inpropriapersona.com)
• What does it mean to be in the public domain? Thoughts about the AP licensing scheme. (inpropriapersona.com)
• Google Opens Up Its EPUB Archive: Download 1 Million Books for Free (readwriteweb.com)

Google Books adds open-standard downloads is from in propria persona, © 2010 by Kristopher Nelson. Want to republish? Get permission. Want to quote? That's fair use.