Blogging milestone; 10,000 visits

I passed the 10,000 visit mark yesterday and have implemented some changes. I will now be accepting anonymous comments, so those of you who were worried that my black helicopters would track you down can now post anonymously.

I didn't want anonymous comments at first because I blog a lot about autism and there are some very nasty characters out there spreading disinformation on mercury, vaccines and such. I have enough material now in my archive that people can know where I am coming from and the level of discourse expected on this blog. I welcome people who disagree with me, but you have to back up your disagreement with facts and logic.

I welcome all comments that add to the discussion, or which ask questions. If I can answer them I will try to do so. All comments get emailed to me, even the ones on posts that are quite old. I am happy to answer question on old posts too. It may be old to me, but not old to anyone else.

How to protect bloggers via "terms of use"

I have been thinking about how to protect bloggers from the bad people who might want to hurt them, and have come up with this as a "terms of use". The idea is that if you post this on the blog, that anyone by reading the blog accepts the "terms of use", and one of the terms of use is that the user is responsible for any damages that their discovery and disclosure of the identity of the author might cause. Along the lines of:

Terms of use: This creative content is offered for the use of user under a creative commons share and share alike non-commercial with attribution license, provided that the user does not use the content to identify the author or individuals mentioned in the creative work. If the user does use the content to identify the author, and/or individuals mentioned in the creative work, and discloses that identity to a third party, the user accepts that user is solely responsible for any and all consequential damages to the user, the author, individuals mentioned, the third party, and any other party who may be damaged as a consequence of disclosure by the user of the identity of author or mentioned individual to a third party. Damages may include (but are not limited to) lawyers fees, lost work, pain and suffering. User further agrees that compensatory damages will be tripled and added as punitive damages.

By continued use of the content, user accepts and acknowledges that user is solely responsible for any and all consequential damages to the user, the author, individuals mentioned, the third party, and any other party who may be damaged as a consequence of the disclosure by the user of the identity of author to a third party. Damages may include (but are not limited to) lawyers fees, lost work, pain and suffering. User further agrees that compensatory damages will be tripled and added as punitive damages.

For the purposes of this agreement, the identity of author and individuals mentioned are considered a derivative work.

All derivative works must contain these same terms of use and any user of the derivative works must accept and acknowledge that user is solely responsible for any and all consequential damages to the user, the author, individuals mentioned, the third party, and any other party who may be damaged as a consequence of the disclosure by the user of the identity of author or individual mentioned to a third party. Damages may include (but are not limited to) lawyers fees, lost work, pain and suffering. User further agrees that compensatory damages will be tripled and added as punitive damages.

A verbal derivative work, that is, a verbal description of the creative work must also contain these same terms of use and any user of the oral derivative work must accept and acknowledge that user is solely responsible for any and all consequential damages to the user, the author, individuals mentioned, the third party, and any other party who may be damaged as a consequence of the disclosure by the user of the identity of author or individual mentioned to a third party. Damages may include (but are not limited to) lawyers fees, lost work, pain and suffering. User further agrees that compensatory damages will be tripled and added as punitive damages.

How much "protection" does this actually supply? If people are honorable and follow these terms of use, the identity of the bloggers or people blogged about should never become known. If it does become known from someone reading the blog, then who ever discloses it becomes liable for any damages. In any case, using these terms of use, does demonstrate a good faith effort to keep the content of the blog from being associated with any particular patient.

Could an anonymous user disclose the identity? Maybe, but to verify that the blog says what the anonymous user says it does, one has to become a user and then becomes bound by the non-identity disclosure provisions. If the blog is not checked, then the claim of identity is simply unverified hearsay by an anonymous source. Not enough evidence to base any damages on.

Can a user even testify about it? Perhaps, but then the oral version is a derivative work, and so people who hear the testimony about it are bound by the terms of use too.

When would it not hold? If the creative work were somehow illegal, threatening, or something that did need to be brought to the attention of authorities, perhaps the terms of use would not be enforceable.

Medical Blogging and the tragedy of the commons

I have been thinking about medical blogs since Flea deleted his. Fat Doctor has deleted hers too, and unfortunately I don't think we will see their blogs reappear. I think the risks are too high. I think that all of the medical bloggers are going to disappear or go private in a month or less. I have no doubt that there are lawyers right now, trying to figure out who various medical bloggers are and who their patients are, so they can file suit against the doctors for "privacy violations" and then "settle" instead of going to trial. (aka as "legal extortion" (to non-lawyers)). Settling for $10k, $30k, even $50k, is much cheaper than going to trial for $200k.

Once that becomes common (i.e. happens even once) we will see US medical blogs disappear. It will be a shame when that happens.

Medical malpractice insurance isn't at a state where it can accommodate blogging. There isn't enough experience with it to be able to set premiums other than exorbitantly. There isn't enough income associated with blogging to support even modest premiums.

The UK medical blogs will stay up because in the UK legal system the loser pays the legal bills of the winner. If the US were to adopt that policy, marginal lawsuits would disappear in the US too. But then so would marginal lawyers. As a non-lawyer cynic, I say that will never happen.

But hey, when a judge can demand $65 million for a lost pair of pants, what does anyone expect? Certainly not "justice".

It is what is known as a "tragedy of the commons". When a resource is not privately controlled, the first to exploit it can liquidate it and acquire what ever the liquidated value is. The liquidated value of medical blogging might be a few hundred $k (liquidated by "legal extortion" that is). The non-liquidated value to everyone collectively might be higher, but who ever liquidates it first gets all the liquidated value.

With such a time pressure to be first, I think it will happen within a month.