Legal digitalization – A catalyst for change – the ILLA (The International Language and Law Association) Conference – 2021

 

[Courthouse*]

I had the pleasure of participating this last week in the ILLA hybrid conference from Bergamo, Italy focusing on the digitization of legal discourse. As usual, the learned field of lecturers provided varying and illuminating perspectives on the changes in the legal field made possible by technology and spurred forward by the Covid situation. In the lectures that I attended, three aspects stood out, notably the evolution of legal forms, communication and substance.

Clearly, the physical barriers imposed by Covid restrictions have forced courts to adopt modern means of procedure. As Daniel Greineder noted, arbitration courts have significantly increased their use of video presentation and online evidence submitting facilitated by use of Live Note or similar software as well as rapid hearing transcripts. On a geographically larger scale, the International Court of Justice proceedings in Africa, as reported by Jekaterina Nikitina, involved mass use of video technology for both advocates and witness, including intentional hiding of faces and voices in the latter case. On an interesting note, the court allowed and requested attorneys appearing via video not to stand before the judges as the cameras would no longer be on their faces, a contrast from traditional court practice. Thus, courts have adopted to the availability of technology and difficulties of current circumstances by liberalizing their procedures.

On a communicative level, this digitization can create issues of vocabulary, intent and design form. Martina Bajcic and Martina Ticic researched key terms of EU online processes, specifically small claims, and noted the tension between use of the same term for all countries when the given term is not commonly known in a given country, giving the example of the word “domicile” in Croatia. Similarly, Sotira Skytrioiri showed how the words “bank” and “headquartered” can have different meanings, depending on specific jurisdiction, highlighting the relevant question whether an Internet bank has a territory. Giuliana Diani discussed the use of legal blogs that extract formal legal opinions to serve as a basis of personal points of view regarding the matters at hand, quickly transforming the decision from a final judgment to a basis for popular argument for legal lay persons. On the design level, Helena Haapio and Anna Hurmerinta-Haanpaa described and provided examples of actual user-friendly design, including the use of software to provide simple interpretations of legal text and a 3-level approach to online legal information: simple instructions, summary of conditions and full text, each accessible by a simple click. It was clear that the accepted manner of communicating law by Internet is in the process of change.

The most intriguing aspect was the impact on legal digitization on the present and future. Ruth Breeze compared non-commercial free advice websites with those of attorneys seeking new customers. Unfortunately, it required great viewer sophistication to distinguish the two, meaning that, through “colonization” the Internet has clearly blurred the difference between NGO legal assistance and aggressive legal firms. On a larger note, Dieter Stein noted the transition of law from oral, i.e., historical, to written, i.e., enactive, to digital, i.e., reactive. To clarify, while oral law was a form of precedent, written law was a guide for future activity, stable and slow to evolve. By contrast, online sites can change their content within minutes without any visual record of the change. On the one hand, these sites provide updated information on current regulations, quite valuable with the constant flux of Covid rules, among other matters. On the other hand, the sheer simplicity of the revision brings the disturbing image from Orwell’s 1984 of the constant, granted non-digital, changing of the news and modifying of the past. I am not sure that the long-term effects of this instant update are for the ultimate benefit of the citizen. Regardless, digitalization is changing the nature of the law.

I apologize for failing to mention the other speakers as I was unable to attend all the lectures. My own contribution was on the importance and manner of writing legal English in a manner that an average reader can understand. I also wish to thank the organizers for managing a hybrid conference quite seamlessly, a living example of digitalization on legal conferences. They provided a wonderful forum to help legal scholars of all kinds view the process of legal digitalization with a much wider lens, gaining a deeper perspective of the present situation and appreciation of future developments.

* Picture captions help the blind access the Internet.

Picture credit: Image by <a href="https://pixabay.com/users/mbraun0223-2118828/?utm_source=link-attribution&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_campaign=image&amp;utm_content=1223280">Mike Braun</a> from <a href="https://pixabay.com/?utm_source=link-attribution&amp;utm_medium=referral&amp;utm_campaign=image&amp;utm_content=1223280">Pixabay</a>

Internet alternative plots

“How did people manage before Internet” is a rather common question today. The blunt answer is quite well and much happier but no one under the age of 30 will believe it. A much more interesting issue is how Internet would have changed the world if it had been around some 1000 years ago.

Historically, its impact would have been huge.  Clearly, the Spanish and Mongols would not have launched their Armadas to conquer England and Japan, respectively, if they had been able to access a long term weather forecast.  Logically, Alexander Graham Bell would have never invented the telephone for the simple reasons that there was no need for it. The list of world-changing potential effects is endless, limited only by a person’s imagination and knowledge. More intriguing would have been the Internet’s impact on entertainment, specifically how its existence would have changed the plots of the stories.

For example, communication issues would be much simplified. Simenon’s Maigret would not have to wait for wires and wake up operators in the middle of the night to receive the information he needed. The whos of Horton and Dr. Seuss fame would not have had to organize everybody but instead simply could have sent a message via whatsapp or tweeter.

Furthermore, characters would be more certain of where they are. Dorothy would have been certain, not merely having a feeling, that she was not in Kansas anymore anda checked for return flights instead of taking the yellow brick road. Likewise, all those characters in movies whose vehicles ran out of gas would have known where the next gas station was.

Logistics and travel would have been much easier. Jules Verne’s Phileas Fogg and Passepartout could have ordered tickets for all their means of transportation in advance, significantly reducing their stress. For that matter, if Brad and Janet from the Rocky Horror Picture Show had done a proper search for a well-rated B&B, their honeymoon would have much ordinary. On a humanitarian (or is that canine) level, wouldn’t it have much simpler if Lassie had been picked up by a local farmer, who published her picture on the Internet, leading to either a nice ride back to her original owners or, at worst, a new home?

How much suffering the Internet could have saved. Algernon, of Flowers for Algernon by Daniel Keys, could have read the result of the trials on rats and realized that his increased intelligence was only temporary. Moliere’s Imaginary Invalid would have known that the last doctor is a quack, thus avoiding premature death.

I should note that I could not think of a single Shakespearean plot that would have “benefited” from an Internet retrofit, but that may be from lack of knowledge or imagination.

It is clear that the plots of countless tales would be completely different if the Internet had existed at the time of their writing. However, different does not mean better. I prefer the non-www version of these stories as they are somehow quite richer and more focused on the essential. I could argue that so was pre-Internet real life in many ways but that might sound dinasaurish.

I welcome any ideas for alternative “what if” plots.

Necessity is the step-mother of (language) invention

In his blog on tennis players and language proficiency, http://www.jeromejerome.fr/en/Blog/tennis-and-languages, Jérôme Osselaer cited Novak Djokovic in regards to the reasons for his knowing so many languages as saying that he understood that Serbian is a minor language.  This polyglot was in strong contrast with most other players, who only know their own native tongue.  This comparison begs the question of why certain people learn many languages.

Let’s start with the assumption that, aside from some “weirdos” who like learning another tongue for its own sake, most people learn what they need to learn, i.e. necessity is the main motivation for actually learning something.  In support of this hypothesis, go to a country speaking an exotic language, such as Iceland, Finland, and Israel, the level of English in the street is quite good.  The average person is rather proficient in conducting a standard conversion in at least one foreign language, albeit with a strong accent and occasionally faulty grammar.  The example of German is interesting since English is highly emphasized in Germany, with even some job interviews being conducted in English.  This tendency may be explained by the fact that, outside of Austria and parts of Switzerland, German is not the first language in any other country as well as the bad connotation the German language had/has with the older generation. In Switzerland, the home of another polyglot tennis player, Rodger Federer, it is quite useful to speak at least three languages given the linguistic diversity of this physically small country.  On the same level, Spanish proficiency is required in many jobs in the US states adjoining the Mexican border, encouraging a wide knowledge of that language.

By contrast, visit a medium sized city in any of the countries speaking a prevalent first language such as English, Spanish or French, the difference between studying and knowing is striking.  Most people cannot give directions in a foreign language.  Of course, the reasons for this ignorance vary.  In some cases, such as in much of the United States, the assumption is that everybody knows English.  Therefore, learning a foreign language is superfluous.  In poor countries, most of the population does not have the income to travel abroad, in fact rendering a foreign language superfluous for travel but not business purposes.  Some countries have extremely poor education systems, such as France, increasing the gap between learning and using.  Finally, some countries have been politically isolated, with active discouragement of foreign languages, as is the case of parts of Eastern Europe.  In Budapest, the capital city of Hungary, relatively few people over the age of 40 understand English (or choose not to understand Russian).  In these places, the mother tongue is considered all that is necessary.

Younger computer users quite interestingly may have a solid reading knowledge of English due to the latter’s status as the lingua franca of the Internet. It is unclear how this comprehension translated into speaking ability. Yet, it is clear that the need to understand English strongly motivates this group to learn English, even in a non-systematic manner.

So, imploring people to learn a foreign language is not very effective.  Linking the world, physically or virtually, seems to provide the “reality” they need to actually go out and learn it.

The Ecstasy of Used Book Stores or Vintage Dust

The age of the Internet has brought countless benefits, including almost instant access to facts and efficient comparison shopping, to name a few.  Alas, change does have its price.  I fear that due to the Internet, the classic used book store with its sights and smells will disappear, as did manual typewriter.

As a bookworm from a family of bookworms, I have always preferred a used book store to a library.  There is a sense of adventure that the Dewey decimal system used by public libraries seems to destroy.  Also, a treasure found there is by definition a shared one, not a private one as when you find that special book buried under 18 other books in a dusty stack in the back of the store.  Only you had the patience and perseverance to remove those other books to find that pearl of a volume, however you wish to define that.

American used book bookstores, especially in college towns, tend to be colored by the national insistence of order and profit making.  The shelves are arranged nicely in alphabetical order by writer in sections having some internal logic.  This desire to facilitate the buying experience has been taken even farther by modern used book stores, such as Powell’s in Portland, Oregon (where I worked), where coffee and pastry are available to render your decision making process even more pleasant.  That the customers are being manipulated to buy books does not make the purchase of books any less desirable, of course.

By contrast, the used book stores in Paris represent the polar opposite. The vast majority are small shops.  Any shelves that may have been installed are hidden by random piles of dust-covered books.   The organization and price seem to be random, with books on widely varying topics lying on top of each other marked by arbitrary prices for better or worse.  Some stores claim to have a specialty, such as modern art or the Far East, in which case the seller might actually know which books s/he has.  Most are manned by passive looking people who seem to be there more because they don’t want to sit around the house than for any desire to make money.  Your decision to buy or just look does not seem to affect their mood at all.  This complete lack of commercial pushiness renders the search through Paris for first-edition Simenon novels all the more pleasurable.

I regret the future disappearance of this passion, which will go the way of letter writing and flower pressing.  In the meantime, I plan to partake of this pleasure when I have the rare luxury of taking an endless walk for no purpose other than to discover what magic book is buried deep in a pile of dust.

Being First Does Matter

As Nike would like to remind us, almost nobody remembers the second person to walk on the moon (Buzz Aldrin). Clearly, being the first to achieve something does have its privileges. Here is short list of those winners and what they received:

The English came up with the first stamp, allowing the UK to be only country whose postal stamps do not state the country of issue.  They also invented the first way and technology to calculate latitude (pre-GPS), i.e. comparing noon in London with the local noon. This required an accurate clock, not a simple endeavor at the time, to keep London time.  Consequently, all time zones are related to GMT, which is located in England.   By the way, there was no daylight saving time to confuse the issue then.

The United States created the first operational telephone system, meaning that the international prefix (1) refers to the United States.  Even more brashly, it also created the Internet, giving American sites the privilege of adding only .com, not com.fr, com.de, etc.  I suppose the British would say having the time zone is more practical.

In more intellectual matters, other European powers, former and current, have created the standards.  Cooking terms are in French because nobody else invested so much effort in codifying the culinary processes.  Philosophy would be much poorer and require fewer letters if Germans had not invented the right word for each complex concept.   Has anybody ever head of an opera translated into Italian?  I would agree that Italian is a wonderful language for song, certainly sweeter than German or English. 

Other cultures also have their achievements. Japan also has its claim to fame:  The sun rises there.  Although you can’t eat or send the sun, it is an illuminating asset from the Japanese point of view.  The Chinese invented thousands of items centuries before the Europeans ever even though of them, such as gun powder and noodles.  However, alas, as is typical of the last few centuries, the West brazenly stole their ideas, improved them, and used them against the Chinese.  As the expression goes, might makes right apparently.

So, the first country to invent time travel or telepathy will have its privileges too, maybe, since sometimes, as Nike says, just win.