Take a stand against DRM? Get fired from your day job.
January 31, 2006 by IngaOn January 10th 2006, the Village Voice ran an article called Code Warriors, detailing the efforts of the Free Culture movement, and those of the NYU chapter in particular. The reporter, Carla Blumenkranz, quoted FC co-founder Fred Benenson explaining that our efforts are about “harm reduction”; she noted, quite aptly, that our mission is to aid in “minimizing penalties and maximizing opportunities, for artists and audiences alike.” But what about the muckrakers? The conscientious objectors? The free culture activists? What protection from penalty do we have? What opportunity?
On Thursday, January 26th, I was fired from my job as a legal clerk at a medium sized IP law firm in midtown, NYC. When I inquired as to the reason, I was shown the Code Warriors article and told that my views about what the firm does were incompatible with…what the firm does. In so many words, I was told that the firm could no longer employ me due to my aberrant views on copyright law—although I was feverishly reassured of my right to hold those views. This assurance had relatively little value, however, as I was still fired for expressing the views in question.
As an active member of FreeCulture.org, and the president of the NYU chapter, I feel both obligated and prepared to stand behind the organization’s stance on where copyright is headed, and where it should be. I can not, in good conscience, renounce my beliefs in the hopes of gaining a rung on the corporate ladder. Still, I would like to say a few words in my own defense.
First, my taking a job in an IP firm was neither a subversive attempt to wreak havoc “from the inside”, nor a hypocritical denial of my Free Culture values. I was, and still am, a student interested in the scope of copyright law, and determined to pursue a career in the field. I wanted to gain an understanding both of the theory of copyright, which my work with FC provided, and its practice. The firm exposed me to the day to day operations of an IP lawyer, and I was nothing if not receptive to these lessons. I was baffled that someone saw fit to fire me over an expression of dissenting views. Doesn’t the field become richer when the wider spectrum of legal thought is explored and encouraged? Certainly, it is wrong to eject someone from their field of interest simply for exercising her first amendment rights and speaking out against the current.
What leapt out at me in rereading the article was my statement about breaking the law. I’d like to clarify that when I said “if there are laws I believe are wrong, I will break them,” I was not making a general statement. FC does not endorse reckless lawbreaking; nor do I. I made that comment in the specific context of CD’s with DRM encryption: I would hold down the shift key and download my CD onto my laptop without a twinge of guilt toward the RIAA executive sitting in his corner office and “getting squeezed.” That does not, however, make me an internal threat to a major law firm. And it’s a sad commentary on the autonomy of law firms that if one is rumored to represent Sony, it must keep its employment policy in check with the politics and business models of its clients.
Still, as a member of the Free Culture movement, and a young woman of 19 without children to support, I can afford to take this blow in the name of progress. The more people are made aware of this story, the less likely it is that firms will be able to maintain their practice of thought-policing without fear of public outcry. If legal reform is going to happen–if Free Culture is to gain enough mastery of legal tools to bring about with action the change we are forever advocating–then its members cannot live and work in fear of the consequences of their free speech. FC will continue to dream of a world where culture and creativity thrive–free of unnecessary restraint–and I will continue to dream of the days when I am a legal scholar capable of enacting those dreams.
UPDATE: Thank you all so much for the outpouring of sympathy and encouragement! I was amazed at how much feedback and coverage we received and couldn’t be happier about it. Fortunately, I have found a new job for the time being, and am not currently seeking employment. However, if you are interested in the activities of Free Culture, or even potential summer interns, don’t hesistate to contact us. Thanks again!
January 31st, 2006 at 7:21 pm
Wow Inga, that’s pretty ridiculous. I hope that this doesn’t become standard practice in the industry. We gots to stick it to the man!
eli b.
(Sorry for not manning the booth today. Didn’t time it right, and I didn’t know it wasn’t an all day thing like Fall).
January 31st, 2006 at 8:06 pm
Wow. Your former management chain must be very paranoid. I’m sorry Inga. *hugs from Florida*
January 31st, 2006 at 8:46 pm
As an objective law student in NYC, I am outraged at the actions your former employer took to cleanse its “inner-workings” of any and all “demonic” contributions. You sound like a peaceful human being with nothing more than a thirst for knowledge and curiosity for justice. Besides that, you are merely a 19 year old college student who, as many of us were at one time, wants to take a stance against something that doesnt sit well with the psyche. What exactly are they afraid of and how can they sleep at night knowing that they suppress one’s free will to speak out. So close to Martin Luther King Jr’s birthday none-the-less. He had a dream just like you and now, decades later, we cannot imagine thinking and living the way Americans did while he was alive. I wonder if those responsible for you termination will feel the same decades from now as well. Hold on to you dream, young lady, and I’m sure you will go far!!!
ps: get off the damn couch, put on some pants, and make some frickin’ money, roomie. cable is due.
January 31st, 2006 at 11:36 pm
I can’t believe it! Were they just not going to tell you why you were fired unless you had asked? Did you have to sign something before accepting the job that you wouldn’t hold opinions that weren’t company approved, or be involved in a group that the firm wasn’t associated with? I really hope that they are regretting their actions. I doubt they can find another clerk that has as much passion and interest in the field as you.
-Laura
February 1st, 2006 at 1:46 am
I’ll assume for arguments sake that the particular firm that employed you was involved with IP litigation. Such a firm would not as a matter of pragmatic business concerns adopt a neutral or objective stance. Litigation is adversarial, and as such, the support staff from partners all the way down to the clerks must possess a measure of zeal and passion toward a particular client’s need.
If I were to assign you the task of finding some precedent in support of a suit against the RIAA (defended the RIAA’s actions and supporting contemporary copyright laws), would you sabotage the task? Probably not. But would you approach the task with the same level of enthusiasm someone harboring the opposing belief would? I would contend that as a matter or pure probability, the answer is likely no.
Employment is (generally speaking) not an exercise in charity. Employers (especially at competitive IP firms) have an interest in hiring not only the brightest people, but those who are going to most effectively represent their clients.
February 1st, 2006 at 3:59 am
Wow…I’m sorry to hear this! While it would have been bad publicity for the firm if clients (or even the general public) made the connection between you and the firm from the article, them firing you is probably going to be even worse publicity for them! I’m going to pass this on to the CANYU list, which has a very large and varied distribution…
February 1st, 2006 at 4:31 am
[…] al Beliefs February 1, 2006 at 03:31 | Print This Post Cory has the story of a legal clerk […]
February 1st, 2006 at 8:47 am
[…] ld no longer work at the firm because her views were incompatbile with what the firm did. Here’s what Inga has to say about it. Via BoingBoing This en […]
February 1st, 2006 at 9:34 am
What if somebody was a clerk at a Civil Rights focused law firm who happened to attend klan meetings on the weekends….. would they get fired? Of course, and it wouldn’t be news either. While I applaud your actions for speaking out against DRM, I cannot be surprised or sorry that you got fired from an Intellectual Property law firm. Good luck in your job search, I’m sure you’ll find something in no time.
February 1st, 2006 at 10:23 am
I can not, in good conscience, renounce my beliefs in the hopes of gaining a rung on the corporate ladder.
i admire and applaud you for sticking to your beliefs, despite the difficult consequences. i would not be surprised if the press that this story generates helps you find a new position quickly. i wish you the best of luck, and don’t ever stop standing up for what you believe in!
~shawn (atlanta, georgia)
February 1st, 2006 at 11:30 am
It is unfortunate that you got fired for your stance on IP but it is not entirely unreasonable for the IP firm. As an IP lawfirm they undoubtedly get cases regarding IP. You are the president of the NYU chapter of Free Culture. If they get any cases in which the client or the issue at had has had an opinion issued by Free Culture, as an Officer of the organization you have a demonstrated substantial conflict of interest. They (or you) would have to review every opinion issued by Free Culture and examine the case to see if you could work on the case.
If the firm loose a case with someone with a published conflict of interest working on the team, it will marr their reputation with their client(s), even if you did top notch work on the case.
If they win a case with a teammember known to have a conflict of interest, it opens the case up to appeal as the opposing lawers could argue that you may have had unfair access to privileged information, even if you didn’t actually have substantial access and/or didn’t access any information.
It just isn’t worth it to a lawfirm (from their point of view) to keep a known conflicted employee unless you were a potential Sr Associate or Partner with a substantial retinue of clients.
February 1st, 2006 at 12:59 pm
“Given the complex politics of the legal field, expressing one’s views outside of the work context should not be enough to warrant a firing.”
Most employment nowadays is ‘at-will’, as other posters have put it: a conflict of interest in law can have dire consequences from a client.
From a publicity perspective, companies might (I know I would) gravitate toward a firm who ensures its employees are of non-dissenting opinion, thus I take odds with the claim that the publicity will serve the employer its ‘just desserts’.
With the case of Roberts, yes he did adopt positions counter to his stated beliefs. However, Roberts had a unique ability to argue in front of the Court, and such arguing capabilities likely more than offset his personal opinions.
I personally have no reservations about ’stealing’ music in violation of copyright, but I understand completely where the company is coming from. The somewhat neutral post subject doesn’t adequately describe the issue.
February 1st, 2006 at 1:00 pm
[…] some of us to action in confronting this injustice done to her. Please read the complete article now.
[…]
February 1st, 2006 at 1:05 pm
Your blog was linked on a IP attorney website and I felt compelled to comment. Speaking on behalf of the IP establishment, I think that your firing has less to do with your political views than it has to do with the statements that you make in your article:
“If I bought a CD that had DRM”—the software that blocks duplication—”I would obviate it,” Chernyak says, carefully. “If there are laws I believe are wrong, I will break them.”
If I was a client of that firm, and I saw that firm’s employees making statements like that, then I would have grave concerns about the safety of my privileged and confidential information at the firm. I would also question the zealousness of the advocacy from that firm. Those reasons alone are just cause for your firing. You didn’t exactly help yourself by making very broad, open-ended statements that you WILL break laws that you believe are wrong. This sort of disregard for the rule of law does not match well with the practice of law.
Having said all of this, I don’t challenge your right to these beliefs, or your right to advocate for civil disobedience in opposition to these laws. Our country has a long and rich tradition of this sort of political discourse. But just don’t expect that the Man, or the Man’s flunkies (your former employer), to be paying your rent while you try to tear down their establishment.
Although it is nice to get some publicity in the Village Voice for your group, I don’t think that they did you any favors by publishing your comment in par. 1. Remember, the press has their own agenda here - selling copy. Outrageous comments like yours make for interesting press, so keep that in mind when dealing with the press in the future.
Best of luck for your cause in the future.
February 1st, 2006 at 1:27 pm
[…] es, or anything potentially odd to some. In this case, Inga Chernyak was fired from her job as a legal clerk at an intellectual property law firm in midtown New York […]
February 1st, 2006 at 1:55 pm
Congratulations! You made slashdot! http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=06/02/01/1651203
I think IP firms must be terrified that everyone will realize the stupidity of this DRM stuff, and the waste of it, and just cut them out of the picture…
February 1st, 2006 at 2:04 pm
[…] ike starforce and Sony, DRM can be intrusive and possibly harmful to your property. Links: The Freeculture post The Village Voice article
Entry Filed under: Random Posting
[…]
February 1st, 2006 at 2:15 pm
[…] ulture.org | Inga Chernyak, president of the NYU chapter of FreeCulture.org was fired from her job at an IP law firm for holding “incompatible views”. This recen […]
February 1st, 2006 at 2:34 pm
Lawyers are often called on to defend views that they don’t support. Take, for example, people who defend people accused of mass-murder, pediophilia and other nasty crimes. It’s not (or, at least, shouldn’t be) presumed that the lawyer defending the person actually agrees with what they are accused of doing. Their job is simply to defend their client, and that’s what they do.
Just because Inga disagrees with current IP laws doesn’t mean that she won’t fight for her (firm’s) clients in a professional manner.
That having been said, it’s not the brightest thing to go around saying that you’ll trash the work of people likely to be (have been) your clients. When talking to the press, as a lawyer, you have to lear to be careful of what you say. Certain comments can get your client in deep trouble. In that respect, I’d say take this as a lesson for a budding lawyer.
P.S. Would you be willing to name the firm that fired you? I presume that it’s common knowledge where you are, but your story has now gone (inter)national, so other inquiring minds want to know.
February 1st, 2006 at 2:50 pm
Oh, grats on the slashdotting.
February 1st, 2006 at 2:50 pm
“But just don’t expect that the Man, or the Man’s flunkies (your former employer), to be paying your rent while you try to tear down their establishment.”
I don’t see anything in what she said that indicates any intention to “tear down the establishment”. It’s not at all clear that declining to run software bundled on a CD is violating any laws, and if you don’t run the software you’re certainly not agreeing to the clickthrough contract embedded in it. If you ordinarily disable autorun on Windows (which I recommend from general security principles) you won’t even be presented with the contract in the first place.
Any IP law firm that would give their clients advice that might imply disabling Windows autorun is illegal is one to steer clear of. That’s poor advice at best.
Being opposed to DRM doesn’t make one opposed to intellectual property rights, to intellectual property law, or to the clients of any honest law firm.
And “If there are laws I believe are wrong, I will break them.” is hardly unexceptional. It would be professionally inappropriate for a lawyer to advocate it, but a law clerk? It’s certainly a career limiting move, but
And I find it hard to believe that there’s any lawyer in the world who would obey all laws, regardless of what they are, no matter how wrong they are. I believe in honest and ethical lawyers, they exist, are there no lawyers who have ever gone to jail rather than obey laws that require them to violate their professional ethics?
February 1st, 2006 at 2:54 pm
Another point: the advice she gave is arguably not against the interests of intellectual property holders. It is clearly in Sony’s interest for people to NOT run their embedded DRM, given the lawsuits that DRM has resulted in.
February 1st, 2006 at 3:05 pm
Hello,
Congratulations on sticking to your guns. Good to see someone on the right side of the argument for once.
Best,
C
February 1st, 2006 at 3:27 pm
[…] ! Free Culture activist fired from intellectual property law firm This story was posted on slashdot about a legal clerk who worked for a New York City intelle […]
February 1st, 2006 at 4:22 pm
[…] bruary 1st, 2006 by atari
NYU undergrad student Inga Chernyak was recently fired from her job as a clerk at a NYC IP lawfirm for a Village Voice article detailing her c […]
February 1st, 2006 at 4:27 pm
I understand your plight all too well. I’ve wrote the first and still the only book-length chronology of Tolkien’s The Lord of the Rings and got sued here in Seattle by another mid-sized Manhattan IP law firm. I didn’t get the impression that any of my opponents cared a piddle about free culture. I was little more than a means to bill hours against one of the most deep-pocketed literary estates on the planet.
Fortunately, their lawsuit was dubious enough and my fair use arguments potent enough that they bailed out just before the judge would have ruled on concurrent arguments for summary judgment. Three months later, the judge dismissed their lawsuit with prejudice.
You can find my book, Untangling Tolkien, on Amazon. It shows that even an impoverished author can fight and beat the system. Search Google for “Inkling Books” and “Tolkien” and you’ll probably hit some of the news stories the lawsuit generated around the world. They were numerous enough to get me into Who’s Who in the U.S.
–Mike Perry, Seattle
February 1st, 2006 at 4:48 pm
It’s not like the law firm has only one client, right? The sacking can only have been a political or personal decision because, from the employers pov, losing such an intelligent and productive employee so early on can only be someone elses gain.
Evan
February 1st, 2006 at 5:51 pm
I wrote an article about a guy who got fired in the uk -a year ago- this month.. with similar ambiguities..
February 1st, 2006 at 8:24 pm
[…] d conscience, renounce my beliefs in the hopes of gaining a rung on the corporate ladder. Link No Comments » No comments yet. RSS […]
February 2nd, 2006 at 12:12 am
[…] Fired from an IP Law Firm for Anti-DRM Views? Found via Slashdot is a unique case involving a student fired from an intellectual property law firm for her dissenti […]
February 2nd, 2006 at 12:19 am
[…] cklash with special guest Mike Pfeffer. For the news, it’s secret satellites and an unethical firing. Scott’s Thing - Spider v. Snake Rym’s Thing - Video Game Ending […]
February 2nd, 2006 at 2:40 am
[…] @ NYU » Blog Archive » Take a stand against DRM? Get fired from your day job.
Free Culture @ NYU » Blog Archive » Take a stand against DRM? Get fired from your day job. […]
February 2nd, 2006 at 11:14 am
“Certainly, it is wrong to eject someone from their field of interest simply for exercising her first amendment rights and speaking out against the current.”
This is an extremely naive view. Your expression of contrary views could very easily be seen by potential clients as a reason NOT to employ the firm you work for, regardless a rational basis. Your views could also be used as an excuse for a disappointed client to take legal action against your firm in an extreme case. Business in America is NOT a democracy, it is a vicious and brutal war between competitors where millions if not billions of dollars are at stake. With that kind of money on the line, people simply don’t take chances, ever.
If your personal views threaten the health of a business, you better believe that the money you might cost your firm will outweigh your personal rights of expression in a heartbeat. Freedom of expression (which I support 100%) is not a license to threaten the hard work of others. If those who choose (yes, it is their choice) to employ you absolutely have the right to choose not to employ you based on your oppositional views. For example, would you hire a nanny to care for your child who had oppositional views on how to raise your child?
Companies don’t exist to employ you. They exist to earn a profit… no other reason. They also equate to the personal property of the proprietors, in which said proprietor has the right to develop whatever culture of thought he/she chooses to within their company. They also have the right to protect their investment in any way they see fit, so long as they don’t violate any laws in the process. That is why it is legal to fire someone in NY State simply because the boss doesn’t like the person being fired. If I start a company, hire someone and then at some point decided that said person is a dickhead, I can fire them for that reason alone. Sure, it would require lots of legal speak about their potentially destructive nature within my company, but the bottom line is, if I don’t like someone, I shouldn’t have to endure their presence within my company. It is (in this instance) MY company after all.
With regard to your stance on copyright infringement, I have to say that you are absolutely 100% wrong. I am a photographer and when my images are used for profit by others without my consent, you better believe I am going to sue the offending parties ass off. I have invested hundreds of thousands of dollars and decades of effort at personal expense in my career in order to pursue my craft/art/whatever. When others decided they’re allowed to use the images I create at my own expense without permission or paying me for my time and effort, they are actively destroying my ability to function as a photographer. In my world, the bottom line equates to theft of services, personal and potentially intellectual property and absolutely threatens my ability to eat, sleep under a warm roof and function in my chosen profession.
The same holds true with any form of copyright theft. Musicians, artists, crafts(people), whatever… cannot survive if they are not paid for their efforts. Personal investment must equate to personal reward, or the land of creative free enterprise will cease to exist. The sad truth in this world is, people need to earn a living and those in the creative fields are more often than not, barely able to do so in this world.
I am sorry you lost your job over your beliefs, but I do support the firm in question right to have fired you.
February 2nd, 2006 at 1:49 pm
Jefferson had no misgivings about protecting private property. Yet he expressed some serious doubts about the wisdom of copyright. These concerns were based on his suspicion of concentrations of power and artificial monopolies. Therefore, Jefferson feared the monopolists could use their state-granted power to strengthen their control over the flow of ideas and the use of expressions. Monopolies have the power to enrich themselves by evading the limitations of the competitive marketplace. Meat is murder ?
February 2nd, 2006 at 4:37 pm
I just want to address the numerous analogies that people are making regarding Inga’s choice to work for her firm: “Its like a anti-abortion rights activist/high times contributor/etc working for planned parenthood/DEA/etc” I think these are missing the point and maligning Inga’s motivations — her interest and position at the IP firm was as someone who was working to learn things about the field that she has been interested in. It was not, and this is where the analogies fail, her intent to subvert the firm or even damage its reputation in any way. Her working there was an innocent attempt by a student at gaining a legitimate foothold in the world of IP in New York. Again, these analogies would lead one to believe she was actively working to betray the firm; an accusation I can assure you, is certainly misplaced.
xrew: Inga was not fired because her boss didn’t like her or because she was in any way not competent to do the job she was hired for. She was fired because of her views on a subject that firm may or may not have dealt with, ie DRM. I hope, for your sake, that you are able to distinguish the difference between disliking someone and disagreeing with their views.
February 2nd, 2006 at 10:37 pm
[…] llectual property rights law firm in midtown Manhatttan. The reason? Her opinions on DRM. read more | digg story
This entry […]
February 5th, 2006 at 1:09 pm
Despedida por hacer uso de su libertad
…De su libertad de expresión, claro.
Inga Chernyak es una joven universitaria y actual presidenta del capítulo neoyorquino de Free Culture…
November 28th, 2006 at 7:23 am
Markus
It was quite useful reading, found some interesting details about this topic. Thanks.
December 1st, 2006 at 1:25 am
Markus
It was quite useful reading, found some interesting details about this topic. Thanks.
December 11th, 2006 at 2:55 pm
Asian big boob picture
I’m agree with you, i think… Asian big boob picture …
December 11th, 2006 at 5:00 pm
Sw florida models actors
I’m agree with you, i think… Sw florida models actors …