So I am back in school AGAIN (I’m a life-long learner), augmenting my not so slow-paced job.
Let’s just say that at this point, I recognize that the more I know, the more I don’t know anything.
The class that I am taking now is Cyberlaw, and while I did take law in business school–many moons ago–that was more focused on contracts and business organizations.
This class looks interesting from the perspective of the legal and regulatory structure to deal with and fight cybercrime, -terrorism, and -war.
One interesting thing that I already learned was a technique for evaluating legal cases called IRAC, which stands for:
– Issues–the underlying legal matters that the case is addressing.
– Rules–what legal precedents can be applied.
– Analysis–whether those rules apply or not, in this case.
– Conclusion–rendering an opinion on the case.
This is a structured way to analyze any legal case.
Of course, before you do these, you have to look at the facts–so that is the very first section.
The problem with that is then you have F-IRAC and that can definitely be taken the wrong way. 😉
(Source Photo: Andy Blumenthal)
andyblumenthal 
me too and i was just thinking about this a few minutes ago . i don’t know why.
i took law in business school. they only had one class or i would have taken more…
my brother studied law and graduated 4th in his class at harvard. jim cramer too, but he doesn’t play a lawyer on tv.
actually i do know why. yesterday someone called me a poet and i’m not a poet. i don’t know what i am. i was a musician. i know i am not a typist and thank-you for letting me type a few words here , so i don’t have to type a whole megillah post.