From: Black Unicorn <unicorn@polaris.mindport.net>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 95 15:11:28 PDT
To: Duncan Frissell <frissell@panix.com>
Subject: Re: cryptography eliminates lawyers?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950907233749.7150A-100000@panix.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.950913180804.6269A-100000@polaris.mindport.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain




On Thu, 7 Sep 1995, Duncan Frissell wrote:

> 
> On Thu, 7 Sep 1995, Black Unicorn wrote:
> 
> > Telecoms will certainly break the professional 
> > > monopoly of lawyers (and other professionals).
> > 
> > This I don't.  How do you mean exactly?
> 
> Licensing requires the ability to outlaw unlicensed transactions.  
> Since the Net trumps censorship and allows consultations at a 
> distance, it cracks licensing,


But won't clients insist on proper credentials in one form or another?  
Doesn't the practicality and accountability of a centralized authority 
(or several authorities) provide the best answer to this?  Who is going 
to accept my signature promising that I did indeed get a law degree and 
pass the bar?

I don't see how the net will eliminate the basic need for highly 
qualified professionals and the proof that they have credentials.  
Perhaps diplomas and such will be transfered into digital signatures for 
the institutions, but I can't see how this "cracks" any "monopoly."  
Perhaps the monopoly is shifted to those who have diplomas, rather than 
those "licensed to practice" but so what?

> 
> DCF
>