Farhad, you keep advocating for the elimination of copyright protection for anything that happens to be in a digital format. I am still waiting for a copy of your new book, in Word, of course, so it will be easier for me to share.

I'm a little concerned that by joining Congress, we'll lose Lessig's remarkable contributions as an outside observer and critic. I don't think that most Congressfolk are inherently corrupt or corruptible, but rather that doing a job everyday that involves individual decisions in extremely grey areas allows for some amount of moral (or perhaps more specifically, ideological) drift. Congress is a place of compromise and the lesser of evils, and I'm not sure that's the place where Lessig can make the most difference.

On the other hand, there's a potential benefit to Lessig being able to observe the inner workings so that he can report back. The risk there is that the people in his district lose the day-to-day vagaries representation in sponsoring an observer...

Because I have not called for that, let alone kept calling.

He has more influence as a legal expert than as a single voice in Congress. This assumes he would win in his district, and I don't think Santa Clara county's electoral intellect should be overestimated by Lessig and his backers. The average voter in SCC does not know him. He seems like an introverted guy, it's not a campaign he's sure to win. Further, since he is a former collegue of Obama at University of Chicago, he could have more influence acting as an advisor.

Lessig would be a smart senator with the right ethics. Are we so obsessed with popularity that we can't even advocate good people for political office?

He may not win, that doesn't mean he shouldn't run or that we shouldn't support his running.

Considering that Lessig has said that he is leaving the copyfight to focus on government corruption, I think this move makes a lot of sense, if he could get on the house ethics comittee. But I fear that is about as likely to happen as Bruce Schneier becoming Director of Homeland Security.

We do need smarter people in Congress, and Lessig certainly meets that criteria. Too bad he would be replacing the reasonable Lantos rather than one of the true nutjobs.

No one has come forward to address Lessig's devasting critique of Clinton's moral courage and character.

Interesting, isn't it?

President Obama - I like the sound of that.

I noticed he planned to fight "earmarks" among other things. People really don't get the earmarks debate - it's a question of whether the executive branch or the legislative branch will be responsible for deciding how to spend money that has already been allocated. Once the money has been allocated, it's spending is a fait accompli. In reality, the "fight" against earmarks is just another executive branch power grab by the Bush administration, with the support of congressional Republicans.