Dave Smith asked about law schools for Cypherpunks. I've been in law school for the past year. I work as a programmer and am interested in c- punk issues, so I guess I'm a cypherpunk. I signed up for Concord University School of Law (http://www.concordlawschool.com/default.htm) mostly because it seemed cool to get a law degree over the web, not because I had any use for it. After I signed up, I thought of a few things I could do with a law degree, such as beat up on lawyers who were beating up on free software projects. The program takes four years of "part time" study if you wish to take the bar afterward, or three years if you just want a JD. As regards my plan to provide pro bono assistance to small, belabored free software teams, it turns out it's not that simple. As best I've been able to determine, If I'm living in State X and I'm licensed to practice in State X and the team is in State X, I can defend them. If the team is in State Y, I could get nailed for unauthorized practice of law in State Y. Even if the Evil Corporation which is beating up on them is in State X, I might not be able to legally (no pun intended) help. This is based on discussions with my professors and deans and with questions asked of the bar offices in several states. Concord is not an ABA-accredited law school, so at the moment you can take only the California bar exam. Once you pass the Cal bar, you can practice in Cal, Vermont, and IIRC Wisconsin. You can also practice, even without a law degree, in Arizona. Since I have no desire to live in California, using my example above I'd be living in State X and licensed to practice in State Y, and for the most part I wouldn't be able to do any legal services, though that varies by state of residence. I can discuss the pros and cons of Concord vis a vis brick and mortar law schools if anyone is interested. Short summary, Concord has the advantage of flexibility (study when and where you like) and cost (approx US$5K per year rather than $18-30K for a b-and-m); disadvantage is lack of ABA accreditation. I've been working as a programmer while in school. The amount of time required for studies was greater than expected, but doable. The problem I've found is the loss of creative mental energy on the job. I can do the rote work with no problem, but don't have the mental energy to come up the innovative solutions I'm paid for. Caveat: I'm a single parent of a 6 year old boy; that'll suck the energy out of anyone, haha. If you're going to go to law school full time, that shouldn't be a problem; look at some of the chowderheads who have made it through, after all. As for the broader issues Dave brought up: Yes there is a need for lawyers with a technical bent. There's a well-known link between lack of mathematical ability and entry to law school, and the innumeracy of the typical lawyer is often a problem when technical issues come up. (ref, the judge in the DVD CCA v 2600 case) Law school is usually very expensive. Including living expenses, figure on adding US$100K to your debt burden if you go full time. You said you won't want to be an ambulance chaser, but odds are you'll have to take a job with a firm for several years and work on what you're assigned, just to pay down the debt. You might also want to consider that there is a glut of lawyers in the US. First year associate salaries at top firms are still good, but if you don't get into a top firm the pay might not be that great. There are also a lot of unemployed lawyers out there, despite the best efforts of the Lawyers Full Employment legislative and judicial teams. Most law schools now have courses on intellectual property and internet law, so they're sorta c-punk friendly that way. Law professors tend to be quite liberal on political and economic issues, and the libertarian bent of most c-punks is a serious irritant to them. I've heard of that being more of an issue in a brick-and-mortar school, where you sit in class and get interrogated by the prof. Regards, SRF