EDITOR'S OPINION Jason MacLaurin SC Editor, Brief | Barrister, Francis Burt Chambers
Our special section “Future Proof” ought to be of interest to (hopefully all) readers intending to participate in the future, which of course might already be here. Developing technology affects not only how law is (and ought ethically and professionally) to be practiced, but also provides novel subject matter for legal work, and questions about what the law should regulate. As noted in Brenda van Rensburg’s “A Macro Way to Reputation Damage” some jurisdictions, for instance in American Bar Association Rules, expressly stipulate that lawyers must keep abreast of technology. This special section also has Angelina Gomez on whether DAOs might become the new corporate form, Michael Woods providing his expertise on “Cyber Threat Landscape for the Legal Profession”, and Eli Bernstein on “The Rise and Rise of Stablecoins”. Brief went for a title of “Future Proof”, rather than Alvin Toffler’s “Future Shock” (the “dizzying disorientation brought on by the premature arrival of the future”) which is the safe play given uncertainty as to the Toffler’s estate’s intellectual property rights and some of the Sussex’s recent initiatives. Previous Brief editorials have noted the Sussex’s use of technology, especially the podcast, in a profitable, if not particularly productive, way,1 however they very recently announced that “Archewell Audio” would release a podcast series: “Archetypes.” Any cynical misgivings about the podcast’s title being mainly concerned with being catchy
and marketable2 were surely dispelled when Markle announced that the “central question” lying at the heart of “Archetypes” is “where do these stereotypes come from? And how do they keep showing up and defining our lives?” and the Sussex’s filing a few weeks ago a trade mark application over “Archetypes” despite its ancient Greek origins, common usage in English from the 1540’s, Carl Jung’s estate likely being ropable and, most importantly it seems, a skin care and cleaning company already owning a trademark for the word. Toffler’s “Future Shock” still resonates today. Notably, 50 years ago a 1972 edition of the Australian “Women’s Weekly” featured an article about the Tofflers visiting Australia on a book tour.3 In 2022 the title “Women’s Weekly” is problematic given it has been a monthly publication since 1983, and in any event the hottest controversy going at the moment seems to be how (and whether) to define the word “Women”. The year 2022 features in science fiction artistic works about dystopian futures that often ventilate issues with which the law also grapples. 1973’s classic dystopian future movie Soylent Green is set in 2022, so it is too late to worry about spoiler alerts when noting its shocking iconic ending phrase “It’s people!” is at least an expression of the need for accurate and honest food ingredient labelling. And, while not explicitly set in 2022, this year marks the 70th anniversary of the famous “Twilight Zone”4 episode “To Serve Man”
about seemingly benevolent aliens who arrive to help an Earth beset by multiple crises, citing as evidence of their good intentions an (encrypted) book “To Serve Man” and taking a polygraph test. The iconic and shocking revelatory line in the closing scene “It’s a cookbook!” highlights not only the unreliability of lie detector evidence, but also the absolute importance of reading the whole of the text before interpreting key phrases. Set in March 2022, 2013’s “The Purge” is a dystopian future/horror/thriller movie about an America, in addressing a crisis in crime, violence and overcrowded prisons, having a government sanctioned annual 12-hour period where laws are suspended and any criminal activity is legal (sort of like the 120 minutes following Buddy Franklin kicking his 1,000th goal recently). Some critics say the film has been said to give rise to profound legal and moral questions such as the competition between the Hobbesian “Modern Unity State” versus the Althusian “Modern Federated Polity” models for civil society, and between legal positivism and natural law theories (the Hart-Fuller debate)5 about whether morality and the law in regards to the validity of and obedience to a law, or whether morality is the source of law’s binding power. For the Editor, these complex issues were all very quickly cut through and went out the window when (spoiler alert) Ethan Hawke’s daughter’s boyfriend decides to use the
Charleton Heston starring in the 1973 ecological dystopian thriller “Soylent Green” set in 2022 – still not the year we were expecting but perhaps a pandemic is the better option?
4 | BRIEF APRIL 2022
