Always strive to learn something useful. --Sophocles

Basically it's an agreement that you won't write anything on Yelp or other review sites. An Ars Technica writer went to a dentist for some standard work, he found this particular doctor via Yelp. When he went in and started signing paperwork, he noticed one that would "transfer ownership of any public commentary I might write in the future to Dr. Cirka". He got into a discussion with the office manager who wouldn't let him talk to the doctor and ultimately he was shown the door.

Doctors are getting these forms from a company called Medical Template. According to the document, if you sign it, the doctor won't use a loophole in the HIPAA agreement that allegedly allows them to sell certain information to medical marketers. However, that particular loophole was closed, so the agreement actually offers nothing for the patient. It's arguable whether or not you can sign away your right to free speech and to complain about services received, so the document is on questionable grounds to start with. Plus, if someone doesn't go to the doctor and still posts negative reviews on review sites, the agreement can't do anything to prevent that because they never signed it in the first place.

Pretty stupid idea if you ask me.

Still, I wouldn't sign one and wouldn't use a doctor that required me to sign it as a condition of treatment (bringing into the question the point about signing under duress). I fired two doctors in Las Cruces over my treatment and though I haven't complained about them on Yelp or other such sites, I have considered it and may yet.

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/05/all-your-reviews-are-belong-to-us-medical-justice-vs-patient-free-speech.ars

This is partial conjecture, but not unreasonable. A professor was asked to write an oped piece on what went on in Wisconsin with the attempt at union-busting by the governor, and as he researched this piece, he posted snippets of what he found on his blog. The Republican party filed a Freedom of Information Act request for his email with many key words, such as Scott Walker. The prof thinks that this is an attempt to silence people trying to reveal the machinations of the RNC, I think he might have a valid point.

And I didn't know you could FOIA a university, I guess you could if it's a public uni but not one that's privately funded (good luck funding that!).

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/28/opinion/28mon3.html?_r=4&pagewanted=print

http://politics.slashdot.org/story/11/03/27/0154213/Using-the-Open-Records-Law-To-Intimidate-Critics