Skip to content

Law is social media…sorta

Saturday, January 14, 2012

Interesting article on the Google & Facebook decision not to co-operate on blending search with social network data.

John Battelle gives plenty of background for this and Venture Beat took up the issue of reduced trust, but what I find interesting are implications for the practice of law.

Just as the average lawyer is finally getting the hang of using search engines on-line, the Google + move slams the door shut on our romance with objective search. Now, what we get is not what the web has to offer, but what Google thinks we might like based on our online social graph. If search is a box of chocolates, Google + is pulling out all the cashew clusters.

The practicing attorney who gets bombarded with irrelevant social network and social media dross when trying to find legally relevant information will look elsewhere. Twitter streams were particularly interesting, but they’re gone too. In short, a lot of what made Google a reliable partner for the working lawyer has been flushed in an attempt to compete with Facebook.

Now, with all this Google + stuff, instead of getting a raft of objective search results, attorneys are going to have to work even harder to get around the everyday and ordinary. One technique, of course, is to use Google’s advanced search page. [ here's the link since it suddenly became VERY hard to find ]

Worse, if they search using Google + (and why wouldn’t you?!) the top results will hardly be a considered keyword tour of Google’s web database. Instead, they’ll end up with stuff someone they know already found because Google + thought that would be a great idea. [snark] Sorta like document review [/snark].

Seriously, though: let’s tease this out and imagine that you’ve Google-circled a bunch of friends at an opposing firm. How convenient it would be were they to bookmark sites that leave a telltale trail to a client that they’re cultivating.

“Susan ran that very same search last week!” proclaims Google +, “Here look: she even bookmarked a bit of her results, which means she thought it was REALLY important!”…With Google +, now you can get potentially competitive information just by being friendly.

Of course, had Facebook permitted use of its “Firehose,” you’d get even more free information. So, I suppose it’s a good thing that only Facebook will mine your profile for sale-worthy data.

Even from the cheap seats, it’s pretty clear that bad search leads to bad law.

Surely, there’s a better way to combine who you know with what they know to create value-added knowledge.

Filed in Law 2.0+, Law Practice 2.0, Tech-ery | | Comments (0)

Time To Make Some Doughnuts

Wednesday, January 4, 2012

I’ve taken a few years off from actively working on my Agile Law concept…and 2012 is when you will finally see what I’ve been hinting at over the last 3 years.

Writing another book is daunting. The first book I wrote was 1994,–and that was a LONG time ago both in terms of technology and in terms of thinking about how the law applies to everyday life.

“Agile Law” as a concept is really foreign to the way lawyers have worked in the past. It’s a scary prospect to offer something to the entire legal profession that will force them to re-evaluate how they function as legal service providers.

Originally, I called it “Law 2.0,” the “Law 2.0+”… Several years ago, I realized that there is already thinking out there that takes us right out of the ranking, scoring and hype territory into a lasting way of thinking about our roles in court, in business and in the office.

BTW, I am a fan of Scott Berkun’s approach, so in the meantime, take a look at his blog and new book and get some inspiration of your own!!

Encouragement and criticism is always appreciated!

Filed in Agile, Law 2.0+, Law Practice 2.0 | | Comments (0)

The Smart Question

Sunday, July 3, 2011

The Smart Question

Just about an hour ago, a troop of young men from South Africa came into the cafeteria. I asked one where they were from,–although I was fairly certain they were South African. One, there are a LOT of South Africans in Belfast and 2) it didn’t sound like any European language I knew. That left Afrikaans.

So, I asked one of the boys and he confirmed. Another young man,–who had [ somewhat bravely, I thought ] sat closer to our table than the others, then asked me where I was from. I said New York, and he said he knew that from the accent. I laughed and said that I didn’t have a New York accent, but then he said he knew I was American anyway!

Then, he asked The Smart Question that I heard as : “Do you speak any African language?”

My response was uncharacteristic: I began to snort “How the he…” Then caught myself on, because after all, he was a young guy and I didn’t want to curse. Then, it occurred to me that he was taking the piss, so I added, “No, but I DO speak Japanese!”

Yoshie and I then walked out, but I started to feel regret over my flippant response. Maybe he truly *had* been curious. And, after all, what was wrong with his question? Absolutely nothing! In fact, it started feeling like a better and better question.

*Did* I speak an African language? Hmmm….

Going upstairs, I continued to chuckle about it in my head, but the longer I thought about it. The more I saw his earnest question as a valid question borne of interest, not teenaged snark. My adult bias, knowing that he was from South Africa, had prevented me from addressing him as simply an openly curious teen. Instead, I diplocked him into the “post-apartheid privileged smartass Afrikaaner” basket.

He deserved better.

So, going back downstairs, I logged on and waited for him to come out of the cafe. Initially, I flagged the wrong boy. Fortunately, this slowed the stream of teenagers down, so that the right boy came out slowly enough that I could engage him directly.

I explained to him that I thought his question deserved a better answer than he got. He seemed pleasantly surprised.

Next came the explanation that Americans in general don’t learn foreign languages and even if a black person was lucky enough to go to a school that taught foreign language, the idea of studying an African language was pretty outrageous.

I didn’t add, “outside of Washington, DC or New York, that is.” No sense making it even more complicated. The general rule holds that most black students DON’T learn foreign languages, so that was how I presented it: when we do, it’s first the European languages and only in rare cases are we exposed to instruction in languages currently spoken in African nations.

I said that American blacks and Africans are completely different people. Even if we got to study an African language, which one? There are hundreds of them…we wouldn’t even know which to choose.

He seems chuffed that an adult (an older black woman?) was addressing his question in a real way. he explained that he spoke “Sutu,” an African dialect from his region. I did not ask how he learned it, beccause his mates were gathered around to see what the fuss was about.

He politely asked if I knew anything about African languages, that there were quite a few in his area, but he had chosen Sutu. I said I didn’t know much about it. I was thinking about how well he spoke and how his parents must be proud of him…not because he had embarassed me inside of my own head, but because he was so poised and proud of his linguistic ability.

His friends, –tourmates, found this all highly entertaining. Several of them stuck around, then figured it was an adult conversation and peeled off. Still, one of them finally got brave and said “I hope he didn’t cause any *offense*” which caused great hilarity and earned him a gut punch. I laughed and said “I have a 22yr old son, there’s probably nothing you could say that would offend or shock me!”

Noting, in retrospect, another bias. I don’t have any problem learning foreign languages. I know several. But, when it comes to an African-origin language, for some reason, I would want to learn the “right one,” the one I’m supposed to have always known. This terrible anxiety grips me, as if my learning the language of my genetic ancestors would scream in spiritual agony if I happened to pick a language spoken by an enemy clan, tribe or nation.

I guess I just hope that none of my genes originate in Malawi,–because that’s the nation I’ve chosen to care about.

And then, learning an “African language” will be as normal to me as learning English, French, German and Japanese.

My new teacher laughed, gave me the thumbs up and walked away. I left him with “Thank you so much for the smart question.”

And, I meant it.

Filed in Comings and Goings, Interculturalism, Ireland, Malawi | | Comments (0)

Away in Galway

Friday, May 20, 2011

Well, this is my last (for now) day in Galway. It’s well worth 3 days to learn the lay of the city center. Will look at coming back to work through the NUI Galway collections. This AM, I think I’ll try to get to Strokestown.

Highly recommend Galway Tours. The only thing I’d change is the long stop in Kylemore Abbey. I’d have rather seen the cairn up close for 30 minutes or cruised slowly through Ashford Castle (we only saw the gate).

There are other tour companies, and I’m sure you can’t go wrong with any of them. But, I took Galway Tours and learned a LOT. Only regret (and I may come back for it), is that the roads prevented the pre-famine village tour today.

The food is fantastic, –I’ve had vegetable soup with brown bread for 2 days for dinner. Lattes and croissant for breakfast. Only felt the need for 1 pint so far (what’s up with that??), but it was lovely.

This is low season in Galway and it’s still full of Americans. Further, it seems recession-proof and there are tons of tourists even now. Make sure to do the hop on hop off bus first!

Galway for business is something you might want to consider seriously. Will be writing more about that later,–b/c that’s why I’m here. That travel diary will be split between here, Black and Green History and Gina’s Green Book.

Rather than tour today, I want to have a look at the web technology center downtown and invite a chat with the asylum seeking folks who were in the paper recently, but may have to do that on the flip flop.

They’re in Lisbrook House, which is run for the Reception and Integration Agency (government) by Bridgestock Company. If I can get there today (there is a big meeting around the dispute), that will round out my trip for now.

It’s a mediator’s dream project.

Filed in Interculturalism, Ireland | | Comments (0)

Twitter T’aint Enough

Tuesday, July 6, 2010

image from some movie
Started blogging more than 15 years ago. I should have about 1,000 entries. But, I don’t. How many versons of my blog lasted? None. But there are about 10 of them since I first started writing for the web in 1994. I tweet a lot, so I’ve put the feed here for diversion.

Should I go back and pull in entries from all the old versions? That might be fun, but time would have to slow to a crawl. There’s just too much to do these days.

What’s important is what will happen in the future. Digging in the past is a way of understanding that future, but it’s not worth much more than that. So, I will probably scan a bunch of photos from childhood. There’s no point in letting them just sit in photo albums.

Going to start taking a lot more pictures, picking up a hobby I’ve been trying to nurture since Uncle Scooby bought me my very first camera. Probably post pics of my folks,–they’d both dead, they won’t care. Lots of pictures from places I’ve been and places I intend to go.

But, there is a lot to talk about. Very little of it has to do with the past. It’s all about the future.

So, let’s get on with it!

Twitter changed the way we all think about social media. Not revolutionary, actually, just effective. And,t hat’s the difference. Texting was around long before Twitter, –but Twitter made it easy and they made it into  social graph,–as opposed to a conversation between 2 people. That’s why they took over email for quick thoughts and, to a large extent, blogging for extended conversations.

Blogs have a purpose, though. We can now take them back to the start and re-evaluate how they fit into our day. Because we have alternatives.

Twitter enforces tightening of thoughts. I would argue that those constraints drive creativity. But, blogs serve as a place to lounge and explore thoughts in a more leisurely environment. Ads and links photos provide distraction and supplementation in a way that is impossible under Twitter’s constraints.

I will try to impose my own constraints on this blog of about 500 words a go. No more than that.

Things I care about most are tagged below and match the categories for this blog. You’ll find I care about a lot more, but I’ll try to keep it tight. Because I run a LOT of blogs and web properties.

Well, that’s a quick thought for the day. Back to preparing for my trip.

Filed in Comings and Goings | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments (0)

Almost great PDF article

Monday, August 31, 2009

I don’t know how you can write a “comprehensive” article about PDF creation WITHOUT giving significant space to Nitro PDF (which I have been using basically since it appeared on the scene), but if you forgive that absence, you’ll learn a lot from Brett Burney’s Review of Nuance PDF Converter 6.

Me, I’d have liked to see the ultimate alternative: roll your own.

Filed in Product Reviews, Vendors | | Comments (0)

Choose law affirmatively

Tuesday, June 9, 2009

Listening now to a webinar by Carolyn Elefant of My Shingle and Susan Cartier Leibel of Solo Practice University on “going solo.”

As someone who went solo in the practice of law back in 1994, then decided that legal tech was FAR more interesting, I like their perspectives.

I’ve been watching the growth of their blogs and reading them for quite some time, and I think they’ve both hit upon a communication style and have the reach to make them worth bookmarking.

OK, what I mean is that there are blogs that are worth bookmarking, and others which you can always find through blogrolls. Bloggers run in crews, so one gateway to the crew of Elefant and Leibel really only requires one bookmark.

My suggestion is that before you bookmark (or, even better add a blog to your Morning Coffee [hmmm name changed!]), you take some time to check out the blogroll. See if another blog in their crew speaks to your issues. if so, book mark that one.

For example, I separate them into these groups because if a blogger has bookmarked something, why should I? So, I often read blogs of Kevin O’Keefe’s clients, I bookmark at source, because I can always find his clients from there.

That and LinkedIn.

OK, so one comment that really made me want to blog is the perspective that people who go solo MUST have the proper outlook on their venture.

You’re not doing it because they’re something wrong with you. You’re not doing it as a placeholder until you can get a “real job.” You’re doing it because it suits you, you’re excited about it and you want to provide great service to clients in a new way.

Right now, they’re talking about not needing a year’s savings to do it. That’s funny. Other than the independently wealthy, and certainly in my case, a few month’s savings was more like it.

A law practice doesn’t require a year’s savings, it requires a client.

The one caveat, however, is that were I straight out of law school, I would NOT suggest opening up a firm. Why? Because there are plenty of older people out there who need your help and who can give you guidance. Confederate with an older lawyer and your practice will move along much faster.

I won’t recap the entire webinar, except to say that legal technology has indeed changed everything. This is the truth behind my early criticism of the argument that legal technology would allow BigLaw to obliterate small firm practitioners.

It kinda goes against the grain to recommend this, but in this case, I think a commercial “university” might be worth doing.

So, here’s the link: http://solopracticeuniversity. com

If you’re interested in solo practice, go listen to their webinar.

And then, read Carla Harris’ book and apply what she’s telling you.

Filed in 24593, Law Practice 2.0, Product Reviews, Services | | Comments (0)

The new Sedona publication

Tuesday, June 2, 2009

I will have a detailed and reasoned critique of The Sedona Conference® Commentary on Achieving Quality in the E-Discovery Process out as soon as possible.

I think this is pretty important stuff, so I want to take the time to do it properly.

Until then, read the work done by Tobias Mayer.

It will give you a VERY good idea of why the Sedona piece doesn’t work for me and why it’s pointing decision-makers in the wrong direction for all the right reasons.

Thanks to Ralph Losey for flagging it! I might not have read it for awhile had it not been featured on his blog with all those pictures of people I do NOT want to emulate!

Filed in Law 2.0+, Product Reviews, Publications, Theory | | Comments (0)

Sedona Webinar

Monday, May 11, 2009

Well, we’re not allowed to blog about what happened “in the desert,” but here’s a webinar that will break some of it down for you!

Finally, someone talking about doing something OTHER than tagging (I hope)!

This webinar will introduce a new Commentary from The Sedona Conference® Working Group on Electronic Document Retention & Production (WG1), “Achieving Quality in the E-Discovery Process,” which discusses the need for greater use of project management, sampling, and other forms of metrics and measures aimed at improving the quality of ediscovery. Our expert panel will be moderated by Kenneth J. Withers (Director of Judicial Education, The Sedona Conference®) and will include members of the Commentary’s drafting team: Jason Baron (Director of Litigation, National Archives and Records Administration), Maura Grossman (Counsel, Wachtell, Lipton Rosen & Katz), and Joseph Looby (Senior Managing DIrector, FTI Consulting, Inc.).

Alternatives to the traditional model and the creative use of project management are what we’re working on in my little shop, so enjoy this presentation. Here’s the link!

Filed in Stop Culling! | | Comments (0)

Cataphora…Yummy! Part I

Wednesday, April 8, 2009

I’m in love with H5 and not just because of their killer website and name that has more cowbell than I can handle, but I also am having special moments with Cataphora.

In the run up to the Sedona Conference, I’m taking another look at legal tech from the perspective of what lawyers really need and I’m pretty sure that the teeny weeny email application I’m writing (prototype due out at the end of the summer) is on the right track.

That being said, Cataphora really does have the right approach and are FIXING IT! “It” being the way search and retrieval of meaningful content is and ought to be done.

So, understand their mission, if you choose to accept it (and you should):

Defining principle

Cataphora’s success and very existence are based upon one defining principle. This arose from a conceptual breakthrough that was simply stated, yet proved to be radical in its practical effects. This idea was that, in order to truly understand a document, you have to know about the circumstances in which it arose. In other words, you have to understand its context.

The negative

Ok, they’re a bit … oh, I don’t know whiny and snarky,

Trustworthiness is a core value in the legal marketplace and at Cataphora. We strongly recommend examining all vendor claims carefully. One way to do that is by looking at how their website used to look. The Wayback Machine makes that easy – just go here and enter the URL for the vendor in which you are interested.

I mean, really! Who CARES what a website looked like in the Wayback Machine?! Is this really part of the E-DISCOVERY dog/pony show to which unsuspecting clients are subjected? Didn’t think so.

If that’s the standard, then most legal tech projects would be doomed, because when some of us were using computers in litigation, some others of us were still in high school counting spots. And, of course, some others of us were practicing law and making googobs of money (ahem!). Besides, an appearance on the Brewster Kahle show is not really an indicator of algorithmic quality. It just means you’re lucky, really smart or have your own private Tardis.

OK, so I don’t think Cataphora folks are lucky. I think they’re really, really smart. Buuuut, it’s not exactly rocket science. Maybe it was 10 years ago, but not any more. Ever looked at Digg Labs?

Two Patents? Hmmm. Gotta think about that one.

I’ve read both, but now I’d better look at the pictures, because this is one area where I’m pretty sure there’s so much out there now that these patents may not hold much water. Not a huge fan of business method patents anyway, but when they involve stuff that seems to be open-sourced to the hilt, it gives me pause.

I could be so incredibly wrong, so I’ll take another look, but at first blush, what they write about on the site seems right out of Collective Intelligence, a book I keep next to the bedside, cuz I’m that much of a dork.

Back to the Positive

But, Elizabeth Charnock, the founder of Cataphora is a much bigger dork, said with all sorts of love, so I think worship might still be in order.

Plus, she’s a girl, and that makes her AWESOME! And, a little scary.

I love Cataphora because….

they “get” the wisdom of letting computers do what they do best. And, computers don’t really care whether you have 1 or 2 terabytes. Which means that you can leave your data unculled, and the computer will keep chugging along.

Not only that, but once the data has been marked as “non-responsive,” it can still be used for all sorts of things. Like weighting. And, making your useful dataset searching smarter. Wanna know how? I bet you do!

Call me! No, really: call me.

So, let’s get real: [ bold statement ] there’s absolutely NO real reason to cull ESI ! [ /bold statement ]

I found this really HYSTERICAL presentation the other day entitled The Real Cost of Privilege Review ( and here) and all it did was make me think of lollipops. Read it and weep.

I want to know who out there is wasting soooo much money…so I can sign them up as clients, because this sort of process is so yesterday, even your 10-yr old could probably re-engineer it to get better and more cost-effective results. I mean, hasn’t anyone ever played pick up sticks???

So, why am I adamant that people stop culling? Because it’s like trying to speak French without any understanding of grammar.

To be more precise, I’m advocating that lawyers stop culling at the first tier, as if their lives depended upon a massive reduction in terabytes. I’m suggesting that culling ought to be done by the computer, and that valuable metadata (in a really, really board sense) ought to be retained until the end of the project. I’m intimating that the document corpus is a body and it’s integrity depends upon the entirety of its members.

In other words, in Cataphora-lingo:

Cataphora is the first and only provider to develop deep analytics (not mere data statistics or simple email widgets) that give insight into the facts expressed by the ESI dataset. True analytics can (among many other things) detect individual and organizational “heartbeats” and de facto organizational substructures, evaluate typical versus anomalous behavior, assess consistency and variation in an organization’s processes, and detect patterns of data deletion.

If you’ve got lawyers doing the culling and searching, here’s yer sign: you’re going about it the wrong way. It’s like taking a hachet to an old growth forest of oak with no appreciation for the vital role played by acorns.

I say, hire yourself a legally-trained person who knows about taxonomies and understands the difference between DATA, INFORMATION and ARGUMENT.

Lawyers, do not. Not unless they’ve taken “Data 101.” They usually work bass ackwards and try to squeeze everything into theory, instead of first trying to understand what they’ve got.

This is where Cataphora’s mission is key: understand the forest before you start cutting trees.

Thus, sayeth the Mighty Snarker, thereby ending-eth the lesson!

Filed in 24593, Classification, Design, Document Review, Fix It!, Stop Culling!, The Mighty Snarker, Theory, Vendors | Tagged | Comments (0)