The Bar News

Bar News Sections

Legal Tech

  • September 10, 2010 | Practice News
    Legal Tech: The advantages of using eFax
    By Peter LaSorsa This is not meant to be an advertisement for eFax but rather an evaluation of the pros and cons of using an electronic faxing service instead of the traditional fax machine. I recently was in an attorney’s office for a deposition and noticed he had staff feeding pages into a fax machine and then calling the other side to discuss some issue related to the quality of the fax. I was amazed that people still utilize the old fax machine. I have been a subscriber to eFax for about five years now and can’t imagine not utilizing the service. First a brief primer on what eFax is. You pay a yearly fee and in exchange you receive a fax number (area code of your choosing), and unlimited faxes for the year.  You can also select plans that limit the amount of pages you can send or receive per month (and you pay extra when you go over that limit). Basically, you send a fax by opening the eFax software, selecting a document from your computer and typing in the other persons fax number — then hitting the send button on the computer screen. You can even have yourself cc’d on the fax. Receiving a fax is even easier. When someone sends you a fax, it shows up in your email inbox as a pdf file. The great advantage to receiving the fax this way is easy storage on your computer and the ability to forward the fax to your client — who probably doesn’t have a fax machine. It’s also great because I can get the fax on my Blackberry and review it while out of the office. Another great advantage is you can send a fax from your desktop, laptop or any other computer.
  • September 1, 2010 | Practice News
    Legal Tech: Data breach notification obligations apply to lawyers too
    By Shamla Naidoo Two weeks ago I wrote about the Houston lawyer’s client whose personal information was dumped in a parking lot. Most states have Breach Notification Statutes that compel companies to notify consumers of such “breach” incidents. Many states apply breach notification obligations where there is inappropriate disclosure of computerized personal information. This makes sense given how easy it is to expose large volumes of data that are stored, generated or shared by computer systems. In Illinois, 815 ILCS 530, commonly known as the Personal Information Protection Act, governs the obligations for such incidents that affect an Illinois resident. The statute defines a data collector and the definition includes privately and publicly held corporations, and……”any other entity that, for any purpose, handles, collects, disseminates, or otherwise deals with nonpublic personal information”. By definition, this statute governs all law offices and even those of us who practice as private individuals are covered because we handle information of our clients that are non-public and personal. Attorneys are data collectors in Illinois! So, you are covered by this statute but what does that mean for your practice? In short, when you are responsible (directly or indirectly) for the inappropriate exposure of your client’s personal information, you must notify them or you will be in violation of 815 ILCS 530 as an unlawful practice under the Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act.
  • August 20, 2010 | Practice News
    Legal Tech: Safeguarding legal documents in storage
    By Shamla Naidoo Remember this rule: A lawyer must act competently to safeguard information relating to the representation of a client against inadvertent or unauthorized disclosure by the lawyer or other persons who are participating in the representation of the client or who are subject to the lawyer's supervision. This month, a Houston attorney's client allegedly found files relating to her legal matters dumped in a parking lot. According to an investigative reporter, the files were held in a storage facility but when the attorney failed to pay the bill, stored materials were auctioned off to a stranger. Among the many issues in this matter, the ethical question is whether the attorney acted competently to safeguard the client’s files. It makes business sense for attorneys to outsource various services to third parties, but we remain responsible for meeting our ethical obligations as well as to manage related and foreseeable risks related to these services. Practically, what are some of the risks related to off-site storage of legal documents and what should an attorney do about these?
    1. Have you done due diligence in selecting a document storage provider?
    2. Who has access to your physical storage space and are they authorized to have access to your files?
    3. Do you have contingency plans for access/transfer of your files if you are no longer capable of making decisions?
    4. Do you have plans for your files at contract expiration/termination?
    5. Does your contract with the service provider allocate consequential damages?
    6. Have you disclosed the foreseeable risks to your client?
  • August 5, 2010 | Practice News
    Legal Tech: Google's treasure-trove of information
    By Shamla Naidoo Many of us use numerous "free" services offered by Google. But we don’t always consider the hidden cost to our privacy. The obvious example is the Google search engine, which tracks every search you make. Other examples include Google Voice, a phone service that tracks every call you receive, and voicemail service that archives your messages. Gmail manages your email, your contacts, and your schedule. Google Maps shows your real-time position on a map, helps you find nearby points of interest, and provides driving and walking directions. It offers real-time traffic information and identifies nearby real estate for sale. Google Latitude lets you share location information, and to see where friends are from your computer or smart phone. While these services enable social interaction on many levels and may increase productivity, there is a cost. You give up your information in return for the “free” service. Google services are offered with terms and conditions, which I recommend reviewing periodically. They include details about what information is collected, how long it is retained, etc. From their Q&A: How does Google protect my privacy? At Google, we are keenly aware of the trust our users place in us, and our responsibility to protect their privacy. We believe transparency and choice are the foundations of privacy. To help you make informed decisions about your own privacy, we work to let you know what information we collect when you use our products and services and how we use that information to improve your service.
  • July 29, 2010 | Practice News
    Legal tech: Is cross-linking to your website a good idea?
    By Peter LaSorsa Each week, I get several requests from people I don’t know asking me to put a link of their website on my website and in return they will do the same. They usually contact me via email and state that this cross-link will help both of our websites. The general answer to that statement is: wrong. There are instances where cross-links help your website with rankings and many more instances where the cross-link will hurt your website rankings. Website rankings are very important in that if your website does not show up on the first page of a search, chances are your website won’t be viewed by the searcher. Search engines like Google and Yahoo use secret algorithms to determine the ranking of websites that are displayed based on a given search. Basically, the search engine is trying to return the most relevant website for any given search term or set of terms. Even though the exact formula utilized is unknown, both search engines rely on the content of the website, how often it is updated and how many other websites which are relevant have links to your website. Having another website which the search engines rank high link to your website is a positive -- however the opposite is also true.  So if your website shows up ninth on a return for search terms “Chicago personal injury lawyer”, linking to a website that shows up 20th for search terms "New York personal injury lawyer” will not help your ranking. In fact, it may lower it. Additionally, if you have a company with no relevance to Chicago or injuries or lawyers and they link to your website, the search engines may punish your website.
  • July 22, 2010 | Practice News
    Legal tech: Is a website enough?
    By Peter LaSorsa Most attorneys by now have a web presence of some sort. The range in the complexity of a firm’s presence on the web is enormous. Some attorneys have a basic one page website while others incorporate video, links and hundreds of pages of content. My website has hundreds of pages of content as well as around 15 videos. Another thing my website has are links to both of my blogs. I believe having a blog is as important as having a website and mandatory if you expect to achieve a high Search Engine Optimization (“SEO”). Basically, one goal of a website is to show up in the first page of an Internet search a prospective clients does on your area of the law. Whether your website shows up in the first page or 50 pages later, depends on your SEO and your SEO depends on many factors. One factor I will discuss in this article is a blog and how it can help your website achieve a high ranking. Search engines like Google and Yahoo rank WebPages using algorithms and those algorithms take into account how often the content is updated and how relevant the content is to the subject matter in the website. So if you are an attorney with a heavy practice in criminal law, a corresponding blog on criminal law which is updated daily and linked back into your website will rank higher than a website with static content. Many attorneys mistakenly view their websites as an electronic brochure and don’t take full advantage of the interactive and information sharing nature of the Web 2.0.
  • July 15, 2010 | Practice News
    Legal Tech: BlackBerry Mobile Voice System 5
    By Peter LaSorsa This article is written from BlackBerry users, however if you own a different PDA, you may check with your manufacturer and see if a similar application is available for you. Research in Motion (“RIM “), the company that produces the BlackBerry, recently released version 5 to its BlackBerry Mobile Voice System (“MVS”). I know in our busy lives we can’t pay attention to each new release of each operating system for devices we own. However, this version 5 offers something that may be of interest to you and you may want to make sure this version is loaded on your phone. This particular feature allows voice over Wi-Fi calling. (i.e. the software lets users take calls from their BlackBerry using their desk phone numbers and extensions). This is an upgrade from the previous version of the software, which only allowed calls on the cellular network. Who cares? You should because a call placed on the cellular network in not secure - but a call placed with this new version is secure because it is being placed using your existing phone system. Another words the call will be as secure as if you were sitting at your desk in your office. An incoming call will ring your office phone and BlackBerry - ensuring you will always be incommunicado.
  • July 8, 2010 | Practice News
    Legal tech: Does monitoring electronic communications in the workplace constitute unreasonable search and seizure?
    By Shamla Naidoo The evolution of communications technology is blurring the line between work and personal lives. The recent Supreme Court decision in City of Ontario v. Quon, No. 08-1332 (U.S. Jun. 17, 2010) is more relevant than ever, especially for employers. In Quon, the employee contends that his 4th amendment protections were violated when his employer, the Ontario Police Department, reviewed his text messages in an unreasonable search and seizure. In fact the employer reviewed his text messages as part of an audit of usage to determine whether or not the company’s wireless plan was adequate. The court accepted the premise that Quon had a reasonable expectation of privacy; even so, they found that the search was reasonable because:
    1. It was motivated by a legitimate work-related purpose; and
    2. It was not excessive in scope.
    In this case the audit was based on overuse of text messaging unrelated to police business. The court determined the audit was conducted for a legitimate work-related purpose, to determine if actual business usage exceeded the purchased plan. The employer communicated the policy and limited the scope of the search by redacting all messages that fell outside of Quon’s normal work hours. The court determined the search was not excessive. The court agreed with the employer that this was not an unreasonable search and that Quon’s 4th amendment rights were not violated by this search. This opinion applied narrowly to the government as an employer and to an employer issued device.
  • July 1, 2010 | Practice News
    Legal tech: Smartphone tips
    By Peter LaSorsa It is probably easier to find an attorney who still uses a typewriter than one who doesn’t own a Smartphone — although they are probably one in the same.  Here are a few tips that may help you become more productive or just get more out of your current phone. For Blackberry owners, make sure you are always updating the device software. Desktop Software 5.0.01 is the latest and greatest. There will be an application on your phone that says Wireless updates — click to update the latest software. You can also go to the Research in Motion website to download the latest version. When you finish downloading, launch the Blackberry Desktop Manager and click Backup And Restore from the Main Menu. Click on the Options button under Backup and you can enable or disable the device memory backup and file encryption. You can also automatically backup the device with these settings. For iPhone users, one tip when viewing long documents or web pages, instead of scrolling back and forth, tap the top edge of the visible screen (where you see the time, battery meter and network provider). The page will rapidly scroll to the top of the document or page. Another tip for iPhone users is to not spend time typing .com or www. Simply highlight the URL field in Safari, tap the X to clear it and type the name of the domain you wish to go to — for example ISBA and you will automatically be taken to ISBA.org. The browser will not only take you to the website adding the .org prefix but also will check to see is there is a mobile version of the website.
  • June 17, 2010 | Practice News
    Legal Tech: 8 red flags to avoid being scammed
    By Shamla Naidoo Some of you may have read an article published in the June 2010 issue of the ABA Journal, “A Scam by Any Name.” In it, the author discusses the growing number of online scam artists targeting law firms and legal professionals, including a single scam that cost six firms in Hawaii over half a million dollars. This type of scam is an unfortunate fact of life in our increasingly interconnected world. Advice from the FBI that “most attorneys are smart enough to just delete these emails, or regard them with suspicion” is like saying don’t open email with viruses – if we knew about the virus, we wouldn’t open the email.  In the physical world, we pay attention to clues that help alert us to dangerous situations. We know better than to walk down dark alleys at night or flash cash in cities known for high crime. However, not all of us apply the same “street savvy” while online; even if we do, malicious emails look like normal emails to a casual viewer. A website set up by criminals may look exactly the same as that of a legitimate organization and sometimes is even a copy of a real website with a few technical differences invisible to the naked eye. Rather than telling them not to become victims, it is more helpful to educate lawyers on “red flags” that often characterize suspicious electronic correspondence.