LegalZoom = bar complaint and allegations of deceptive advertising

We’ve all heard the adds for LegalZoom on the radio.  They claim LegalZoom was developed by “expert attorneys.”   Hmmmm…. It always made me wonder.

But read for yourself their disclaimer, which in part says:

LegalZoom is not a law firm, and the employees of LegalZoom are not acting as your attorney. LegalZoom’s legal document service is not a substitute for the advice of an attorney.

LegalZoom.com, Inc. (”LegalZoom”) is a registered and bonded legal document assistant, #0104, Los Angeles County (exp. 12/09). LegalZoom cannot provide legal advice and can only provide self-help services at your specific direction.

LegalZoom is not permitted to engage in the practice of law. LegalZoom is prohibited from providing any kind of advice, explanation, opinion, or recommendation to a consumer about possible legal rights, remedies, defenses, options, selection of forms or strategies.

Well, somone filed a bar complaint in North Carolina.  The complaint alleges that the software that creates the legal documents constitutes the practice of law because it selects the content. 

So does this mean all forms are bad?   I think not, and remember this is just a complaint, not a decision.  I think that it depends upon the extent to which the forms are reviewed for changes before they are distributed to the “clients.”   But, time will tell…

Of course, although you can do some documents yourself, there are so many things to consider that in most cases, you need a professional.  Biased?  Yes, but I also speak from experience.  Legal issues are not like doing your taxes.  Taxes have a defined set of rules (albeit large).  Legal documents reflect the breadth of creativity in business and life, and there are so many “reasonable” rules whose application can vary by jurisdiction.  One size does not fit all. 

For more information, see eLawyeringBlog’s post here.  For a nice discussion of the allegations of LegalZoom’s deceptive advertising practices, see For Connecticut Lawyer’s blog post here.

Futurelawyer: A technology blog worth reading

I stumbled across http://futurelawyer.typepad.com/futurelawyer/ today.  Futurelawyer is a blog about technology developments for lawyers.  However, he also reviews new phones, computers, and other programs that any business person can learn from.  Lately, he’s posted about the possibility of a color Kindle, itunes in the pool, and new Palms.

Funny video: Engineer’s Guide to Cats

 

First Napster, then Google Book Search, and now other sites?

First there was Napster, a platform for uploading and sharing music that was mainly in violation of copyrights.

Then there was Google Books Search (aka GoogleBooks), where Google had scanned and uploaded all sorts of books, attempting to be the next Library of Alexandria – but on the internet.  Unfortunately, they rolled right over copyright issues.  (See Google’s website on the settlement here.)

Now, perhaps it is because of the advent of the Amazon.com Kindle, increasing the popularity of electronic books (I like the smell of paper books myself), there is an increasing and alarming number of other sites that are being used to upload and share copyrighted novels and other works in violation of those copyrights.  For instance, books and novels are popping up without authorization on Scribd and Wattpad, which are marketed for uploading documents like college theses and self-published novels.  As soon as they are notified of violations, the sites say they are taking the violative material down, but it poses an interesting question.  Regardless of the intended or orignal use of these sites, if a deluge occurs, can they be forced to go the way of Napster, if they cannot get this under control?   Time will tell.

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/12/technology/internet/12digital.html?_r=1

Saturday Night Live Star Trek Sketch

http://www.hulu.com/watch/72444/saturday-night-live-update-feature-star-trek

Live free: Ride the cart

I was at the Beavercreek Krogers today and saw a man with white hair riding his shopping cart back to his car, just like this kid.  Its just a reminder that you are never too old to experience the joy in life. Wheeeeee!

 

 

 

 

Picture source: http: //www.flickr.com/photos/jemaleddin/133560623/

www.talkaboutit.org

That’s all I’m going to say. Informative! Click HERE.

Another lesson in protecting your brand: The VISA? Black Card

So, I’m flipping through the magazine du jour, trying to relax when there it is: an add for the Visa Black Card, which has a little TM symbol next to it.  Hmmm…. I think.  Didn’t they just blatantly rip that off of American Express?

Turns out AMEX never registered it. Yes, yes, I hear you shouting: “Even if you don’t register a trademark, you should have a common law right to use it!”  The problem here is apparently that  American Express never called or marketed their black card as the “Black Card”.  So, they didn’t “use” it?  Instead, they call theirs The Centurion Card.  It was only popular culture — movies, rappers, moguls, and the like – that called The Cenurion Card  the Black Card.  So American Express never “used” that name.  Thus, they’d be hard pressed to prove rights.   They also never secured the domain name so another couldn’t use it.  Oooops.

So, along comes Visa and swoops it up, sticks a TM on it and gets the domain name www.blackcard.com.

So far it looks like AMEX is silent. 

Lesson learned…. look out for what people call your product — it maybe a better name than what you used.

Jurors using Twitter get called on carpet

Apparently, a juror used Twitter to update followers on the status of the case — a big “no-no.”  Jurors are told not to disclose information about deliberations during deliberations.  The juror tweeted, ”Stay tuned for a big announcement on Monday everyone!”   The lawyers moved to disqualify the juror.    For more, click HERE.

And in Arkansas, a $12.6 M verdict was appealed.  It was alleged a juror’s Twitter posts showed he was biased.  The juror posed: “oh and nobody buy Stoam. Its bad mojo and they’ll probably cease to Exist, now that their wallet is 12m lighter.”  He also posted: “I just gave away TWELVE MILLION DOLLARS of somebody else’s money.”  For more, click HERE. 

The courts found nothing wrong — IN THOSE CASES.  As with, say, verbal communications, these comments did not contain anything about the deliberations themselves.  Or so say the courts.   The problem of course with any of these communications during deliberations is not just that they make comments to the world — but that they invite responses, which they are likely reading if they are on these cites.    Jurors should just steer clear of the subject all together other than to say that they are in jury duty or not, so people know not to expect a return communication.  Better yet, they should avoid getting on these sites if their method of making these tweets or status updates allows them to see other’s comments which could include comments about the case.  Jurors are admonished not to read newspapers and tv about the cases, and comments from others run afoul of the same problems.

So now, we — as  lawyers —  need to follow juror social networking sites during and after trials.

Don’t misuse a copyrighted work. Learn about the CREATIVE COMMONS!

We all make presentations or brochures, reports or other materials, and find ourselves in need of a certain type of image.  Often, we just can’t find it in Microsoft’s limited clip art.

That’s where the CREATIVE COMMONS comes in.  It was founded in 2001 to foster creativity and create a “body of work that is available to the public for free and legal sharing, use, repurposing, and remixing.”   There are images, sounds, videos and all sorts of other works in the Creative Commons. 

The Creative Commons contains works with a standardized Creative Commons license.  Creative Commons works are not in the public domain, and are not “no rights reserved.”  The copyright holder still retains some of his rights, but is giving you limited use rights that are defined by the Creative Commons license in a standard and easy to interpret graphical format.  Yea for easy!

There are several Creative Commons licenses.  Keep reading.  It really is quite simple. 

To search for works with a Creative Commons license, go to http://search.creativecommons.org/

Then, to see the types of things you are allowed to do with each image, you will see little symbols, which are translated as follows (see more at http://creativecommons.org/about/licenses/).  And if you are super-duper curious, there is a full legal license for each at that site that you can read.  Happy hunting.

And if you want to put a Creative Commons license on your own work, the logos for these are here: http://creativecommons.org/about/downloads/  Just be sure to use them correctly.