LegalTechnology.com is the award winning niche web site for legal technology and online legal services news and information, which has been described by The Times newspaper as "the definitive online resource for the latest news about legal technology." Along with a searchable archive of back issues of all our publications, its facilities include: an extensive diary of forthcoming legal IT events, a jobs board for recruitment opportunities within the legal IT market and our definitive top 250 chart of which systems the UK's largest law firms are using - leading US legal publishers LexisNexis Martindale-Hubbell recently described this chart as "wonderful data".

Traffic report: the Insider web site is currently averaging over 11,000 page views and 50,000 hits each week. Apparently Wednesday afternoons between 3:00pm and 4:00pm are our peak viewing times.

Here's a comment on the Twitter Joke Trial proceedings in the Court of Appeal...

Andrew Sharpe, Lexis PSL lawyer, said: “Today the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) heard the appeal of Paul Chambers against his conviction under section 127(1) of the Communications Act 2003. The case is better known by its Twitter hashtag #TwitterJokeTrial, as it involves the prosecution of Paul for sending what was considered by the Crown Court to be a message of a menacing character. Paul had joked on Twitter that if Robin Hood Airport did not get its act together (to clear snow in January 2010), he would blow it up.
 
“The Court has reserved judgement, meaning that it needs time to consider the arguments presented today. A judgment is expected in around a month.
 
“From today’s hearing, it appears that the Court has not chosen to address whether the offending tweet had a menacing character to be caught by section 127(1) of the 2003 Act. This is disappointing to many commentators, who consider that the whole basis for the prosecution under this provision was flawed. Instead, the Court has addressed the effect of Article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights, the right to freedom of expression, on the case. The right can be qualified by legislation in the interests of national security or public safety. The Court of Appeal must therefore consider whether prosecution of Paul for a bad joke on Twitter under section 127(1) was a proportionate response by the Crown Prosecution Service in order to safeguard national security or public safety. If it was not, then Paul will be acquitted. If not, his conviction (including his fine) will stand.”

Solicitors Own Software (SOS) has today launched a new multimedia resource portal for law firms seeking to learn from the successes of others as they face the challenges of the new post Legal Services Act legal landscape.

In launching the new microsite, David McNamara, managing director of SOS said: “There has been much scaremongering about how mid-tier firms will survive in the future; however, we aim to stimulate a more positive tone to this business critical conversation. Many of our clients have been preparing for the impact of Alternative Business Structures (ABS) and have valuable stories to share. The SOS resource portal focuses on these law firm successes, providing real life insights and practical advice from our clients about the actions they are taking to realise their business goals and stand out in the market, and how they are harnessing IT to help.”

The multi-media resource features case studies, videos, infographics and an ABS whitepaper containing a collection of voices from law firms, consultants and business leaders. The free whitepaper addresses How can law firms succeed in the new legal era?

“As a significant supplier to the market,” continued David McNamara, “there is an expanse of knowledge and record of success within our client base which can help others look to the future with confidence. We are delighted that wider industry experts have also contributed to the portal.”

Top executives from firms including Ashton KCJ, Wollen Michelmore, and Woolley & Co have participated in the portal to impart their experiences and share lessons learned. Sector experts Chris Cann and Michaela Hardwick tackle issues like risk, compliance and change management. Neil Rose, a recognised commentator on the Legal Services Act, also offers some key lessons for law firms.

From today SOS has also launched a new marketing campaign designed to stimulate the business critical conversation of what law firms can do differently to compete in the new legal era and to build awareness of this new free resource for law firms determined to succeed.

More information is available at http://www.soslegal.co.uk/success

Comment: Well done SOS for taking this initiative. There's been a bit too much focus on the threats posed by the LSA and not enough on the potential opportunities it opens up to ambitious law firms of all shapes and sizes. The site will be added to over the coming weeks, so stay tuned.

As a result of the intense social media interest and speculation surrounding an incident in New York last week involving 51-year-old, West London housewife Mrs Joanna Mardon – better known as the freelance journalist Joanna Goodman – we are making this document (also attached as a PDF) publicly available. (Jane Christian is the marketing director of Legal Technology Insider Ltd and the wife of Insider/Orange Rag editor Charles Christian.)

A modest bit of gloating here as we've just had these survey results come in from a technology vendor...

Iridium Technology – a consultancy that focuses on business intelligence for law firms – has just announced the results of their customer satisfaction survey. As part of the survey, Iridium included questions about legal media outlets and their client’s interest in social media.  The majority of respondents to the survey were CFOs and Financial Reporting Managers.  Key findings:

·         The Orange Rag/ Legal Technology Insider,  Legal IT Professionals, and TheKnowList were cited as the most important sources of legal IT news and information

·         Iridium provides regular updates to their client base through monthly update emails and more than 90% of the clients rated this content as “Valuable” or “Highly Valuable”.  However, when asked if they were interested in following Iridium on Facebook, 83% of the respondents replied “No Interest”.   Additionally, when asked if they were interested in following Iridium on Twitter, 92% of the respondents replied “No Interest”

“Firstly, kudos to Rob Ameerun, Charles Christian and Daniel Brown,” states Tom Jones, President of Iridium Technology.  “The results clearly showed that these three fine publications are where Iridium clients go for legal news and information.  Secondly, it is good to know that our clients are not interested in following Iridium on Twitter or Facebook.  This will save Iridium time from posting updates which we already provide through our newsletters, allowing us to continue to focus on providing high quality BI implementations for our expanding client base.  Tweet that!”

Iridium’s customer satisfaction survey was independently run by Adept Alliance LLC, a Reno-based business services firm.

So normal service on this blog has been interrupted by the trip to LegalTech New York. Plus the timezone disconnect and jet-lag. Plus the almost non-existent wifi & mobile phone coverage in the conference vicinity (why can conference organisers never get this right). Plus an attack on the Orange Rag's marketing director Jane Christian by a British legal IT journalist (full details to follow next conference call with the NYC District Attorney's Office). And now we have the snow – yes we are snowed-in in deepest, whitest Norfolk. However normal service is resuming...

Here are a couple of social media-related legal stories the blew up last week, which we are reporting out of interest...

Facebook Timeline
Kim Walker, Data Protection Partner for law firm Thomas Eggar LLP provides Facebook users with advice on protecting their privacy before their Timeline goes live: Facebook has long been a source of information for employers checking the background on potential and current employees and making sure that social media policies are not being over-stepped with derogatory comments.

Once Timeline is enabled, Facebook users receive a Timeline page which scrolls down to reveal key information shared since they joined the online community. Click on a chosen year and you can view everything the user did in that particular year – good and bad! For employees, I would strongly recommend a quick check back through their Timeline during the seven day preview period that is allowed once Timeline is enabled and before it goes live.  Comments and posts that may not be viewed in the best light by employers can quickly be deleted alongside photography and information that may not present users in the best light.

In general we advise employers not to look at social media pages unless they have got a particular suspicion about an employee. If you don't need to look then you should not really be fishing. In addition, in most cases what are employers actually going to learn? Companies are unlikely to be able to dismiss or discipline someone who likes to go out and have a few drinks at the weekend unless it actually impacts on their day job.

The other obvious potential issue of Timeline for employers would be if they found a post which is several years old and breached their social media policy. However, as it was not picked up on at the time it was originally posted, the employee may well argue that it is now too late to take action fairly.

Equally, for those seeking employment it is worth ensuring the Timeline presents them in a way that will appeal to prospective employers. Be wary of any inflammatory comments or colourful past behaviour which may dent otherwise gleaming professional records.  Employers are increasingly using online communities such as Facebook and LinkedIn to research candidates so it is worth investing time in ensuring Timeline presents a positive profile.

As well as the personal angle, businesses using Facebook profiles to promote their companies will also have to consider the impact of Timeline. Customer complaints or negative posts could make an untimely reappearance in the Timeline. The new feature will also make it harder to consign adverse publicity to history, especially if others are keen to keep it alive. Again, these issues can all be managed and averted but better to do so before the interface goes live and impacts on any current marketing campaigns.

Most importantly, users should reassess the privacy settings on their Facebook profiles before their Timeline goes live. The audience for old posts that appear on the Timeline can be limited and there is even the option to individually change the audience of each post if required. While Timeline makes Facebook history more immediately visible than before, it is not sharing any content that couldn’t previously have been found. It is therefore the responsibility of users to ensure they have the correct privacy levels set and manage the information shared on their Timeline as they see fit.

Comment: And don't forget Facebook intends to roll out Timeline to all its users, whether they like it or not.


Bar takes action over barrister's wrists
Andrew Sharpe, LexisPSL Lawyer (and prominent legal tweeter @TMT_Lawyer) has produced the following commentary on the Bar Standard’s Board’s decision to fine David Harris (aka @GeekLawyer) £2500 for inappropriate use of the micro-blogging site Twitter.

One of the earliest legal adopters of Twitter in the UK was the person behind the account @GeekLawyer, who gave a colourful account of the life of a barrister in the South East of England. For many years followers of @Geeklawyer were entertained by some ribald commentary and banter; just the sort of thing that makes Twitter attractive for some. Whether or not @GeekLawyer was fictional was not a concern.
 
Matters changed last week, when the very real David Harris was brought before the Bar Standards Board on a number of charges, which included a charge that he had ‘engaged in conduct which was likely to diminish public confidence in the legal profession... via the internet site “Twitter” and using the pseudonym “Geeklawyer”....’ The decision of the BSB was published on 26 January 2012, which showed that David was fined £2,500 for his inappropriate use of Twitter. Here is the link to the decision http://www.barstandardsboard.org.uk/complaints-and-professional-conduct/disciplinary-tribunals-and-findings/disciplinary-findings/?DisciplineID=75521
 
Understandably, given that the messages to which the charge related have not yet been published, this has caused a certain flurry of interest and concern within the legal twittering community. Some have focussed on the point that lawyers cannot expect to hide behind anonymous accounts (eg @TheTimeBlawg), but the other concern must be the approach that lawyers’ regulatory bodies will take to the normal exchanges on Twitter.
 
Both the Bars Standards Board and Solicitors’ Regulation Authority have similar public confidence in the legal profession provisions in their Codes of Conduct.
 
The Bar Standards Board Code of Conduct states:
Applicable to all barristers
301. A barrister must have regard to paragraph 104 and must not:
(a) engage in conduct whether in pursuit of his profession or otherwise which is:
(i) dishonest or otherwise discreditable to a barrister;
(ii) prejudicial to the administration of justice; or
(iii) likely to diminish public confidence in the legal profession or the administration of justice or otherwise bring the legal profession into disrepute;
(b)  engage directly or indirectly in any occupation if his association with that occupation may adversely affect the reputation of the Bar or in the case of a practising barrister prejudice his ability to attend properly to his practice.
 
The Solicitors’ Regulation Authority Code of Conduct includes a set of core principles. Principle 6 (and the SRA note upon it) states:
 
Principle 6: You must behave in a way that maintains the trust the public places in you and in the provision of legal services.
2.10 Members of the public should be able to place their trust in you. Any behaviour either within or outside your professional practice which undermines this trust damages not only you, but also the ability of the legal profession as a whole to serve society.
 
Clearly, the issue here is the interpretation that will be placed upon these provisions by the regulators. Solicitors looking for guidance can only turn to the Law Society’s Social Media practice note published on 20 December 2011. However, in the context of the SRA Principles and where the dividing line may be between critical communications and behaviour that undermines public trust, the practice note is of little assistance. The danger is that lawyers may consider the risks of going over the line are too great, and so withdraw from public debate; the so-called chilling effect. Even if individual lawyers may be confident of their use of social media, compliance officers at law firms may be more circumspect.

To give a concrete example, I and many others were highly critical of the charging, prosecution and conviction of Paul Chambers as a result of his tweet about blowing up Doncaster Airport in January 2010, which criticism continued when his appeal against conviction failed. It could easily be argued by an over-zealous regulator that such volume of criticism from lawyers who, until the case is heard at Court of Appeal, could be considered to be ‘wrong’, undermines the public’s trust in the legal profession to apply properly the will and intention of Parliament as set out in the relevant statutory provision. In the so-called Twitter Joke Trial case, many of us consider that section 127 of the Communications Act 2003 was used completely inappropriately to prosecute Chambers.
 

by Neil Cameron of the Neil Cameron Consulting Group

Well the ABS race is on. In just a fortnight we have had Silverbeck Rymer and Russell Jones & Walker start on the road to become ABSs. Neither is doing it for themselves; they are both subject to takeover - one domestic, and one foreign. Silverbeck Rymer is being taken over by Quindell Portfolio in an £20m example or vertical market integration, and RJW by Australian market pioneers Slater & Gordon in a horizontal integration move worth £54m.

In The Times newspaper Tina Williams of Fox Williams is quoted as saying “This deal is a real wake-up call to law firms that expected to have years to adapt to a changing market”. I could not agree more.

Over the past few years firms UK general have had one of three reactions to the Legal Services Act and the creation of the ABS:
• they have ignored the whole phenomenon hoping it might go away;
• they have half-heartedly flirted with the concept;
• they have determinedly examined the options, and readied themselves for a move – like Irwin Mitchell and Duncan Lewis.

But there are many routes to forming an ABS; one is by an established law firm on its own initiative, one is a new start-up with new capital, and one is the investment of external capital in an established law firm. For a more detailed examination of the consequences of these options see our ‘Flirting with Floating’ article.

Quietly, in the background capital-rich organisations have been circling around the market like lions drawn to fresh young meat. Some in a blaze of self-publicity – such as Lyceum Capital – and others more stealthily like Investec. Other established enterprises that believe they can expand into this market have also been examining their options – like the Co-Op.

No-one could have predicted which way this was going to pan out, or predict accurately what will happen next – the law of unintended consequences makes sure of that. But now all bets are off, and I think we are going to be amazed at how quickly things move – especially in the high-volume consumer law areas such as personal injury and similar work.

Like all the girls at the teen-age dance, even if you don’t really want to dance neither do you want to be the last left standing at the end of the evening with the other no-hopers with no-one to partner up with. Make no mistake, Slater & Gordon is mopping up the Australian market for their target work – buying up firms and building a brand that attracts potential clients at the expense of other competitors. That is exactly what they want to do here – and who is going to stop them?

Any law firm reliant upon any degree of such business must now determine what it will do to counter the threat. They must either:

• launch a highly attractive and competitive service to the new sleek enterprises – which will require a heavy investment in marketing and systems. Few firms can afford to do this;

• undertake their own IPO and hope that the market will find them attractive enough, and then use the capital raised to invest in marketing and systems. This will take time;

• throw themselves under the feet of one of the new entrants – the estimated RJW partner bung of £2m will be attractive here, although that sum per partner will continually reduce as less attractive firms come forward desperately competing for involvement;

• find a new business partner with which to form an ABS – again, this will end up being a cut-throat beauty parade – and quicker than any of us think;

• wind up the firm and retire.

Best of luck guys…

Peppermint Technology has just announced the appointment of David Thorpe as Director of Business Development, he starts work there on Monday.

Arlene Adams, Peppermint Technology CEO, comments: "David brings a wealth of market experience and knowledge to Peppermint. His appointment reflects the influx of demand we are seeing for the Peppermint Platform. A highly experienced player in the UK Legal market, David was quick to recognise the unique value of the Peppermint Platform that brings together applications, content, collaborative working and transactions in one single system."

Thorpe comments "I have spent the last 30 years helping law firms become more efficient. Arguably, law firms today face a bigger challenge now than at any time over that 30 year period: There is a global recession; there is more competition for business; there are ABSs entering the market and more and more clients are demanding Alternative Fee Arrangements (AFAs) and other billing variants from their law firms.

“Traditional legal software products are designed to focus on the back office. While this is important and is something that the Peppermint Platform delivers very well, the real value of Peppermint is how it enables legal providers to transform the client experience.  The Platform recognises the power of data and connects together data, applications, people and process in one system centred round a single client profile. The result is transformational. By using the Platform legal providers can start to offer clients an ‘Amazon-like’ experience in legal services.  

"This is the first platform I've ever seen with this focus and it's revelatory. Of course efficiency and cost cutting is important but that will inevitably lead to a dead end; someone somewhere will always find a way to provide the work at a lower cost. By adding value to the experience of the client, law firms using the Peppermint Platform have a USP which doesn't depend on forever finding cheaper delivery options. It's been a long time since I was as excited by a software proposition as I am about Peppermint. I am really looking forward to taking the message to the market and working with the outstanding team at Peppermint."

Comment: Thorpe told us a few minutes ago that the Peppermint Platform was the most exciting legal IT system he had seen since Elite in 1993. He added that people forget how back then Elite – now the firmly entrenched market leader – was also seen as a novelty and not regarded as serious competition to the likes of the Miles 33, John Hemmings and Digital Kienzle (later Axxia) systems that then dominated the larger firms market.

Adams added that David's experience in the larger firms sector was also an attractive proposition for Peppermint as they were now attracting the interest of 500+ user firms.

So, Thorpe has joined Peppermint. All those vendors who have been trying to ignore the potential threat represented by Peppermint may need to reassess their ideas now.

• Arlene Adams will be speaking at the LawTech Futures event in London in March www.lawtechfutures.com

The January (issue #249) of the Legal Technology Insider newsletter has gone out now – print copies should be arriving in the post while the digital edition has just been sent using our new NewZapp edistribution service.

Top stories include...
• IRIS Legal to focus on three inhouse centres of excellence
• Weightmans 'exploring' LexisNexis ERP offering
• BLM iManage order upsets Sharepoint fans
• Scottish & English Law Societies offer guidance on social media & cloud technology
• Total buys K-Cloud
• There's a new chef in the Workshare kitchen who can cook !

Our next issue is out on 23rd February (probably!)