Communications - Legal Technology - Technologist
Technologist - The FindLaw Legal Technology Blog

Recently in Communications Category

While Google has created a concept driverless car, Cadillac has decided that 2017 will be the year that we surrender to our robot overlords. That's when it will release to the general public a car with "limited automated driving capabilities." Details are very slim, but it probably won't be as terrifying as Skynet or as awesome as KITT.

With increased automation, though, comes the question: When there's an accident in a driverless car, who will be responsible? The manufacturer? The driver? What if the driver wasn't driving; should he have been? It's a thought experiment that's coming closer and closer to reality.

For anyone who has graduated in the last ten years from law school: How did you take notes in class? For the vast majority of us, it was on a laptop. And we communicate with professors either through email or in person.

This is not news, unless you're sitting on the Supreme Court.

But, recently, I've been noticing a growing backlash: professors barring laptops from class or refusing to take emails from students. Even outside of the university system, it's happening. The Los Angeles Unified School District had a botched attempt at issuing iPads to its students which was just cancelled after a lot of expense and bad publicity.

In each of these examples, the same reason is provided: It's too much of a headache.

In the tech industry, a company may only be as strong as its non-compete agreement -- at least that's what Amazon thinks. Back in 2010, Amazon sued a former Sales VP Daniel Powers, after he accepted a new role at Google. In a bit of déjà vu, Amazon is again suing another one of its former employees that went to Google.

Will this case be more successful? We'll have to wait and see.

Aereo's tiny little personal antennas have had television broadcasters up in arms, but today the Supreme Court handed the broadcasters a win.

Back in March, Aereo founder Chet Kanojia was so confident in his position that he defiantly proclaimed that he has no Plan B should the Court rule against his company. Today, he issued a statement calling the Court's decision "a massive setback for the American consumer." He added, "We are disappointed in the outcome, but our work is not done. We will continue to fight for our consumers and fight to create innovative technologies that have a meaningful and positive impact on our world."

Let's take a look at the Court's legal analysis in coming to its decision.

How do you correspond with clients and other privileged parties? Unless you're on the Supreme Court, which apparently still uses memos on ivory paper, you probably use email. And if you need to send documents or files to a client, you probably attach them to the email.

What else are you doing? Not much, according to a recent survey -- the majority of lawyers do little more than include a confidentially statement in the email.

Are You a Twittering Lawyer? Your New Profile Has Arrived

The new Twitter profile layout is out -- and it's looking good. Have you taken a look? It's more modern, with bigger text, more images, and more information displayed in a clear way. If you want to check it out, log on to Twitter (on a computer, not on your phone) and you'll get a big notice with the option to switch to the new profile with just one click.

If you don't like it, one click will change it back. (If don't see the big notice, go to your old profile and click on the gearbox. Click on settings and go to "profile." From there, you'll see a link called "your profile." Click on that to switch to the new profile layout.)

In honor of the new profile, here are some quick tips on using Twitter effectively as a lawyer.

Anyone who's looked at a magazine or ad campaign knows that no one is Photoshop-free. In some cases, photoshopping models goes too far -- so much so that there is a website devoted to "Photoshop disasters." The debate about whether this kind of photo alteration is appropriate because of the effects on women's self-esteem has been ongoing for some time, but now two legislators in the House of Representatives have introduced a bill to curb the practice.

Truth in Advertising Act: The Proposed Bill

The Truth in Advertising Act, if passed, would direct the Federal Trade Commission to study the practice used by advertisers to alter the facial and body characteristics of the people photographed, "and to develop recommendations and a framework to address it." Working with outside groups who have a stake in such legislation -- such as consumer advocates, industry execs, and medical groups -- the FTC would develop a strategy for reducing the use of overly Photoshopped images.

Coffee is one of those things that people either love, or hate. Here at FindLaw, you will find many in the former category. There are those of us that take our coffee seriously (yes, I'm looking at you Mr. Peacock, with your own personal French press). So, when I came across an article in Ars Technica regarding a study on how caffeine affects memory, it got my wandering to a hot cup of joe.

So, I thought I'd do a "coffee tech" post on the best ways for you to get your fix. (Sidebar: Since I take my coffee seriously, I'm only writing about products that I actually have experience with.) Oh, and the study showed some improvement to memory -- though you really didn't need another excuse for that second cup, did you?

Many people see Snapchat as one of the four horsemen of a coming tech-pocalyse, a bubble burst that will make the "Dot Com" collapse look like a minor ripple. It's an app, worth $3 billion or so, that does one simple thing: it allows you to send and receive self-destructing pictures to each other.

Typically, that means snapshots of naughty bits.

It's allegedly worth the money because of its immense popularity. Will this massive hack, of 4.6 million usernames and phone numbers, harm that popularity? Will users still send selfies when their service provider failed to patch a known security flaw that they knew about for months? And should you, avid Snapchatter, be worried?

We've had our suspicions since June or so, but today, someone far more important than a blogging lawyer came to the conclusion that the NSA's bulk collection of phone metadata (calling records, phone numbers, etc.) "almost certainly" violates the Fourth Amendment: U.S. District Court Judge Richard Leon.

Judge Leon granted an injunction barring the NSA from collecting any metadata related to the two plaintiffs who alleged that they were affected by the phone program, while denying a similar injunction for a similar Internet data collection program that allegedly ended in 2011. (In a footnote, Judge Leon noted that a class has not yet been certified in the case, though four extensions have been sought -- hence, the limited scope of the injunction.) The injunction, however, is on hold pending any further appeals.