Kevin S. Brady, Esq.

Free and low-cost CLE seminars for Minnesota attorneys, part 7.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Mon, 10 Oct 2011 00:03:00 +0000

A few upcoming events:

Lindquist & Vennum's next free Business Law Webinar is "Tiptoeing Through the Employment Law Minefield," to be presented Tuesday, October 18, 2011, from noon to 1PM, CDT.

Lommen Abdo are presenting their Fourth Annual Entertainment Law Symposium, Friday, November 4, 2011, at the 50th floor of the IDS Center in Minneapolis. This year's seminar features attorneys and entertainment industry luminaries, including Steven Greenberg, noted music producer and author of Lipps Inc.'s 1979 #1 hit, Funkytown. This is always a very interesting, informative and fun event -- I highly recommend it. Cost is $125 for 6.5 Minnesota CLE credits. Participants also receive a free lunch and get to hang out at the SXSW mixer after the symposium.

Free and low-cost CLE seminars for Minnesota attorneys, part 6.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Thu, 23 Jun 2011 03:10:00 +0000

Here are a few offerings of low-dough (or no-dough) CLE events in the area:

Lindquist & Vennum has a series of free, 1 hour webinars. The next one is "Estate Planning and Business Succession for the M&A Transaction," from noon to 1:00PM, Tuesday, July 19, 2011. More upcoming Lindquist & Vennum CLEs can be found here.

The Salvation Army sponsors its 19th annual Estate & Charitable Gift Planning Institute, a free, all-day CLE, Wednesday, September 14, 2011, at the Minneapolis Convention Center, and broadcast live to several locations around the state. Some ethics credit is also included in this event.

Free and low-cost CLE seminars for Minnesota attorneys, part 5.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Thu, 21 Oct 2010 02:01:00 +0000

When I started this series of CLE postings back in May, I stated a goal: that I would try to keep you apprised of seminars that are either free or reasonably priced. "Reasonably priced" being within a price point of around $10 per hour credit. However, I would like to point you to an excellent all-day CLE that, while costing a bit more than our $10/hour index, it is nonetheless a bargain.

On November 12, 2010, the Minneapolis law firm of Lommen Abdo is presenting its 3rd annual Entertainment & Sports Law Symposium, an all-day event offering 6 Minnesota CLE credits, including 1 Elimination of Bias credit. Topics covered will include licensing, recording and film deals, estate planning for artist/athlete clients, and more. Plus lunch, and a mixer after the event. All for $125 - just over $20 per credit hour. Still, a mere fraction of the cost of most all-day CLE seminars.

Free and low-cost CLE seminars for Minnesota attorneys, part 4.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Mon, 13 Sep 2010 22:22:00 +0000

Labor Day has come and gone, the state fair is history, and law schools are back in session. With summer fading and fall on its way, it's time to get geared up for some upcoming low-budget CLEs.

The U of M has an all-day seminar, Law and Inequality: A Journal of Theory and Practice. The event will be held on Tuesday, September 28, 2010, at Room 25 of Lockhart Hall, Walter F. Mondale Hall, at the University of Minnesota Law School, from 8:00 AM to 3:45 PM. Credit for 3.0 standard and 2.0 elimination of bias hours has been applied for. Cost is $50 for the all-day event if you register on or before September 17; $60 if you register after the 17th.

William Mitchell College of Law has a slate of upcoming CLEs, some free, others very reasonably priced. Some are available as webcasts.

Free and low-cost CLE seminars for Minnesota attorneys, part 3.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Tue, 17 Aug 2010 14:09:00 +0000

Summer is almost over and things are beginning to pick up around here. I spotted a free, all-day CLE event in Minneapolis. It's the 18th annual Estate and Charitable Gift Planning Institute to be held Thursday, September 23, 2010 at the Minneapolis Convention Center, and broadcast live to other locations in Minnesota and around the country. The event is sponsored by the Salvation Army and the Minnesota State Bar Association.

The CLE will run from 9:00 AM to 3:00 PM, and covers various topics relating to advising clients in areas of charitable giving, tax implications, etc. CLE credit has been applied for in Minnesota and is still pending; although the amount of MN credit has not yet been determined, other states are allowing around 5 hours total, with an hour or so of ethics included in that amount. Your mileage may vary, depending on the state you practice in. Registration deadline is September 17, 2010.

You can register for the event here.

Free and low-cost CLE seminars for Minnesota attorneys, part 2.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Tue, 25 May 2010 23:57:00 +0000

Here are links to a few more free and cheap continuing legal education seminars for Minnesota attorneys:

The Minnesota Association of Law Libraries posts a monthly online newsletter (PDF) that lists several upcoming CLE events. Scroll down to the "CLE Corner" section of the newsletter for listings.

Washington County Continuing Legal Education hosts free seminars, held at noon at the Washington County Government Center in Stillwater, MN. Membership in the Washington County Bar Association is not required.

William Mitchell College of Law has two upcoming events in June. The Business of Going Solo, a 2-part, 5.0 CLE credit (total) lecture, Thursdays June 10 and June 17 from 8:00 - 11:00AM each day, with a cost of $25 for one session, $40 for both. Working With Muslims is from noon to 1:30PM on Friday June 18, costs only $10 ($20 for the live webcast) and provides 1.5 hours of elimination of bias credits.

Free and low-cost CLE seminars for Minnesota attorneys.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Tue, 04 May 2010 22:55:00 +0000

The Minnesota Board of Continuing Legal Education requires that licensed attorneys complete 45 hours of continued legal training - including 3 hours of ethics and 2 hours of elimination of bias - every three years. Anyone who practices law around here knows how hard it is to find free (or even low-cost) CLEs to satisfy that requirement. There are many organizations that provide for-fee CLE seminars, MSBA and MinnCLE among those, and they do a fine job of organizing informative events. But many of these courses are expensive, ranging upwards of 200 dollars for an all-day event.

Of course, these for-fee CLEs are well-planned and executed, with subject matter targeting specific law practice areas. It's nice if your law firm or corporation is willing to foot the bill for their attorneys' continued learning. However, many - perhaps most - lawyers are on their own for this expense. In a 3-year reporting period, the total cost can easily exceed a thousand dollars.

Like many attorneys who don't have this cost covered by employers, I ferret out the free and cheap CLEs whenever I can. What is my definition of "cheap"? Let's set the price point at, say, $10 per hour or less. That puts the price tag of your 3-year obligation at less than $450, if you are flexible enough to seek out these events.

I will try to share news of bargain CLEs as they turn up, so check back to my blog from time to time for additional postings. Here are a few upcoming events:

Intellectual Property: Beyond the Basics, Friday, June 11, 2010, 8:30AM - 4:30PM, Thrivent Financial Bldg., 625 4th Av. S., Minneapolis, MN. Presented every year by the law firm Kinney & Lange. It's an all-day event, typically yielding about 6 MN credits, 7.5 WI credits. You can opt to attend only the morning or afternoon session for half credit. Cost is free, but advance registration is required.
The Business of Going Solo, a two-part seminar, Thursday, June 10, 2010, 8:00-11:00AM, and Friday, June 11, 2010, 8:00-11:00AM, William Mitchell College of Law, 875 Summit Ave., St. Paul, MN. Cost: $25 for one day, $40 for both days. Register online or call 651-290-6370.
William Mitchell offers other free or low-cost CLE lectures. Many of these can be attended via webcast. Check their schedule more more details.
Earn CLE credit by auditing a class at William Mitchell, free for alumni (on a space-available basis, of course). Taking one class can net you a good chunk of your entire 3-year reporting requirement. Registration information.
MSBA 9 Days in June, a series of free, day-long CLEs at various locations around Minnesota. MSBA membership not required to attend these events.
The Dakota County Law Library and 1st Judicial District Bar Association offer free CLEs, typically one per month. Check their schedule for upcoming events.
Preventing Legal Malpractice Claims and Ethics Complaints in Your Law Practice, various locations across Minnesota in June 2010. Presented by Minnesota Lawyers Mutual Insurance Co. - see site for schedules.

One other idea: present your own CLE. Not only do you get credit for the presentation, you can also claim the time spent in preparation. So if you give a 1 hour lecture that you spent 3 hours preparing for, you earn 4 hours of credit total. You have to pay a small fee to apply for accreditation, but you could charge a small admission fee to recoup that. In addition, many in-house corporate law departments present their own CLEs. However, those attorneys must receive at least 25% of their CLE time from outside sources, per Minnesota Board rules. Check with some of your in-house friends to see if they could use your expertise for an hour or two, and save them the trouble of having to leave work to go to outside seminars.

Licensing of Internet users?

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 21:31:00 +0000

There has been some buzz recently concerning the idea of "licensing" Internet users. This idea was presented last month by Craig Mundie, Microsoft's chief research and strategy officer, while speaking at an economic forum in Switzerland. The question pondered: are we at a point where it may become necessary to require some kind of licensure for Internet users? Mundie suggested that government entities could--even should--license potential Internet users in the same way that drivers are licensed. Keep in mind, this is an idea espoused not by some crackpot, but by a respected member of the technical community. The idea is hardly novel; it had surfaced more than six years ago.

Mundie's argument is that the Internet is so often used as a tool for criminal activity and abuse, that perhaps government bodies should step in to create a licensing system to regulate who has access to the Internet and what activities those individuals may engage in. This frustration is derived from the fact that never before in history has such a broad communications tool been available to so many. Until about fifteen years ago, mass media was the sole domain of a relatively small number of players: publishers, broadcast station owners, networks, etc. There existed central control over those media outlets and outsiders had little, if any, access to the media. Now anybody with a PC and an Internet connection can communicate with any other person in the world who is connected. Abuse can--and does--occur. Copyrighted files are shared, viruses are circulated, defamatory and threatening messages are sent--by individuals who, for the most part, remain anonymous. There is no central control over what happens on the Internet, and some people are frightened by that.

We have seen what governments elsewhere have done to regulate the Internet. Perhaps the most striking example is that of the Chinese government's efforts to control the content that Google's search engines serve up for Chinese users. Other nations have similarly restricted their citizens' abilities to access certain online data, either through filtering, monitoring, or by agreements with online providers--or all the above. Thus, the governmental pinch point has primarily been with the online service providers. Mundie's proposal would effectively move that pinch point to the user. Clean up the user base and you clean up the activities that occur online. At least that's the theory. But is this a good idea?

Setting aside the complex technical and logistical issues that would invariably arise, let's turn our attention to the legal considerations at hand, should someone in the U.S. decide to move forward on this kind of regulation.

First, Mundie’s analogy to licensing automobiles and drivers is disingenuous–and flawed. Government licensing of drivers and vehicles is premised on public safety considerations, clearly within the scope of government regulation. There simply is no comparison between keeping our highways safe, and preventing misuse of online communications. You cannot convince me that the decision of who may be granted the ability to post photos (or viruses) on the Internet carries the same gravitas as choosing who we shall allow to steer a 4,000 pound vehicle down a busy freeway at 65 miles per hour.

A more apt analogy might be a comparison to the FCC’s regulation and licensing of public airwaves. But even that analogy falls short, because while FCC regulation of radio communication is necessary due to the limited spectrum available and the obvious need to avoid interference, there is no such limitation with the Internet. There is room for everyone to access and use the Internet and communicate freely.

But the most fundamental flaw in any Internet-user licensing proposal in the United States would of course be the insurmountable First Amendment issues that would arise. The government, in an attempt to regulate access to the Internet, would most certainly run afoul of constitutionally-protected free expression. Adding further scrutiny to the proposal is the fact that the government would be, by limiting who can access it, attempting to control the content placed online.

Regulation of the time, place and manner of speech by a government entity is subject to a four-part standard: (1) The regulation must serve an important government interest; (2) the government interest must be unrelated to the suppression of a particular speech; (3) the regulation must be narrowly tailored to the government's interest; and (4) the regulation must leave open ample alternative means for communicating speech.

While the proposed regulation would likely satisfy point (1) (the government's interest in reducing unlawful and abusive activities online) and probably (2) (the government seeking to mitigate online crime and not aiming to suppress speech), the remaining two points would be troublesome. The fact that the government would require sweeping licensing requirements for anyone wishing to access the Internet would likely be construed by the courts as overly broad in scope and thus not narrowly-tailored (3), and the fact that there are no alternatives to Internet access (read: no other mass-media access for ordinary citizens) means that (4) would likely be a major roadblock.

The issue is further muddied by some questions. What bright-line test would be used to determine qualification for licensure? What test would be used to determine when someone's activities have stepped over the line? What monitoring and metrics would be in place to ensure enforcement? Who will have access to that data? The idea doesn't just smack of arbitrary and capricious regulation, it defines it.

In sum, an Internet user licensing scheme like that advocated by Mr. Mundie would be somewhat like trying to license journalists. Or herding cats.

SEO basics: promoting your small business website.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Sun, 24 Jan 2010 01:07:00 +0000

There has been a great deal of buzz the past several years over what is called "SEO" - search engine optimization. SEO is essentially the art of making your site "search engine-friendly." In other words, optimizing your site such that it will likely show up immediately in the search results when your customers employ certain key online queries. For example, if the site is promoting tax preparation services in St. Paul, you might want it to show up at or near the top of the results of a Google, Yahoo or Bing search from queries such as "tax st paul" or "twin cities tax preparation."

However, far too many site owners and SEO "experts" attempt to tailor solely to search engine algorithms, without giving thought to the human visitors they ultimately want to draw in. Since today's search engines are becoming more and more sophisticated, designed to track closely with human query behavior, it follows that the best approach to SEO is to make your site human-friendly. Do this well, and the search engines will follow. Here are a few things to consider.

Optimize your web page's code.

Metatags in the HTML of a website no longer bear the importance they did a few years ago. Google gives no weight at all to the description tag or to keywords, and the other major engines probably ignore them as well.

However, there is one tag that still retains some importance: the title tag. This tag provides the text that appears in the title bar at the top of the browser, identifying your site. Search engines do index this tag, so you'll want a brief but meaningful half-dozen or so words that clearly identify your site. Too many websites have "index" or "home" as their title, which offers no insight as to what kind of site your visitor just landed on.

Make certain that your site is accommodating to search engine spiders. This can be accomplished by using a robots.txt file, or incorporated into your website's HTML code.

Site navigation.

Make it easy for people (and search engine spiders) to find their way through all of your site's pages. Have a set of links or buttons, prominently displayed, to guide visitors to your site's features. A well-crafted sitemap will ensure good navigability and help the search engines crawl and index each page on your website.

Content - keep it simple and user-friendly.

A website with useful text-rich content will be far more informative and useful to your visitors, and more conducive to good search engine rankings. While lots of interesting graphics and slick flash animations are nice eye-candy, they offer little to help your visitors find their way around your site. Search engines don't care whether your site is pretty or not, and most of your customers won't either. Besides, that animated splash screen may look impressive, but your impatient visitors might use that 15-second load time to consider hitting the "back" button and going elsewhere.

Consider posting some short articles, primers or FAQ pages to help inform visitors about your products and services. Talk up your company and products and describe what you can do for the customer. People will appreciate the added value in this, and more likely to return to your site. Good information also helps create buzz, and your visitors may tell others about what they have found on your site. Search engines give considerable weight to such content.

Get others to link to your site.

The single biggest thing you can do to build traffic and search engine rankings is to get others to place links to your site. Having a network of organic links pointing to your website from other relevant sites provides positive "votes" for your site and is a good way to enhance your site's web presence. Oftentimes all you need is a brief email to the webmaster of another site asking for a backlink. Avoid engaging in link exchange programs with spammer, directory or scraper sites. Links from these sites have little value and may even cause search engines to devalue your website's rankings. Check your site's popularity from time to time and see who is linking to it.

Use other online tools.

Create a weblog and link to it from your site. This will give you a valuable tool to keep your visitors apprised of changes, special events and other news. A blog is also an excellent tool for you to continually pitch your company's strengths. Using social networking sites like Twitter and LinkedIn may also be helpful in building a network of customers and colleagues. It helps create more buzz for what you have to offer.

For a more in-depth look at SEO considerations, I have a primer on website promotion. While the article is aimed at small law firms, the principles apply to other small business sites as well.

My website is quite unattractive, perhaps even quaint, with its 1996 look. But the site is easy to read and navigate through, it clearly states my objectives and what I do, it provides helpful information, and it gets traffic from people who are interested in my services. It's also indexed and ranked well by the major search engines and appears near the top of search results for many relevant search queries. It's not ideal, but it works fine for me.

Good luck with your company's web promotion!

Law office on the cheap: a few free tech tools for your small firm.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 03:12:00 +0000

I am in the process of putting together a home office for my law practice. In the relentless quest for tools to help me do my job, I always look for good free ones. Here are some excellent desktop and cloud-based applications I have dovetailed into my day-to-day.

Productivity suite. OpenOffice.org has come a long way since its humble beginnings nine years ago, now offering a robust suite of desktop apps that rivals - even supplants - MS Office. Word processing, spreadsheets, databases, presentations, and more. OpenOffice can read and write files in other common office software packages, which gives seamless compatibility with clients and others using MS Office. With 100 million downloads to its name, OpenOffice can't be bad.

Google Docs is a great alternative in that it's a cloud app, which allows you to create and store documents that are accessible from anywhere online.

Scanning to PDF. I'd love to have a high-speed scanner to convert all my paper documents to PDF in short order. Who wouldn't? But in my home office, I use a $100 flatbed scanner to scan one page at a time. Merging multiple scans into a single document can be a clunky, time-consuming operation involving multiple programs. Not with Scan To PDF. Quickly convert scans to PDF files.

Online research. While not as versatile or powerful as Lexis or Westlaw, Google Scholar has nevertheless created some buzz in the legal community recently. Search Google's extensive index of caselaw and check citations for free.

File backups/synch. Backing up files is crucial. FileMyster is a great little program that allows you to back up my entire drive to another drive, or select only certain folders to backup. The interface is very straightforward, and you can choose to backup manually, or setup a schedule for syncing your files.

Data encryption. If you're like me, you tend to carry certain files around on USB flash drives. The ubiquitous little storage devices are a common necessity, but if you ever lose one with sensitive data on it...

...Enter TrueCrypt, a free encryption program that will lock down your data with robust security. Encrypt a partition or a whole drive.

Firewall. For a more solid layer of protection than afforded by Windows Firewall, download the free ZoneAlarm firewall.

Antivirus. Avira Antivirus is a powerful, free antivirus app. Microsoft Security Essentials is a good alternative that is light on system resources.

Antispyware. Ad-Aware does an excellent job of ferreting out and removing spyware and adware programs surreptitiously installed on your PC.

Calendar. Using Google Calendar is a great way to keep track of your appointments anywhere. This is particularly useful when you are away from the office and not able to check into your Outlook account.

Phone management. With Google Voice you can access your voicemail online, read transcripts of voicemail, block or forward calls, create custom greetings based on who's calling, make free domestic long-distance calls and extremely cheap international phone calls, and route incoming calls to up to 6 phones. This latter feature is nice, as I set it up to ring my home and cell phones simultaneously. Never miss a call from a client or colleague. You can also set GV to ring directly to voicemail during certain times of day. Get a free phone number from Google, or use your existing number. The downside: Google Voice is by invite only and it takes a few weeks to get a free account. But it is worth the wait. Get your place in line.

Perception is reality.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Sun, 06 Dec 2009 16:48:00 +0000

I have a friend who is a restaurateur. He owned and operated a nice little Italian cafe for about three years. The place served delicious and creative chef-driven cuisine, crafted by people with genuine passion. It had a very good wine list and stellar service. My wife and I enjoyed dining there, and never had a bad meal.

It went under last spring.

The restaurant was located in a conservative, working-class suburb. It seemed out of place there, serving up $30 entrees to a populace accustomed to sports bars, fast-food and $10 all-you-can-eat pasta at the chain Italian place nearby. The sluggish economy didn't help either. Had the little cafe been located in a tony neighborhood in the heart of the city, or one of the more affluent suburbs, the outcome might have been different. But no amount of marketing or caché was going to change the facts as they were. The restaurant languished in a place where too many people simply viewed it as being overpriced, no matter what the true value was. The perception was, in their minds, reality. They were unwilling to look beyond the price tag, and thus, the perception became indelible.

What value do you see yourself providing to your clients? Now, think about how your client would respond to that same question. You might be surprised at the difference. At the end of the day, the true worth of the services you provide to your client is derived from her perception. What can you do to ensure it is not indelible?

Our first severe weather of the summer.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 03:53:00 +0000

After a lackluster summer of drought and cooler-than-average temps, we finally got a genuine taste of severe weather in the Twin Cities area when a thunderstorm passed through the northwest metro. A few tornadoes were even spawned by this system, with some damage in the western 'burbs. Luckily, no fatalities or injuries.

We received an inch of rain and a nice light show, but little else in our area. Our yard can use the rain, though we have received 4.3 inches in the past 48 hours. Things are getting a bit soggy.

After the storm passed through I took some photos of the wall of cumulonimbus clouds that were leaving the area. (At right. Click to embiggen.) The cloud-to-cloud lightning was spectacular. All I needed to do was open the shutter for several seconds and I was guaranteed that at least a few good bolts would show up in the image.

Goodbye, Kodachrome

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:32:00 +0000

After more than 70 years as the benchmark of color transparency photography, Kodak's iconic Kodachrome film will be retired. The company is ceasing production of the film, which now accounts for only a fraction of one percent of Kodak's still-picture film sales, in an era where film sales are increasingly being pushed aside by digital photography. There is presently only one lab on the planet that processes Kodachrome.

With my first 35mm camera, a boxy, 1940s-vintage Argus C3 bought used in 1972 for $20 from a camera shop, I cut my teeth on amateur photography, shooting roll after roll of Kodachrome. I still have many of those slides today, and the color is still spectacular. The fine-grained detail and color reproduction accuracy of Kodachrome was, and still is, without peer.

Interestingly, the film is actually exposed in black and white. Only through a complex process are the three primary colors then integrated into the exposed images, rendering Kodachrome's true colors. The complexity of this process is the reason so few labs were able to develop the film, the last remaining one being in Parsons, Kansas.

It's the end of an era. Kodachrome will be missed by many. I think I'll go listen to some Paul Simon.

Stretching the useful lifespan of an older PC.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 11:31:00 +0000

With the effects of the recession sinking in the minds of consumers, many people are foregoing the purchase of new computer gear and opting to hold on to their older PCs. Others may find bargains in used equipment, rather than laying out more money for new stuff. And unless you are a "power user" with plans to use your system for intensive applications like video editing, gaming, etc., you might be pleasantly surprised at what you can do with a computer that's a few years old or even older yet.

I had purchased a new PC just last year which suits my needs quite well. But I held on to my previous system, a Gateway machine that I bought back in 2001. Yes, an eight-year-old system with a 950MHz processor, 768MB RAM and a couple 60GB hard drives. Hardly the epitome of performance. Yet I was amazed at what I could do with that old PC after I dragged it out of storage recently.

I could have simply set it up as a terminal on a home network, but I was more interested in finding out what this ancient computer could do on its own. I probably couldn't give it away on Craigslist. But it still had some usefulness that I was willing to find.

I had previously wiped the hard drives clean and repartitioned them. I reinstalled Windows XP and went from there. For those who wish to avoid Windows, and have a knack for experimenting a bit, there is the free Ubuntu Linux operating system. I personally find Ubuntu rather awkward and clunky, but many others have taken the time to really learn it. Nevertheless, Ubuntu is quite powerful, and worth considering.

My next step was to install all the necessary and useful applications - without spending any money, of course. This is very easy to do with the availability of good, free open-source software (FOSS). The choices are many, and you won't have trouble locating good ones. Here are my choices:

Browser: Mozilla Firefox. Free, powerful and versatile, with better security features than IE. But you may want to consider Google's excellent Chrome browser, which is fast and lean. Chrome puts a very light footprint on system resources, important when optimizing an older, slower machine. For an email client, Mozilla's Thunderbird is an excellent, free alternative to Outlook.

Now that our system is online, the next step is downloading and installing security applications. I like AVG antivirus, which is incredibly powerful for a free app. Zonelabs' free ZoneAlarm firewall is a must if you want to step up to a better firewall than the basic Windows offering. Don't forget anti-spyware protection. Ad-Aware provides excellent protection for this and is updated frequently. This trifecta of freebie apps should provide reasonably solid protection.

Don't want to shell out hundreds for MS-Office? No problem, as the free OpenOffice.org suite does just about everything Office does. The interface and menus of OOO are very similar to those in Office. It is a bit of a system hog, though nowhere near as bloated as MS-Office.

There are free alternatives for all the other applications you will want. WinAmp is a good choice for media player. Irfanview is an outstanding graphics editor. You can find numerous other open-source apps and utilities at CNET downloads and Source Forge.

With just an afternoon of tinkering I was able to get my old PC up and running with a decent arsenal of useful applications. I now have a nice, older PC that I can give to a friend or family member who needs one.

In these tight economic times, home and small business users who want to get online and get some work done can really stretch out the useful life of their PCs and defer buying new gear for a while. It is do-able and only requires a little time.

If you're going to do something illegal, don't go into a nearby bar and brag about it later.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Thu, 08 Jan 2009 15:07:00 +0000

Last week the local news outlets here in the Twin Towns were abuzz over an incident wherein a man parachuted off the 440-foot tall Foshay Tower in downtown Minneapolis. Actually, BASE jumping occurs more often than you think here, as there are plenty of sufficiently tall structures to choose from. But in this instance the parachutist got caught. He got caught because that evening he thought it would be a brilliant idea to show off his exploits on video to a number of patrons at a local bar. But not just any bar. The bar at the W Hotel, located on the first floor of the aforementioned Foshay Tower. A bar employee called police, and well, the rest becomes history.

USPTO to start charging "practitioner maintenance fees" for registered patent attorneys and agents.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 22:28:00 +0000

It was bound to happen eventually, and with the hubbub within the patent law community and from the USPTO the past few years, it doesn't come as a surprise to me. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office will begin assessing an annual "practitioner maintenance fee" from all registered patent attorneys and agents, something they had been kicking around for about 5 years and finally codified this month.

The fees, which will be $118 per year for active practitioners, and $25 for those wishing to be placed on inactive status, will go directly to the USPTO's costs of maintaining the roster of attorneys and agents, and to help cover the costs of things like mailings, publications, and other services to practitioners.

Much as I'd rather not part with another chunk of money, I don't have a problem with the fees. Every other state and federal bar (that I know of) charges its admitted attorneys some sort of fee for them to remain admitted to practice. The Patent and Trademark Office should be no different.

While I haven't practiced in patent prosecution in over 4 years, I will stay admitted to that bar because (1) I never know what kind of case may land in my lap tomorrow, and (2) I busted my butt and wracked my brain to pass that PTO exam. I'm not letting that go just to save what amounts to a couple dinners out each year.

The remaining unknown here: will the PTO add a continuing education element as well? That idea has also been mulled over in the IP community, and it's an idea that I do not support.

I am not convinced that requiring patent CLEs will necessarily change the equation in that practice community. Most, if not all of the patent practitioners I know are quite fastidious about keeping up-to-date on changes in the law and other issues surrounding their practice. I might go so far as to say that patent people are, as a general rule, a bit fanatical about staying on the bleeding edge here. Patent prosecution is extremely specific, and the professionals in that field drill down deep. Secondly, attorneys in most states must already fulfill a CLE requirement there. Patent practitioners will naturally round out their state requirement by gravitating toward patent-related CLEs. It's not unusual for many attorneys to fulfill their state requirement by loading up with almost an entirety of patent coursework.

Thus, adding a PTO-level CLE requirement seems redundant and I fail to see the added value that such a requirement would bring, other than to line the pockets of the people who promote those courses.

A recommended blog.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Fri, 07 Nov 2008 16:11:00 +0000

I'm normally not a big fan of the usual "self-help" and "motivational" materials - seen it all before. Lots of books, seminars and sites replete with trite cliches, sloganeering and buzzword corporatespeak. Been there, done that.

That said, I have found a great motivational blog I subscribe to and read every day. It's Seth's Blog, which is aimed primarily at the marketing crowd, but his postings offer something we all can use as professionals. Godin is different. He won't tell you how to accomplish or how to set your goals. It's more thought-provoking than that. He talks about things like finding and building "tribes" to direct your attention and business to, not just "markets" in the usual sense. He observes the world around him, noting how people act and interact and then distills this observation of human nature into innovative marketing concepts. Seth gives you a little morsel of human nature and lets you chew on it a while.

This not your typical motivator site. It gives you a different take on some aspect of the world and lets you "take it from there."

My kind of motivation.

My Nikon D60 is working out great.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Sat, 27 Sep 2008 23:47:00 +0000

Last month I ordered a Nikon D60 digital SLR kit with a Nikkor 18-55mm zoom lens on sale for under $600 from Amazon. While only having dabbled with the camera so far, and not yet having the opportunity to really put it through its paces, the camera has nevertheless worked like a champ.
Rock-solid yet lightweight with lots of features, including 10 MP format, 3-area AF sensor, sensor cleaning system, 3fps continuous shooting, superb resolution and dynamic range, good color reproduction, sharp kit lens, low shutter lag, SDHC (>2GB) memory support, in-camera retouching, fast auto-focus, crisp 2.5" LCD display, and high-capacity Li-Ion battery, are just some of the things that make this a great entry-level DSLR.

I can't wait for the trees to turn colors for some nice fall photo ops. All I need is a good telephoto zoom lens and I'll be set.

Cheers.

Businesses: addressing the big customer dissatisfactions.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 01:10:00 +0000

As a consumerist with some disposable income, I'm quick to notice whether the glass is half-full or half-empty when dealing with various businesses. I just expressed the half-full side, demonstrating my continued admiration of the Neptune Cafe Italiana, in a brief article I posted today.

However, if I am rubbed the wrong way by a merchant, I am just as apt to pan the place. I've done that a few times, and it ain't pretty. I'm not talking about an otherwise good company's occasional bad-hair day. Benefit of the doubt is best in those instances. What I'm referring to is when something is really wrong in the way a merchant has handled things. It can be some comedy of errors where the place has committed one blunder after another. Or perhaps its just one particularly glaring problem. I've ranted a bit on this sort of thing before. I vote with my feet: torque me off and I will not come back.

Today I spotted an excellent blog article by Seth Godin that really hit it on the head. It essentially asks: what is the one thing that is most in need of fixing? Good question, but will the business owner or manager be astute enough to recognize it in the first place? As the old saying goes, knowing your problem is only half the battle. And if they do recognize the problem, will they get past their egos and preconceived notions to effectively tackle the problem?

From time to time I try to apply an inward-looking philosophy to my own law practice and ask myself if I am doing something that really needs to be fixed. Is there something I am doing that really puts off clients? One must really have their ear to the ground to determine this. Listen to your customers, your clients. Be aware, understand their concerns. Above all, listen. It's something that all professionals should do if we want to minimize our deficiencies.

Cheers.

If you don't have knowledge of a subject, don't try to convince us that you do.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 15:31:00 +0000

As an attorney, I am often asked for advice by clients. We're in the advice business--it's what we do. Sometimes I am asked about an issue in which my knowledge base is...well...somewhat lacking. What to do? Fess up my absence of knowledge on the subject, or simply punt by offering up some speculative response?

I am sometimes amazed (and amused) at the number of people who, in the course of conversation, will paint themselves into a corner in their attempt to impress others with their "knowledge" of topics they know little about. Be it law, medicine, technology, whatever, the scenario is the same.

While waiting for an attorney meeting to begin one day a couple years back, I observed a colleague telling a story about how Coca-Cola had a "lifetime patent" on their cola product, one that had been "continuously renewed since the 1880s." She asserted that some kind of special exception had been carved out for them by the Patent and Trademark Office. Holding back my urge to burst out laughing, I interjected that this was a mere urban legend, a tired old saw that had been debunked ages ago (the formula is actually a trade secret). Yet the attorney, who was not a patent practitioner, remained adamant in defending her silly position. The fact that I was a patent attorney did not faze her in the least; she was so intent on being "right" that she continued to clutch this defective argument like a dog with a bone. As with the Emperor and his imaginary set of clothes, she seemed to truly believe in the foolish story she was telling. She would not let go, and I simply gave up. It wasn't worth the trouble, and the meeting was about to start anyway. The other attorneys rolled their eyes and smiled.

I had to think: would she do the same with a client? With a client who might--gasp!--rely upon such advice? Is being "right" from the very beginning more important than serving the interests of the client with well-planned, thoughtful advice? As attorneys, we are conditioned to "win the argument." We want to be perceived as omniscient in the eyes of those we serve. Sometimes we become so fixated on that goal that we blindly ignore the facts. This can give rise to dangers.

If the impromptu advice you toss to the client turns out to be wrong, and your client or someone else calls you out on it, you look like an unprepared fool. This is the best case scenario, and the harm to the client is minimal, if not the harm to your reputation. At worst, when nobody catches the bad advice, your client actually follows it and gets into trouble. Better make sure your malpractice premiums are paid up.

I'll offer another anecdote.

Back in my engineering days, not long after I had graduated, I interviewed for an electrical engineering position with an electronics manufacturer. The V.P. of engineering took me to lunch, quizzing me about my engineering training, experience and knowledge. He then abruptly changed the subject. "What's the current price of steel," he inquired. Caught off-guard momentarily, I wasn't sure how to approach the seemingly irrelevant question. This inquiry came from a person who was near the top of the corporate foodchain, and he expected an answer right then and there. I responded that I really didn't know, and that the answer might depend on many factors. He pressed me a bit. I reiterated my ignorance of the subject, but stated that I could look it up and have an answer for him. The conversation moved on to other topics, and the interview went well overall. I got the job.

Shortly after I started, that same V.P. took me to lunch again as a welcome gesture, and told me why I was hired over the 3 or 4 other candidates, all of whom were highly qualified. He said I was the only candidate who didn't try to offer "some bullshit story" (his words) in response to his price-of-steel question. In filling the engineering position, this veep didn't want to hire a poseur who shoots from the hip, he wanted someone who would carefully research each problem. That little lesson has stayed with me since and it applies to every profession.

Faced with a client's inquiry of a problem or issue for which my knowledge is limited, my answer is and always will be: "I don't know but I will research it and we will go from there." It's not the time to be Cliff Clavin. When the stakes are high, and they usually are, there is no shame in admitting ignorance. It's also an opportunity to demonstrate to the client a willingness to go the extra mile with diligence, to get the facts straight. If it turns out that the answer involves something beyond my resources or my abilities, then I must seek co-counsel or refer the client to another practitioner. Nothing less will do.

Cheers.

Finished scanning my slides...finally!

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Sat, 09 Aug 2008 00:20:00 +0000

A few weeks ago I gave a preliminary report in this blog of the Plustek slide scanner. I can now say--some 800 scans later--that the scanner worked reasonably well. While not a professional-quality instrument, it did OK for my "hobbyist" needs. I will add that Photoshop or some other good photo editing program is a necessity, as the scanner's bundled software is crude at best. Many of the scans required color adjustment (a bit too much magenta), with others needing some tweaks of brightness and contrast.

A blower brush is another necessity, as dust invariably clings to the transparencies. Cotton swabs (the high-quality ones on the long wooden sticks, not Q-Tips) are indispensable for gently removing stubborn bits of dust and lint and for wiping off mold. Just don't attempt to remove debris from the emulsion (back) side, as it can be easily damaged. Better to remove such spots using Photoshop. You can use a can of compressed air for dust removal, but be very careful not to damage your slides with the high-pressure blast. Despite my best efforts to extricate contaminants, I still found myself using the dust/scratch removal function of PS quite a bit.

I now have several gigabytes of scanned images from 35mm slides I had shot in the 1970s and 1980s. The images look good and I'm glad I took the time to preserve them before they became irreversably deteriorated. It took up several evenings of my free time, but the job is now complete. I have posted selected images on one of my sites for your perusal.

Cheers.

Rogues and scoundrels at your doorstep.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 13:15:00 +0000

If you are a homeowner, you no doubt have encountered a few door-to-door sales people hawking their wares. Everything from burglar alarms to vacuum cleaners is peddled this way. Although the sales tactic is becoming a dinosaur of sorts, it still exists, and not all the players are what they say they are.

I recently stumbled upon a fascinating article by the Houston Press online. It's quite long, but well worth the time to read. A real eye-opener, the piece details the dark side of door-to-door sales. Think that clean-cut young person standing on your doorstep pushing magazines is really a high-schooler from your neighborhood? Think again. There is a good chance he or she is actually a street-smart kid, recruited in another city by some shadowy marketing agency, trained, and dropped off in your neighborhood to aggressively canvass the area. These operations are the on-the-street equivalents of boiler-room marketing firms. The sales people are charming, cunning, and highly-motivated to get into your wallet...or even worse. There have been documented instances of sales people committing crimes on the job, such as burglaries, assaults, and even murder. Residents need to be vigilant, and cautious.

Many communities have addressed this issue by regulating doorstep sales. They often require certain sellers to obtain a permit, or register with the city prior to canvassing. Sometimes a background screening is performed. A descendant of older (and often unconstitutional) Green River ordinances, these modern regulations tend to be narrowly tailored to regulate commercial door-to-door marketing activity. Non-profit, religious and political fund-raising must generally be exempted from the regulations, on First Amendment grounds.

Nevertheless, some aggressive direct marketers ignore the ordinances, or otherwise skirt them, often by claiming that their customer contact is "informational" in nature, and they are "not selling." Others will camouflage their commercial sales venture by claiming it is a school or non-profit fund-raiser, in order to side-step the local ordinances. But make no mistake: selling is their business, and that business is very profitable.

Regardless of what type of sales call is lurking on your front porch, the homeowner must put safety and security first. Never open the door for people you don't recognize, and whatever you do, don't let them in your house. Ever. Don't give them any personal information. This is stating the obvious, yet so many people make these simple mistakes, sometimes with tragic results. Ask the seller to leave a card or pamphlet on your porch for you to peruse later. If they insist on making a sale now, it's probably not in your best interest. Ask them to leave. If they don't, call the police.

With the ensuing economic downturn, marketers are finding more creative ways to separate you from your hard-earned cash. Their tactics will only become more aggressive, as disposable incomes continue to shrink. The old adage still applies: if it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Be informed. Be alert. Stay safe.

Cheers.

Channeling Earl Muntz.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 19:21:00 +0000

In the early 1950s, with television still an emerging phenomenon, the receivers were far from ubiquitous in American homes. Indeed, only the more well-off could afford a typical TV set. In that era, they were huge behemoths encased in fine hardwood cabinets, containing dozens of vacuum tubes to illuminate an anemic 12-inch monochrome CRT screen, costing upwards of a couple hundred dollars. A couple hundred 1950s dollars.

Then along came a brilliant fellow named Earl "Madman" Muntz, self-styled entrepreneur, advertising "celebrity" and self-taught engineer. As pragmatic as he was flamboyant, the man saw a huge void in the market for cheaper TVs, and created B&W sets that could sell for under $100. He accomplished this feat by paring the designs to the bone, creating a sort of Occam's Razor of electronic circuitry--that the simplest, most spartan design would win the day.

Muntz would commonly walk through the engineering labs of his company, wire-cutter in hand, looking for ways to trim the designs of his product. Upon spotting a prototype that appeared a bit too embellished, Muntz would start excising parts one by one until some function of the device would stop, while the hapless engineer would sit idly by and watch his design get clipped. Muntz would then replace only that last "critical" part and walk away. If it wasn't necessary for the basic operation of the receiver, it wasn't included.

The sets were of dubious quality, and only worked well in urban areas where the broadcast signals were strong. But the Muntz TVs enabled countless people of modest means to watch Ed Sullivan in their living rooms. And thus, helped launch the television era, all the while making millions for Muntz. This chestnut became a favorite tale among engineers and people in the media for decades to come, even inspiring the verb "Muntzing," as a metaphor for simple (albeit inelegant) design techniques.

So why am I telling this well-worn story? Because, right now, we could really use a bit of "Madman" Muntz.

We are in the midst of a recession, with the costs of commodities like food, petroleum, and other necessities spiraling out of control. We have to tighten our belts and find ways to cut costs in business and in our personal lives. A bit of Muntzing is in order.

When faced with increasing expenses (and often, static income), it becomes necessary to trim the budget--to apply some Muntzing. Look over your expenses: the bills you pay, the checks you write. Try to find some things that can be clipped out. This will, of course, depend on your values and needs. It might involve eliminating a service, like lawn care, and doing it yourself. Or perhaps cancelling cable TV, or not eating out so much. In any case, go through your budget and see what you can live without. Ask yourself "Do we really need this?" When the times get better (and they will), you can always bring them back.

That's probably how "Madman" Muntz would've done it.

Cheers.

Picked up a slide scanner, now the fun begins.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 20:57:00 +0000

I finally decided to pull the trigger and buy a slide scanner. With approximately eight hundred 35mm slides awaiting digitization, I opted to pursue the DIY angle, rather than send them out for conversion.

Much as I would've preferred to get a more professional model like the venerable (and over $500) Nikon Coolscan V, I instead chose to go a more economical route. I ordered the Plustek OpticFilm 7200 slide and film scanner from Amazon, on sale for around $180 with free shipping. Upon opening the carton, I was up and running within 30 minutes.

The Plustek's software was reasonably simple to install, the process fairly painless. However, the accompanying SilverFast s/w required that I enter a 30-digit key during installation, a bit onerous, IMHO, given that this is just bundleware, and not some high-dollar app. It's not as if hordes people will be lining up to pirate the program. Methinks some software developers need to get over themselves.

I popped a few slides into the slide-holder (which holds 4), and scanned them using SilverFast. It was evident that a bit of color-correction would be needed, and the onboard controls in SilverFast did a nice job of returning the images to something close to authentic. I can use Photoshop to dial in the image quality later.

[The photo at right was scanned at 600 dpi, for illustration here. I tweaked out some of the red, but it still needs some adjustment in PS.]

The scanner is capable of high resolution--up to 7200 dpi--a bit of overkill for my modest purposes. Not to mention that file sizes can get rather unwieldy at that setting. I set my scanner at 3600, which will provide plenty of resolution in the event I choose to make some 8 x 12 prints later. A scan at 3600 dpi takes just under a minute, and produces a .jpg file around 4MB in size.

Dust is a constant issue with transparencies, and a squeeze-bulb type blower brush from a photo store does the trick nicely for delicately removing particulates.

In all, the Plustek scanner works like a champ. While certainly not professional gear, it nonetheless does what it was intended to do--make decent digital scans from transparencies.

I spent the good part of yesterday evening scanning slides from a 1984 European trip, digitizing about 60 of them so far. Needless to say, this will be a work in progress.

Cheers.

Windows Update problems, redux.

noreply@blogger.com (Kevin S. Brady, Esq.) — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 19:19:00 +0000

My problems with the latest WinXP patch a few nights ago got me thinking...could it have been conflicting with my firewall (ZoneAlarm)? Then today I stumble upon this.

Cheers.