Clipart Source: Microsoft Office

Copyright. Defamation. Contracts. Patents. Restrictive Trade Practices. Litigation. Cyberlaw.

It has been almost a month of blogging, a month of reading, a month of trying to discover the PR practioner in me, a month of learning all along… A full circle. Time for me to consolidate my ‘bloggings’ on PR and the Law.

Clipart Source: Microsoft Office

1. PR and Law was too broad a topic to explore in a blog. It was a challenge to keep each blog short, readable and as comprehensive as possible. I feel that I did not do enough justice to 3 posts in particular: Litigation PR, and the posts on online copyright and defamation.

2. There are no easy answers to any of the issues addressed in my various posts on copyright, patents, defamation, restrictive trade practices, and litigation. Every post only kindled a debate and the desire to read more and (re) search more…

3. PR campaigns have been at the forefront in battles fought over Intellectual Property Rights on both sides. A case of PR vs. PR !

4. While I did come across books on Litigation PR (only 2), I did not find a single book that looked at PR and the Law as a whole. I found this to be quite a frustrating experience. Did I not look hard enough?

5. There are hundreds of e-resources available on the topics that I have covered in the blog, too many to even mention here. To use a cliched expression, the Internet is a veritable mine of information on this topic. Reader’s discretion is advised!

6. About 60% of the all the information that I came across in my (re) search into this topic, was on Litigation PR. This in itself shows how popular this branch of PR is and how much scope it has.

7. Love it or hate it, PR is here to stay. No matter how many reams are written about the not so palatable parts of PR, it is a fact that PR cannot be done away with. Call it by any name — networking, marketing, advertising — it is still PR!

Endnote: I think I may have found a topic for my dissertation. 

With the increase in legal work for PR professionals and in PR work for legal professionals, I pose a question which can have implications for the future of PR in an increasingly legal environment

Who should the CEO of a company choose to head the all-important communications function? Should it be a lawyer or a PR professional?

Let me confess here that my question is hardly original (though the presentation definitely is!). I first read about this debate in the The Public Relations Stategist in an article by F.W. Wiley and B.M. Epstein (1995).

They have stated that many Fortune 500 companies like General Motors have their communications departments run by lawyers and that this is ‘a matter of increasing concern’ to PR professionals.

While the PR professional is trained to take the widest possible view-point and communicate with the stakeholders accordingly, lawyers are the legal experts. A win-win best situation would be one where the PR person would be trained in law or a lawyer who has had training in PR.

I feel that at the level of heading the communications department of a company, it is important for that person to have legal knowledge. But more important is communication skills, because effective communication is the basis of all communication and that is what good PR is all about.

What do you think?

Endnote: Whatever the outcome of the above discussion, PR and PR professionals have a bright future in the current litigous environment we live in.

Image Source: http://www.sxc.hu

I have a lawyer friend. Her name is Sharmila and she is currently in London to do her LLM.

Whenever we meet we always talk about food! Until recently, that is.

Yesterday afternoon, after a nice lunch, we got around to talking about assignments — our next favourite topic of discussion — and by default this blog. When I told her about the blog topic, she said something that surprised me for its sheer candidness.

You’re doing a blog on PR and the Law? You should have done your blog on Lawyers and PR. That would have been more appropriate as lawyers and law firms need PR.

I asked her to elaborate and this is what she had to say. In India, lawyers cannot advertise their services. So they depend entirely on PR for their business and clientele.

 In fact, to quote Sharmila, lawyers do a lot of ‘PR ing’. This is mainly achieved through:

•    Networking through local clubs, and conferences & seminars organised by national and international bar associations.

•   Word of mouth wherein a grateful client will recommend his/her lawyer to other people who may need legal services.

•   Contributing to newspaper columns by offering legal advice on topics such as infrastructure, nationality & emigration, and finance.

•   Appearing on the TV, though this is a fairly recent trend.

•   Using blogs to reach out to younger, potential clients. Indian Lawyer is one such blog.

•   Big law firms look to recruit lawyers who can bring in high profile clients. If these lawyers come from ‘well-known’ families, it is like a bonus recruitment!

The latest trend in India is for law firms to hire PR agencies for effective communication strategies and its implementation.

Well! This was a very interesting  piece of information for me and it spurred me to (re)search for more information on this issue in the UK.

In the UK, there have been a series of reforms pertaining to the legal profession with the Legal Services Act 2007 having implications for the PR profession. The Legal Services Act 2007 has brought in the opportunity for solicitors to ‘team up with non-lawyers and to attract capital for their businesses in a carefully regulated environment’ (Solicitors Regulation Authority).

There are many PR agencies who offer legal PR (as opposed to litigation PR). For example, MConsulting and Kelso PR. Needless to say, there is a lot of scope for PR work to flourish in this sector.

Endnote: In the US, lawyers are allowed to advertise, which opens up an entirely new angle to a discussion on PR and the Law. I came across a US lawyer’s blog titled ‘Real Lawyers Have Blog’. It makes for interesting reading.

I have decided to do the same with my post on Litigation PR (henceforth known as LPR)!

The Old Bailey

In court cases, plaintiffs and defendents are warned by judges not to influence the ultimate verdict outside the courtroom.

Even 20 years back, I believe that this would have been possible. But in today’s times of the media reporting ‘happenings’ even before they happen? Forget it.

This is where LPR comes in. It is believed that publicity has the potential of influencing public opinion and that is a powerful tool for any lawyer, plaintiff, or defendant.

LPR encompasses the behind-the-scenes communications support needed by the legal team to win their case, not just in the court of law, but also in the court of public opinion. 

A victory in the court of public opinion engineered by LPR sometimes has more impact than the actual courtroom verdict.

One just has to recall the cases of OJ Simpson and former US President Bill Clinton’s ‘Monicagate’. Both scored significant wins in the courts of public opinion after initial scepticism.

Though the ethics of LPR is hotly debated (‘Litigation Public Relations: Problems and Limits’, by D.C. Gibson and M.E. Padilla), lawyers have realised that LPR provides their clients with many advantages.

2006, Praeger Publishers, pp.204

This is the reason law firms get LPR tactics in motion even before a possible lawsuit; these tactics could continue even after the verdict is announced.

With the importance of LPR being acknowledged and the amount of media coverage that lawsuits get, it is not surprising that PR professionals are attracted to this niche area.

PR agencies are now offering specialised LPR services. Some of PR agencies which offer LPR in the UK are Kysen PR, Bell Yard, and Byfield Consultancy.

I recommend to you this interview on litigation comunication and media relations. Do listen to it.

I also came across a book (featured right) during my (re)search on this topic. Need I say anything more about LPR?

Endnote: While PR firms are offering specialised LPR services, the same is not reflected in PR education or  training in universities. A random survey of the PR courses taught in Universities in the UK and the US have revealed that none of them offer LPR as a separate module. Will this change in the future?

Initially, I had thought about discussing both online copyright issues  and defamation in my earlier posts on the same topic. But my friend’s comments made me feel that this would require a separate post in itself.

Image Source: http://www.sxc.hu

In the case of printed material, what is printed is final and any changes/corrections/additions that are made come as an addendum, errata or disclaimer. In the case of information on the Internet, they can be constantly updated or modified, as and when required.

It is this very nature that probably makes people feel that information on the Internet is informal, and not comprehensive. Actually, nothing ever gets deleted even when websites or blogs like this get updated. They get archived.

Image Source: http://www.sxc.hu

So if a defamatory article or comment has been published or posted and later removed due to the fear of a lawsuit, they can always be retrieved.   

While the law on defamation (libel or slander) is quite clear for offline media, the interpretation of the law for online defamation is not clearly defined, and therefore interpreted.

Though the law recognises that comments made on blogs or chats can be libellous, a recent comment by Justice Eady implies that ‘the casual, conversational nature of bulletin boards meant that defamatory comments were more like slander than libel’.

Many PR professionals create, write, and edit print and online newsletters, either for internal use agency or for their clients. They could administer websites and moderate discussion forums. In this context, they must be very careful not to defame fellow employees or others in what they write.

For a basic guide to Defamation as per UK laws as well as other communication laws, Out-Law.com has some excellent resources.

Endnote: The Internet is truly and openly in the public domain and utmost care should be the mantra for online PR.

The Internet has revolutionised the way we look at information, at knowledge and at communication itself.

Image Source: http://www.sxc.hu

The impact of the Internet revolution on PR is not the focus of this post. For that, I suggest that you read some of my classmates’ blogs: Rama Arya, Krysten Gibson, Courtney Kennedy, Subhir Kotwal and Luke M.

Two laws that impact communication and have implications for PR on the web are under focus here – the Copyright Law and the Defamation Law. This post will discuss the former, while the next post will discuss the latter.

Due to the ease and convenience of the Internet, it is very easy to cut and paste relevant information and use it. Look at blogs. They are peppered with videos, images, links and quotes.

Image Source: http://www.sxc.hu

A random survey of blogs that I have been ploughing through has revealed most of the images (largely cartoons) and videos have used them without attributing the source. This is a serious violation of copyright.

Cartoonstock.com, the website from where most of these cartoons are sourced have very clear guidelines on how to use their image resources. But it appears that most people do not read them!

No discussion on online copyright violation can be complete without mentioning the Napster case. This was the first major case to address copyright laws on the Internet.

While Napster became an easy target for legislation, the hundreds of thousands of individuals who used the Napster facility to share and swap music files also violated copyright. But it was next to impossible to take action against each one of them!

Though laws have been enacted to protect copyright, they have not kept pace with the rapid technological changes happening in the field. This issue is addressed in an excellent article by John Bosen. Also read this blog post on Open Source Blogging — the comments also make good reading!

Due to the very nature of a borderless and seamless Internet, it is essential for a PR practitioner to be aware of the differences in the legal systems and the laws of different countries. The responsibility and the integrity of the PR practitioner is far more at stake online because of this very nature.

Endnote: The Internet has many free resources to offer. With a little effort and the right combination of key words, these resources show up on the first page itself. A fellow University student, Andrew Otto has put up a blog post on how to find images that are not under copyright.

Image Source: Photobucket

It’s that time of the year. When old gives way to new. When some people make resolutions. When some people do not. And so on and so forth.

It’s New Year’s Eve today, the end of an eventful year for me. If someone had told me at the beginning of 2008 that I would be doing a Master’s Degree in PR, I would probably have said, ‘Oh yeah?’

Oh yeah! I am doing an M.A. in PR. Working my way through a field that is fascinating, creative, contradictory, in your face and behind the scenes — all at the same time. A field of study that is interwoven with other disciplines like psychology, management, communication, political science, history and, of course, law.

In the process of learning and exploring, I have grappled with many questions about the profession. But one question remains uppermost in the list.

Where do ethics — and  I will be bold enough to use the word — morals fit in PR?

This question was triggered by a comment made by a classmate of mine, Luke M (Thank you, Luke!), at the end of a talk on ‘PR as a Persuasive Industry‘ by Trevor Morris in November 2008. I cannot recall the exact comment that Luke made but it went something like this: PR does not really differentiate between ‘morally reprehensible’ issues and other issues.

Morris responded to comment that by saying that what is morally reprehensible for one may not be morally reprehensible for another. A fair enough, but easy, answer I think.

The law says that even an accused is entitled to be represented by a lawyer; a doctor cannot turn away a sick person. What about PR? Are we bound to take up every account that is offered to us?

In India, tobacco and alcohol cannot be advertised. However, new brands are launched nearly every week and manage to get excellent media coverage as well as feature write-ups. No prizes here for guessing how that happens!

I feel that just having codes of conduct for the profession are not enough. The PR profession also needs to take a stand on issues that it will not work on. Let the law not tell us what we can do or not do. Let us decide what we will and will not do.

Endnote: William Butler Yeats once said, ‘In dreams, lie realities.’ With apologies to him, I’ll rephrase it to say, ‘In idealism, lies reality.’

HAPPY NEW YEAR

Image Source: http://www.hindiblogs.com

This blog post explores yet another facet of the relationship between PR and the Law — restrictive trade practices or trade monopolies or anti-competitive measures. Sports sponsorships, in general and cricket sponsorships in particular, are very anti-competitive and I could think of no better example than cricket to explore this topic.

In India, cricket and cricketers are worshipped with something close to fanaticism. Top players like Sachin Tendulkar have their endorsements and public image managed by a professional agency. It is, therefore, not surprising that the game and it players garner more than the lion’s share of sports sponsorships there — I believe that it could be as much as 95%!

Not surprisingly, too, the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) is the richest sports body in India. The BCCI also has, arguably, the strongest financial clout among the cricket boards of other cricket-playing nations in the world, and is often referred to as a ‘bully’.

In early 2003, the Indian cricket team nearly boycotted the Champions Trophy tournament because of differences involving individual and event sponsorships. This was because many of the Indian cricket team members had endorsements that clashed with that of the event sponsors and also breached the exclusivity that the International Cricket Council (ICC) had promised the event sponsors. 

2005, p.256, Berg Publishers

Non-participation of the Indian cricket team would have lead to massive tournament losses, something that the ICC wanted to avoid. On their part, the BCCI wanted to avoid the inevitable litigation they would be embroiled in if the Indian team did not participate.

This row was resolved after a massive PR exercise undertaken by both the ICC and the BCCl to ensure the participation of the Indian team and to prevent litigation.

All this and more is discussed in a book by J. Amis and T.B. Cornwell titled Global Sport Sponsorship, which provides a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary analysis of the sport-commerce nexus.

The book has devoted a lot of space to cricket sponsorships. It also cites many instances of sponsorship campaigns being hijacked or the official sponsors being left out of the public mind, due to aggressive campaigns by competitors. For example, cola wars in cricket (Pepsi vs. Coca-Cola), credit card wars in Olympics (Master Card Vs. Visa).

The PR implications for restrictive trade practices are immense. In this day of monopolies, mergers, and anti-competitive practices, the PR practitioner has an important role to play. It is the PR practitioner who stands between the client and lawsuits!

Endnote: The very same BCCI, which organises the Indian Premier League,  is now being accused of anti-competitive tactics for barring Indian cricket players from playing in the English county cricket or rival cricket leagues like the Indian Cricket League.

Image Source: divisionstreet.wordpress.com

We live in a litigious world.

You don’t believe it? Pick up a newspaper. Any newspaper. Or for that matter even a current affairs magazine. Go through it. You will find at least one story on defamation. Chances are that you will find another story which has the potential to be labelled as defamatory.

Defamation has often been referred to disparagingly as unsubstantiated gossip or half truths or half lies. Defamation has no statutory definition. In the UK and in many other countries as well, the defamation law differentiates between libel and slander. Libel is defamation in a permanent form (published or broadcast), and slander is a temporary form of defamation, usually by spoken word, disparaging gestures or actions.

Generally, the privacy of an ordinary citizen is protected under the law. The following video presents an interesting case of ‘breach’ of privacy law in Canada.

A recent article in The Birmingham Post  claims that defamation cases have increased by 500% in the last 6 months or so. This has significant implications for PR professionals and other communicators.

PR practitioners must always been on their guard against defamatory stories against their clients, and against invasions of their privacy. Even though going to court could be an option and lawyers could very well win the defamation case for the clients, the public image of the clients often suffers irreparable damage.

This is where the communication skills of PR practitioners and their contacts with the media play a very crucial role.

In an article for PRWeek, Alex Blyth says that PR practitioners need to get involved much before the lawyers in high profile libel cases. He cites examples of PR interventions leading to potentially libellous stories never being published, and therefore lawsuits being avoided.

The costs involved in defamation cases can be extremely high due to which publishers, both newspaper and book, are extremely wary of publishing anything even potentially libellous.

Endnote: It is not uncommon for publishers to get manuscripts vetted by their legal and PR/marketing departments before even signing a contract with the author. I have myself sought legal opinion on 2 manuscripts.

Image Source: Vista Icons

Merry Christmas, dear reader!

I always think about traditions during festivals, mostly those traditions that revolve around food. These days I am also thinking a lot about my blog topic. So this Christmas, I thought about food, PR and the Law. Quite a lot of thinking about unrelated topics, actually!

Or so I thought until my mind turned to this question: What if the traditional Christmas lunch/dinner of turkey had been patented? Would the Christmas lunch/dinner menu be different? Or would people be paying to have a patented tradition upheld? I suspect the answer would be the former!

Patents have been criticised for conferring a ‘negative right’ upon the patent owner(s), permitting them to exclude competitors from using or exploiting the invention, even if a competitor subsequently develops the same invention independently.

Pharmaceutical patents have had a long-lasting affect on healthcare. Large sections of the population in developing countries are unable to afford the high price tag that patented medicines usually have. Quite a few of these medicines are life-saving drugs, for example the AIDS anti-retrovital drug.

Pharmaceutical companies cite high R&D costs (Banta, 2001) as the reason for exclusivity rights and subsequent high drug prices. Critics and independent audits have investigated pharmaceutical budget allocations to address this price justification and discovered that the marketing expenditures of new drugs are often double the amount that was allocated for R&D (Barton & Emanuel, 2005).

PR campaigns have been fought on both sides of the patent law. The pharmaceutical industry’s campaign efforts have focused on the fact that they are providing differential pricing and parallel imports as a means to provide medication to the poor, sometimes even free of cost.

These findings, among many others, are presented in a very balanced deconstruction of the Perceptions of the Intellectual Property Rights by Roya Ghafele.

The software industry is also patent-driven. There is a PR large-scale campaign currently underway to stop software patents in the European Union. The tactics include lobbying and online petitions and is spearheaded by the Foundation for Free Information Infrastructure.

The Scales of Justice is a symbol for law and are used as one for Intellectual Property Rights as well, of which Patents are a part of.

A few years back when software patent wars had ridiculous levels, an email did the rounds in India. The email revolved around the possible fall out of the Government of India (GoI) patenting ‘0’. Yes, you read it right —zero! It is acknowledged that the binary system (on which software coding is based) and ‘0’ evolved in India. So, if the GoI patented the ‘0’, no other nation could use it. Can you imagine a scenario wherein you could not use ‘0’?

Endnote: While this email drew many laughs at the improbable scenario, it brought to light the fact that knowledge can be brought for a price, when actually knowledge is priceless. In the name of patents, copyright, intellectual property rights, and whatever else we may call it, we have forgotten to acknowledge that ultimately it is for the benefit of humanity.