This is where the problem comes into play. Most often when these articles, posts or entries are published they are attributed to the lawyer/law firm on the account instead of the actual author. Unfortunately, misleading readers into thinking something was written by a lawyer runs afoul of most states’ rules of professional conduct, requiring:

A lawyer shall not make a false or misleading communication about the lawyer’s or the lawyer’s services. A communication is false or misleading if it contains a material misrepresentation of fact or law, or omits a fact necessary to make the statement considered as a whole not materially misleading.

As the Kevin’s article suggests, these posts and articles written under the auspices of being written by lawyers gives the impression of legal advise or opinions when in fact they are most likely written by college students at best. Of course, this may explain some of the content I have seen on many lawyers’ websites, but more importantly it goes to something far more important that the rules of professional conduct, it contributes to the public’s view of lawyers as liars and cheats who will do anything to make/save a buck. Let’s be honest, most legal blogs are not there to educate other lawyers, though they may do so as a bonus. They exist to increase search engine rankings and to improve the overall status of the lawyer/law firm who write them, to give them credibility in the area of law they practice. Taking credit for an informational article about the law that was actually written by a college student can hardly be deemed credible or trustworthy, neither to the public or other lawyers.

While I am not suggesting any ethics opinions are necessary to curb this practice, I would hope the members of the bar in general would refrain from this blatant degradation of our profession. As a self-proclaimed self-governing body, should not attorneys aspire to be seen better than this? Should we not encourage each other to something greater? Social media is an amazing tool which, when used properly, can be a boon to any business, including the law. But it can also be the converse, just another tool to artificially inflate a company and try and fool the readers into thinking something is what it isn’t. As Kevin O’Keefe aptly put it, “…this would be one that would draw a ton of publicity on and offline. Nothing gets more sensationalized when it comes to legal news today than lawyers and social media.” Or as we used to say in High School, “Don’t be THAT guy”.

A special thanks to Kevin O’Keefe for the article which prompted this post. If you have not read the original, head on over to his blog at kevin.lexblog.com and check it and the rest of his site out.

If you have a Mac or are considering using a Mac or iPad in your law office, this is the perfect place to learn everything there is to know about making the transition and how to get the most out of your new machine. I will be speaking on Thursday and Friday so I look forward to seeing a lot of you all there.

Don’t worry though, I will still post here about the iPad in general and maybe one or two apps which I think every lawyer should know about. Who knows, maybe if you see some of the really amazing apps for the iPad you will decide to buy one for yourself. Didn’t I mention I call the iPad the “gateway drug” to Mac products?

Let me preface this post by saying, I love macs, but have used PC’s since before MS-DOS was around, ah, good old IBM PC-DOS. So please don’t take this post to mean this blawg will be a mac only blawg, it is simply the machine I choose to use. To be sure, I do run Windows XP on my MacBook Pro. I promise this will be my last Mac-only post for some time.

So I had a problem with my 1st Gen-Macbook Pro (MBP) shutting down on me a few times. It wasn’t too often and was oddly random so I sent off for it to be repaired under the warranty at the end of last year. Apple paid for overnight delivery of my MBP to Apple and repaired the machine and overnighted it back to me, total down-time, 2.5 days. I was very pleased with Apple for this, but that sort of customer service is on par with their company so it’s no surprise or anything to write about.Unfortunately, the problem happened to me again last month. I contacted Apple and the machine was picked up that day and was being looked at more “in-depth” and I was assigned a Product Specialist to assist me. As this was the second time I had the machine in for repairs and I am coming up on my year anniversary of having the machine, I was a bit distraught. Though I had the ‘first model’ of this machine and I have a three year warranty, I was concerned about the issue. So I decided to email Steve Jobs and see what happened. I expressed my concerns of the machine not being fixed and it shutting down on me in the middle of a presentation for a mediation, or worse, at trial. I told him I had made the switch to Mac last May and was overall pleased with the switch, but my machine randomly shutting down concerned me and didn’t seem like something a product from Apple, Inc. should do. My email finally went out Monday night (11:30 p.m.) of this week.

The next morning I visited my blawg and notice that someone from Cupertino, CA had visited my site, downloaded my first Keynote presentation and viewed my welcome video. I thought it was odd, but chalked it up to the increasing traffic I’ve gotten for my presentation from different places around the country and thought some Apple employee may have heard about it. At ~11:15 that morning I received a call from Steve Jobs. He said he had received my email last night and that a VP would be contacting me to “assist me with my problem”. The VP was instructed to give me a brand  2nd Gen-Macbook Pro, with twice the memory mine had and a much larger hard drive to be picked up that day. Needless to say, I was floored. I thanked him for going above and beyond what I thought was excellent customer service and explained that this was in no way the response I expected. After receiving my new top of the line Macbook Pro, an Executive VP with Apple, Allen Rhodes, gave me a call to make sure I was completely satisfied with everything.

I have to say that this is why Apple is moving up in market share…this is what true customer service is and Apple’s response goes so much further to getting people to make the switch than any advertisement ever could.

The day Bill Gates or Michael Dell call a single customer because their machine crashed is the day I go back to WinBlows.

The Effects of Social Media on Jury Trials
Originally social networking media sites Twitter and Facebook were used as a way to connect and communicate with old friends and out-of-town family members. More recently however the sites are used as an outlet to share every little aspect of people’s lives, even the mundane “I’m eating breakfast.” Partially to blame is easy internet access via smartphones—they enable users to permanently stay “connected” while on-the-go. Constantly being plugged-in is what ultimately encourages users to update statues or tweets 24/7. While it’s perfectly fine if you wish to publicly announce small tidbits of your daily life to the world on a regular basis, using social media sites while you’re actively participating as a juror can get you in a heap of trouble—so much in fact that you can be slapped with improper juror conduct and may face jail time.
While not all states have been able to control the improper use of technology in the courtroom just yet, currently leading the pack is California. Under the code of civil procedures §611 jurors have always been prohibited from researching, discussing, or spreading information outside of the courtroom, but California recently passed a new law that mandates judges to explicitly explain that the code includes “all forms of electronic and wireless communication.” The new law will take effect in 2012.
While one may think that a law like this shouldn’t be necessary—after all hasn’t it always been known that jurors are only permitted to deliberate a case using the evidence presented in court?—it’s been deemed as a necessity after a slew of mistrials erupted due to the discovery of some jurors researching defendants’ criminal histories on the internet and discussing the case with fellow jurors whom they “friended” on Facebook.

The temptation is so easy—a juror can easily come across a news link to the case on Facebook or be influenced by the comments or statues someone posts regarding a high profile case. Not to mention that some jurors have a hard time controlling the various updates regarding the cases themselves. To delve in the seriousness of how people constantly discuss their juror experience, here are some real tweets extracted from Twitter on 9/20 using the hashtag #juryduty:

• Jury duty update: Weapons case. Defendant repping himself. He just gave what was essentially the “Unfrozen Caveman Lawyer” speech. Srsly
• Ok…was not looking for jury duty to be longer than three days…not a happy camper right now
• S/o 2 the people who r having wayyyyyyy 2 much fun at jury duty playing cards.. -_-

While it may seem like updating a Facebook status about a trial is harmless, it’s important that you remember why you were selected to be juror in the first place: your verdict will determine whether an innocent or guilty person is sent to jail. That said, you essentially have someone else’s life in in your hands. You never want to risk having a mistrial of a guilty man for example because you couldn’t fight the urge to tweet about the case.

So How to Avoid the Temptation? While ultimately it’s up to you to fight the urge to access social media and the internet while a case is underway, here are some additional suggestions that may make the process a little easier:

• Turn off your phone
• Temporarily remove the social media apps from your phone, or sign-out
• Do not friend request fellow jurors
• Temporarily deactivate your social networking account(s) until the trial is over

Alvina Lopez is a freelance writer and blog junkie, who blogs about accredited online colleges. She welcomes your comments at her email Id: alvina.lopez @gmail.com.

Giving these type of presentations on iPads in litigation and in the law firm as well as on mediation and trial presentations is great fun. I am currently averaging 1-2 speaking engagements per month and am always willing to speak more when asked. If you or your organization would like to schedule a speaking engagement, feel free to email me at speaking[at]TechnoEsq.com.

Comments? Send them to milochat@miloweekly.com

Download the podcast directly by right-clicking and saving this link:

Of course, I find it of interest given my article of iOS vs. Android OS so long ago. I received a number of emails from techies who swear up and down how much more secure their Droid’s are and yet those same people are nowhere to be found now. I will give you the Android marketplace is more open, but that is exactly what the problem is: anyone can write an app and put it in the marketplace without anyone vetting it. Here’s the article and you can judge for yourself:

Symantec this week published “A Window Into Mobile Device Security,” a 23-page document that details the security approaches employed by Apple and Google in their respective mobile operating systems. It also offers a closer look at past and possible future security holes found in the iOS and Android platforms. In a head-to-head comparison, Symantec found that Apple’s iOS is more secure than Google’s Android. Specifically, iOS was characterized as having “full protection” against malware attacks, while Android was deemed to have “little protection.” iOS also has more protection than Android against resource abuse and service attacks, data loss, and data integrity attacks. Apple’s platform was also found to have greater security feature implementation in the categories of access control, application provenance, and encryption. In fact, Google’s Android platform only topped iOS in one security category: isolation. There, Android received the highest marks, while iOS was said to offer “moderate protection.” In specifically discussing iOS, Symantec’s report concluded that Apple’s “provenance approach” acts as a strong security barrier, as every app that is to be released on the App Store goes through vetting procedures. This, according to the paper, has proved a deterrent against malware attacks, data loss attacks, data integrity attacks, and denial of service attacks.” The report characterized iOS as “well designed and thus far…has proven largely resistant to attack.”

However, Symantec did find vulnerabilities within iOS, namely 200 different security holes dating back to 2007. While any vulnerability is a weakness, the bulk of issues were found to be of lower severity, which, according to the report, would allow the assailant to “take control of a single process but not permit the attacker to take administrator-level control of the device.” The study did discover security concerns that could allow entry to administrator-level control, and were therefore of the highest severity. If an attacker had administrator-level control, it would reward them with access to “virtually all data and services on the device,” Symantec wrote in the report.

Synamtec’s report highlights what is likely the most public example of an iOS security breach, the iPhoneOS.Ikee worm released in November 2009. But that worm only affected devices that users have willingly “jailbroken,” a term used to describe a warranty-voiding process that allows users to install unauthorized software on their iPhone, and something that Apple explicitly tells its customers is a major security concern. Also highlighted in the report is iOSs isolation model. While iOS “totally prevents traditional types of computer viruses and worms, and limits the data that spyware can access,” Symantec said it does not “prevent all classes of data loss attacks, resource abuse attacks, or data integrity attacks.”

Lastly, iOSs permission model can safeguard access to the devices location as well as the SMS and Phone applications. This stops the attacker from knowing where you are, being able to send SMS messages, and phoning numbers without your consent. As for Android, Symantec found that although Google’s mobile operating system is a considerable improvement over traditional desktop operating systems, it has two extreme weaknesses. First, the provenance system in place “enables attackers to anonymously create and distribute malware,” they found. In addition, its permission system “relies upon the user to make the important security decisions,” and considering most of Android users are not of high technical capability, this causes problems.

During February this year, Sophos security researchers encouraged Google to cancel its over-the-air installation of apps. They urged Google because they expected it would allow the swift and quiet installation of malware to unsuspecting Android users. Sophos warned that as soon as the “install” button was pressed on the website, the application would be installed on the device in the background, without any input from the user.

The review concluded that “mobile devices are a mixed bag when it comes to security.” While they may have been built to be secure, they are made for the consumer market, which has has led to less security for more usability.

Source AppleInsider.

CALLOUTS AND SPLIT SCREEN

As mentioned in our review of Exhibit A, any app which attempts to call itself a trial presentation app has to do callouts. These are the zoom in boxes attorneys use to ‘callout’ certain areas of an exhibit, say paragraph 3 of a document, so that the jury can focus on a particular part of the exhibit. While Exhibit A was the first to offer this ability but did so with some bugs, TrialPad has executed this feature flawlessly. Callouts are as simple as selecting the callout tool from the toolbox menu at the top of the screen and using your finger to select the area to zoom in on. What sets TrialPad apart from Exhibit A is the ability to not only do multiple callouts on one document, but to do have two documents on the screen (split screen) and do callouts from each of the exhibits simultaneously. Each callout can be moved around to difference positions on the screen by dragging with your finger.

As you can see, this sort of thing is imperative if you want to compare and contrast two versions of a document, say a contract, and bring the difference between them to the jury’s attention. In the example above you will notice that the annotations made to the underlying exhibit are shown in the callout as well (this has been lacking in some other apps which do callouts).

One suggestion I have however is that because TrialPad automatically sizes the callouts to the width of the screen, it can be a bit confusing when you have two callouts from separate exhibits to know which document each came from originally (since they are both the same size). One solution might be to have the callouts downsized a bit and shifted either to the right or left depending on from which exhibit it was called out.

Bottom line is that this feature was executed perfectly with TrialPad 2.0.

VIDEO CLIPS

While I knew the ability to play video on TrialPad 2.0 was going to be available, what I didn’t know was that we would be able to make video clips using TrialPad 2.0. Calling up a video is simple as they are accessible in the left hand pane under the “Video” tab. Once a video is selected it is loaded into the presentation area and ready to play. I have so far loaded a 4 GB deposition into TrialPad 2.0 and it literally was brought up instantly and ready to play. Play controls come up over the video just like they would when watching any video on your iPad, along with the ability to ‘push’ the video out to an AppleTV.

What is a surprise however is that below the video are two new icons. One to take a snapshot of the video from wherever the playhead is and the other to create a clip of the video. This is nice if you want to create a snapshot of a part of a video or want to create a clip on the fly of a portion of a deposition. When you press the clip button a “filmstrip” of the video opens up with the standard yellow brackets used by iMovie and the built-in video function of the iPAd, allowing you to trim your video to only play a certain portion of the video. The only problem is that the size of the editing window is a bit too small and it takes a couple of tries sometimes to get the clip to “trim” to exactly where you want it. Once you’re done trimming the video though, the resultant clip is saved in your list of Videos as a clip and you can use the edit button to rename the clip to anything you want. This is a killer feature and to be honest, one I hadn’t thought of putting into a trial presentation app on the iPad for fear the hardware could not handle it (forgetting that the iPad already lets you trim videos in the Video app and iMovie already).

WHITEBOARD

The other nice addition to TrialPad 2.0 and one which is certainly available in other trial presentation apps is a blank whiteboard for drawing. This was a feature TrialPad had to include in the new version and it has all of the standard features you would expect: multi-colored drawing pens with variable widths, the ability to erase and undo drawings and the ability to save the whiteboard, email it or add it to DropBox directly from TrialPad 2.0. This feature is quickly becoming a standard feature in these apps and it’s good to see TrialPad getting on board.

KEYNOTE VIEWING

While most developers will not understand why, TrialPad’s new feature of allowing keynote presentations to be displayed in TrialPad 2.0 is probably one of the most welcome for me as a Mac-using trial lawyer and fanatic fan of Apple’s Keynote. I don’t know of any other trial presentation app which will allow you to bring in Keynotes into the app and display them (it shows them slide by slide), annotate on them and save them using the HotDocs feature, but I was really excited when I saw this ability in TrialPad 2.0. Now when I want to bring in portions of my opening and show them to a witness, to demonstrate the jury the credibility of exactly the slide I showed them earlier, I can open my Keynote in TrialPad 2.0 and mark on the actual slide, emphasizing certain parts, etc… this was a really nice touch and another I didn’t expect from the new version.

There are many other new features to TrialPad 2.0, such as importing of PowerPoint slides, multi-page TIF’s, list view of cases, exporting of pages as PDF’s with or without annotations, moving exhibits between cases, multi-colored laser tool (one of my favorites) to name but a few. TrialPad has just risen the bar for other trial presentation apps with all of these new features and it will be exciting to see what this new competition will foster in this growing market!

TrialPad’s initial cost is $89.99, which is certainly higher than any of the other trial presentation apps out there. However, given the attention to detail in the user interface, highlight readability, split screen feature, multi-callout functions, and the rest, $89.99 is certainly worth the cost of the app.

We will be going to trial with TrialPad twice in July so be sure to check back here as we put TrialPad through its paces in a real court-room setting. We are looking forward to what all of these apps have to offer and are now even more excited for the iOS 5 update to come out bringing with it wireless displaying of these apps on the AppleTV.