Introduction

• New Year’s Resolutions: SPOILERS! Ouij will get published, Josh will have more faith in people, and no more judges preemptively tell Laura she’s going to lose.
• Law geek iTems: When your firm dislikes you helping yourself to their SMTP server from outside the office, you’d best be prepared to board the iOS ship. Josh shares his top five iOS apps for law practice.
• Josh grudgingly agrees that elderly legal secretaries would trounce him soundly in a race to format chicken scratch into legitimate pleadings.
• Work-mandated or otherwise “officially” encouraged social media use, and how bad it can be for your soul.

In the News

• Who owns your Twitter followers when you’re — mostly, kinda — tweeting for your employer? And check out this poorly-vetted plaintiff PhoneDog’s response to press about the lawsuit. We disagree that Twitter followers = customer list.
• According to Google transparency data, police agencies may begin using take down requests to hide depictions of police brutality. Incidentally, Google doesn’t break down requests for identification granularly, so we don’t know if police agencies are requesting the identification of the people who film them.
• ABA has a felicitous and thorough article on the law school crisis. Should the government cap funds available to law students?
• Josh points: Note how the article doesn’t even begin to suggest that the ABA could have begun to control the problem years ago by simply exercising more control over law school accreditation to ensure some reasonable parity between graduates and available careers.  (by Simpsons’ “Ha Ha” Kid)

You’re Doing It Wrong

• We didn’t really have time to talk about Carrier IQ, but you should learn more about it if it’s new to you.
• Some good links about the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) (no, really, this one you *must* learn more about if it’s new to you!):
• SOPA status update: haha: http://www.zdnet.com/blog/btl/reddit-will-enact-nuclear-option-to-protest-sopa-pipa/66739, also:
• High-traffic sites, including Reddit, plan a blackout in protest of SOPA.
• Here’s a good, quick SOPA status overview from @digiphile, still a few weeks old, but see the recommended additional sources in that post for follow up information.
• Read the bill and its companion, PIPA, and the much-better OPEN Act at Keep the Web Open. (Laura especially likes the quick-hit info on this comparison chart.)
• The anti-SOPA movement continues to gather steam…
• We talk about the Supreme Court’s take on another bill that had the Internet all in a kerfuffle. Read Eldred v. Ashcroft for yourself.

Love for Our Geeks

• Ouij tells us what he likes about LG and how/why other listeners should give feedback.

Like What You Hear?

If you like what you hear, please consider giving us a positive review on iTunes, leave your comments (here and/or there) and, of course, subscribe to the podcast.

We want to talk about what you want to hear about! Send questions, ideas, comments, complaints, and corrections by email to podcast /at/ legalgeekery /dot/ com.

Incoming search terms:

• ios legal apps
• best law apps
• Find best legal app
• law school ios apps
• lawyer ios app
• law apps
• law ios apps
• new law apps
• police ios app
• top apps for cops

Related posts:

1. Episode 30: FBI Blows Cases So You Can’t See the Specs on its Little Black Box
2. Episode 29: Let Me Point Out This “Unpublished” Opinion, Because It Doesn’t Exist
3. Why Are Legal Apps So Focused on iPhone and iOS?

Looks like Amazon is having a fire sale (no pun intended) on hornbooks today. Come on, little buddy, there’s no shame in picking yourself up a well-organized outline on basic federal income tax. We all know your professor is just winging it anyway.

You don’t need a Kindle for this sale — it’ll deliver to any of your Kindle apps (on iOS, Android, Windows, OS X, etc.).

Gavel bang to @anthroflutist for bringing the sale to our attention. Let us know what you pick up.

Incoming search terms:

• barbri kindle fire
• horn book app
• hornbook for sale
• kindle fire barbri
• kindle fire legal apps
• law kindle app
• law student hornbooks ipad
• legal apps for the kindle

Related posts:

1. Why I Own a Kindle and an iPad
2. Why Are Legal Apps So Focused on iPhone and iOS?
3. Can Lawyers Ethically Sell Used Electronics?

• The Copyright Office recently sought submissions for new exceptions to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The EFF yesterday filed a comment with the Office seeking an extension of last year’s exceptions for phones and remix videos, and urged that the Office expand its protection to the jailbreaking of smartphones, electronic tablets, and game consoles. Hypothetically, if I had a modded xbox 360 sitting at home, it would be nice to know that it wasn’t violative of the DMCA.
• According to a CBS report, 20% of wireless 911 calls are made inadvertently. I’d also like to take a moment to recognize the stupidity of making the 9 digit synonymous with reaching an outside line. The first two digits I press on my phone are 9 and 1. One double tap, and the police show up at my lab. Again, hypothetically.
• Carrier IQ is alleged to have silently recorded data from potentially millions of smart phone users. The first class action suit alleging violation of the Federal Wiretap Act was filed against Carrier IQ yesterday in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.
• You know those privacy screens some people in your office use? They’re pretty lame and mostly ineffective. Why not perform this relatively straight-forward hack and make the screen invisible without polarized glasses? I’m definitely doing this.

Incoming search terms:

• invisible screen in office and glasses
• legally modded x box controller
• office privacy screen
• privacy screen glasses

Related posts:

1. Legal Geekery Roundup for 11.09.2011
2. Legal Geekery Roundup for 11.11.2011

Introduction

• Josh grills Laura on what it’s like to be a real lawyer, and we find out what she’s been doing with herself.
• Josh went to Mexico and worked on a law review article pertaining to the First Sale Doctrine.
• Legal Geekery has been tweaked a bit, and now features Matthew Butterick’s Equity font!
• You may have noticed, but Josh has been trying to update LG at least once per day for NoBloPoMo.

In the News

• Cell phone tracking. Government is attempting to keep a portable cell phone tracking device secret by essentially giving up a case where the judge asked for information on how the device worked.
• Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA). EFF is leading the charge against the SOPA bill claiming that it would threaten whistle blowing and human rights.

You’re Doing It Wrong

• And here’s a link just because we love to rip on Righthaven.

Like What You Hear?

If you like what you hear, please consider giving us a positive review on iTunes, leave your comments (here and/or there) and, of course, subscribe to the podcast.

We want to talk about what you want to hear about! Send questions, ideas, comments, complaints, and corrections by email to podcast /at/ legalgeekery /dot/ com.

Incoming search terms:

• 30 FBI
• equity font butterick link install
• f b I cases
• fbi what you cant find out

Related posts:

1. Episode 26: Just riffin’ on bar exams, summering, and Bitcoin
2. Episode 29: Let Me Point Out This “Unpublished” Opinion, Because It Doesn’t Exist
3. Podcast Episode 27: A Veritable Zoo of Copyright Trolls and Monkeys

• Justice Stevens defends his Kelo opinion while simultaneously criticizing Justice O’Connor for alleged inconsistencies in her dissenting opinion.
• If you play video games on your computer, it’s likely that your personal information, and maybe your credit card, were compromised in the recent Steam hacking. Lifehacker has some tips on what you should do if you have a Steam account.
• Gizmodo makes some persuasive arguments about why you should be very concerned about the HR 3035 bill, which would effectively legalize most robocaller services.
• While I don’t typically report on legal gossip, apropos of Veteran’s Day, Above the Law today published what can only be labeled a diatribe written by Professor Michael Avery of Suffolk Law School. In the email, he vehemently objects to students soliciting the staff for donations that would go into care packages for deployed American soldiers. Incidentally, this man was largely responsible for my decision to cross Suffolk Law off my list of potential law schools.
• Judge orders divorcing couple to exchange dating website and Facebook login credentials, in violation of Terms of Service. I guess we finally have definitive proof that absolutely no one reads click-wrap agreements.

You can find all of these links, as well as previous Roundups, on our Delicious page.

[Edit 11.12.11: Factual correction thanks to Louis Grube]

Incoming search terms:

• michael avery suffolk law
• suffolk law michael avery
• professor michael avery
• michael avery suffolk
• suffolk law mock class
• most evil
• barbri boston best site suffolk harvard
• michael avery dates student
• egg-one school is the first legal school for video games
• click wrap agreements funny

Related posts:

1. Legal Geekery Roundup for 11.09.2011

• Wired begins licensing photographs taken by its staff with Creative Commons licenses.
• Adobe announces that it will be officially killing off Flash Player for mobile devices. Forces iOS competitors to lose the snarky site redirects.
• Stanford CIS reviews the Digital Advertising Alliance’s recently announced supplementary set of self-regularory principles for third parties on the web.
• An interesting Op-Ed in the NYTimes about whether solitary confinement is tantamount to torture.
• Speaking of Wired, they recently got their hands on one of the GPS devices that served as the basis for the recent SCOTUS United States vs. Jones case. The warrantless GPS device was found in the wild, well hidden inside a vehicle.

Related posts:

1. Typography for Lawyers Brings Legal Geekery a New Design

I was inspired to write this post following Josh Fenton‘s recent appearance on TWiL. Denise Howell asked Mr. Fenton whether he believed that existing laws should be interpreted to encompass the internet and applied accordingly, or whether new laws should be drafted and previous laws updated in lieu of the omnipresence of the internet. The relevant transcript from the podcast follows:

Denise Howell: Josh, you had a piece on your JetLawyer site that I read that was basically urging . . . we’ve talked about cyberspace exceptionalism before on the show — a term that Eric Goldman uses quite a bit, and your piece on your site was basically arguing against that. That you should treat property in the real world and property when it takes the form of bits the same way. I’m wondering if you feel like there’s a parallel here as we’re talking about communications. Should you treat them differently when they’re in the form of bits?

Josh Fenton: I don’t think so. I think that the easiest way to deal with the questions that arise in the digital age is to make the connection to the analog concepts that existed before the internet came along. And to that extent, things like piracy, and conventional larceny, they are comparable.

I don’t mean to pick on Mr. Fenton here because I think that his position that old laws should be interpreted to encompass the internet is perfectly reasonable. In fact, such a position was my gut reaction when posed this same question by Professor H. Brian Holland during his cyberlaw course. More to the point, I can appreciate that it might be the default position of a digital progressive. The internet is a ubiquitous part of our lives, and many of our daily activities on the internet have real-life analogs: chatrooms are like parties; instant messages are like phone conversations; email is like snail mail; YouTube is like television; blogs are like newspapers (or journals, depending on the blog). So it’s easy to appreciate why people like myself, who have effectively grown up using the internet, might assume that the easiest solution to legal questions arising in light of the internet is to treat the virtual world like the real world.

If advocates would simply acknowledge the issue as a legitimate concern, and offer an argument as to why it should not govern, their counter policy arguments would seem much more credible.

The problem is that every single example I gave above is far more complex than its real life analog. Imagine that I’m hosting a party and I want to play a board game with my friends. I’ve already gone out and purchased the game, it’s in my house, and we’re ready to go. No complex issues of law arise. Now imagine that I want to play the same board game in a chatroom.¹ Perhaps the easiest solution is to take a digital picture of the actual board or stream a video of the board over the course of the night. Can I transmit those images to the chatroom? Have I already violated various trademarks and copyrights just by taking the picture? Suppose I digitize the entire board game for archival purposes, converting manuals into PDFs and using high resolution images for the content, and then my computer is hacked, and a copy of the game is made and downloaded from my computer. The latter hypothetical is particularly apposite because traditionally speaking, I will have been entirely divested of the tangible property if it’s stolen from me. This is especially true where the original copy of the “good” was digitally distributed. The hacker now finds himself with an exact copy of the software I purchased, with no degradation in quality whatsoever.²  Am I now culpable for negligently assisting in infringement?

Regardless of how superficially similar the virtual world may appear to the real world, we are faced with an entirely new set of problems that have arisen merely by virtue of the prevalence of goods that can be infinitely copied without loss of quality. For the most part, these problems could never have been anticipated by the legislature, and expecting their rationale for enacting these laws to hold up in light of new problems that arise only in a digital medium is presumptuous at best.

I am strongly in favor of giving citizens the traditional property rights to which they have grown accustomed over the centuries

Does that mean that intellectual property owners should have a trump card that reads, “I need X because my property is infinitely reproducible and I need protection?” No, it doesn’t. But it does mean that these arguments shouldn’t be thoughtlessly dismissed. I read far too many scholarly articles that advocate for laws more favorable to internet consumers, that subsequently fail to address the issue of harm to producers in light of infringement. In actuality, I have found that these types of arguments made by content producers generally are meritless (e.g. the producer claims to need more stringent protections on its IP even where its revenue derived from IP is consistently outperforming other aspects of its business and thriving in an economic downturn). If advocates would simply acknowledge the issue as a legitimate concern, and offer an argument as to why it should not govern, their counter policy arguments would seem much more credible.

Please do not misunderstand me: I am strongly in favor of giving citizens the traditional property rights to which they have grown accustomed over the centuries,³ but in our fight for digital equality, I firmly believe that ignoring the fact that tangible property and virtual property are fundamentally different only hurts the cause.

[Photo Credit to Erik Mallinson]

Incoming search terms:

• board games mr x
• josh fenton law
• pictures of board games
• why you shouldnt think
• true and original copy digital
• the Internet shouldn\t have laws
• protect internet virtual property law
• mister x board game
• 1 do you think that traditional contract law concepts apply to this virtual property
• h brian holland

1. First, consider that such a task was likely impossible prior to the invention of the internet.
2. In the real world, a tangible good will exhibit some quality loss when it’s reproduced thereby rendering copies, for the most part, less valuable.
3. See, e.g., the law review article I am currently writing advocating for the application of the First Sale Doctrine in most instances where companies purport to be licensing rather than selling goods.

No related posts.

This is a republished guest post by Scott Kuhagen. Scott is a third year law student at Temple University Beasley School of Law in Philadelphia. You can find his blog at scottkuhagen.com.

I’ve been tinkering some with Lexis Advance, the updated version of the Lexis legal database, and thought I’d offer some initial thoughts on the user experience.

Two things I should state up front:

1. When I began law school, I was very much in the Lexis camp. I had used LexisNexis Academic and LexisNexis Congressional as an undergraduate and in jobs before law school, and I was comfortable with the vaguely similar interface. I also strongly preferred Shepard’s Citation Service over Westlaw’s KeyCite feature, which I found unnecessarily unwieldy.
2. When WestlawNext came out last year, I began using that much more often because it was a significant improvement over Lexis and so-called “Classic Westlaw.” I’ve since grown to like it very much, but am mindful that in practice, the price of using WestlawNext can be very high—$60 for a search, and $15 for each document opened from a search, according to an article by Professor Ronald E. Wheeler, Jr., Director of the University of San Francisco Law Library – h/t Law Librarian Blog)—so I’m trying to not get too used to it!

So far, I’ve used Lexis Advance to do some basic research and test out how it compares to regular Lexis. For the sake of illustrating some of my points, I conducted an intentionally very broad search for “modified categorical approach immigration 3d Circuit.”¹ This was an attempt to get relevant results about how the Third Circuit has applied this (admittedly difficult-to-explain) doctrine to examine whether a criminal conviction fits within a potential removability ground in the Immigration and Nationality Act, if the statute under which the person was convicted is phrased in alternative elements and only some—not all—of those elements could constitute removable offenses.  Here are some initial thoughts about what I’ve found:

Starting Your Search

Just like Google, Bing, or even WestlawNext, you can start your search by typing it into a single search box. If you want to immediately narrow your search at this point, there are numerous options for restricting by practice area, jurisdiction, and source type; as you might expect, Lexis has also included advanced options for constructing Boolean-type searches. I do not really have a strong reaction to this part, as those are standard features of many other websites and academic databases, but compared to what I’ll call “regular Lexis,” it does remove the step of selecting databases that you want to search up front.

The new Lexis Advance search box.

Narrowing Down Your Search

I like two of the new changes designed to facilitate quicker access to the documents you’re seeking: (1) the date range slider; and (2) the choice of source tabs at the top.

Lexis Advance date slider for cases.

The slider makes it easy to restrict your search by a specific date range.² This graph also gives you an idea of how popular the search terms have been over time. With respect to the choice of source tabs, once you’ve received search results, the ability to quickly change the type of results you want to look at depending on what type of source you need—for example, switching from cases to analytical materials or other secondary sources—without having to select new databases to search, is also helpful:

Different tabs at the top for different types of documents after search results are returned.

Endnotes in PDF Versions of Lexis Advance Documents

When you either email yourself a PDF of a document, or download a PDF version of a document, the endnotes in that document are not clickable (i.e. you cannot click a endnote and be taken to the end of the document to read the note). In longer law review articles or treatise sections, this is highly inconvenient. I have—many times—sought out a document on Westlaw or WestlawNext specifically because they provide this function, which makes navigation far simpler within the document. In Lexis Advance, if I want to read the endnote, I have to scroll to the end, find the right note, then scroll back up to continue reading; this is quite disruptive to the overall reading process and absolutely untenable if you intend to read documents on an E Ink reader like the Kindle. Granted, this is also a problem in regular Lexis.

Copy and Cite

In Lexis Advance, when you highlight text and choose “Copy Clip to Clipboard,” the resulting citation is missing a pinpoint citation. Both regular Lexis and WestlawNext supply the pincite when copying clips. In Lexis Advance, you’re given only the generic full citation without the specific page reference to where your highlighted text appears. I would hope this type of functionality arrives soon.

The Tabs

They’re kind of interesting, and are one of the most noticeable changes to how a user actually uses the service compared to regular Lexis. They seem useful for managing several different documents at once, especially when it prevents you from leaving a document when you click another citation or link. But I must confess to finding them distracting because the entire page has to reload in order for the new document to be displayed in a new Lexis Advance tab. On some level I’d prefer to just open an entirely new browser tab, rather than have multiple documents open in Lexis Advance tabs within the same browser tab. But it seems that it’s difficult to even do that. When I press Control and click a link, which should theoretically open a new browser tab in Chrome, a new Lexis Advance tab opens in the same Lexis Advance tab instead. This might be my own somewhat neurotic web browsing preference, but I suspect there are others who deal better with one document per browser tab. On the other hand, Kyle Courtney, a law librarian at Harvard Law School, praises [PDF] the numerous document tabs within a single browser tab, opining that they make it “easy to toggle to different steps in the research trail path without opening 34 windows and losing track.” Reasonable minds can differ!

What I like: separate Chrome browser tabs for separate documents, even if there are a lot of them.

What I’m not so impressed with: multiple documents within the same browser tab.

Conclusions

I know I have not engaged in a rigorous examination of Lexis Advance’s search capabilities compared to Lexis Advance or other databases, but Dan Baker at the University of Houston Law Library has more developed thoughts in this area, and his two posts on the subject are worth reading (especially his second post).

At this point, I expect that I will continue to try to use Lexis Advance and get used to it, but I’m hard-pressed to say why I’d use it over regular Lexis for basic legal research. Someone conducting more intense and sustained research over a longer period of time may feel differently. The single search box is nice, but if I have to select specific databases, that’s not the end of the world for me. Otherwise, the changes, while appreciated, do not seem major enough to the user experience to entice someone away from regular Lexis.

Incoming search terms:

• lexis advance review
• lexis advance reviews
• lexis advance vs westlawnext
• lexis advance law school
• law student
• where is the clipboard on westlawnext
• lexis advanced
• LexisAdvance
• review lexis advance
• lexis advance vs westlaw next

1. I realize, in retrospect, that including “3d Circuit” in my search terms might have been an imprecise attempt to force a focus on Third Circuit cases, mostly by hoping for hits on “3d Cir.” or other such permutations in the citations of cases. Unfortunately it appears that in the jurisdictions tab on the single search box in Lexis Advance, one can only choose “U.S. Federal,” not individual federal circuits, along with specific states.
2. Although LG Editor-in-Chief, Josh Auriemma, points out  that this is both similar to and slightly less useful than Fastcase’s 3D graph visualization.

Related posts:

1. A Review of Fastcase’s Cloud Printing Suite, Part I
2. Lawyers and Law Students: Hold Off On Upgrading That iPad
3. A Review of Fastcase’s Cloud Printing Suite, Part II: The Word Ribbon

Meet Matthew Butterick’s Equity font. You should be reading this article right now in said font unless I’ve messed something up, or you’re using a seriously outdated browser.

I had the privilege of beta testing the font for Matthew, and I’m a fan (obviously, or I wouldn’t have embedded it into this blog). I used it in a number of court filings before it went live, and I’ve been just as satisfied with it as I have been with my typical [prohibitively expensive] filing font. The sales pitch here is that this is a font made by a lawyer, for lawyers. In particular, by the lawyer who literally wrote the book on legal typography.

“[I]f you can find a bet­ter font for legal work, buy it.”

Butterick just released a really neat type specimen on Equity that, inter alia, outlines the history of the 1930s font named Ehrhardt that served as the inspiration for Equity. It’s an interesting read and it’ll give you an idea for what a professional can do with the font.

The license terms are very progressive, which is why I can embed the font here on LG. It also allows limited embedding in Word documents if you’re transferring files back and forth between computers without a license for the font.

Check out Equity. You’ll dig it. 

Incoming search terms:

• equity font
• lawyer font
• lawyer fonts
• fonts for lawyers
• legal typography
• font for legal documents
• font for law
• equityfont com
• Lawier font
• geekery font

No related posts.

We got our hands on a new feature from the Fastcase Cloud Printing Suite recently that we’ve been looking forward to sharing with our readers. In our last review of the Fastcase Cloud Printing Suite, I mentioned that I was looking forward to experiencing the Cloud Printing integration with Microsoft Word. This feature takes your Word documents, parses through them, identifies the case citations within, and allows you to pull up any or all of the cases in one fell swoop.

While the browser plugin component of the Cloud Printing Suite is a killer feature for Biglaw types, the Word plugin is a must for offices of all sizes.

I foresee several different ways one might use this product to benefit his or her practice. The way that I have primarily been using it is to go back before oral argument begins and use this feature to pull all of the cases listed in my own brief. It really streamlines the oral argument preparation process. The other less obvious and perhaps even more useful way that one might use this product is to incorporate it into the document receiving process. At my firm, legal assistants scan and OCR documents into our case management system upon receipt. Training them to use Acrobat (or the Nuance Free PDF Reader) to convert the PDF into a Word document and then run the Cloud Printing app to extract all the cases cited by opposing counsel doesn’t require significant additional time or effort. So when I sit down to read opposing counsel’s brief, I can already have a file saved in the CMS with every case cited by opposing counsel.

“As we’ve come to expect from Fastcase, the experience is simple, seamless, and straight-forward.”

Now that you hopefully have an appreciation for the theoretical utility of the product, let’s talk about the implementation. In my unscientific study, the add-on is able to identify and find each and every case citation in my brief approximately 99% of the time. The efficacy is very slightly reduced when running the app on opposing counsel’s OCRed brief, but that’s a limitation of the OCR technology and there’s little Fastcase can do about that. Depending on the quality of the brief, the quality of the scan, and the quality of the OCR algorithm used, your results may vary. I have had great success scanning documents in with our Bizhub at 400 DPI, and OCRing and converting to Word with Acrobat 8. The results I have seen show close to 100% accuracy. Just today I identified several citation errors in a brief from opposing counsel within ten minutes of receiving the document by mail.

Now let’s talk about usability. As we’ve come to expect from Fastcase, the experience is simple, seamless, and straight-forward. After downloading a small add-on program, a new ribbon is added into Word (see below). After entering your activation key, you can either pull single cases by citation, or click the Extract Cases button, causing the add-on to attempt to identify each and every case listed.

Visually, the implementation is similar to the browser-based Cloud Printing plugin that we reviewed previously, which is great because we were fans of the browser visuals. Upon clicking the Extract Cases button, we’re met with the following image:

Comparison of my brief's Table of Contents with the cases identified by the plugin. Click to enlarge.

As you can see, even in its beta stage, the citation identification algorithm is excellent.  I have yet to see an actual false identification (not caused by my own mistake). Once you select the cases you want, you can either print them or save them to various file formats.

It’s really a simple feature, but it’s a quality-of-life improvement. I am constantly surprised by how adding small tweaks like Cloud Printing to my practice aggregate to save a lot of time over the long term, but the effect is really undeniable.

As I mentioned, the program is in beta, and will likely be modified before its release. With that said, here are some features I’d like to see:

1. Native support to save documents as PDF.
2. The ability to save multiple cases as separate files within a zip file. (I mostly want this to support my Kindle addiction.)
3. Where the user elects to save multiple cases as one Word or RTF file, it would be nice to have headings filled out properly to allow for easy case navigation  with the Word Navigation Pane.

Note that all of these feature requests are fairly nit-picky, and that should tell you something about the guys and gals at Fastcase. Just as I’ve developed a “Shut Up and Take My Money” policy with Apple products, Fastcase is approaching that level of confidence with me as a result of their consistently well-designed and highly polished apps.

If you still don’t have a Fastcase account, I’m strongly urging you to consider checking them out. We need progressive thinkers like these guys pushing tech development in our field, and handing over our dollars supports future development.

Incoming search terms:

• review fastcase
• fastcase reviews
• cloud print review
• table of contents court brief
• cloud printing reviews
• integrate cloud print into microsoft word
• pdf CLOUD PRINT
• ribbon with cloud print
• what can i do with the cloud for my law firm
• why doesn\t fastcase cloud printing recognize all of my cases

Related posts:

1. A Review of Fastcase’s Cloud Printing Suite, Part I