Archive for the ‘What’s New?’ Category

I’ll Take “Advancements in Legal Technology” for $1,000 please, Alex

Friday, May 13th, 2011

Recently, there has been some discussion out of IBM about the possibility of using Watson-like technology for legal research, litigation and discovery. While this sounds like a great idea in the abstract, in reality, it remains to be seen whether Watson is capable of such an undertaking.

For those who have no idea what I’m talking about, Watson is a room-sized computer created by IBM and named after its first president, Thomas J. Watson, that is capable of answering queries phrased in natural language. Watson became famous this past February when “he” prevailed on Jeopardy! against two of the biggest winners in the game show’s history.

According to IBM fellow Guru Rao, IBM is working towards being able to use Watson-like technology “to weed out relevant information from warehouses of data.” For lawyers, the thought of having a machine that can go through a mountain of discovery and almost instantaneously obtain the most relevant documents sounds like a dream come true. This technology could also be useful for pinpointing the perfect case or statute when engaging in legal research.

But will lawyers be willing to take Watson for his word when he is less than 100% confident in a conclusion? While Watson answered many clues correctly on Jeopardy!, he was actually less than 50% confident in many of his responses. Also, Watson’s confidence and accuracy improved with longer, wordier clues, and decreased with shorter clues with fewer words; thus, simple queries like “instances of malpractice” would be the least likely to produce reliable results.

I, for one, am looking forward to seeing where IBM is able to take this technology in order to help lawyers. Watson may be fully capable of winning a game show, but whether or not he will be a winner in the courtroom remains to be seen. 

Further Reading:

http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202481662966&slreturn=1&hbxlogin=1

http://www.networkworld.com/news/2011/050311-ibm-hopes-to-bring-watson.html?docid=050911i

Cell Phones are Computers – The Evolution of Technology

Thursday, March 10th, 2011

For most people, the word “computer” conjures up images of a traditional desktop computer and monitor, or perhaps a laptop or even a netbook. Few, if any, would associate the word with their cellular phone. However, it is undeniable that modern cell phones are, more and more, performing tasks for which we would ordinarily use our computers. We can check our email, surf the web, stream music and videos, and download software, all with a little device that fits in our pocket.

Recently, in United States v. Kramer, 2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 2367 (8th Cir. 2011), the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit held that, under the definition provided by 18 U.S.C. § 1030(e)(1), even a cell phone used only to make phone calls and send text messages constitutes a computer. This statute defines a computer as a device which “performs logical, arithmetic, or storage functions.” The Eighth Circuit determined that a cell phone performs logical, arithmetic, or storage functions “each time an electronic processor performs any task—from powering on, to receiving keypad input, to displaying information.” According to the court, even the most basic function of a cell phone—placing a phone call (I forgot they could do that!)—requires the phone’s processor to perform logical, arithmetic and storage functions. Therefore, even cell phones without internet access and web browsers constitute computers under this statute.

The implications of this decision are far-reaching. First, 18 U.S.C. § 1030, the “Fraud and related activity in connection with computers” section of the Federal Crimes Code, now applies to fraudulent access and usage of cell phones. Additionally, as was the case for Neil Scott Kramer, defendants may face a sentencing enhancement for “use of a computer” to facilitate the commission of certain crimes. Further, this could open the door to new rules regarding searches and seizures of cell phones, and could broaden laws relating to computer hacking and internet crimes. It remains to be seen whether other courts, including the United States Supreme Court, will agree with the Eighth Circuit’s analysis.

Legaltech New York

Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011

Yesterday, my associates, Molly Gilligan, Diana D’Auria and I, spent the date (actually our annual jaunt) at Legaltech, New York, the large commercial legal technology show (not to be confused with the ABA’s Techshow, where I will be speaking in April). As usual, there were many vendors and we were able to visit with friends from our many partners, including LexisNexis TimeMatters, CaseMap and Concordance, Legal Files case and matter management software, AccessData Summation (I have just become a newly-minted Summation Support Specialist, which replaces my prior certification as a Summation Certified Trainer) and Payne Systems (Metadata Assistant). We also visited with our newest partner, Business Integrity, which markets Contract Express, an easy, user-friendly document assembly software program. It was particularly heartening to hear the totally positive feedback for my book, The Lawyer’s Guide to LexisNexis CaseMap. Users love it and apparently so do the people at Casesoft, the Lexis division responsible for CaseMap, TextMap, NoteMap and TimeMap.  Overall, a great day, some new friends made, some old aquaintances renewed.

One minor complaint. One of my associates tried to register online on the first day of the show. Because registration was closed, she was informed she had to register at the show. Lo and behold, the otherwise free registration was no longer available and we were hit with a $50.00 registration fee for attending the show. Nowhere on the Legaltech site can I find mention of this policy, and it’s not apparent (if it exists) on the portion of the site devoted to Legaltech in California. That just didn’t seem fair.

Great Free Microsoft Office Manuals

Friday, January 21st, 2011

Free is always a great price, but this time, free is not only a great price but a great product.  A company, Mouse Training, has release its training manuals and Quick Reference Guides for Office 2007, Office 2003, Office XP (2002) and Office 2000. The materials include Word, Excel, Outlook, PowerPoint, Access, Project and Visio.

All of the documents are in pdf format. To get them, go to http://www.mousetraining.co.uk/ms-office-training-manuals.html.

When Tech & Ethics Collide

Saturday, April 3rd, 2010

The latest issue of Lawyers USA has a interesting (albeit brief) summary of an ABA program, Dangerous Curves Ahead: When Legal Ethics and Technology Collide,” presented by Catherine Sanders Reach, Director of the ABA Legal Technology Resource Center. Knowing Catherine, I am sure that the program was interesting and thoguht-provoking. It covered issues, including the Model Rules, Metadata, Email, Social Networking, and Data Security. The topic paralleled a PBI in which I participated, “How Your Computer Can Get You Into Trouble;” it’s also the topic of an article I’m writing for Trial magazine (journal of the American Association for Justice) this fall.

Of greatest importance, the article (and Catherine’s program) highlight the need to be judicious with your use of technology; it’s so easy to take things for granted.

Reflections on Techshow (Part I)

Saturday, March 27th, 2010

Having just returned from Techshow 2010 in Chicago, the ABA Law Practice Management Division’s annual trade show and CLE program extravaganza, I was struck by a couple of things. First, no longer did it seem as though every booth was focused on e-discovery. While there is no question that e-discovery is an important issue, I felt as though the issues the vendors focused upon were things like case management (and my friends from Time Matters and Legal Files were present), document management (ditto for Worldox and Fujitsu (Scansnap), legal research (Lexis for Office – Wow! and West’s new product) and other products designed to improve workflow. I, for one, was pleased to see this.

But that doesn’t mean e-discovery is passe or forgotten. Some vendors focused on it, as did some of the programs. Perhaps one of the better programs I attended was E-Discovery in Small Cases, a topic that is often forgotten. Many of my clients handle these “smaller” cases, and they are in fact the bread and butter of many firms. But the e-discovery vendors often focus so much on the big ticket (and big revenue) cases that they forget that these small potatoes are present and their value adds up too.

 In future posts, I’ll talk more about these and other topics. And in my other blog, www.palegalblog.com, I plan to discuss why so few Pennsylvania attorneys attended.