Please read:
Cass Sunstein: "Of Artificial Intelligence and Legal Reasoning"
Marc Lauritsen: "Fall in Line with Document Assembly"
Susskind, Chapter 4
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Links from today's class
In an effort to address a couple of loose ends that came up in class today, here are two links and observations from today's class:
Talking of automating legal processes / practice and some of the less desirable directions that could go brought to mind this cautionary tale. Some law firms seem to have developed a business model based on 1) finding defendants automatically (i.e. by screening the Web), 2) automating demand letters and law suits and sending a ton of them, and 3) usually setting the price of settlement at just about what it would cost to defend the case.
It is not always perfect. (Click on the PDF link near the bottom to see the actual demand letter.)
While we talked a little about ethics and lawyer use of new technology, lawyer use of e-mail was once controversial too. In the mid 1990s state bar associations released many different opinions about the issue. Here is one from 1997 when the Vermont Bar Association released an advisory ethics opinion approving of lawyer use of e-mail, primarily because e-mail technologies "appear no less secure than the ordinary fax or telephone communication."
Speaking of ethics - would lawyers not still have an ethical duty to "supervise" work that is done for them by computers? Assuming that the letter in the first example is as bad as some of the comments imply, should the law office that sent it be subject to sanctions?
Talking of automating legal processes / practice and some of the less desirable directions that could go brought to mind this cautionary tale. Some law firms seem to have developed a business model based on 1) finding defendants automatically (i.e. by screening the Web), 2) automating demand letters and law suits and sending a ton of them, and 3) usually setting the price of settlement at just about what it would cost to defend the case.
It is not always perfect. (Click on the PDF link near the bottom to see the actual demand letter.)
While we talked a little about ethics and lawyer use of new technology, lawyer use of e-mail was once controversial too. In the mid 1990s state bar associations released many different opinions about the issue. Here is one from 1997 when the Vermont Bar Association released an advisory ethics opinion approving of lawyer use of e-mail, primarily because e-mail technologies "appear no less secure than the ordinary fax or telephone communication."
Speaking of ethics - would lawyers not still have an ethical duty to "supervise" work that is done for them by computers? Assuming that the letter in the first example is as bad as some of the comments imply, should the law office that sent it be subject to sanctions?
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
Welcome
Hi, and welcome back to VLS and welcome to the second offering of the Digital Drafting course.
To reiterate the reading, please read:
- Susskind, Chapter 1
- "What Can Information Technology do for Law" 21 Harv. J. L. Tech. 589
- "Parchment, Paper, Pixels" Peter Tiersma.
Please note that the last reading is a new addition. It is actually the first chapter of a book by the same name by Prof. Tiersma.
You are also welcome to review any of the material still up from last year. Most of it might make sense, but some might be answers to questions that came up in class that don't make sense without the context.
In a change from last year, you are also invited to post questions on this blog if you choose to. You can also post current events news or other relevant items.
Here are some links to some of the current event items we (might have) mentioned in class:
- Seravia
- LegalZoom (with many other links to follow too.)
- RadiantLaw
- Rio Tinto
- Pangea3
To reiterate the reading, please read:
- Susskind, Chapter 1
- "What Can Information Technology do for Law" 21 Harv. J. L. Tech. 589
- "Parchment, Paper, Pixels" Peter Tiersma.
Please note that the last reading is a new addition. It is actually the first chapter of a book by the same name by Prof. Tiersma.
You are also welcome to review any of the material still up from last year. Most of it might make sense, but some might be answers to questions that came up in class that don't make sense without the context.
In a change from last year, you are also invited to post questions on this blog if you choose to. You can also post current events news or other relevant items.
Here are some links to some of the current event items we (might have) mentioned in class:
- Seravia
- LegalZoom (with many other links to follow too.)
- RadiantLaw
- Rio Tinto
- Pangea3
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)