Kansas Business Attorney - Latest Comments in General

Re: “first thing we do…let’s kill all the reporters.”

Rebekah — Thu, 10 Jul 2008 07:32:53 -0000

Dan, thanks for the shout out -- I had no idea you were interested in Global Voices!

Re: Clio: More Terms of Service

dancovington — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 12:19:44 -0000

Jack -
Fair enough. Thank you for clarifying; you're already showing that you are responsive and going a good direction. Hope to watch your success.

Re: Clio: More Terms of Service

Jack Newton — Mon, 30 Jun 2008 03:56:53 -0000

Hi Dan,

The current Clio Terms of Service reflect the fact that Clio is currently in beta, and are not necessarily the same Terms we will launch with when we release our product to paying customers. Our beta users know that the service may change dramatically while they use it, may be down for maintenance occasionally, or may be subject to occasional bugs or other issues - these are the kinds of issues beta periods are meant to iron out and eliminate. The Terms of Service intend to reflect the typical risks associated with using a beta service.

Look at our Terms of Service, like Clio itself, as having Beta status. We're listening, and are keen to hear what you and the legal community would like to see in a Terms of Service for our commercial release.

Best regards,
Jack

Re: Clio: More Terms of Service

dancovington — Sun, 29 Jun 2008 17:55:32 -0000

Follow up: To be sure, let's not lump all Saas-providers as bloated and unresponsive. What if one actually took the time to craft its Terms of Service with its customer in mind, hiring someone with expertise to aid in the drafting, then actually took that a step further, negotiated terms with an actual client, and offered that ToS Agreement to you. Ahhhh. Wouldn't that be nice. Look no further. Have a look at the good folks at VLO Tech; bet you won't see folks blogging with complaints about their Terms: VLOTech.com

Re: “first thing we do…let’s kill all the reporters.”

dancovington — Fri, 27 Jun 2008 15:32:01 -0000

Video of Global Voices Summit 08 here (streaming for now): http://summit08.globalvoicesonline.org/stream/

Re: SoloSmallTech

Sam Glover — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:46:00 -0000

Shucks, you made me blush!

Re: Tiny Twitter: it’s good. portable. Twitter.

Sam Glover — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 14:02:58 -0000

Looks pretty smooth. Check out TwitterBerry, too, which works great for those with Blackberries.

Re: License to display your online files … BEWARE

dancovington — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 04:32:44 -0000

Erik (and Adobe), "...checking with our lawyers" and "looking into it"? We shall see. I'm just a country lawyer, but my readers and I have heard PR before. Honestly ... I wonder if you checked with anyone or looked into anything? For now, I suspect you feel like you "handled" me. Hope not. That kind of thing makes my guts itch... and that feeling just doesn't go away easily.

Re: Todd Burroughs — Taylor Design Group, P.A.

dancovington — Thu, 05 Jun 2008 02:17:33 -0000

Thanks Chris; will definitely check it out.

Re: License to display your online files … BEWARE

Erik Larson — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 14:22:22 -0000

Thanks Dan, we're looking into it and will keep in touch. And thanks for the kind words about the service; I expect you will be very happy with Acrobat 9 as well, some good stuff in there for the legal profession, expanding on the advances in Acrobat 8.

Re: License to display your online files … BEWARE

dancovington — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 14:02:06 -0000

Erik - Fair enough. However, I would be more comforted by a more meaningful limitation like "solely to deliver the Services to you, in accordance with your use of sharing, setting, and options in the Services." As it is written, I know what you mean and you know what you mean. But for those of us who have ethical and contractual duties to protect confidentiality and privilege, the current language doesn't give me that warm, fuzzy I-would-bet-my-bar-card-that-a-Court-would-construe-the-limitation-in-my-favor vibe.
By the way, as I spent a little time trying the service (with nominal documents), I'll have to tell you I think it's keen. It is the kind of gorgeous, diversely functional, collaborative tool I love, and I am looking forward to giving 9.0 (with so many lawyer-friendly functions) a spin.

Re: License to display your online files … BEWARE

Erik Larson — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 11:07:59 -0000

Also, I am checking with our lawyers to make sure our intent and our language are not askew. Thanks for the posting!

Re: License to display your online files … BEWARE

Erik Larson — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 11:00:11 -0000

Hi Daniel, thanks for the note. We've actually been receiving compliments on our Acrobat.com terms of service...I am not a lawyer, nor could I play one on TV, but I think the operative phrase there is "solely to deliver the Services to you."

In other words, we reserve the right to do what you asked us to do by when you uploaded your documents to Acrobat.com.

Re: Unsealed First Amended Complaint vs. Yahoo

dancovington — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 16:06:28 -0000

...and not to worry (if you're alarmed at the footer on the complaint), the Court has unsealed this pleading: http://tinyurl.com/58nj49

Re: Zombie Dub: a new cd from Scott Arford

dancovington — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 13:29:46 -0000

Arford...the one in the vintage tie: http://boxoffice.com/sfiff/2008/05/09/scott-arf...

Re: License to display your online files … BEWARE

Rick Georges — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 12:28:19 -0000

Great catch, Dan. I have posted about your astute observation. Thanks.
Rick

Re: License to display your online files … BEWARE

dancovington — Mon, 02 Jun 2008 19:36:12 -0000

In all fairness, though, Adobe's new Acrobat 9.0 seems to have tons of great features attorneys will love. See what Finis shares:
http://tinyurl.com/6jwqop

Re: 100 Best Products of 2008

dancovington — Fri, 30 May 2008 18:11:39 -0000

For me:
1. Skype (and Fring)
2. Opera mini
3. Tilt (and its predecessor 8525)
Honorable mention:
* Lifehacker.com (if I could only have one RSS feed)
*Flock (mostly brilliant)
*2GB micro sd's from buy.com

Re: Metadata: is it in your attorney’s vocabulary?

dancovington — Fri, 23 May 2008 17:19:18 -0000

After coming across a metadata removal service, I have to wonder and invite opinions on whether such removal is contrary to the FRCP rule to preserve information as litigation becomes likely. I'd like to invite you to join the "shredding metadata? duty to preserve?" room on FriendFeed, a place for us to share and discuss things. I hope you'll join the room. You can check it out here: http://friendfeed.com/rooms/shredding-metadata-...

Re: Disqus: better comment dialogue

dancovington — Fri, 23 May 2008 14:26:59 -0000

Re: Law 2.ooooooooooooooooooooh. Why so great?

vlotech — Wed, 21 May 2008 14:37:39 -0000

I'd actually like to jump in here too if you don't mind. Security is the top priority concern to address when considering online law practice. VLOTech provides clients with the same methods of protections used by banks and government agencies. These companies and agencies also handle very sensitive client data which is transmitted online.

For any attorney wanting to practice law online, I would recommend that you conduct thorough research on the company that is hosting your sensitive data. Understand their security, backup and data retention policies. Know who runs the company and how serious they are about these issues. Make sure they will answer your questions about security upfront. With the VLOTech application that I use with my vlo, data is encrypted at both the communication and storage levels.

Of course, the limitations of protecting sensitive attorney/client data come down to the individual business practices of the attorney and his or her firm. They will need basic knowledge and practices as far as protecting their remote devices, including the passwords and login information for those devices. Issues like removing metadata and sending unencrypted emails to clients are going to be the responsibility of the attorney who chooses to practice online. It's impossible to discuss all of these security issues here. There are many other best practices for online practice that any attorney, whether practicing from a vlo or from a traditional law office, needs to understand and implement. It really depends on the combination of business methods and technology used to practice law virtually.

Re: Law 2.ooooooooooooooooooooh. Why so great?

vlotech — Wed, 21 May 2008 14:21:19 -0000

Yes. My virtual law practice has much less overhead than a traditional law office. I don't have to pay all of the expenses associated with an office building, and because I use my home office I take home office deductions as appropriate. I really don't require that many office supplies so that is minimal. I have to pay to be connected to the Internet, but most of the hardware that I'm using now was similar to what I had in place before I hung my shingle. Once a year I pay for an SSL certificate for my website. When my clients pay with Paypal as their credit card service, that service takes a small fee which counts as a business expense. There is a monthly fee to VLOTech to host my practice which pays for the server space, bandwidth, and other costs for them to host the vlo. Again, it's significantly less than paying for a physical law office.

I'll be honest with you and your readers, the biggest expense the first year of my virtual law practice was advertising. I tried both online and traditional advertising and by the second year was really able to narrow that cost down to what worked best for marketing a vlo. I'm planning on working with VLOTech clients to advise them on marketing and setting up their vlos.

Keep in mind that there are some VLOTech clients who plan on running a VLO in addition to their traditional law office. The technology may be used to complement existing law office software. In that case, the application may not lower their overall office overhead, but it does serve as an additional client and revenue generating tool to add to their practice so it certainly doesn't hurt the bottom line.

The online demo of the VLOTech application will be on the website soon for anyone interested to try it out from both the client and the attorney side. Thanks, Dan, for the opportunity to share with your readers.

Re: Law 2.ooooooooooooooooooooh. Why so great?

dancovington — Wed, 21 May 2008 03:32:43 -0000

Grant, I've heard lots of reactions to increased portability and communication, and over and over , we get this one: gosh, what about security if all that client information is "out there"? Your take?

Re: Law 2.ooooooooooooooooooooh. Why so great?

dancovington — Wed, 21 May 2008 03:25:59 -0000

I really have to thank Grant and Stephanie. Didn't I promise they would bring ideas you had not considered? And I do have at least one follow-up for Stephanie: would it be a fair statement to say that with an online office comes somewhat less overhead than a traditional practice? Am I making a bad presumption, or how does that piece of the puzzle affect the big picture?

Re: Law 2.ooooooooooooooooooooh. Why so great?

vlotech — Wed, 21 May 2008 00:09:12 -0000

There are so many positive things I could write about to answer your question. I've blogged about the benefits of a VLO and other issues on VLOTech's website as well as my own Virtual Practice Blog. I'll try to touch on a few of the biggest benefits of a VLOTech VLO.

From a personal perspective, my virtual law practice gives me the flexibility that I need. I have a great work/life balance. I do work a solid work week, but I do it at times when it is convenient for me and family to do so. Sometimes this means working until midnight, but it also means that I have the freedom to travel places during the typical business work hours. My family went on vacation last year and because my VLO is accessible anywhere I access the Internet, I was able to stay on top of my law practice remotely.

From an economic standpoint, the VLO expands my client base to the entire state where I practice law. I have online clients across the state. Because my clients are invoiced and pay me online through the VLOTech application, I do not have to spend as much time with collections or billing. I have been practicing online for over two years now and have not had a collections issue with a client yet. I believe this is because of the convenience to the online client and the "accept price quote" and "release of services" system set up in the VLOTech application that only releases the final legal work to the client after they have paid their bill.

From my client's side, they appreciate the convenience of an online law office. Each of my clients has their own homepage where they communication with me securely, upload and download documents and handle other transactions.

Of course there is also the awesome benefit of being a "Green" business. My virtual law practice is almost completely paperless. I have very little overhead and need minimal office supplies to run the practice. More and more clients are seeking out businesses that are eco-conscious so it is good for business in more than one way.

Those are the main points that I can think of. I'd be happy to answer any specific questions anyone might throw out there.