September 2007

You are currently browsing the monthly archive for September 2007.

LawLink (.com) is a LinkedIn copycat exclusively for US attorneys whose mission is to help attorneys build professional relationships with other attorneys and leverage their existing professional relationships.

The admittedly large number of US attorneys pales in comparison to the global audience who are interested in their activities and from whose attention the network would benefit. Such “little gated communities” might work but only for limited purposes. Why not let others in the gate and restrict certain views to members only?

Following up on Kevin O’Keefe’s post on AmLaw 200 firms using Facebook (source Doug Cornelius), I did a quick trawl on Facebook for the top UK legal firms’ workplace networks. Figures are: Linklaters (with 895 members), Allen & Overy (846), Baker & McKenzie (669) and DLA Piper (623). Only these four of the top 20 appear to have networks.

Although a lot of attention is focussed on grabbing eyeballs through search engine optimisation and marketing, often too little consideration is given to what those eyeballs do when they arrive. I’ve referred a few times before to “web usability guru” Jakob Nielsen. Like many, and unlike himself, I don’t believe he’s God: some of his more recent guidelines are somewhat controversial. However, his latest Alertbox article deserves a read.

First take a look at this eye-tracking study heatmap of views of the US Census Bureau’s home page, showing in colours from red, through yellow and blue to grey, where users’ attention was most focussed.

You’ll note that, clearly:

  • users focussed on the left of the columns, primarily the top left
  • users focussed on text more than pictures (though the female grabbed some eyeballs)
  • users avoided anything that looked like an ad

On this particular page, the most important statistic is top right, but because the formatting is suggestive of an ad, users didn’t focus on the whole of it.

This behaviour is fairly typical of most other similar studies – and this is science, not some black art. So the message is clear. Feel free to make your web pages visually attractive with graphics and formatting, but make sure the important information and links are top left in plain text.

OPSI has significantly improved its access to Acts of Parliament. See, for example the new Pensions Act 2007. The page layouts are now fully stylesheet driven, with more accurate layout; and there are options to view a “plain” version (without sidebars) or a “single page” version, presenting the full text on one page rather than split over several pages. The annoying header information has been removed. Other improvements are that references to other Acts are hyperlinked and the Avanced Search page enables one to search via Type, Area (jurisdiction), Date Range and Format. There is an RSS feed for each Act, though what this is intended to achieve is not clear: it delivers links to the various sub-pages – whose titles are insufficiently specific – in apparently random order.

Apart from the latter point, this is an all-round improvement and a significantly better view/copy/print experience for newly-enacted legislation than the Statute Law Database.

The Information World Review Blog posts an interview with James Mullen, Information Officer at CMS Cameron McKenna and author of LI Issues. He speaks for many serious blawgers in saying that his blog has exposed him to many individuals and organisations he may never have encountered otherwise. Thanks to James for mentioning Binary Law along with Information Overlord as the two blogs he considers “most trustworthy”.

The September issue of IWR features an article – Law users irked by lacklustre service – citing frequent complaints by users against the Big Two about high costs and poor customer relations, but also criticism of some of the smaller niche players. A spokesman for LNB states the obvious in saying that information that once required premium subscriptions is now available for free on the web and that consumer expectations have risen dramatically, but sadly the article does not note LNB’s response to this state of affairs. On the other hand, some larger law firm and accountant customers appear to be their own worst enemy, according to an information manager at a bank:

their market power is derived from the fact that not everyone can do it. This … leads to a conservatism when sourcing information and a reliance on a few brand-name suppliers. This in turn has made competition and innovation pretty moribund in this part of the information world.

I think s/he speaks about innovation within the established publishers. Innovation has been alive and well amongst small players and that will only increase.

More legal information world stories:

IWR has recently signed up as an official partner in the Guardian’s Free our Data campaign.

The Free our Data campaign questions if the ancient institution of Crown copyright still has a place in the digital age, with the tongue in cheek suggestion that the simplest way to abolish Crown copyright might be to abolish the Crown itself.

In a leader, The Guardian praises BAILII (7 years late).

Pay up, mate

A day in court is a rare event for me. So it was illuminating to attend a county court hearing assisting a friend trying to recover her tenancy deposit.

Judgment had been issued against the landlord, who had failed to respond to the claim. In his application to set aside the judgment, apart from denying he had received the claim, the landlord had set out the spurious arguments previously given in a letter to the tanants and more as to why he felt entitled – without it seems any serious consideration of the terms of the tenancy agreement – to withhold almost the entire deposit.

The DJ listened politely but felt no need to ask the tenant to speak and dismissed the landlord’s application as he could show no quantifiable loss. So the judgment stands, though seeing the colour of the landlord’s money will have to wait.

What struck me, however, was how inefficient the system is:

  • The DJ admitted he did not have a copy of the claim in front of him though it had been submitted online and was presumably just a click and print away.
  • The proceedings were informal, but nevertheless the DJ used standard legal jargon. Neither claimant nor defendant were native English speakers and did not fully understand much that was said or the result. Indeed, the landlord seemed to think he had won and I had to disabuse him after the hearing. Could the DJ not have explained “that means you’ll have to pay up, mate”?
  • We’d all taken a few hours off to see to the matter and were all gathered together in one room, the amount of the judgment was calculable and the landlord had his wallet in his pocket. Yet there was no court service “ATM” in the corner to accept the landlord’s credit card at the one end and spew out a cheque in favour of the tenant at the other!

Bring on Justice 2.0!

Economics 2.0

“Collaboration can occur on an astronomical scale, so if you can create an encyclopedia with a bunch of people, could you create a mutual fund? A motorcycle?” Don Tapscott and Anthony Williams, authors of Wikinomics, think so.

Smart companies are encouraging, rather than fighting, the heaving growth of massive online communities–many of which emerged from the fringes of the Web to attract tens of millions of participants overnight. Even ardent competitors are collaborating on path-breaking science initiatives that accelerate discovery in their industries. Indeed, as a growing number of firms see the benefits of mass collaboration, this new way of organizing will eventually displace the traditional corporate structures as the economy’s primary engine of wealth creation. …

Many mature firms are benefiting from this new business paradigm … Companies such as Boeing, BMW, and Procter & Gamble have been around for the better part of a century. And yet these organization and their leaders have seized on collaboration and self organization as powerful new levers to cut costs, innovate faster, co-create with customers and partners, and generally do whatever it takes to usher their organizations into the twenty-first century business environment.

Some specific examples of companies going the wiki way:

China’s burgeoning motorbike industry isn’t dominated by a handful of corporate behemoths employing thousands of employees, or outsourcing tasks to smaller subcontractors. Instead, a self-organised system has emerged in which many smaller companies collaborate to share the risks and the profits – often, admittedly, by copying Japanese designs.

When hobbyists started hacking the computerised parts at the heart of the Lego Mindstorms range, the toy company initially threatened to sue them. Then it had a change of heart, and started encouraging them to be ‘prosumers’: consumers who play far more than a superficial role in the creation of products.

The gold mine at Red Lake in Ontario, operated by Goldcorp, was ailing and facing collapse until its chief executive Rob McEwen heard a talk about Linus Torvalds, the Finnish inventor of the open-source computer operating system, Linux. Why not place Goldcorp’s secret geological data on the internet, McEwen wondered, and see if there were experts outside the company who could suggest where to mine? The ‘Goldcorp Challenge’ reaped handsome profits, turning a company worth $100m into one worth $9bn.

Newer entries »