New York Bar Rules Aren't Insane!
Back in 2006, the New York State Bar proposed new rules regarding attorney advertising - you can read some discussion of the original draft of the rules here, here as well as in my fandom_lawyers post here.
You can see the current rules, as approved, in PDF format here and I think it would be a good idea for any attorney, no matter where you practice, and any law student, to look them over.
To paraphrase the press release, New York State Bar Association President Mark H. Alcott issued new regulations announced today that "the new regulations are significantly different from the draft regulations and represent a final product that will provide a balance between protecting the lawyer's right to advertise and protecting the public from overly aggressive and salacious advertisements..."
Basically, lawyers from New York and around the US went ballistic over some of the definitions, and hence, many of those definitions were changed.
Initially, the rules were going to apply to any "public communication or communication to a prospective client..." but now, it seems they're only going to apply to advertisements - and advertisements have now been defined as follows:
Advertisement means any public or private communication behalf of a lawyer or law firm about that lawyer or law purpose of which is for the retention of the lawyer or law communications to existing clients or other lawyers.
It specifically notes that communications to other lawyers, or to existing clients, cannot be deemed advertising.
They're also now applying the same standards to websites as they have to professional cards, professional announcement cards, office signs, letterheads or similar professional notices or devices, which is a good thing, at least for consistency purposes.
And it seems I don't have to worry about my heidi8.com domain name, because:
A lawyer or law firm may utilize a domain name for an internet web site that does not include the name of the lawyer or law firm provided ... the lawyer or law firm in no way attempts to engage in the practice of law using the domain name.
So, I am going to get a separate domain name for work-related emails, and keep heidi8.com for my personal stuff. Yay gmail.com for making this easy and possible! And I have until Feb 1 to do it and let people know about the change.
The one bit I'm curious about the interpretation of is this:
A lawyer shall not solicit professional employment from a prospective client [or] engage in solicitation:
(1) by in-person or telephone contact, by real-time or interactive computer-accessed communication unless the recipient is a close friend, relative, former client or current existing client
Is everyone on my flist a close friend? What about a specific filter of 100 people or so? My curiosity is theoretical, and without practical implications, but how many close friends can one have? Does one have to have met a friend in person for the friendship to be close?
I say no. But I don't know if the Bar would agree with me.
While NY lawyers have to keep a copy of all advertisements posted online for one year, they didn't include the initial requirement to file a "copy of each advertisement shall at the time of its initial mailing or distribution ... with the Departmental Disciplinary Committee of the appropriate judicial department." Whew.
Good news for non-NY lawyers: the Bar managed to remove a rule originally in the draft regulations that would have extended New York disciplinary authority to non-New York lawyers practicing or soliciting legal services in New York. The Association objected on the basis that it was overbroad, and it was not included in the final version. Instead, a provision was added to the solicitation rule specifying that the anti-solicitation provisions apply to non-New York lawyers who solicit New York residents.
Anyhow, the gist of all this is, while they're not 100% perfect, they're nowhere near as bad and problematic as they could have been had the originally promulgated rules been approved.
And that makes for a happy new year.
You can see the current rules, as approved, in PDF format here and I think it would be a good idea for any attorney, no matter where you practice, and any law student, to look them over.
To paraphrase the press release, New York State Bar Association President Mark H. Alcott issued new regulations announced today that "the new regulations are significantly different from the draft regulations and represent a final product that will provide a balance between protecting the lawyer's right to advertise and protecting the public from overly aggressive and salacious advertisements..."
Basically, lawyers from New York and around the US went ballistic over some of the definitions, and hence, many of those definitions were changed.
Initially, the rules were going to apply to any "public communication or communication to a prospective client..." but now, it seems they're only going to apply to advertisements - and advertisements have now been defined as follows:
Advertisement means any public or private communication behalf of a lawyer or law firm about that lawyer or law purpose of which is for the retention of the lawyer or law communications to existing clients or other lawyers.
It specifically notes that communications to other lawyers, or to existing clients, cannot be deemed advertising.
They're also now applying the same standards to websites as they have to professional cards, professional announcement cards, office signs, letterheads or similar professional notices or devices, which is a good thing, at least for consistency purposes.
And it seems I don't have to worry about my heidi8.com domain name, because:
A lawyer or law firm may utilize a domain name for an internet web site that does not include the name of the lawyer or law firm provided ... the lawyer or law firm in no way attempts to engage in the practice of law using the domain name.
So, I am going to get a separate domain name for work-related emails, and keep heidi8.com for my personal stuff. Yay gmail.com for making this easy and possible! And I have until Feb 1 to do it and let people know about the change.
The one bit I'm curious about the interpretation of is this:
A lawyer shall not solicit professional employment from a prospective client [or] engage in solicitation:
(1) by in-person or telephone contact, by real-time or interactive computer-accessed communication unless the recipient is a close friend, relative, former client or current existing client
Is everyone on my flist a close friend? What about a specific filter of 100 people or so? My curiosity is theoretical, and without practical implications, but how many close friends can one have? Does one have to have met a friend in person for the friendship to be close?
I say no. But I don't know if the Bar would agree with me.
While NY lawyers have to keep a copy of all advertisements posted online for one year, they didn't include the initial requirement to file a "copy of each advertisement shall at the time of its initial mailing or distribution ... with the Departmental Disciplinary Committee of the appropriate judicial department." Whew.
Good news for non-NY lawyers: the Bar managed to remove a rule originally in the draft regulations that would have extended New York disciplinary authority to non-New York lawyers practicing or soliciting legal services in New York. The Association objected on the basis that it was overbroad, and it was not included in the final version. Instead, a provision was added to the solicitation rule specifying that the anti-solicitation provisions apply to non-New York lawyers who solicit New York residents.
Anyhow, the gist of all this is, while they're not 100% perfect, they're nowhere near as bad and problematic as they could have been had the originally promulgated rules been approved.
And that makes for a happy new year.