Not fandom, per se...
But it's definitely an issue for lawyers who use the internet personally and/or professionally. I was mostly afk when Law.com first reported on the proposed new rules for attorneys admitted in New York but luckily The Volokh Conspiracy got me up to speed over the last few days and MyShingle is sounding understandably concerned, too.
As law.com said in their initial summary of the proposed rules would "[u]pdate the existing rules to cover all manner of electronic communications, including Web postings, e-mails, pop-up ads and other means of communicating with potential clients via the Internet." That sounds pretty innocuous, but let's look briefly at what some of the new rules actually say:
The content of advertising and solicitation shall be predominantly informational,
and shall be designed to increase public awareness of situations in which the need for legal
services might arise and shall be presented in a manner that provides information relevant
to the selection of an appropriate lawyer or law firm to provide such services.
Every written advertisement or solicitation, including computer-accessed
communications, other than those appearing in a radio or television advertisement or in a
telephone directory, newspaper, magazine or other periodical, or made in person pursuant
to section 1200.8(a)(1) of this Part, shall be labeled "Attorney Advertising" on the first page.
Any packaging utilized to transmit the advertisement or solicitation shall be labeled
“Attorney Advertising” in red ink. If the communication is in the form of a self-mailing
brochure or pamphlet, the words "Attorney Advertising" shall appear in red ink on the
address panel of the brochure or pamphlet. In the case of electronic mail, the subject line
shall contain the notation "ATTORNEY ADVERTISING".
All advertisements or solicitations shall include the name, office address and telephone number of the lawyer or law firm whose services are being offered.
Again, it doesn't sound terribly terrible, until you look at the new definition of "advertisement":
“Advertisement” means any public communication made by or on behalf of a lawyer
or law firm about a lawyer or law firm, or about a lawyer’s or law firm’s services.
Technically, that means any public communication by a lawyer about a lawyer. So I could run afoul of this by posting to this blog, "I believe pink is the best colour in the world," and nothing but that. It's an opinion, it doesn't include my real name or phone number, and it doesn't say Attorney Advertising. I don't think it's unreasonable to conclude that their definition of "advertising" is a bit overbroad.
Also, for those of you who have your own personal domain names, take a look at part 7 of the proposed rule:
(e) A lawyer or law firm may employ a domain name for an internet web site that
does not include the name of the lawyer or law firm provided:
(1) all pages of the web site include the actual name of the lawyer or law firm in
a type size as large as the largest type size used on the site;
(2) the lawyer or law firm in no way attempts to engage in the practice of law
using the domain name; and
(3) the domain name otherwise complies with the disciplinary rules.
(f) A lawyer or law firm shall not use a name that violates section 1200.6(d)(8).
There is no exception for a page that is wholly personal and which contains no discussion of the site-owner's legal services, and there's no de minimus exception for discussion of legal issues separate from an actual advertisement of services. However, handing the domain name over to a third party, like a sibling, parent or spouse who isn't a lawyer, or even to one's child, would "enable" that exception, at least for any pages that didn't contain law-related content.
The comment period has reportedly been extended until November 15, and I presume that means the rules will not go into effect on the initially stated date of November 1, although if anyone has further information on this, please let us know. As the NYCourts page says,
Persons who wish to comment should send their responses to:
Michael Colodner, Esq.
Counsel
Office of Court Administration
25 Beaver Street
New York, New York 10004
I know I'm commenting. This doesn't "bring the rules into the computer age". This restricts a lawyer's personal and professional right to free speech, and so, this goes a bit too far.
As law.com said in their initial summary of the proposed rules would "[u]pdate the existing rules to cover all manner of electronic communications, including Web postings, e-mails, pop-up ads and other means of communicating with potential clients via the Internet." That sounds pretty innocuous, but let's look briefly at what some of the new rules actually say:
The content of advertising and solicitation shall be predominantly informational,
and shall be designed to increase public awareness of situations in which the need for legal
services might arise and shall be presented in a manner that provides information relevant
to the selection of an appropriate lawyer or law firm to provide such services.
Every written advertisement or solicitation, including computer-accessed
communications, other than those appearing in a radio or television advertisement or in a
telephone directory, newspaper, magazine or other periodical, or made in person pursuant
to section 1200.8(a)(1) of this Part, shall be labeled "Attorney Advertising" on the first page.
Any packaging utilized to transmit the advertisement or solicitation shall be labeled
“Attorney Advertising” in red ink. If the communication is in the form of a self-mailing
brochure or pamphlet, the words "Attorney Advertising" shall appear in red ink on the
address panel of the brochure or pamphlet. In the case of electronic mail, the subject line
shall contain the notation "ATTORNEY ADVERTISING".
All advertisements or solicitations shall include the name, office address and telephone number of the lawyer or law firm whose services are being offered.
Again, it doesn't sound terribly terrible, until you look at the new definition of "advertisement":
“Advertisement” means any public communication made by or on behalf of a lawyer
or law firm about a lawyer or law firm, or about a lawyer’s or law firm’s services.
Technically, that means any public communication by a lawyer about a lawyer. So I could run afoul of this by posting to this blog, "I believe pink is the best colour in the world," and nothing but that. It's an opinion, it doesn't include my real name or phone number, and it doesn't say Attorney Advertising. I don't think it's unreasonable to conclude that their definition of "advertising" is a bit overbroad.
Also, for those of you who have your own personal domain names, take a look at part 7 of the proposed rule:
(e) A lawyer or law firm may employ a domain name for an internet web site that
does not include the name of the lawyer or law firm provided:
(1) all pages of the web site include the actual name of the lawyer or law firm in
a type size as large as the largest type size used on the site;
(2) the lawyer or law firm in no way attempts to engage in the practice of law
using the domain name; and
(3) the domain name otherwise complies with the disciplinary rules.
(f) A lawyer or law firm shall not use a name that violates section 1200.6(d)(8).
There is no exception for a page that is wholly personal and which contains no discussion of the site-owner's legal services, and there's no de minimus exception for discussion of legal issues separate from an actual advertisement of services. However, handing the domain name over to a third party, like a sibling, parent or spouse who isn't a lawyer, or even to one's child, would "enable" that exception, at least for any pages that didn't contain law-related content.
The comment period has reportedly been extended until November 15, and I presume that means the rules will not go into effect on the initially stated date of November 1, although if anyone has further information on this, please let us know. As the NYCourts page says,
Persons who wish to comment should send their responses to:
Michael Colodner, Esq.
Counsel
Office of Court Administration
25 Beaver Street
New York, New York 10004
I know I'm commenting. This doesn't "bring the rules into the computer age". This restricts a lawyer's personal and professional right to free speech, and so, this goes a bit too far.