1ff6
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.7" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Legalethics.com</title>
	<link>http://www.legalethics.com</link>
	<description>Focusing on the ethical issues associated with the use of technology by legal professionals</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2013 01:07:04 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.7</generator>
	<language>en</language>
			<item>
		<title>Cloud Services &#8212; DropSmack</title>
		<link>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=521</link>
		<comments>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=521#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Apr 2013 01:07:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peterk</dc:creator>
		
		<category>Electronic Files</category>

		<category>Internet Use</category>

		<category>Computer Use</category>

		<category>Security</category>

		<category>Cloud</category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.legalethics.com/?p=521</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An interesting article describing the use of DropSmack to target networks via DropBox.  In addition to broader considerations lawyers should consider before using cloud services, developments like this highlight the need for education regarding technology and security.

]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An <a href="http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/security/dropsmack-using-dropbox-to-steal-files-and-deliver-malware/9332">interesting article</a> describing the use of DropSmack to target networks via DropBox.  In addition to <a href="http://www.legalethics.com/?cat=108">broader considerations lawyers should consider before using cloud services</a>, developments like this highlight the need for education regarding technology and security.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=521</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lawyers may use .org suffix in domain name.</title>
		<link>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=520</link>
		<comments>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=520#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 02:02:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peterk</dc:creator>
		
		<category>Advertising</category>

		<category>Internet Use</category>

		<category>Computer Use</category>

		<category>Arizona</category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.legalethics.com/?p=520</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For-profit Arizona law firms may use the .org domain name suffix as long as the website is otherwise not false or misleading. See Arizona Ethics Op. 11-04 (December 2011).

]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>For-profit Arizona law firms may use the .org domain name suffix as long as the website is otherwise not false or misleading. See <a href="http://www.azbar.org/Ethics/EthicsOpinions/ViewEthicsOpinion?id=717">Arizona Ethics Op. 11-04</a> (December 2011).
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=520</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>California lawyers may operate virtual law practices in the cloud</title>
		<link>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=519</link>
		<comments>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=519#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 01:55:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peterk</dc:creator>
		
		<category>California</category>

		<category>Internet Use</category>

		<category>Computer Use</category>

		<category>Cloud</category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.legalethics.com/?p=519</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[California lawyers may maintain a virtual law office in the cloud where communications with the client, and storage of and access to all information about the client’s matter, are conducted solely via the internet using a third-party’s secure servers. The lawyer may be required to take additional steps to confirm that she is fulfilling her [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>California lawyers may maintain a virtual law office in the cloud where communications with the client, and storage of and access to all information about the client’s matter, are conducted solely via the internet using a third-party’s secure servers. The lawyer may be required to take additional steps to confirm that she is fulfilling her ethical obligations due to distinct issues raised by the VLO and its operation. See <a href="http://ethics.calbar.ca.gov/Portals/9/documents/Opinions/CAL%202012-184-ADA.pdf">California Formal Eth. Op. 2012-184</a> (May 2012).
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=519</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Oregon allows attorneys and agents to access private social media data in certain circumstances</title>
		<link>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=518</link>
		<comments>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=518#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 01:46:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peterk</dc:creator>
		
		<category>Internet Use</category>

		<category>Oregon</category>

		<category>Social Computing</category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.legalethics.com/?p=518</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Oregon lawyers may access publicly available information on social networking sites, can request access to non-public information if the person is not represented by counsel in the matter, and may in limited circumstances advise or supervise an agent to access non-public information under Oregon&#8217;s Covert Activity Exception (Oregon Rules of Professional Conduct 8.4(b)). See Oregon [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Oregon lawyers may access publicly available information on social networking sites, can request access to non-public information if the person is not represented by counsel in the matter, and may in limited circumstances advise or supervise an agent to access non-public information under Oregon&#8217;s Covert Activity Exception (Oregon Rules of Professional Conduct 8.4(b)). See <a href="http://www.osbar.org/_docs/ethics/2013-189.pdf">Oregon State Bar Eth. Comm. Op. 2013-189</a> (Feb 2013) (note there may be an issue seeing the full opinion).
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=518</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>California lawyer can use unfair competition law against online legal service provider</title>
		<link>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=517</link>
		<comments>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=517#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2013 01:38:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peterk</dc:creator>
		
		<category>California</category>

		<category>Internet Use</category>

		<category>UPL</category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.legalethics.com/?p=517</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A California lawyer&#8217;s lawsuit against on online legal service provider alleging unauthorized practice of law withstood a demurrer. See Law Offices of Mathew Higbee v. Expungement Assistance Services, Cal. Ct. App. 4th Dist. No. G046778 (Mar 14, 2013).

]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A California lawyer&#8217;s lawsuit against on online legal service provider alleging unauthorized practice of law withstood a demurrer. See <a href="http://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/G046778.DOC">Law Offices of Mathew Higbee v. Expungement Assistance Services</a>, Cal. Ct. App. 4th Dist. No. G046778 (Mar 14, 2013).
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=517</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Carrier IQ and security of certain mobile devices</title>
		<link>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=507</link>
		<comments>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=507#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 01 Dec 2011 02:54:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Peterk</dc:creator>
		
		<category>Confidentiality</category>

		<category>Electronic Files</category>

		<category>E-mail</category>

		<category>Internet Use</category>

		<category>Privacy</category>

		<category>Security</category>

		<category>Cellular phones</category>

1f29

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.legalethics.com/?p=507</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[An interesting, perhaps troubling, issue raised with respect to security of certain mobile devices. Read more about Carrier IQ  (http://www.geek.com/articles/mobile/how-much-of-your-phone-is-yours-20111115/, http://androidsecuritytest.com/features/logs-and-services/loggers/carrieriq/carrieriq-part2/, http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/11/secret-software-logging-video.  A somewhat long video of how this works is available here. http://tinyurl.com/cwcyjoc. Although there will likely be more articles about this in the media in the future, this highlights potential security and related [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>An interesting, perhaps troubling, issue raised with respect to security of certain mobile devices. Read more about Carrier IQ  (<a href="http://www.geek.com/articles/mobile/how-much-of-your-phone-is-yours-20111115/">http://www.geek.com/articles/mobile/how-much-of-your-phone-is-yours-20111115/</a>, <a href="http://androidsecuritytest.com/features/logs-and-services/loggers/carrieriq/carrieriq-part2/">http://androidsecuritytest.com/features/logs-and-services/loggers/carrieriq/carrieriq-part2/</a>, <a href="http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/11/secret-software-logging-video">http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2011/11/secret-software-logging-video</a>.  A somewhat long video of how this works is available here. <a href="http://tinyurl.com/cwcyjoc">http://tinyurl.com/cwcyjoc</a>. Although there will likely be more articles about this in the media in the future, this highlights potential security and related issues for users of mobile devices.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=507</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Debt Collection Agency Can&#8217;t Use Facebook to Contact Debtor, Florida Court Rules</title>
		<link>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=505</link>
		<comments>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=505#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2011 11:12:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Hricik</dc:creator>
		
		<category>Florida</category>

		<category>Internet Use</category>

		<category>Computer Use</category>

		<category>Privacy</category>

		<category>Social Networking</category>

		<category>Social Computing</category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.legalethics.com/?p=505</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The story about what it portrays as a growing use of social media by debt collectors is here.

]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The story about what it portrays as a growing use of social media by debt collectors is <a href="http://www.law.com/jsp/lawtechnologynews/PubArticleLTN.jsp?id=1202485594771&#038;Court_Rules_Debt_Agency_Cant_Contact_Woman_on_Facebook=&#038;src=EMC-Email&#038;et=editorial&#038;bu=LTN&#038;pt=Law%20Technology%20News&#038;cn=20110311&#038;kw=Court%20Rules%20Debt%20Agency%20Can%27t%20Contact%20Woman%20on%20Facebook&#038;slreturn=1&#038;hbxlogin=1">here</a>.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=505</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Autocomplete Causes Misdirection: Court Disqualifies Recipients</title>
		<link>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=499</link>
		<comments>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=499#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Jan 2011 12:10:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Hricik</dc:creator>
		
		<category>Confidentiality</category>

		<category>California</category>

		<category>E-mail</category>

		<category>Internet Use</category>

		<category>Computer Use</category>

		<category>Attorney-client privilege</category>

		<category>Privacy</category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.legalethics.com/?p=499</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The story with a link to the court&#8217;s order disqualifying the lawyers who read the misdirected e-mail is here.

]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The story with a link to the court&#8217;s order disqualifying the lawyers who read the misdirected e-mail is <a href="http://legalpad.typepad.com/my_weblog/2010/12/email-oops-ends-with-gordon-rees-being-booted-from-case.html?utm_source=feedburner&#038;utm_medium=feed&#038;utm_campaign=Feed:+legalpad_feed+%28Legal+Pad%29">here</a>.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=499</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>California Issues Ethics Opinion on Confidentiality and the Use of E-mail and Technology To Transmit Client Information</title>
		<link>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=498</link>
		<comments>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=498#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sun, 26 Dec 2010 11:44:12 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Hricik</dc:creator>
		
		<category>Confidentiality</category>

		<category>California</category>

		<category>E-mail</category>

		<category>Internet Use</category>

		<category>Computer Use</category>

		<category>Attorney-client privilege</category>

		<category>Privacy</category>

		<category>Rules of Conduct</category>

		<category>Ethics Opinions</category>

		<category>Discipline</category>

		<category>Security</category>

		<category>Cloud</category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.legalethics.com/?p=498</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[California Formal Opinion 2010-179 outlines the lawyer&#8217;s duties when transmitting or storing confidential client information when the underlying technology may be susceptible to unauthorized access by third parties. An attorney’s duties of confidentiality and competence require the attorney to take appropriate steps to ensure that his or her use of technology in conjunction with a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://ethics.calbar.ca.gov/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=wmqECiHp7h4%3d&#038;tabid=837">California Formal Opinion 2010-179</a> outlines the lawyer&#8217;s duties when transmitting or storing confidential client information when the underlying technology may be susceptible to unauthorized access by third parties. An attorney’s duties of confidentiality and competence require the attorney to take appropriate steps to ensure that his or her use of technology in conjunction with a client’s representation does not subject confidential client information to an undue risk of unauthorized disclosure. Because of the evolving nature of technology and differences in security features that are available, the attorney must ensure the steps are sufficient for each form of technology being used and must continue to monitor the efficacy of such steps.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=498</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Article Surveys Use of Evidence from Social Networking Sites in Personal Injury Cases</title>
		<link>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=496</link>
		<comments>http://www.legalethics.com/?p=496#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Dec 2010 11:09:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>David Hricik</dc:creator>
		
		<category>Confidentiality</category>

		<category>Internet Use</category>

		<category>Computer Use</category>

		<category>Privacy</category>

		<category>Social Networking</category>

		<category>Security</category>

		<category>Social Computing</category>

		<category>Evidence</category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.legalethics.com/?p=496</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The article is here.

]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The article is <a href="http://www.law.com/jsp/lawtechnologynews/PubArticleLTN.jsp?id=1202476307983&#038;src=EMC-Email&#038;et=editorial&#038;bu=LTN&#038;pt=Law%20Technology%20News&#038;cn=20101217_ltnda&#038;kw=Social%20Networks%20in%20Personal%20Injury%20Litigation">here</a>.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&amp;p=496</wfw:commentRss>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

0

