http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&p=507Debt Collection Agency Can’t Use Facebook to Contact Debtor, Florida Court Rules
http://www.legalethics.com/?p=505#commentsFri, 11 Mar 2011 11:12:17 +0000David HricikFloridaInternet UseComputer UsePrivacySocial NetworkingSocial Computinghttp://www.legalethics.com/?p=505The story about what it portrays as a growing use of social media by debt collectors is here.
]]>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&p=505Autocomplete Causes Misdirection: Court Disqualifies Recipients
http://www.legalethics.com/?p=499#commentsMon, 03 Jan 2011 12:10:13 +0000David HricikConfidentialityCaliforniaE-mailInternet UseComputer UseAttorney-client privilegePrivacyhttp://www.legalethics.com/?p=499The story with a link to the court’s order disqualifying the lawyers who read the misdirected e-mail is here.
]]>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&p=499California Issues Ethics Opinion on Confidentiality and the Use of E-mail and Technology To Transmit Client Information
http://www.legalethics.com/?p=498#commentsSun, 26 Dec 2010 11:44:12 +0000David HricikConfidentialityCaliforniaE-mailInternet UseComputer UseAttorney-client privilegePrivacyRules of ConductEthics OpinionsDisciplineSecurityCloudhttp://www.legalethics.com/?p=498California Formal Opinion 2010-179 outlines the lawyer’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.
]]>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&p=498Article Surveys Use of Evidence from Social Networking Sites in Personal Injury Cases
http://www.legalethics.com/?p=496#commentsFri, 17 Dec 2010 11:09:43 +0000David HricikConfidentialityInternet UseComputer UsePrivacySocial NetworkingSecuritySocial ComputingEvidencehttp://www.legalethics.com/?p=496The article is here.
]]>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&p=496Adobe Flash Plug-In Creates Tracking Issues
http://www.legalethics.com/?p=472#commentsTue, 17 Nov 2009 22:32:14 +0000prfhricikInternet UsePrivacyhttp://www.legalethics.com/?p=472An article in Wired Magazine reports that half of the Internet’s top websites use a little known feature in the Flash plug-in that allows for tracking of browsing activity and gathering of “private” information. Ryan Singel, You Deleted Your Cookies? Think Again(Aug. 2009).
]]>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&p=472Jones Day: Linking to Our Site is Trademark Infringement
http://www.legalethics.com/?p=453#commentsTue, 16 Sep 2008 19:28:50 +0000David HricikWebsitesAdvertisingBlogsIntellectual PropertyInternet UseComputer UsePrivacyDomain Nameshttp://www.legalethics.com/?p=453There’s an article here. Oh, and here. Oh, and this one.
There’s a webpage, blockshopper.com that tracks who buys what property and for how much in certain upscale neighborhoods. Some Jones Day lawyers bought property in those neighborhoods, and that truthful, factual information was posted on the site, along with truthful factual links to the firm’s website, and truthful, factual links to the individuals’ bios on the firm webpage.
Jones Day filed this complaint for trademark infringement. The sum of the alleged confusing and illegal conduct is using a link to the firm’s website and linking to the two lawyers’ bios who bought houses.
]]>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&p=453NY St. Bar Ass’n Approves Gmail Use Despite Contextual Ad Scanning
http://www.legalethics.com/?p=452#commentsSun, 14 Sep 2008 14:54:28 +0000David HricikConfidentialityWebsitesE-mailInternet UseAttorney-client privilegeNew YorkPrivacyRules of ConductBar AssociationDisciplineEthics WallsMalpracticehttp://www.legalethics.com/?p=452The New York State Bar Association concluded that lawyers could use gmail and comply with the duty of confidentiality despite the fact that email is ’scanned’ by Google to place contextual ads. The committee warned that this sort of unthinking, automated review was proper, but not human review. N.Y. St. B. Ass’n. Comm. Prof. Eth. Op. 820 (Feb. 8, 2008).
]]>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&p=452Screenshots Created by Yahoo Mail and Left on Hard Drive?
http://www.legalethics.com/?p=451#commentsFri, 12 Sep 2008 10:13:09 +0000David HricikMeta-dataConfidentialityElectronic Filese-DiscoveryAttorney-client relationshipE-mailAttorney-client privilegePrivacyEthics OpinionsMassachusettshttp://www.legalethics.com/?p=451Nat’l Economic Research Assocs., Inc. v. Evans, LECG Corp., 21 Mass. L. Rptr. 337 (Mass. Super. Ct. Aug. 3, 2006) is a fascinating case in various ways, and just came to my attention. Apparently, when a user views mail on yahoo, it takes a screenshot of the mail which is stored on the hard drive. While it’s not as easy to later access as a temp file, apparently they reside on the hard drive. I couldn’t find the opinion on line, but it was on westlaw.
Anyone who uses public computers or employer-owned laptops to communicate “in confidence” should examine this issue. I’m not sure it’s accurate, but the court clearly stated that Yahoo, alone, left these ghost emails!
]]>http://www.legalethics.com/?feed=rss2&p=451Lawyer Suspended for Snooping on Wife’s, Other Lawyers’, E-mails
http://www.legalethics.com/?p=448#commentsFri, 30 May 2008 11:59:15 +0000David HricikE-mailInternet UsePrivacyDisciplineWest Virginiahttp://www.legalethics.com/?p=448The case, from the West Virginia Supreme Court, is here. There’s a story about it here.