Google Mobile Compatibilty Penalty Begins April 21 - Test to Make Sure Your Site is Okay for SmartPhones

Mobile-friendly sites will be ranked higher in Google Search Results Beginning April 2015. 

The Google Webmasters have let everyone know that beginning next month, sites that are not easy to read on mobile devices are not going to rank as high as comparable sites that are easy to read with a mobile device or smartphone.

In other words, you are going to be penalized starting April 21, 2015 if your website or blog is not compatible with mobile devices and friendly to searches on small phone screens.   

The deadline to be mobile-friendly is April 21, 2015.

.

Check Your Site for Compatibility with Mobile Devices 

There is an online site that allows you to input your site’s url and determine if you need to worry about this or not.

1. Go to Google’s Mobile-Friendly Test and enter a few pages to confirm the compatibility of your site or blog.  
2. Go to your Google Webmaster Account and check your entire site by grabbing a Mobile Usability Report. 

What if You Fail the Google Mobile-Friendly Test? 

.
If your site or blog fails the test, don’t panic. The test itself (or your Google Webmaster Report) will explain the steps you need to take in order to have your blog or web site ready to meet Google’s Mobile Friendly requirements by the deadline of April 21st.

You may need to get busy, though.  April 21, 2015 isn't that far away ....

Why Is Google Doing This? 

Google is pushing mobile compatibility because so many of its clientele are searching Google using mobile devices. Google wants to provide the best information to those folk who are using Google and that means pushing those providing content on the web (like you and me and your competitors) to make sure that their stuff is friendly for mobile devices. 

It’s all about delivering the best service to the person choosing Google for a search in lieu of Bing or Yahoo or Ask etc. on their smartphone.  

From the Google Webmaster Central Blog:

When it comes to search on mobile devices, users should get the most relevant and timely results, no matter if the information lives on mobile-friendly web pages or apps. As more people use mobile devices to access the internet, our algorithms have to adapt to these usage patterns. In the past, we’ve made updates to ensure a site is configured properly and viewable on modern devices. We’ve made it easier for users to find mobile-friendly web pages and we’ve introduced App Indexing to surface useful content from apps. ….

Starting April 21, we will be expanding our use of mobile-friendliness as a ranking signal. This change will affect mobile searches in all languages worldwide and will have a significant impact in our search results. Consequently, users will find it easier to get relevant, high quality search results that are optimized for their devices. 

For more information, check out:

• Google’s Guide to Mobile Friendly Sites
• "Mobilegeddon" Is Coming on April 21 - Are You Ready? by Chuck Price at SearchEngineWatch (gives some pros and cons to having a mobile-friendly site as well as discussion of having a separate site for phone searches)

Write About What You Know -- It's Good Advice, Especially for Lawyers Writing Blog Posts

Whether or not Mark Twain advised us to "write what you know" is debatable, but it's considered good advice by many and you've probably heard the quote and considered its lesson.  (I first heard it as advice given to me by poet Naomi Shihab Nye in an early writing class.)

Those who disagree argue that it's exactly what writers shouldn't do -- instead, they should use their imaginations and creativity to write about what they don't know.  They've got a point.  Maybe it is a bit confining for the fiction writer: how could we have Star Trek or Narnia if writers were kept to writing about only the things of which they know?  However, it is particularly wise counsel when the writer is an attorney who is publishing content online for his or her peers, clients, and potential clients to read and consider.

"Write what you know" has been attributed to Mark Twain.

The Temptation to Write About The Unknown in Law Blogs

Law firms who have blogs for legal marketing purposes are always concerned with how their blawg is going to help the firm make rain.  Some track their analytics to see how many times a particular post link has been clicked; others monitor how often the blog has spurred someone to call the firm for more information or maybe even to set up an appointment.

ROI (return on investment) is important to judge.  True enough.

Thing is, if your blog is working for you as a marketing tool then there's always the temptation to boost what you are doing to get more traffic or more potential clients.  To expand your firm's practice or practice areas using the blog.

Conversely, if the law firm's marketing efforts aren't working and business is stagnant, then the firm may be considering new practice areas as a way to boost business.  Writing blog posts discussing that new area of the law may be one of the first toes they put in the water as they segue the practice .  

There's also the reality that after awhile, the blogger runs dry on things to discuss and is searching for ideas and themes for new blog posts.  Maybe new practice area issues or blog themes will be easier to write.

My suggestion:  please don't decide to write posts discussing a new and untried practice area.  It's one thing for a savvy personal injury lawyer, for instance, to decide to focus efforts on a new type of PI theme, like delving into the product liability area.   It's another thing for that personal injury lawyer to decide to market in criminal law just because he (or she) thinks that criminal trials would be exciting, different, fun, or profitable.

Here's why.
.

Write About What You (or Your Law Firm) Knows

Most blogs aren't taken as seriously as more traditional publications, like your Bar Journal monthly magazine, or even blogs like HuffPo.  Your reader is going to be taking your post seriously, however.  And so will your State Bar should they decide to review your stuff.

It's just smart to write about the practice areas you know and within which you have experience.  If you are an injury lawyer or law firm who would like to venture into criminal law, great!  Go get that CLE and learn your criminal rules of procedure and insure that you are competent to practice criminal law before you start writing posts on your professional law blog about criminal law issues.

Moreover, if you're a personal injury lawyer who writes a blog post (or a series of posts) about criminal law matters, then you are putting yourself out to the public as a criminal attorney just as if you were to buy advertising on a local radio station or an advertisement in the telephone directory.  There are ethical considerations here (and disciplinary rules) that need to be considered when lawyers are blogging.

Bottom line, if you are a lawyer writing about a legal issue on a law firm blog, either have a personal professional depth in that topic via education and/or experience, or may sure to quote your law firm expert who practices in that area as part of your coverage of the topic.  Don't be what my Uncle Billy would call "a man with a hat and no cattle."  It can get you in trouble with readers, potential clients, and the disciplinary authorities.  
.
.

Online Review Defamation Case: Jury Verdict is in for Dietz Development LLC v. Perez

Late last Friday afternoon, as juries are wont to do, the verdict was reached in a Virginia defamation case that I’ve been following for awhile now: Perez v. Dietz Development, LLC (for details in the case, read my earlier post and for the dance turn the case took up at the Virginia Supreme Court read this).

Bottom line, both the plaintiff and the defendant were held to be guilty of defamation by the Virginia jury — and no damages were awarded to either side. Zowie.

It took the jurors the full Friday to deliberate the case, where Fairfax County’s Jane Perez was sued by her contractor for alleged harm to his business (around $750,000) because of the negative reviews that she wrote about her experience with his company in online reviews at Yelp.com as well as Angie’s List.

That’s defamation claim, round one.

Defamation claim, round two, hit when the owner of the company, a man named Christopher Dietz, went online and wrote some stuff in response to the things that Jane Perez had written. Things that Perez would argue defamed her.

Talk about finger-pointing.

Jury Finds Defamation in Perez v. Dietz Development 

Now, each side can argue that they were right — the other side has been found guilty of defamation. Of course, each side has to walk away with no award money in their pocket to cover the costs of litigating this case through a week of trial, much less that appellate review round to the state’s high court.

Who knows what the bottom line is for either of them once all the dollars and cents are added up. (Perez was assisted by the ACLU and Public Citizen, FYI.)

Here’s the thing: the victim of a negative online review (which the jury agreed was defamatory) took the same action that many lawyers understand: he responded to the bad review, and in doing so found himself faced with a defamation claim against him and months and months of this controversy being spotlighted in the local media. As well as spending lots of time and money in the fight.

This is not a lawyer online review case. It is, however, something for lawyers to consider before they decide to reply to any negative online review that pops up on an online review site like Yelp, Avvo, YellowPages.com, etc.

The Dietz Lesson for Lawyers Deciding How to Handle a Bad Online Review 

Lawyers and law firms have lots to consider before taking up their arms in battle against a negative online review.  Practical things that may fly in the face of principles and true justice.  What are the consequences of a lawyer's responding to an online review that is negative, maybe even defamatory?

Will another lawyer be all too happy to pursue that unhappy client’s defamation claim against the attorney or his firm?

Are these cases akin to the warnings that lawyers get when pondering a lawsuit over unpaid attorneys’ fees (i.e., that they are inviting a counterclaim for malpractice no matter how weak it may be, as a strategic defense play)?

Just one more consideration in how to deal with negative reviews these days. It may be painful to be silent in the face of a disturbing, negative online review, but many may argue that it is the prudent thing to do.  Particularly when lawyers are involved and there's the possibility of Bar disciplinary action in addition to civil litigation (as was recently faced by an Illinois attorney who responded to a negative online review, now she's been disciplined for her actions).

Those interested in learning more about this case can review the Complaint filed by Christopher Dietz and Dietz Development that started this lawsuit back in October 2012:

Complaint for Defamation Based Upon Online Review in Dietz Development LLC v. Perez (Virginia)

Google Plus: Tips for Writing Google+ Posts and Why You Should Care About Google Plus

Google is promoting Google+ in a big way. Surf around and you’ll find continuing integration of Google+ into other Google offerings; for example, it’s impossible not to notice the growing Google+ connection in GMail if you use the Google e-mail service.

Blogger pushes a connection with Google+ where Blogger posts automatically appear on Google+ and vice versa, Google+ comments automatically appear on the Blogger blog. There’s also integration between Google+ and YouTube; Google+ and Google Chrome; and the big one for me this week: Google+ and Google Search.

That’s right. Contributing to Google+ is going to help you get top ranking in Google Search Results. Why?  Well, you need to think of your Google+ Page as a kind of blog and the content that you write for Google+ as mini blog posts.

Google+ Posts Are a Big Deal Now Because Google+ Appears in Google Search

There’s a great article at Moz explaining their research into a correlation between Google rankings in Google Search Results and Google+ contributions. (We’re talking stuff you write and put on Google Plus, not the “+1” which is Google+’s hat tip to the Facebook Like feature.)

Go read the Moz article on the "Amazing Correlation" they've discovered for lots of details on this study.  Bottom line, Moz found that sharing stuff on Google+ helps you with Google Search. (Why does this surprise anyone?)

You want to take the time in writing your Google+ contributions because each Google Plus post connects with Google Search (go here to read how spiders work):

1. Google Search will read ("crawl") and index your Google+ contribution. IMMEDIATELY. 
2. Google Search is going to check those links in your Google Plus post, too. IMMEDIATELY. 
3. Google Search includes Google+ in its PageRank categorization — this is good for your Google+ page, but it’s good for your web site or blog, too, if you’ve inserted their links into your Google+ post. 

For an in-depth discussion on writing posts for Google Plus, I recommend Dustin Stout’s article, “The Anatomy of a Perfect Google+ Post.” He’s providing lots of detailed instruction.

However, for many of my clients, what Dustin recommends is too much for them: they want to slap something into Google+ and go — lawyers are an impatient (busy) lot.   For example, Dustin’s suggestion that communication be encouraged by asking for comments simply will not be followed by many attorneys right now because they don’t have the time to commit to these conversations. And don’t even get them started on Twitter: they will not tweet.

Therefore, I’m offering the following information for a fast post on Google+ that I think will help the writer accomplish the goal of being noticed both on Google+ as well as on Google Search.

Remember: you care about how to write a Google+ post because it can help you appear in the top results in Google Search.

Tips for Writing Google+ Posts Without Spending Too Much Time On Them

These are tips for those who are busy but want to be involved with Google+ — there’s more than can be done, but if you want to be lean and mean, here are my tips and suggestions:

1. Consider Your Google+ Post to be a Mini Blog Post - Because It Is

This contribution on Google Plus isn’t a blurb and it isn’t a tweet. It's a short blog post on Google+, a social media site.

Inverted pyramid approach, sure, with maybe 1 or 2 paragraphs. It’s a short and sweet blog post, not a comment to a news article or a Wikipedia entry.

Approach the Google+ contributions as exactly that: contributions you are making to the readers out there, and if they want further information then they need to click over to the link you provide. That can be your website or your blog, of course. It can also be any other site on the web.

Recap: One paragraph is okay, two is better, don’t go over three. Link should be there for more information (Google+ will shorten the link for you). Content should contribute to the reader. Rant if you must, but I don’t read rants and I know lots of folk that are annoyed by ranting. Google+ readers aren’t the same as other sites: I suggest you offer fun, positive, informative content to them.

2. Use Bold and Italicized Fonts to Help the Reader Zip Through Your Post

Bold-face words and italicized words not only stand out from the remaining text, but these highlighted words and phrases help to create headings and sub-headings which readers can scan quickly (especially helpful with a small screen). Use them to follow the old lesson of “tell them what you will be telling them, then tell it, then tell them what you told them.”

Highlighted text accomplishes the first step of that lesson, plus Google Search will like it from an SEO perspective.

Never use ALL CAPS — it’s like you are screaming on the screen. Bad form. Rude.

How to insert bold and italics into a Google+ Post

For bold text, put a * symbol (asterick, there above the number 8 on your QWERTY keyboard) at the starting point where you want the bold to begin; put another * at the end of the phrase or word to appear in bold.  (*bold*)  When you hit "share" and your words are published on the Google+ site, what you typeds as *bold* will appear as bold.

For italics, same thing but use the underscore key _ instead of the * symbol. You can find that next to the + symbol on your QWERTY keyboard; you have to hold down the Shift key here or you’re going to type a minus sign (or a strikeout, depending on how you look at things). No minus sign/strikeout here! You want the underline and you just want one (1) of them. One of them: _. Not a bunch of them: __________.

For underlining text, which I don’t recommend but you’re you so maybe you like it, you do use the minus symbol instead of the * symbol as described above for the bold text.

3. Use Hashtags to Help Searches Find You 

Consider what you’ve written and pick out your main words or phrases — aka your “key words” or “key phrases.” Two or three, four on the outside: don’t go nuts.

These are what you want to identify with a hashtag. The hashtag helps people find your stuff on Google+: hashtags are a way to index your content so it is easier to search and to find.

In Google+, clicking on a hashtag within a post will take you to search results of other Google+ posts containing that same hashtag.

The hashtag symbol (#) is above the number 3 on your QWERTY keyboard. Hold down the Shift key, hit the 3 key, and voila: you’ve typed a hashtag.

Some folk insert their hashtags into their content; it’s a common practice on Twitter, where there is a character count limit of 140 characters. Doing this saves character space.  Google suggests that you do this in Google+ posts.

However, it makes your content harder to read.  I like to see hashtags at the end of the contribution, or post, lined up there in a row. I believe that Google can find them just as easily, and doing this method doesn’t intrude on your writing. #writing #post #hashtag #Google+

4. Images (Photos) Are VERY Important for Google+ 

Just surf through Google+. Look at how visually appealing it is. Notice how your eye slides right on by those posts with no photos or pretty visuals? Sad, boring little posts that might have something important or entertaining for you, if you noticed them.

Google+ is designed for the eye. Your posts need eye candy.

This may take the most time, granted, but it need not cost you anything in terms of money. Free public domain images are all over the place on the web (read my post here on finding free infographics and my post here on finding free photographs) and they are very helpful on Google+.

If you are promoting or discussing your own site or blog, then make sure to place a nice image in that content; when you link to it, the image will appear in your Google+ post. Problem solved.

If you haven’t, then you need to insert an image directly into Google+. This isn’t as time-consuming as it sounds. Just click on the little camera icon on the place where you write your contribution (post) on Google+ — a new window will open for you. You cannot pull a photo from a link to a URL, however — that is a drag, and I’m thinking it will change.

And yes, the image is important enough for you to take the time to download an image and then upload it into Google+ (more encouragement to get those images into your blog posts in the first place).

5.  Reference Names in Google+ Posts with +, @, or E-Mail address

If you name someone in a Google+ post, and they have a Google+ page, then you can include "+" before their name and Google Plus will notify them that you've discussed them in your post.  You can also use the "@" prefix, made popular by Twitter, and it will do the same thing.  (Caveat:  they have to set their account to receive these notifications in order to get them.   That's their call.)

Don't be shocked if a list pops up when you do this: Google may have several names for you to review, so you can pick the right Google+ account from several similar or identical names.

Also, this notification process only works between two Google+ accounts.  If you want to notify someone who isn't on Google Plus that you've named them in your post, then use their email address after the "+" or "@" symbol.

______________

To summarize:

1. Write short posts, 1 to 2 paragraphs, with positive, informative, entertaining content.
2. Include links. 
3. Bold and/or italicize as needed in your Google+ post.
4.  Include hashtags - I recommend placing them at the end of the post.
5.  Add an image if your linked material doesn't already provide it.
6.  Notify those mentioned in your post with + or @ before their name or email address. 

Infographics for Lawyers: a Great Addition to Your Law Firm Web Site or Blawg

Infographics (informational graphics) are so much fun, and sure they are getting to be pretty darn trendy right now.  (Just go over to Pinterest and search for "infographics" to find all sorts of wonderfully creative infographics on all sorts of topics.

Thing is:  infographics are great tools for lawyers to use to educate readers about all sorts of issues.  Law firms can place infographics into their websites, their blogs (blawgs), their newsletters, even in client emails.  (I'm not sure about using them in motions or briefs yet - but if I were a judge, I'd welcome the innovation.)  

Here, for example, is a great infographic from DailyInfographic that provides details on the impact of the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) upon employers (click on it or hit Ctrl + a couple of times to enlarge the image):

For more information on infographics, check out these online sources:

Daily Infographics 

Visual.ly

Fast Company's Infographic of the Day

To learn more about creating original infographics for your site, for free, see:

Picktochart

Infogr.am

Commercial Speech vs Political Speech and the Law Firm's Blog - Is Your Blawg Protected Free Speech or Not? What Would Your State Bar Answer Here?

Free speech isn't without its limitations, lawyers know this, and when it comes to "commercial speech" the United States Supreme Court has been happy to allow limitations on the free speech of attorneys and law firms when "commercial speech" is involved.  Lawyers don't like being regulated, however, and there are attorneys blogging today who may think that their blog (blawg) isn't subject to state bar review when in fact, it is.  Those bloggers (blawgers) are at risk of bar discipline.

Free speech protections provided by the federal constitution are not as broad for commercial speech as they are for other forms of free speech.  Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service Comm'n of New York, 447 U. S. 557 (1980); Virginia Pharmacy Board v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc., 425 U. S. 748 (1976).  Advertisements are subject to governmental regulation.

This distinction between different kinds of speech is very important for lawyers who write blogs to remember.

Consider, for example, the concerns of the High Court in Bates v. State Bar of Arizona, 433 U.S. 350 (1977) where things like (1) the adverse effect on professionalism; (2) the inherently misleading nature of attorney advertising; (3) the adverse effect on the administration of justice; (4) the undesirable economic effects of advertising; (5) the adverse effect of advertising on the quality of service; and (6) the difficulties of enforcement were determined to be sound bases for regulating attorney advertising even though "advertising by attorneys may not be subjected to blanket suppression."  Bates, 433 U.S. at 368- 379, 383.

Of course, the Bates opinion came down long before blogs popped up everywhere.  Lawyer blogs are tricky things.  There are firm-blogs, and individual lawyer blogs.  Ones written for specific practice areas (e.g., appellate, real estate, or environmental law) are popular these days.  You will find some blogs attached to law firm web sites (where they may be tools to boost the search result rankings of the firm's site) or you may find blogs as stand-alone publications (where they have their own separate domain).

Blogs and Free Speech:  Commercial vs Political Speech

Twisted into all this complexity of law blogs ("blawgs") are the legal protections afforded to the particular blog under constitutional free speech protections.  Not all blogs (blawgs) are the same, and not all blogs will be policed in the same way.

Commercial speech in a blog will allow the Bar to regulate and police that publication, just as the Bar regulates advertisements in the Yellow Pages, on the television screen, or in a standard firm web site.

If the blog basically serves an advertising purpose, then the state bar association that has jurisdiction over the lawyer or law firm responsible for that blog will argue it has a right to regulate that blog.  Period.

When does a blog not have to conform to Bar regulation?  When the blog publishes content that is protected as political free speech.

Political free speech isn't trying to sell the reader on hiring the lawyer or the law firm.  Political speech essentially involves any “... interactive communication concerning political change.” Meyer v. Grant, 486 U.S. 414 (1988).  It's not trying to sell the reader on paying the author of the content for the author's goods or services, in other words.

What happens if there's a mishmash of the two within the blog?

Blogs published by lawyers may offer political speech, but all too often they are intertwined with commercial speech -- especially if the blog is attached to the firm web site.  Whether or not the speech will be given free speech protection isn't as easy of a question to answer.

If one of the motivations for the blog is marketing the lawyer or law firm but it's not the only reason for the blog's publication, then what?

In Bolger v.Youngs Drug Products Corp., 463 U.S. 60 (1983),  the problem of mixed commercial and political speech in advertising was addressed.  Lawyers cannot use political free speech posts to protect themselves from regulation:

Advertisers should not be permitted to immunize false or misleading product information from government regulation simply by including references to public issues.

Bolger, 463 U.S. at 68.

If the blog combines commercial speech with political speech, then it will not automatically achieve the constitutional protections that a blog devoted solely to political speech will have.  Nevertheless, that combination of commercial speech with political speech may still rise to that level of constitutional protection if certain characteristics exist.  See, Bigelow v. Virginia, 421 U.S. 809, 818 (1975); Board of Trustees of the State University of New York v. Fox, 492 U.S. 469, 474 (1989).

According to other precedent, we have a test:

....For commercial speech to come within that provision, it at least must concern lawful activity and not be misleading. Next, we ask whether the asserted governmental interest is substantial. If both inquiries yield positive answers, we must determine whether the regulation directly advances the governmental interest asserted, and whether it is not more extensive than is necessary to serve that interest. Central Hudson Gas & Elec. Corp. v. Public Serv. Comm'n, 447 U.S. 557, 566 (1980); Adams Outdoor Advertising v. City of Newport News, 236 Va. 370, 383, 373 S.E.2d 917, 923 (1988).

Whether or not the reader may be misled means looking at the unsophisticated reader (Bates) and the assumption is going to fall in favor of the potential that someone out there reading the blog posts may be misled -- think Jethro Bodine as your potential reader when you're evaluating your publications.

The Bar Is Focused on Lawyers Misleading their Readers

The reason for bar regulation of lawyer advertising is to protect the public from being manipulated by lawyers marketing themselves in various formats: newspapers, television commercials, internet marketing, etc.  It's true that there's a profit motive in lots of web sites that enjoy protected free speech: the local newspaper's web site, for example, is published by a company operating for a profit and yet its site content is under the First Amendment free speech umbrella.

State bars, however, are going to come down on the side of regulation of the site or blog.  Consider your blog content and the design carefully.

Ask yourself this:

Would Jethro Bodine think you're selling yourself to him, even if your posts are careful not to market your practice or your firm directly?  Does having your blog attached to your law firm web site suggest that the blog is a commercial tool to get him to call the firm for a free initial consultation?  Does the design itself suggest commercial intent with things like 1-800 numbers in huge fontfaces in headings, footers, or margins?

If so, then you need to make sure that your blog (blawg) conforms to your state's advertising requirements (disclaimers, etc.) even if the majority of your content is political in nature.

Yelp Review Gets Reviewer Sued by Company Claiming Significant Damage From Single, Bad Online Review: Is This The Case That Sets the Precedent for Internet Defamation Suits Based on Bad Online Reviews?

If this isn't the start of a trend, I don't know what is.  There's a sizable case over on the East Coast that seems to be holding its traction against the usual arguments of free speech in a case where defamation damages are being claimed based upon an online review.  I think that lots of lawyers are going to be watching what happens here.

(It's not that these bad reviews haven't been the subject of lawsuits filed by lawyers already:  there's a Dallas law firm that has filed a $50,000 damage suit for a bad review on Google ("Ben Doe") and there's a Florida lawyer who sued for removal of a bad online review at a lawyer-review site and had the case settled pretty quickly.)

Why?  I've already had more than one discussion with clients in different parts of the country that are angry and fretful about the opportunity offered to anyone out there to write a bad review of their work and have it published for all to see at Yelp or Avvo or whereever.  There are lots and lots of review sites these days.

The calls that I've had regarding bad reviews are from lawyers in firms that practice in emotional areas: family law, criminal defense, etc. where someone is going to be upset.  It's almost an old joke that no one likes their ex-spouse's divorce lawyer.  

Most of my law firm clientele are concerned with how to deal with snarly reviews at these online sites, when they are prohibited or limited in publishing client testimonials from clients that are very pleased with the work the lawyers have done.  They aren't so concerned with the single bad review as their perceived inability to balance that bad review out with the numerous client letters, cards, and testimonials that they have on file where clients offered stellar reviews of the firm and its work.

It isn't fair, granted.  However, no one has brought up the idea of suing the bad reviewer.  Yet.  I'm thinking that those lawsuits may be coming.  Consider this.

The $750,000 Internet Defamation Lawsuit Out of Virginia

Dietz Development is a small District of Columbia business owned by Christopher Dietz that Fairfax, Virginia resident Jane Perez contracted to do some work on her home last February.  Seems Mr. Dietz and Ms.Perez are acquainted because they went to high school together, and that's why Dietz Development got the call.

Now, these two ex-students and former friends are on opposite sites of a defamation suit that is getting international attention (like this article in Great Britain's Daily Mail).  Dietz Development is alleging a loss of $750,000 in lost profits and damage to the company's reputation (or business goodwill) because of one, single bad review posted on the Yelp site.

Read the complaint here (provided by The Washington Post).  The Yelp review appears as Exhibit B (second post on page).

There was a similar review posted to membership review site Angie's List, which has been included in the complaint (see Exhibit A) but isn't getting the spotlight that the Yelp review has garnered, perhaps because the readers of Angie's List are not the general public but only those who pay a membership fee to access the Angie's List web site.

Judge Grants Restraining Order: Reviewer Must Edit The Online Review as Case Proceeds

This week, a judge granted Dietz's motion for a temporary order requiring Jane Perez to change the online review although the order does not require that the bad review be taken offline in its entirety.  (Whether this is drawing a line on potential damages claims or giving the plaintiff a big hint that he's going to win this thing is too soon to tell.)

Media reports are that Perez has been ordered to remove her allegations that Mr. Dietz stole jewelry from her home.  I haven't been able to find the actual court order online (yet).

What Was in the Yelp Review That Got Jane Perez Sued?

The lawsuit alleges that not only did the review complain about the quality of the work that was done, or not done, it also claims that Mr. Dietz stole jewelry from the home (theory: he was the only one with a key to the house aside from the home owner at the time that the jewelry went missing) and that Dietz was operating without the proper license to do business.

Of course, Mr. Dietz posted his own reply to her bad review.  He's arguing that wasn't enough.  From this single bad review, the plaintiff is claiming a huge amount of damage ($750,000).

And this case is proceeding through the courts. It's not being tossed.  And the judge just made the review edit the review.  

In my opinion, online reviews of businesses -- including law firms -- are going to be considered in a different manner than book reviews (where book reviewers are also facing the risk of being sued for a bad review).

These online business reviews may be able to hurt a business more than a single bad book review, also my opinion here.  After all, a book review is understood to be the opinion of a work of fiction or non-fiction and the reader understands that what is poison to one may be meat to another.  It's subjective.

An online review of a service provider, on the other hand, can be objectively judged.  Was the work shoddy or not?  Expert opinion and factual support can provide an answer.  Was there a theft?  Who did it?  These are things that can be proven with facts in a courtroom.  Same thing with the licensure issue.  Maybe this is true for damages sustained from a bad review, as well.

Will more businesses sue for bad online reviews?  Will law firms tee it up?  I think so.

And where are the publishers in all this?  They sure are quiet and I'm wondering if that's smart.  

Here's my first big question: where is the responsibility of the publisher in these online review defamation cases?  I'm wondering if the online web site that profits by building a review directory for the public isn't going to be held by a judge somewhere to have a corresponding duty regarding the reviews that are placed upon its site pages.

Surely there are going to be plaintiffs that include these sites in their pleadings; after all, these are probably deeper pockets than the individual reviewer.  My little voice is asking, "if someone claims a criminal act like theft, then isn't that stepping across some sort of publisher duty line in an online review of a business?"

Another big question I have: what does this do to trustworthy reviews?  Free speech is important and it's priceless in its value.  Something that we may learn once it's gone (like privacy rights) in the near future.

I do read online reviews before making a purchase or inviting someone into my home for repairs.  Will these suits simply insure that the bad reviews won't get published out of fear of reprisal and I won't be able to learn that the book or the plumber or the car is a bad deal?

If this litigation happens, then what's the value of the review site to me?  Why bother reading CitiSearch for a restaurant to check out if all that CitiSearch can offer me is fluff stuff?

5 Tips for Creating Strong Passwords That Are Easy to Use

Today, there is a story that those who are following the tabloid story of Twilight star Kristen Stewart's affair with the director of her new Snow White movie are vulnerable to malware attacks.  Seems that evildoers like to tag their malware (viruses and the like) to popular topics -- and this Twilight saga split of the Kristen Stewart and Robert Pattinson is right up their alley.

One of my clients is very concerned about this, since her kids love Twitter and Facebook and use her laptop routinely - and in doing so, they've already opened the door to one or more viruses which her tech support believes gained access through those shrunk links that appear on tweets and the like.  It's called "clickjacking."

Which brings us to passwords.  My client's biggest concern was protecting her financial sites as well as her blogging account.  Could the virus circumvent her passwords?  How do you create a strong password?  How can you make passwords that are strong and that are also easy to use (and remember)?

Passwords need to be easy for you to remember and hard for those computer villains to figure out, even with their sneaky password finding software.  Don't share them with anyone.  Don't put them on sticky notes on your monitor.  Remember to change them -- say on the 1st of every month.

Here are five (5) tips for creating strong, easy to use passwords:

1.  Use a quote or a short sentence that is personal to you.

Carnegie Mellon's Computer Science Department recommends sentences such as "I have two kids: Jack and Jill."  For sites that only allow a certain number of characters, they suggest you memorize a short version of this sentence and use it:  "Ih2K:JaJ"

2.  Use two unrelated words and then add some tweaks

Tweaks?  They can be whatever works for you: like added punctuation and a capital letter or two which will be easy for you to remember.

Carnegie Mellon gives an example here of  "book and goat" which then becomes "bo!ok29goat"

3.  Use different passwords, and change them often.

PCMag recommends that you change your passwords as often as you change your underwear.  PCMag also recommends that you use different passwords for different sites: never use the same password for different things. Don't use the same password for your online banking and your email account.  That's just asking for trouble.

4.  Move your hands on the keyboard.

PCMag has another good idea:  once you have your secret password, move your hands on your keyboard so they are one row up or one column over -- then type.

5.  Make things easier to remember by having your own password themes.

ComputerWorld suggests having a personal theme to your passwords that relate to a personal life event, such as the birth of a child.   OneMorePush and IceChips were given as some of their examples here.

What I'm Doing With My Passwords These Days.

Not too long ago, I was hit by an evildoer that did get one of my email account passwords.  However, the damage wasn't too bad -- it was an account I had set up to receive all those newsletters, daily quotes, etc. and not my personal or professional stuff.   Still, it was scary enough that I spent most of a workday setting up all new passwords and a password-changing schedule (not on the 1st).  I feel safer for it, and I think you will, too.

Another thing I did:  I stopped opening those shrunken links.  If the tweet doesn't give me enough info for me to google the site, and if I'm not interested enough to do a Google search, then so be it.  Turns out to be a nice time saving tool as well as a security strategy.

For more:

Microsoft suggestions on passwords.

Microsoft Password Strength Checker (input your password for evaluation). 

On-Page versus Off-Page Search Engine Optimization: What's the Difference?

On Page SEO, short version, involves all the words that you can see on your web site's pages.  How this content is optimized for the search engines is just one component of effective SEO.  Here is where key words and key phrases get put to good use.  Captions, headlines, paragraphs, footers, disclaimers, etc. are all a part of On Page SEO. 


Off Page SEO, succinctly, is everything else.  Some of the off page factors include: linkage on the site, both internal links and external linkage; writing the text of internal links themselves; building site popularity through tweeting, commenting on forums and blogs, press releases, submitting to directories, etc.

There's a lot that goes into search engine optimization - and there's lots of stuff out there on the web for you to read about SEO, if you're interested.  (Read Google's SEO overview here.) There's also lots of people out there claiming to know all about SEO.  Maybe they do, maybe they don't.  Ask for examples of their accomplishments before you pay them anything.

Meanwhile, consider this.  The purpose behind optimizing content is to get your content noticed and highly ranked in search results on its themes or topics by the search engines.  Which for most folk mainly means Google.  You're competing with other content to get into the top spots.

Google is in the business of competing with other search engines to provide the more informative and on-target results to its reader's search requests.  If Yahoo could give you better results (and you should compare them often -- Yahoo gives better locator information IMHO, for example) then you'll switch to Yahoo, right?

It's really not rocket science.  Write the best content possible for your topic.  Think of your reader, and help them here.  Give them your expertise.  Give them links.  Give them information in easy to follow language. 

Help Google beat its competition, in other words.  Do this, and do this well, and you've achieve your SEO goals automatically. 

Cutting and Pasting into Blog Posts: Don't Be Lazy

I have a client that is great about keeping up with her weekly blogging schedule.  She posts twice a week, period.  You can depend on it. 

And that's great.  

What isn't so great, though perfectly understandable, is taking a section of writing from another source (another post, a magazine article, a book) and then cutting and pasting the guts of that writing into a blog post with a brief introduction, "I really liked this [insert name of source material] because it's so on point! It's so true!"

Or something like that.  Why is this bad?  

Well, as my client points out this might (or might not) be within the fair use doctrine and therefore not any kind of copyright infringement and it's clearly not plagiarism because she's giving credit where credit is due (she's not trying to claim the stuff as her own). 

However, substitute the cut and paste for a hyperlink and the post becomes a sentence or two.  Insufficient original word count.

True, it's great to find something that you want to share from a book (or magazine article or blog post) that someone else has written and use it as the basis for a blog post.  There's also the time-saving benefit (as my client pointed out, these types of posts are helpful on days where posts are scheduled and there's a time crunch). 

But what are you really sharing of yourself here?  And, without going into geek-talk (my client hates going down this road), Google will not appreciate these kinds of blog posts.  At all.  

Here's what I think needs to happen.  

I think that when you share something, you need to give your reader more than "lookie."  I think you need to comment and give your opinion on why you are sharing this writing with them.  

If you don't have time for that, then go for a link list ... something like a Top Ten list, ten great sources of inspiration when you're dieting; ten great recipe sites; ten great med mal blogs, whatever.  That's pretty fast blogging and it's giving your reader more of you than one of these "lookie" posts does. 

Books on Your Blog or WebSite: PDF or eBook? Why You Should Choose PDFs.

There's lots of chatter right now about adding books (eBooks, booklets) to blogs - particularly law firm blogs.  Usually, this talk is accompanied with a discussion of coordinating those publications with an offer for the book at no charge in exchange for the reader signing up to a service like Aweber.

More and more law firms are doing this.  A nice book cover image appears in the sidebar; it's a free offer for in-depth information on an important topic like tips on avoiding foreclosure; tips on making end of life decisions; ways to limit risk in alternative investments, etc.  Click on the image and the reader usually has to provide an email address in order to get the freebie, and afterwards that email address may receive a series of follow-ups: more free information, etc.

Choosing to Build a Book for Your Blog or Web Site  

Along with the chatter about books on blogs comes lots of confusion and I've had several calls from clients and colleagues that are overwhelmed about the process (or options) once they start investigating this stuff.  Once they understand their state's bar regulations on the issue, and they've got a game plan on what they want to accomplish, then comes the practical decisions to be made.  How to get this done - it's not as easy as it may first appear. 

Offering a free book on your blog is not a bad idea -- it's a good idea -- but you need to know at the get-go that it isn't all that easy to get from start to finish.

Right now, self-publishing eBooks are trendy.  These are coded documents that can be read on specific devices (e-Readers) like Kindles, Nooks, Sony eReaders, as well as IPads, Kindle Fires, etc.

This is usually the first kind of document that the lawyer envisions.  Maybe the only one, because many aren't considering PDF formatted documents as something that can create snazzy books for their sidebar.   All this talk about self-publishing means many lawyers don't understand the different options open to them. 


PDF Books for Your Sidebar

For lots of lawyers and law firms, the formatted eBook alternative of using a .pdf document, formatted both for security and for a professional appearance, is the preferred option.  Surf around and you will find that PDF documents are appearing quite often in blog and site sidebars as the chosen format for that free book offering.

Why a PDF?  

1.  PDF books are easy to create: you can create your book using Microsoft Word or Open Office.  No need to learn fancy coding like you need for a self-published eBook for Kindles or IPads.  

2.  PDF books can be full-color with sophisticated graphic design.  This format allows a glossy, magazine-like product that self-published eBooks cannot provide now with their coding limitations.  Kindles and other eReaders don't like images very much, and they are hard to insert into the reader-approved format. 

3.  The PDF option gives you lots of number-play.  With a PDF book, you can include all sorts of graphs or tables or pie chart images that the Amazon/Smashwords/etc. coded eBook cannot include now.  Footnotes, no problem.  E books coded for Kindle or the IPad or the Nook are best left to words alone, black on white text, with hyperlinks.  No footnotes, please.  Check out various magazines, blogs, and other graphically-oriented publications on the nearest Kindle or Sony E-Reader and see what you find.  

4.  Most readers are familiar with the PDF format; additionally, these documents can be read on almost every device.  You can even upload a PDF document onto a Kindle, for example.  However, you cannot read a Kindle eBook on any device other than a Kindle eReader or a computer that has downloaded the free Kindle software onto its hard drive.  

  

What I Suggest You Consider Doing For Your First Publication

For law firm clients ready to place books on their blogs or web sites, I proposed that they review their blogs or newsletters to find a series of posts or a single theme that can serve as the springboard for a .pdf document.   

Next, prepare a Word (or Open Office) document with text that flows, pulling together those blog posts or newsletter articles into a cohesive document that will serve the reader well as a PDF book.  Make sure to include a table of contents and an "about the author" section.  

Work with a graphic designer if you choose to do so, or just use a Word template.  Get your Word document looking like a professional product, then convert it to a PDF document.  

Make sure that you have your security features in place (no cutting and pasting, limited sharing or printing, etc.) and you're done.  

Now you have a very nice offering, in a format that most recognize and can read on whatever screen they choose to use, that can be:

             a.  placed on the blog;

             b.  sent by email to whomever you choose; and

             c.  used in an email marketing campaign;

             

Cut and Pasting From the Web: Be Careful.

Last week, another client was happily posting away on their blog and proud of their word count.  Which was good.  However, most of that word count involved cutting and pasting from other web sites.  Not so good.

First of all, it's fine to share news releases.  They are written to be distributed -- the intent of that release is to get that message out.  So, sharing these cuts and paste excerpts in a blog post with an intro "news from Acme site this week" is not a bad, horrible (and by that I mean illegal) thing to do.

Second, it's fine to share information provided on government sites, for example in their "frequently asked questions" section.  Intro the cut and paste excerpt with something like "the [name of agency] recommends the following" and you're fine. 

Third, it's okay to share your own stuff.  Excerpts from your firm website in a firm blog post isn't violating anything.  Example:  the post is discussing a major product recall and you provide an excerpt from the site that discusses your state's products liability law. 

Here's where it's not okay.  It is not okay to take content from other sites - especially news sites - and cut and paste them into your blog post, wham bam.  My client, excited about coverage in the media, plugged media coverage into the blog without getting any okay from the media source.

Not to mention not checking with the news source to determine how much they wanted in payment for the use of their news story.  And its photos. 

Luckily, that post was not published online before someone checked with me and I pointed out that this was copyright infringement of the copyright held by the media source. 

Newspapers and television news departments publish news with photos and videos online because that is how they generate revenue.  They will share that content and those images with you, but they may want payment for the use.  Maybe it's a lot.  Maybe it's a little.

Point is: news stories and television videos - even if you are prominently a part of the story - should not be duplicated on your web site or blog without the permission of the copyright owner. 

Sure, you may think I am nit-picking.  After all, aren't you helping that news source by publicizing its work?  Sorry, but I don't know that the owner of the copyright will agree with that argument.  And, after all, isn't the story all about you and your victorious win, so don't you have some sort of indirect ownership right in the news article anyway?  No.  No you don't.     

Go ahead if you want to risk it.  Lots of sites do this, true.  However, now that NewsRight is out of the box, my nit-picking today may seem prophetical tomorrow.

Better safe than sorry, folks.  Plus, it's the right thing to do.  Don't just plug those news articles into a blog post, even if you or your firm is the star of the story. 

Tips for Regular, Fast Blog Posts – Personalizing the Informational Blog

Blogs are not one size fits all, and while there are blogs that are very personal in nature, there are others (like this one) that are more informative in nature.  Many law blogs wear the informational hat, for example.
Which doesn’t mean that they can’t bring a personal touch to their informational blog, although most of these bloggers don’t want to start writing posts about their football team’s latest victory or where they are taking the kids on vacation this summer. 
Here are some tips on how to infuse an informational blog with some of your individual personality (which readers do like to see):
1.  Books.
Post regularly on books you have read and recommend to others.  Easy to do, the fastest way to do this is just insert the image of the book with a link to Amazon or BN or Powells or whatever and title the post “I Recommend This Book” or “Recommended: [insert title']”. 
2.  Photos.
Post photos regularly, with a short caption beneath them. Choose pix that you have taken, or grab something from the public domain. Images are great for informational blogs, both visually and from an SEO perspective (Google likes this).  Try tying the image to your blog’s theme or to related news. 
A public domain photo of Abe Lincoln on President’s Day, for example.  Another: your photo of the old historic building downtown right before it was torn down.  With that one, your title could simply be:  Acme Building, 1932-2012.  Something like that.
3. Quotes
Post quotes that you like on a routine basis.  There are sites that organize quotes, in case you cannot remember the exact wording.  These can be words of wisdom or they be related to your blog’s theme or set of topics.
The text of Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech could be placed on your blog for MLK Day, for example. 
How often?
Not more than once a week, I would suggest.  However, having one of these quick posts on a weekly basis brings a two post a week blog to the three post a week blog, and that can be a big difference to readers and to the search engines. 

Why I Use Google Scholar In My Blog Posts

The more I use Google Scholar, the more I like it.  I think you will, too.  I always use Google Scholar, for example, to hyperlink cases or statutes or law review articles in blog posts because:

1.  it's free;
2.  it's easy for readers to access (no subscription hurdle);
3.  it's reliable;
4.  (best of all) within the document, Google Scholar hyperlinks citations for ready reference; and
5.  there's a Shepardizing of sorts provided, too.

For example, click here to check out New York Times v. Sullivan, 376 U.S. 254 (1964) on Google Scholar.  Nice, huh?

What is Google Panda and Why You Should Care, and How Much, About Panda's Power over Your Site or Blog

This past week, one of my law firm clients had a problem with a guest post they were providing on another blog.  Seems that company had heard of Google Panda and was so scared of Google Panda that they refused to publish the guest post unless one paragraph within the post was rewritten -- it was quoting from the law firm's blog, and they were terrified that Google would penalize their site for duplicate content. 

Of course, this is ridiculous.  However, it was easier in time and money for my law firm client to rewrite a paragraph than argue over SEO, so there was one problem solved.  However, all this hoopla has me hearing more and more terrorized, trembling comments from colleagues and clients about the very scary Google Panda and what it means .....

So, here goes. 

First of all, what the heck is Google Panda?

Google Panda is a change in the algorithms used by Google to decide which site gets ranked first, second, third, etc. in the results list it provides to your search request.  This began months ago; there was a recent Panda update in October 2011 that some consider to be pretty big. 

Short version: the top secret mumbo jumbo that Google uses to decide who gets top billing got revamped.  

Why do this?  Google tries to explain in a February 2011 blog post, pointing to a desire to move "high quality sites" up in the search results and "reduce" the ranking of "low quality sites."  Low quality sites specifically including those that copy content from other sites ... and here is where some big reactions have come.  Some pretty big and established sites saw themselves fall in ranking at Google.com.  What the heck was going on?  So, Google provided "additional guidance" on how Google searches and ranks web sites in May 2011. 

Google suggests that you look at your site from their perspective, and ask yourself the following questions:

• Would you trust the information presented in this article?
• Is this article written by an expert or enthusiast who knows the topic well, or is it more shallow in nature?
• Does the site have duplicate, overlapping, or redundant articles on the same or similar topics with slightly different keyword variations?
• Would you be comfortable giving your credit card information to this site?
• Does this article have spelling, stylistic, or factual errors?
• Are the topics driven by genuine interests of readers of the site, or does the site generate content by attempting to guess what might rank well in search engines?
• Does the article provide original content or information, original reporting, original research, or original analysis?
• Does the page provide substantial value when compared to other pages in search results?
• How much quality control is done on content?
• Does the article describe both sides of a story?
• Is the site a recognized authority on its topic?
• Is the content mass-produced by or outsourced to a large number of creators, or spread across a large network of sites, so that individual pages or sites don’t get as much attention or care?
• Was the article edited well, or does it appear sloppy or hastily produced?
• For a health related query, would you trust information from this site?
• Would you recognize this site as an authoritative source when mentioned by name?
• Does this article provide a complete or comprehensive description of the topic?
• Does this article contain insightful analysis or interesting information that is beyond obvious?
• Is this the sort of page you’d want to bookmark, share with a friend, or recommend?
• Does this article have an excessive amount of ads that distract from or interfere with the main content?
• Would you expect to see this article in a printed magazine, encyclopedia or book?
• Are the articles short, unsubstantial, or otherwise lacking in helpful specifics?
• Are the pages produced with great care and attention to detail vs. less attention to detail?
• Would users complain when they see pages from this site?

From what I know at this point, Google Panda will still get some more tweeks, and in the long run, Google is always going to be trying to better itself -- to make sure that you don't find another search engine preferable to Google.  It looks like Google is trying to thwart content mills that just copy stuff from other sites and republish them as their own, you know the sneaky ones that I mean; however, sites that do things like publish press releases are getting hit here, too, and that's not fair (e.g., PR Newswire). 

Some reputable sites are facing a 60% loss in web traffic after Google Panda - and that's money either in sales or jobs or marketing or something, folks.  Sixty percent is a huge hit, and it's not hitting those sneaky, yucky, content copying sites -- it's hitting respectable, longstanding sites that are understandably peeved.  For many folk, being angry and fearful of the Google Panda Power is justified and I hope they get their trains back on the track soon. 

However, Google's position is understandable and if you are writing for the web with the intent to add value then I don't think Panda Power is something for you to lose sleep over.  I learned today from David Naylor that Google Panda isn't named after the cute bear but after a Google engineer named Navneet Panda.  I like David Naylor's two cents worth on Google Panda: ask yourself two questions and stop worrying about it.  The questions?  Go read Naylor's post to find out. 

And, if you really want to learn all about this, Search Engine Roundtable has done a video on Google Panda (including the October 2011 updates) which you can watch on YouTube. It's ten and half minutes, if you've got the time.

google, blogs, blogging, google panda, seo

Tags for Your Blog Post or Tweet - Finding Popular Tags to Boost the Chances People Will Find and Read What You Wrote

Once you have written your post or tweet, you might want to consider indexing what you've written so others can find it.  On Technorati, for example, the most popular tags can be found, listed alphabetically, at Technorati's Tag Index. 

What is Technorati?  It's a site that collects information placed in blogs and then creates indices of the information as well as rankings for the blogs within its system (which total in the millions).  If your blog is not listed at Technorati, then you need to get cracking and get your blog in Technorati's sights.  It's a big deal. 

For Twitter, tags go by the name "hashtags" and you can find a listing of popular hashtags at Hashtags.org - but this site is different than Technorati's Tag Index.  Here, you enter a hashtag, and the site returns with information on how popular it is ("trending").  Look at the percentages on the left: if they're low or nonexistent, then choose a different word for your hashtag.  (For more on how Hashtags.org works and why it's a big deal, read the informative article provided by TwitterTipsCentral, "Where To Find A List Of Twitter Hashtags ".)

Tip: Create Your Own Index of Tags

And, remember that tag.  No need to reinvent the wheel.  If you regularly publish items dealing with dogs, or beer, or recipes, or speaking Klingon -- whatever your focus -- collect the most popular tags for that topic and save them.  Make your own list of tags for your use, as a ready reference.

Why should you care about tagging?  Read my earlier post, "Twitter Tip: What is a Hashtag?" for details on why tags are a good thing. 

hashtags, twitter, tags, technorati, tagging, tips, blogs

Blogger Sues Blogger for Copyright Infringement: Nikki Finke's Deadline Hollywood vs The Hollywood Reporter

Nikki Finke reports on the comings and goings of the Hollywood biz at her blog, Deadline Hollywood, and I've read her for years -- she has been instrumental in making blogs more respectable as a legitimate news source.  Nikki Finke's background as a journalist - working at Newsweek, the Los Angeles Times and The New York Observer, in addition to having her writing appear in The New York Times, Vanity Fair, and The Washington Post means that she had top of the line journalistic credentials when she jumped over into the blogging arena. 

Nikki Finke's decision to become a blogger is important to all bloggers, and in doing so, she undoubtedly felt a lot of backlash from the traditional journalists who do not consider blogging to be respectable as a news source.  That's a rabbit trail topic - something to discuss in more depth on another day.

Point here is, I'm not the only one who admires her work, apparently.

Over the past few weeks (or maybe months), Finke has been posting about her battles with The Hollywood Reporter and her claims that her stuff has been popping up without authorization over at THR, which is another blog.  Today, I read on Reuters that Finke's filed suit:  "Deadline blogger sues The Hollywood Reporter." 

Among her claims (and by "her" I mean Finke as well as her parent company, both plaintiffs in the litigation), an allegation that source code was swiped from Deadline Hollywood.  That's plagarism, 21st Century style. 

Finke goes on: she's also alleging that there has been theft of "intellectual decisions" in what she follows in her blog posts.  As bloggers understand all too well, posts go up minute by minute (almost as fast as tweets) when there is a big story -- and deciding what to post and when is a big thing when you're publishing a blog.  Blogging will get more consideration and exposure as a venue for words, and news, and opinion, because of this lawsuit - if for no other reason than everyone's got to catch up with what exactly Nikki Finke is alleging is the harm that has been done and how it happened. 

Once again, Nikki Finke may be helping bloggers everywhere gain more respect for the medium - this time, not on the screen, but in the courtroom. 

blogs, copyright, nikki finke, deadline hollywood, blogging, journalism

Lawyers Should Know Ethics Rules and Social Media Policies for Blogs and Social Media (LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook): Bar Regs and Other Social Media Guidelines

Individual bar associations across the country may or may not have regulations governing social media on their books: social media moves fast; the process of creating new rules to govern the practice of law within certain jurisdictions, not so much.

Obviously, lawyers should know their own bar rules and regulations, since they are bound by the ethical rules applicable to their jurisdiction(s).  That's not the only attempt at corralling online communications on the web, however. 

Social Media Policies and Guidelines Established for Private Companies and Public Entities

Attorneys should be aware that social media policies and online communication guidelines are being set up by many different types of entities now; savvy lawyers will be aware of those internet rules and regulations that may apply to certain clientele - as well as those of a competing law firm (e.g., the April 2011 social media guidelines established by Baker & Daniels).

For example, there are social media policies in place for the States of Delaware, Oklahoma, and North Carolina as well as big corporations like Ford Motor Company, FedEx, and Coca-Cola. Many more have been collected for review by Chris Boudreaux at SocialMediaGovernance.com, an excellent go-to site for those interested in learning more about the evolving trends in controlling social media today.

Lawyers and Ethical Rules, Social Media Guidelines

Does the attorney have to know these social media guidelines?  No, the lawyer will not be controlled by these policies; however, he or she should be able to explain why they disagree with a particular guideline if a client, potential client, or referral source asks about it after reading the lawyer's blog or social media tweets, pokes, etc.  Having access to this information when creating an internal set of online social media guidelines as part of law firm policy will also be very helpful. 

Does the lawyer need to know about ethical rules?  Yes, they do need to know what their local and state bar associations have defined as acceptable online communications.  Lawyers and law firms should be aware of the ethical rules and regulations that apply to their online activities: they may be disciplined for violating them (e.g., reprimand, suspension).

In some states, a broad brush is applied to blogs, Twitter accounts, and pages on LinkedIn, Facebook (and now Google+) where the governing body attempts to regulate these new marketing avenues using the same solicitation rules already in place for things like web sites and direct e-mail communications.  Comments and guidelines to existing ethical codes need to be monitored. 

For example, the State Bar of Texas has tried to keep up with the rapid changes in social media by issuing an "interpretive comment" to work in conjunction with Part 7 of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct. 

Another example: the State Bar of Florida, which has passed specific regulatory language that applies specifically to the growing use of social media by attorneys and law firms.  Shown below is the Florida Bar's Guideline for Networking Sites, note how Florida goes into detail about such things as LinkedIn professional pages and Instant Messages: 

Anonymous Comments: Should You Block Them From Your Blog?

Anonymous comments did not start with the World Wide Web; they've been around for centuries and they've always been a headache at times. For an interesting read about anonymous comments, check out the Online Journalism Review's article on traditional journalism's take on anonymous commenting -- you'll learn a lot: for instance, did you know that Benjamin Franklin wrote many an anonymous comment under the psuedonym "Silence Dogood"?

The position of many print publishers is this: if someone wants to have their words published in their publication, then the publisher feels that the writer should have the cojones (yes, I'm in Texas) to put their name right up there with their comment. Of course, the publisher's lawyers have pointed out that there may be legal consequences to the words printed in the publication; therefore, having the ability to find that potential co-defendant if the comment proves litigious is important to the legal team.

I get it. And I'm still in favor of allowing anonymous comments on your blog (or blawg).

Here's why: technology being what it is today, right now there are all sorts of hurdles to leaving a comment on a blog or newspaper or online magazine. Just this past week I experienced the following:

1. I had a devil of a time trying to leave a comment to a Typepad post - I was requested to sign in via Twitter or Facebook or Google to leave the comment, or alternatively leave my name and address (for the blog's growing email marketing list). If I used Twitter, I was asked to agree to allow the platform to post its own tweets on my Twitter feed. That's right. Their stuff. On my Twitter feed. Without my prior looksie. I was left with two options, well three: (a) agree to be on their mailing list; (2) allow the platform to be my Tweet-partner; or (3) not leave a comment. Surprise: I didn't leave the comment.
2. A client in Florida wanted to put a comment at one of the top Florida newspaper's online sites. Same platform issue. After much time (that we both could and should have dedicated to other things), her comment was left on the news article -- and now, she is watching her Twitter feed, to see what they are going to do (and I hope she's got her finger on the Application Approval button at the Twitter settings page).

In social media today (think Klout), you want to have comments on your blog (or blawg).  You want to make it easy for readers to communicate with you.  Sure, there's a spam issue and yes, there will be times when a comment is troublesome. I'm not recommending that bloggers ignore the contents of the comments and monitor what's being written by readers. 

However, it is just too darn easy to surf away if the blog (or blawg) puts up a hurdle for the reader to jump in order to write a short thought or two about the post.  Who wants to spend all that time and effort just to leave a little message?

I know I don't.  I leave anonymous comments when it's too much burdensome to get through the blogging platform's hurdles ... maybe I will leave a signature within the comment itself.  If I remember.  For something like, "thanks for sharing this" I may not.

Bottom line:

• blocking anonymous comments doesn't help your reader (or your social media dialogue, if that is the terminology that floats your boat) and may alienate some of them, since it's the fastest and simplest way of leaving a comment online. 
• forcing readers to allow third party access to things like their Twitter feeds just to have the joy of leaving a comment on your blog is just plain disrespectful and manipulative and wrong in my humble opinion, and I'm sure I'm not alone here. 
• blocking anonymous commenting is not going to prevent you from getting troublesome comments: it's just as easy for troublemakers to create online pseudonyms with fake online email accounts, etc. as it was for Ben Franklin to sign "Silence DoGood" to his letters long ago -- you're not stopping the dedicated writer who doesn't want to leave his real name. 
• in the event of a huge lawsuit, techies may well be able to track down the source of the comment anyway: how anonymous that writer really is in today's technological world is debatable.

Lawyers: Please Stop Stealing News Video for Your Firm Web Site, and YES You Are, Too....

It's Friday, thankfully ... because if I have another client conference where I have to explain this simple fact to a lawyer this week, I may start pulling my hair out.  And I like my hair, I don't want to do this. 

So, I'm going to rant here on my blog instead, and here goes:

When an attorney is interviewed by a reporter and that interview gets uploaded as a video on the reporter's website -- usually, a local television station's web site, or that lawyer is quoted extensively in a publication -- usually, a daily newspaper serving his local community, then it's understandable for that lawyer to be excited about this and want to share this great news. 

And not just with his family and friends, of course.  This is great exposure for the attorney: he's been acknowledged as an expert in whatever the topic of the interview was - from the Mets vs. the Yankees to the future of class action lawsuits in view of the 2011 U.S. Supreme Court decisions in Wal-Mart and AT&T.  Whatever.

Clients should know about this, right?  Sure.  And, referring attorneys should be aware of this, right?  Yes.

However, this interview cannot simply be taken from that online website and stuck on the law firm web site or blog without gaining the permission of its owner, the publication that's uploaded it onto their site.

No. No. No. 

Too many lawyers do this, and they should know better.  If they are sued for copyright infringement, that law degree is going to be a big fact used by the plaintiff that they did know better. 

And yes, sometimes you will have to pay for the use of the video or article.  How much will depend upon the publication.  There are times where the publication waives that charge, I've seen this happen more than once.


However, they're the ones who have to waive it.  You have to get permission, simple as that.

And if you think I'm being picky (and yes, I've been accused of being picky and it's true, I am) then think again.  Web sites are being sued without so much as any prior notice (e.g., cease and desist letter) in more and more parts of the country for just this sort of thing.

Go read my posts regarding Righthaven if you're interested. 

In the meantime, STOP stealing those news stories where your name is mentioned by just sticking them on your web site or blog.  Stop. It.

Okay, rant over.  

Whew.