Many of you are likely already familiar with the alleged facts in the disturbing and complicated case of Captain Robert Semrau. For those who are not, here’s a quick refresher. 

Capt. Semrau was serving a tour of duty with the Canadian military in Afghanistan. He was assigned to a small Operational Mentor and Liason Team (OMLT) tasked with working hand-in-hand with a larger force of Afghani military assisting them in becoming a self-sufficient fighting force capable of challenging the Taliban militia on their own when Canada’s mission comes to a close. On Oct. 19, 2008 his orders were to troll . . . [more]

Law is a vocation where every word counts; each word has a meaning. However, in almost all correspondence with lawyers, the words “without prejudice” or “confidential and legally privileged” are present. With the ever-growing use of email, it has become standard to include a confidentiality notice at the end of your message, just below the signature. Do we really know the meaning of the words we use though?

“Without prejudice” has been used by British courts for over 100 years. According to an article by Ronald D. Manes, Solicitor/Client Privilege, it originates from the solicitor-and-client privilege which was “established by . . . [more]

As Windows 7 and Office 2010 sweep across the land, along with a plethora of interesting new hardware devices like iPads and netbooks, the urge to upgrade is striking a great many attorneys. I can hardly walk into a room without somebody sidling up to me and asking “So….should I upgrade?”

The answer is always the same: “Maybe.”

“Maybe?” they respond, with that unsatisfied look in their eyes. They’re surprised. I’m a technologist. I’m supposed to always be pushing them to the bleeding edge, chuckling softly that they only have 4GB of RAM, suggesting that they could get a 3rd . . . [more]

Richard Susskind has been far and away the most interesting speaker I’ve heard this year. He’s been travelling around the world delivering his message of coming change for the legal profession. He spoke at a recent CLEBC course and at the BC Court of Appeal 100th anniversary course.

For those of you who haven’t yet had the Susskind experience, he predicts that the legal profession is undergoing profound changes as corporate clients are under increasing pressure to cut costs, and as private clients cannot afford the bespoke services provided by lawyers. He anticipates that over the next ten years, the . . . [more]

On May 12, 2010, I attended the San Francisco manifestation of Carl Malamud’s road show on legal information. Carl has criss-crossed the United States putting on programs about government information in general, and legal information in particular. The San Francisco/ Berkeley version of the program included luminaries from the world of information, law, librarians and information cowboys. If you want to see my bit, here is a link.

Questions like, “How can we organize a movement to determine exactly what types of information states already make available digitally?” sat side by side with questions like, “Can I get Twitter . . . [more]

Recently there has been debate about the concept of personal branding. Detractors of personal branding argue that companies, objects and services can be branded, but that people cannot be branded in the same way. Much of this debate seems to hinge on the idea that to undertake acts of personal branding, one must relinquish a degree of humanity and individuality. This couldn’t be further from the truth and is purely an issue of semantics.

Branding is the process required to create (and maintain) a controlled and instant impression of the identity or personality of the subject in the minds of . . . [more]

If there’s one lesson lawyers really should learn about participating in online communities, it’s this: how you contribute to a conversation is at least as important as what you contribute. Those who don’t appreciate this guideline run the risk not just of seeing their comments ignored, but also of earning a bad reputation that’s hard to shake.

I’m thinking specifically of lawyers who engage in strafing an online conversation, scattering self-promotional marketing messages at each landing point. They’re newcomers with some credibility in the marketplace, but have little invested in any specific virtual community. So they charge in, market, and . . . [more]

As director of the Program of Legal Studies for Native People (PLSNP) I have several roles. One is advising prospective Aboriginal law students about how they might best prepare for the Law School Admissions Test (LSAT). This often leads to a discussion about why they have to take it at all since it is not created for Aboriginal Canadians or demonstrated to be a valid measure of skills for Aboriginal Canadians. (I can’t argue with that – when I asked for statistics about how LSAT score correlates with success in law school for Aboriginal Canadians, I was told that would . . . [more]

On June 2^nd, 2010, the Canadian federal government introduced a new copyright bill intended to “modernize Canadian Copyright law,” as Tony Clement, Minister of Industry put it in the press release. I want to join the healthy welter of blogging around this latest attempt to “modernize” our act. Now before you read any further, let me say that the one to read in these matters is Michael Geist, especially as he is all over the most draconian aspect of this new bill, namely how the digital lock provisions trump all other rights.

For my part, I want . . . [more]

Almost two decades have passed since the United Nations began digitizing its documents. The UN started the Official Document System (ODS) as a pilot project in 1992, and officially launched it in 1993. Since then, there has been an explosion of UN documents and publications available in electronic format from a variety of sources, for free and via subscription. I recently checked the current status of UN documentation online, and here’s what I found. And what I expected to find, and didn’t. And some worrisome developments.

Discovery Tools

UNBISnet, the UN Dag Hammarskjöld Library bibliographic information system, indexes e-versions . . . [more]

I read the quote more than a month ago and I still can’t quite get it out of my head. It appeared in a brief item by Julius Melnitzer at the Legal Post blog, and I’ll take the liberty of reproducing it in full here (emphasis, as they say, added):

Pfizer, whose general counsel has created the Pfizer Legal Alliance to manage its external counsel relationships, has brought the concept to Canada, and is seeking bids from Canadian firms. The pharmaceutical giant has limited its US representation to 19 firms, which may indicate that it is looking for only

Bizarro robot cartoon

Lawyers have not been thinking about robots as long as cartoonists, science fiction writers (Isaac Asimov’s Robot series being perhaps the best known) or engineers (Geoff Simons, Are Computers Alive? Evolution and New Forms of Life 1983 – but see P. Sw irski, “A case of wishful thinking”). A political scientist anticipated some legal issues in the early 1980s (S.N. Lehman-Wilzig,””) notably about potential criminal liability that future technology would threaten.

However, we have been catching up in the past ten or fifteen years. This column is a partial survey of some of the interesting questions . . . [more]