This is the second article in a series about mismanaging projects. In other words, if you can avoid doing the stuff here, you’ll be on the road to managing projects effectively.

There are five aspects you have to manage to move projects forward effectively:

1. The project itself, discussed in the previous column.
2. Time.
3. Money.
4. The client.
5. The team.

Let’s talk about mismanaging time. This topic is complex, and I’ll break it into two sections, concluding in my next column.

The Matrix of Project Times

The table below flags time-related issues on three different scales for various aspects of a project . . . [more]

Alberta does not have an anti-SLAPP law, i.e., legislation to protect those who speak out in the public interest from the costs of protracted litigation initiated by powerful interests. I can think of two Alberta examples of why anti-SLAPP is needed that I would like to disclose in an upcoming research paper. My problem is that if I name the plaintiffs in those strategic lawsuits, I will certainly be sued.

I had a vague sense that I would be afforded legal representation and indemnity by my university if I was sued in these circumstances. But when I made some inquiries . . . [more]

To a significant extent in legal and professional publishing, as in other areas of publishing and indeed business and real life, commercial and financial failure plays a critical part in charting its paths. Probably, it is its failed projects and ventures which determine its future rather than its overall historical success, where such has been achieved over time. Here, maybe more than in some other fields, just like the inevitable conclusion of all political careers, the expectation of failure is embedded at its very core, though perhaps often needlessly. It is so embedded that in so many scenarios, notably in . . . [more]

A puzzling question: where on a Saturday morning might you find 35 creative professionals – designers, artists, writers, technologists, and more – donating their time and expertise to help generate support for bail reform in Ontario?

The answer: why, of course, you’ll find them squeezed into a conference room at the Law Society of Ontario!

On Saturday February 1st, a diverse group of creatives – armed with coffee, muffins, flipcharts, sticky notes, and sharpies – excitedly dove into a 6-hour design sprint to find new ways to create enthusiasm for bail reform.

The Law & Design CoLab’s fourth . . . [more]

It is pretty clear that, in the past, lawyers did a great job disrupting themselves.

The term “disruption” comes from Clayton Christensen’s observation that the ability of a company to make a higher and higher performing product always outstrips the ability of customers to make use of these performance improvements. As technology pushes a product’s performance into “performance oversupply,” it changes the circumstances of the market. It becomes harder for to sustain attractive profit margins on the product. Companies in other parts of the value chain can begin to steal market share, or “disrupt” the incumbents. Companies find themselves . . . [more]

In a recent Law Society continuing education program on Indigenous Law Issues 2019, former Justice Harry LaForme offered a critique on the failure to appoint indigenous persons to the bench. In so doing, he made pointed comments regarding J0dy Wilson Raybould, Beverly McLachlin and Kim Campbell, three key influencers in making such appointments. He described the performance of Wilson Raybould as “sad”, and the reported statements of McLachlin and Campbell as “patronizing” or worse.

(LaForme’s remarks may be reviewed in full on the unique service provided by the Law Society which provides web access to continuing education programs offered . . . [more]

Creative Commons licences (also commonly referred to as CC licenses) are a less-restrictive alternative to those in the traditional copyright system. Since 2001, they have been used to encourage collaboration and create a space to allow for the public sharing of information.

There are a number of different licences, each with varying levels of restrictions, but with the overall goal of allowing people to share and build upon the work of others. Permissions to use the creator’s work are granted up front and to everyone. The Creative Commons organization has created a system of open licences using plain language . . . [more]

I’ve got blog-worthy good news. So good, in fact, that I’m persuaded to take a break from my consecutive blogs on amending American copyright for open access (my developing case here). Instead, I devote this blog to a far more here-and-now breakthrough in increasing public access to research.

It arises out of the work of a half-dozen anthropologists (and me), who think that, given their study of people and society, they have a moral duty to share that work with those people and that society. This group, Libraria by name, has worked over the last two years with Berghahn . . . [more]

A couple of recent decisions have provided some clarity to what prior art can be relied on to show that a patent is obvious. One of the cornerstones of patent law is that a patent must be for an invention that is ‘inventive’ or ‘non-obvious’. This leads to the next question, “inventive” compared to what?

A car with a six-cylinder internal combustion engine may be inventive if all you have is a bicycle but may not be inventive if you already have a car with a four-cylinder internal combustion engine.

The Patent Act, in section 28.3, states:

28.3

When I hear about the arrest of peaceful land protectors, I think about all the times I’ve heard that colonialism happened “a long time ago.” This is 2019. It never ended. When I see colonial violence in action I grieve not only for those brave people who stand peacefully as they are overwhelmed on their own lands, but also for future generations who will be forced to pay for our hubris.

-Hayalthkin’geme (Carey Newman), OBC, MSM, Audain Professor of Contemporary Art Practice of the Pacific Northwest at the University of Victoria

The ongoing “colonial violence” that Hayalthkin’geme speaks to is . . . [more]

Kudos to Professor John Lande (one of my heroes in the conflict management field) for his newest publication: Theories of Change for the Dispute Resolution Movement: Actionable Ideas to Revitalize Our Movement.

John’s Indisputably Post February 7^th provides a great overview of this unique volume – available for free.

It arose out of John’s worry about the future of ADR in legal education and his sense of discontent with the “usual” conference formats – you know the kind, lots of interesting panels with thought-provoking insights but no call to action. Not surprisingly, people leave the conference and . . . [more]

I have never cared for American football and have never watched a Super Bowl. My only interest is in the commercials produced for the American broadcast, which for the last many years I simply watch on line the day after the game. So for me, the matter that gave rise to the decision in dispute in Bell Canada v. Canada (Attorney General), 2019 SCC 66 (“Bell”) is not really important to me.

One of the best commercials that aired during Super Bowl LIV involved Bill Murray reprising his role as weatherman Phil Connors from the film Groundhog . . . [more]