Thanks to @StephanieDube for circulating this timeless piece of computer history, making 1981 (my second year of legal practice) look more like 1948.
The best thing about receiving the San Francisco Examiner on computer says one satisfied user, is being able to COPY IT!!
Thanks to the
National Arbitration Forum Blogfor this reminder about IP ADR:
Involved in an Intellectual Property Tiff? Consider ADR
In their article Keep a Lid on Costs in IP Disputes (Texas Lawyer, 1/26/2009), Ted D. Lee and Miguel Villarreal Jr. write that an executive whose company is hit with an intellectual property suit or who believes another company is infringing on their company's IP rights should know that IP cases are expensive to litigate. When faced with these challenges, the Texan lawyers propose settling as quickly and with the least expense as possible, with pre-trial settlement and alternative dispute resolution, such as mediation. "Consider alternative dispute resolution" and "keep the door open for settlement" made their list of ten areas to discuss with your IP lawyer.
I'll never forget watching an ABTL mock trial with two juries equipped with focus group dials. The mock trial concerned an allegation of copyright infringement and the two juries were comprised of the people likely to be hearing the evidence (regular people) and the people likely to be presenting it (lawyers).
Each mock juror in a focus group jury holds a dial. If the attorney questioning or the witness answering is making a favorable impression, the juror dials UP; if making an unfavorable impression, the juror dials DOWN (and you thought Coliseum days were over); and, if making NO impression, keeps the dial in the middle.
The audience watched a screen over the trial scene carrying two live graphs: one charting the lay jury's reaction and one charting the attorneys'.
Here's what happened -- the entire day. Whenever the lawyer or witness scored a "relevant" point -- established an essential element of his cause of action or undermined witness testimony that had been legally unfavorable, the attorney jury dialed up. The lay jury flat-lined. Whenever a lawyer or witness had a "relevant" point scored against them, the lawyer jury dialed down. And the lay jury flat-lined.
The lay jury dialed up when the witness seemed to be telling the truth of his or her experience (the story had narrative coherence) and dialed down when the witness appeared to be evasive.
Then we watched the lay jury deliberate and they did what juries do everywhere -- they cherry-picked the evidence that supported the party they believed and made facts up when challenged by jurors who contradicted them.
"She just made that up out of whole cloth" I remember saying to a fellow audience member.
And then every single juror who wanted that party to win accepted the new "fact" and incorporated it into their "story" of the case.
Got it? The jury doesn't care about your legal cause of action. Now Stanford Law School tells us that most patent infringement cases don't involve copying while trial consultants instruct that juries only care if inventions are copied. That's big (and unexpected) trouble for patent infringement plaintiffs and prosecutors. See How Juror Misconceptions Affect Patent Trials at Law.com here. Excerpt below.
[P]atent trials get played out on an emotional playing field, as well as a legal and technical one. Veteran trial lawyers and jury consultants say that most Americans think that infringement means inventors claiming they've been copied, their ideas "ripped off" or stolen. "Jurors will almost always talk about copying," says jury consultant Doug Green, even when copying has not been alleged. The idea that copying is at least unethical, if not illegal, is wired into Americans from grade school. Besides, juries don't like the idea of a plaintiff demanding money from a competitor who developed a product independently but simply lost a race to the patent office -- even though that's exactly what the law provides.
New research done using Stanford Law School's new IP Litigation Clearing House -- a searchable database of 78,000 intellectual property cases filed since 2000 -- demonstrates that formal allegations and findings of copying are actually quite rare in patent disputes. "No one seemed to know whether patent infringement defendants are in fact unscrupulous copyists or independent developers," says Stanford Law School professor Mark Lemley. Co-authored by Christopher Cotropia of University of Richmond Law School, the new research, which is published online by Stanford, attempts to answer that question, and does: It's overwhelmingly independent developers that are getting hit with patent lawsuits.
And if you want some seriously and steadily good advice about persuading your jury to do the right thing (or settling your case short of trial in light of the jury's probable pre-dispositions) put Anne Reed's fabulous ABA Top 100 Legal Blog Deliberations on your news reader.
Thanks to Rex Hammock's RexBlog for calling our attention to this fabulous Honda commercial on failure.
Favorite quotes:
Indy car driver: You're constantly on the brink of crashing, because that's the fastest.
Edison: I never failed. It just never worked 10,000 times.
From Wikipedia:
The theme music [to the Lone Ranger] was the "cavalry charge" finale of Gioacchino Rossini's William Tell Overture, now inseparably associated with the series, which also featured many other classical selections as incidental music including Wagner, Mendelssohn, Liszt, and Tchaikovsky. The theme was conducted by Daniel Perez Castaneda.
Classical music was used because it was in the public domain -- thus allowing production costs to be kept down while providing a wide range of music as needed without the costs of a composer. While this practice was started during the radio show, it was retained after the move to television in the budget-strapped early days of the ABC network.
For the over-50 crowd, this will bring back fond memories:
"With his faithful Indian companion, Tonto, the daring and resourceful masked rider of the plains led the fight for law and order in the early western United States. Nowhere in the pages of history can one find a greater champion of justice. Return with us now to those thrilling days of yesteryear. From out of the past come the thundering hoofbeats of the great horse Silver! The Lone Ranger rides again!" Episodes usually concluded with one of the characters lamenting the fact that they never learned the hero's name ("Who was that masked man?"), only to be told, "Why, he's the Lone Ranger!" as he and Tonto ride away.
From the Wikipedia entry on The Lone Ranger.
This film, set to Lenny Bruce's "Thank You Maskman" used to play in art houses before the (usually foreign) film you went to see.
From Six Ways to Get People to Say "Yes" at Copyblogger
6 Powerful Compliance Triggers
Here are six common compliance triggers identified by psychologists along with my suggestions for applying them to copywriting:
Reciprocation — There is an overwhelming urge to repay debts, to do something in return when something is done for us. This deep-seated urge is so strong, noted paleontologist Richard Leaky has said that it is the very essence of what it means to be human. Sociologist Alvin Gouldner points out that no society on Earth escapes the reciprocity principle.
Application: Give people something for free. Whoever is on the receiving end of your gift is then in your debt. What can you give? Anything: a free book, planning kit, sample, subscription, catalog, special report, or virtually anything else that’s related to your product or service, as long as it’s free. The urge to “repay” can then lead people to make a purchase.
Commitment and Consistency — We are driven to remain consistent in our attitudes, words, and actions. So, when we are led to make a commitment of some kind, to go on record or take a stand or make a decision, there is an urge to remain consistent with that original commitment later on. The key is to get the initial commitment, which can appear small, reasonable, and innocent. This commitment can not only lead to compliance via the principle of consistency, but also to further compliance for larger requests.
Application: Ask for a little “yes” first, then build on that. Sales people sometimes call this the “foot-in-the-door” technique. Begin by asking your prospect to agree to a simple request, such as making a small transaction or completing a simple questionnaire. By getting people to make a decision, take a stand, or perform an action, you establish a new psychological “commitment.” Once you have that commitment, no matter how small, you can build on this small commitment and make ever increasing requests.
Social Proof — Most of us are imitators in most of what we do. We look to others for guidance, especially when we are uncertain about something. We ask, “What do others think about this? What do others feel? What do others do?” Then we act accordingly, all thanks to the power of social proof.
Application: Show others using your services or buying your products. List testimonials of satisfied customers or clients. Feature stories of those who have been “converted” from another service. Show pictures of people using your product. Provide case histories of some of your best customers. When people see that what you offer is okay with other people, they are more likely to give it a try themselves.
Liking — No matter how reasonable we may think ourselves to be, we are always more likely to say “yes” to those we know and like. We readily comply with requests from those who are similar to us and for whom we have good feelings. It’s what makes refusing to buy Tupperware from a friend or relative next to impossible.
Application: Be personal and likable. This is one element of selling that most people know instinctively, but often fail to put into action. Getting people to like you in person is one thing. But how do you do it in print when people usually have no chance to meet you? Reveal yourself. Show your feelings. Tell a story that prospects can relate to. Use flattery and praise. Present your sales message in such a way that you are not just selling something but working with others as an ally with common problems, concerns, and goals.
Authority — In this age of specialization, we are more prone to respond to authority than ever before. Regardless of an independent spirit, we look to experts or those we perceive to be experts to give us the answers and show us the way. Even the mere symbols of authority, such as titles and specialized clothing, are enough to trigger a response. Example: Note how seeing someone with a white smock and stethoscope instantly suggests “doctor” and makes anything that person says about medicine seem more authoritative.
Application: Provide signs and symbols of expertise. Establish your expertise by providing solid information. Show your credentials. Create trustworthiness by admitting flaws or shortcomings and demonstrating lack of bias. Show similarities between you and your prospect or customer. Cite awards, reviews, speaking engagements, and books you’ve authored. You can also “borrow” authority by associating yourself with those who have authority. Example: Show a photograph of yourself with someone your prospects will consider an authority.
Scarcity — In general, the fear of loss is more powerful than the hope of gain. By properly engaging the instinctive tendency to avoid losing something — or avoid losing the chance to possess something desirable — you can trigger a “yes” response with scarcity.
Application: Create time limits and limited availability. A “reply by” date is one of the most powerful ways to create scarcity. You can do this with a specific deadline or expiration date. If you can’t be specific about the date, use a general deadline, such as “reply within the next 10 days.” Use limited availability by mentioning how fast your supply is selling or citing the actual number of items that remain. You can also put constraints on supply, such as limiting memberships to the first 500 or creating a limited edition with X number being produced. The video division of Disney creates scarcity by putting their videos “back in the vault” so if you want a copy, you must order immediately or miss your chance.
For full article, click here.
From Wired:
The Recording Industry Association of America is objecting to the webcasting of pretrial arguments in an upcoming file-sharing trial.
The RIAA claims that the re-runs "will be readily subject to editing and manipulation by any reasonably tech-savvy individual."
That is among the arguments the RIAA is making in urging a federal appeals court to reverse a Massachusetts federal judge's order that would allow the pretrial broadcast this Thursday. The broadcast, assuming it goes forward, will include a Boston University student and his attorney challenging the RIAA's copyright infringement case. It is believed to be the first time a U.S. federal trial court has allowed a live internet stream from the courtroom.
"Petitioners are concerned that, unlike a trial transcript, the broadcast of a court proceeding through the internet will take on a life of its own in that forum," the RIAA wrote (.pdf) the U.S. 1st Circuit Court of Appeals. "The broadcast will be readily subject to editing and manipulation by any reasonably tech-savvy individual. Even without improper modification, statements may be taken out of context, spliced together with other statements and broadcast (sic) rebroadcast as if it were an accurate transcript.
Such an outcome can only do damage to Petitioner's case."
For full article, click here. Thanks to Gwynne Monahan tweeting as @econwriter5.
Mediator blah blah receives Honorable Mention!! Congratulations to New Zealand's master mediation blogger Geoff Sharp!
NEW YORK, NY, January 16, 2009 – The International Institute for Conflict Prevention & Resolution (CPR Institute), a membership-based, nonprofit alliance of global corporations, law firms, scholars, and public institutions dedicated to the principles of commercial conflict prevention and alternative dispute resolution, announced the winners of the 26th Annual CPR Awards Program at a dinner held at New York’s Barclay InterContinental on January 15.
The CPR Institute’s Awards Program honors outstanding scholarship and practical achievement in the field of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). Award criteria focused on processes, techniques, systems, commitment, and scholarship which address the resolution, prevention or creative management of major disputes involving public or business institutions between corporations, between government and corporations, or among multiple parties. The judges of the CPR Awards comprise judges and lawyers from leading corporations, top law firms, and academic institutions across the U.S.
According to Kathleen Bryan, President and CEO of the CPR Institute, “As the ADR field grows more sophisticated, the search for effective problem solving approaches and best practices continues to move CPR’s mission forward. Many times, it is the work of our colleagues and peers that inspires our own activities and motivates us to spearhead innovation and promote excellence. It is for this reason, each year, CPR celebrate advancements and contributions to the field of conflict management.”
Outstanding Original Professional Article
The award for Outstanding Original Professional Article recognizes an article published by academics and other professionals that advance understanding in the field of ADR. The 2008 CPR Award for Outstanding Original Professional Article was awarded to Christos Ravanides for his work, “Arbitration Clauses in Public Company Charters: An Expansion of the ADR Elysian Fields or a Descent into Hades”, 18(4) Am Rev Int’l Arb (2008).
Outstanding Original Student Article
The award for Outstanding Original Student Article recognizes an article or paper focused on events or issues in the field of ADR. The 2008 CPR Award for Outstanding Student Article was awarded to Katherine Dirks for her article, “Note: Ethical Rules of Conduct in the Settlementof Mass Torts: A Proposal to Reverse Rule 1.8 (G).” 83 N.Y.U. Law Rev. 501 (2008).
Outstanding Book
The award for Outstanding Book recognizes a published book that advances understanding in the field of ADR. The 2008 CPR Award for Outstanding Book was awarded to two particularly influential publications: Negotiation Genius: How to Overcome Obstacles and Achieve Brilliant Results at the Bargaining Table and Beyond, Harvard Business School Press, Bantam Books (2007) by Deepak Malhotra and Max H. Bazerman, and Challenging Conflict: Mediation Through Understanding, ABA Section on Dispute Resolution/PON (2008) by Gary Friedman and Jack Himmelstein.
Outstanding Short Article and Blog
The award for Outstanding Short Article recognizes a short article published by academics or other professionals that advance understanding in the field of ADR, with an emphasis on advancements of international understanding. The 2008 CPR Award for Outstanding Short Article was awarded to David Hoffman for this work, “Microsoft and Yahoo: Where Were the Mediators? They Help Countries and Couples, Why Not Businesses?”, The Christian Science Monitor (2008).
In addition, Honorable Mention was awarded to Geoff Sharp for his blog, “Mediator Blah … Blah …”, Mediation (2008). As a result of this submission, CPR is creating a new category for 2009, entitled Outstanding Electronic Media, which will recognize, blogs, websites and other electronic media that have in the subject year made an outstanding contribution to the field of ADR.
CPR Institute provides thought leadership and innovation as the global resource for conflict management and resolution of complex business-related disputes. Its wealth of intellectual property and published material has educated and motivated General Counsel and their law firms around the world toward an increased reliance on alternative forms of dispute resolution rather than litigation. CPR Institute’s membership is comprised of general counsel and senior lawyers of Fortune 1,000 organizations, partners in the top law firms around the world, as well as leading judges, government officials, neutrals, and academics. Its proprietary panel of esteemed arbitrators and mediators has provided resolutions in thousands of cases, with billions of dollars at issue, worldwide. For more information, please visit www.cpradr.org <http://www.cpradr.org> .
ADR in IP Litigation from ALI-ABA
Wednesday February 18, 2009 from 1:00-2:00 pm EST
Why Attend?
In a difficult economy, intellectual property protection and assertion is more important than ever. The combined stressors of a poor fiscal climate and shrinking legal budgets place a significant strain on any business dependent upon IP assets. as companies face difficult economic decisions, it is increasingly difficult to fit the expense and extended uncertainty of copyright, patent and trademark litigation into a forward looking business plan. This one-hour seminar explores the use of alternative dispute resolution as a means of protecting intellectual property and business activity, while minimizing the expense and devotion of time related to traditional IP litigation.
What You Will Learn
This program examines how to move an IP dispute toward alternative dispute resolution; best practices for controlling the expense and length of the process; and best practices for successful alternative dispute resolution. Whether you are an experienced IP practitioner or simply one grappling with IP issues in your general commercial practice, knowing how to offer your clients a wide array of ADR options might make the difference between a practice that survives and one that thrives. The seminar will cover the following topics:
How to choose between litigation and ADR.
- The most successful strategies for guiding your dispute into the best ADR forum at the most productive time.
- The five basic rules of “distributive” or “fixed sum” bargaining that will give you the “edge” in all future settlement negotiations.
- The five ways to “expand the fixed sum pie” by exploring and exploiting the client interests underlying your own and your opponents’ legal positions.
- The Ten Mediation/Settlement Conference Traps for the Unwary.
Invest just 60 minutes at your home or office to learn about alternative dispute resolution in the IP field from this duo of experts. This audio program comes to you live on Wednesday, February 18, 2009, 1:00-2:00 pm EST, via your phone or your computer. Materials corresponding to the course may be downloaded or viewed online.
Planning Chair
R. David Donoghue, Esquire, Holland & Knight LLP, Chicago, IL
Faculty
Victoria Pynchon, Esquire, Settle It Now Dispute Resolution Services, Beverly Hills, CA
This week, Susan Cartier Liebel (@SusanCartierLiebel) she of Build a Solo Practice and Solo Practice University, hosts Blawg Review #194 on our favorite theme: innovation, using the Phoenix as her inspiration. As Susan explains:
The Phoenix represents to many the life cycle: birth, growth, death and re-birth because from the ashes life arises anew often strengthened through reinvention. But this happens not just from reinvention of oneself but through innovation. And innovation helps to propel us forward.
The term innovation means a new way of doing something. It may refer to incremental, radical, and revolutionary changes in thinking, products, processes, or organizations. A distinction is typically made between Invention, an idea made manifest, and Innovation, ideas applied successfully. (Mckeown 2008) In many fields, something new must be substantially different to be innovative, not an insignificant change, e.g., in the arts, economics, business and government policy. In economics the change must increase value, customer value, or producer value. The goal of innovation is positive change, to make someone or something better. Innovation leading to increased productivity is the fundamental source of increasing wealth in an economy.
As we face the new year in what can only cheerfully be called a "down" economy (as opposed to one that's been systematically strip-mined) innovation is precisely what we need.
So run on over to Susan's Blawg Review for the best innovative posts of the new year.
Next week, the Blawg Review Inaugural and Martin Luther King, Jr. Day Special at On Being a Black Lawyer.
Blawg Review submission guidelines here. Join the community by hosting Blawg Review in 2009 here.
Larry Lessig on The Colbert Report Deeplink by Tim Jones from Electronic Frontier Foundation.
Last night, Larry Lessig, a close ally and former board member of EFF, chatted with Stephen Colbert about Lessig's new book Remix, and how America's broken copyright laws are criminalizing our kids:
Colbert: Isn't that like saying that arson laws are turning our kids into pyromaniacs?? They're breaking the law! You can't just throw the law out the window!Lessig: "Totally failed war." Is that familiar to you?
Of course, remixes on YouTube promptly followed!
Check out Chicago IP Litigation this morning on patent litigation wisdom from the bench.
Chief Judge Michel: The State of Patent Law
Making good on his promise to turn his IP Colloquium into National Public Radio for IP law, Doug Lichtman's newest offering is an extended interview with Federal Circuit Chief Judge Michel. Click here to listen to Licthman's interview, you can even apply for New York or California CLE credit after listening.
Mosey on over to David's blog for a summary of Lichtman's most compelling advice.
Follow David on Twitter here. H/t to @kdtalcott.
Being a British Barrister Blogger, Charon QC, the Host of Blawg Review #193 is nothing if not Bold, Bawdy, Brazen, and Bodacious without being at all Blustery or Bullying.
For my IP ADR Readers, I'll highlight the IP Deadly Sins which IP disputes might fit comfortably inside -- including luxuria (extravagance, later lust), gula (gluttony), avaritia (greed), acedia (sloth), ira (wrath), invidia (envy), and superbia (pride).
Though I'm giving you an IP executive summary of No. 193, there's no reason to put off your own pleasure by stopping here rather than by hoping across to pond to experience Charon first hand, yourself.
Lust: The only IP connection for Lust in #193 is Charon's reference to my own solipsistic link in "Blawg" Review #171 to Kate Monro's stunning Virginity Project Blog - a post set in Torrance and La Mesa, California in 1970, which Charon is kind enough to call "good."
Gluttony: There appears to be an original work worthy of copyright protection at Lacklustre Lawyer, wherein Barack O'Bama is said, lyrically, to be . . . yes! Irish! (that accounts for the smoking addiction; hows quitting going, Barack?)
Greed: Well, certainly we should find some greed among the classes possessed by possession. I am NOT referring to a suit I learned about just today in which an ink cartridge manufacturer has pasted warnings on its products that the the cartridge itself is not be sold, but rather licensed, in an attempt to put the ink-refillers out of business (sheesh). Rather, Charon refers us to the Wired GC's disqusition on Steve Jobs in This Year Can Fly Away.
Sloth: This topic gives Charon the right to talk about legal tweeters, a subject that makes my husband wince (blogging was bad enough). I try not to talk about it. But Charonc takes it head on, giving
an honourable mention to a woman who has over 20,000 tweets to her name….
@infobunny. A virtual bottle of Rioja for her excellent *#bumsngin* theme with pics of bums and gin bottles and for her Piratical Christmas Advent calendar - revealed each day on… Twitter.
Wrath: Because this is an ADR as well as an IP Blog (and IP, strangely, does not appear under wrath despite the rage theft of one's innovative product design invariable produces), we note Charon's reference to Justin Patten's stellar blog, Human Law, mentioning that Justin
takes wrath in his stride. He is an enthusiastic supporter of mediation and has been around in the blogging community in the UK since 1189. His most recent post is appropriate for inclusion in this section…“Picking the right solution for conflicts at work”.
Envy: IPKat makes an appearance under "Envy" -- Charon calling IPKat "a must for UK IP fanatics," citing IPKat's post this week about ”Artist’s resale right derogation - [admitting] the IPKat was wrong”.
Pride: The TV screens mentioned by Charon may not be embroiled in IP disputes, but at least their ˆcontent" is indisputably IP,
“Celebrity Big Brother is back with freaks and celebs for all. Lucy Pinder has attracted attention because of her natural 32G chest and because she is according to the Sun, “posh totty”, a “bit of a Tory” and “admires Margaret Thatcher for being the first female PM”. The 25-year-old is coulrophobic — she is scared of clowns - which may also explain her antipathy to Gordon Brown.”
That's the Executive IP Review of Blawg Review #193 - an anemic version of the original which you should repair to immediately, preferably with a glass of vintage wine suitable to Charon's fine taste.
As to Blawg Review #194 over at Build a Solo Practice, please send your submission to Ed. at BR here.
I understand Susan Cartier Liebel over at BSP will be using "innovation" for her theme so its an excellent opportunity for IP Bloggers to see themselves featured as the best of the blogs for the week!
Victoria Pynchon
Les J. Weinstein
Eric Van Ginkel
Michael D. Young
John L. Wagner
Jay McCauley
Enter keywords:
Live Telephone Seminar
