An unfiltered view of all posts.

What the Supreme Court’s New Abortion Opinion Could Mean for Americans’ Privacy Rights – and Why It Matters

By: Maggie Shahrestani,
Alex Shahrestani

The new case criticizes the legal method used to establish a Constitutional right to an abortion. But judges have used that same method to establish a right to privacy. Could overturning one eliminate the other?

Possibly. 

In early May of this year, a Supreme Court opinion leaked to the press before being finalized and published. Officially, the Court ruled in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health, which concerns a Mississippi abortion law and whether it violates the Constitutional right to an abortion, on June 24, 2022. The final ruling looks broadly like the leaked draft, and the precedent set by past Supreme Court rulings – that women have an intrinsic right to an abortion prior to fetal viability – has been undone. There is no constitutional abortion right at all in the United States. Instead, abortion is just another policy matter decided by state and federal legislatures. 

Various media outlets have tackled questions what this ruling could mean for access to abortions and the more broad-reaching effects on marriage equality and LGBTQ+ rights. But perhaps less obviously, this case could cast doubt on Americans’ right to personal privacy.



 

Privacy: A Right Beneath the Surface

Strictly speaking, there is no overarching “right to privacy” in the Constitution. At least not explicitly in the text itself. Yet abortion cases like Roe and Casey, and the famous marriage equality case, Obergefell, depend heavily on a Constitutional right to privacy. If a privacy right is not explicitly stated in the document, how did the Justices find it there?

Without going too deep into the weeds, the short answer is they made an inference. Starting with a case in 1965, the Court inferred that certain explicitly stated rights – such as the right to refuse to house soldiers in your home, and protection from unreasonable searches and seizures – each assume and imply a zone of privacy around an individual’s home and personal life. The zone of privacy exists then, even though it’s not explicitly stated. It’s a right that lingers beneath the text of the Constitution.

Since that time, that Constitutional zone of privacy has been recognized and protected in cases touching on all kinds of issues, including whether parents have the freedom to educate their children as they see fit, whether states can prohibit the study of particular languages, and of course, whether there is a Constitutional right to an abortion.

Shaking the Foundations

In the opinion, Justice Alito broadly criticizes the Court’s tendency to recognize Constitutional rights that are not explicitly stated in the text of the document. The opinion calls Roe, “remarkably loose in its treatment of the Constitutional text.” That scathing comment specifically aimed not just at the Roe Court’s identification of abortion rights, but at its identification of the essential underlying right to privacy. “It [the Roe Court] held that the abortion right, which is not mentioned in the Constitution, is part of a right to privacy, which is also not mentioned.”

The opinion, which reverses Roe on the issue of abortion rights, stops short of eliminating the privacy right. However, it is clear that the Court’s reasoning applies to all implicitly granted rights, and the opinion hints that any presumed Constitutionally-based right to privacy rests on shaky ground:

“Roe. . . was remarkably loose in its treatment of the constitutional text. It held that the abortion right, which is not mentioned in the Constitution, is part of a right to privacy, which is also not mentioned.”

“[The] Court found support for a constitutional ‘right of personal privacy,’ but it conflated two very different meanings of the term: the right to shield information from disclosure and the right to make and implement important personal decisions without governmental interference. Only the cases involving this second sense of the term could have any possible relevance to the abortion issue, and some of the cases in that category involved personal decisions that were obviously very, very far afield.”

In our view, the Court’s attempt to make a distinction between snooping and meddling is a dangerous one to make. We go back to basics to explain why: What is privacy? Where should we draw the line between public and personal?

Why Privacy Matters

In the world of virtual work and the all-pervasive digital marketing machine, there is no shortage of hand-wringing about privacy rights. But what is rarely discussed is the fundamental question of why privacy matters so much. If we can better-articulate the vague, slippery certainty we have that somehow privacy does matter, and matters deeply – then we are better equipped to draw the line between what belongs to everyone and what is rightfully hidden from the public eye.

So here is our attempt at an answer.

Our view is that privacy rights are synonymous with identity rights. The space elevated beyond intrusion is a space where a person can decide who they want to be. And in fact, that very right to choose who you want to be is useless – even nonexistent – without a protected space where you can explore and experiment. 

For example, if you come from a particular religious or philosophical background, it can be difficult or even damaging to explore opposing viewpoints with the participation of your local community. The outcome of your decision on how to process the additional information should be determined by your actual decision, not by the inferences which might be made by an outside observer. If your community is able to observe you throughout the learning process, there is much less room to question, explore, and grow.

Imagine getting dressed and doing your hair in the morning in front of the whole world. Imagine all your thoughts and ideas being on display to everyone, instead of just the ones you choose to share. Or if a writer could not delete or edit any of their work before publishing.

Just as a sculptor creates art by carving away material, we create ourselves by editing parts of our thinking, by crumpling up versions of ourselves and tossing them out. We are all more complicated, more blurry around the edges than the version of ourselves we share with the world. And the only reason we have the freedom to create ourselves is that we have a wall to hide behind. 

This brings us back to the Court’s dangerous distinction in Dobbs. 

Given this understanding of privacy as the ability to choose your identity, is there really a difference between the right to “shield information” and the right to make personal decisions without interference? We would argue that these are two sides of the same coin. To be watched is to be constrained. To be tracked is to be disrupted.

The Future of Privacy 

Where do we go from here? Is the writing on the wall for Americans’ constitutional right to privacy?

Not necessarily. The Alito opinion stops short of throwing out all rights that aren’t explicitly in the Constitution. Instead it cautions that the Court should have a high bar for such inferred rights, and it agrees with past rulings that there is a particular way to test for an implied right. 

Specifically, there are two questions to ask to determine whether a right can be inferred: One, is the right deeply rooted in U.S. history and tradition? And two, is it essential to the nation’s “scheme of ordered liberty”?

In the opinion, the abortion right does not meet that threshold. It is not deeply rooted in U.S. history and tradition; no state constitution ever contained such a right, and in fact most states outlawed abortion for a good portion of history. 

But privacy? That’s a whole different ballgame. As early as the 1740s, some English courts already recognized a right not to have one’s private papers seized by public authorities.

With a host of historical examples, it seems likely that the debate will not be over whether a privacy right exists at all, but rather over its scope. Does it cover privacy in the home only, or in the doctor’s office too? Does it prevent the government from spying on you? The right to make very personal decisions without government interference?

These questions will need answers in future cases. But regardless of where the courts end up landing, what seems certain to us is that privacy is in for a shake-up. And good news for U.S. history professors and graduate students everywhere – scholarship on the history of privacy will become very relevant in the American legal system.

You are currently viewing How to Protect Your Ideas As a Startup Founder – Part III

How to Protect Your Ideas As a Startup Founder – Part III

In our previous two posts, we discussed your company’s ability to keep an ex-cofounder from walking away with the company’s business idea. We covered some preventive measures you can take, but ultimately we also concluded that the startup world is messy. Companies are constantly failing and pivoting and restarting and morphing into something totally different. It’s not always easy to track which parts of which ideas belong to which people.

So what if you walk away from a startup, and you want to start a new company using an idea you previously shared with your former cofounders? Is that okay? Or do you risk a lawsuit from your former company?

As we discussed in Part II, it all depends on whether the idea is protectable and — crucially — whether it’s entirely yours. 

Here are some steps you can take to make sure everyone is on the same page regarding whose ideas belong to whom:

  1. Use careful language.

As a co-founder, you probably throw ideas out to your team all the time. “We should do X!” or “Let’s try Y!” But if you’re pitching an idea to the company, use language like, “I have this idea, is this something the company would be interested in?” 

  1. Document conversations.

Send emails and texts about your ideas. If there’s an intellectual property dispute later, you want to be able to point to a paper trail documenting who came up with the idea at issue. You can use that careful language in this written correspondence, even if you’ve been a bit less precise in your casual conversations. 

  1. Be up-front about your plans.

Ultimately your best bet to avoid a dispute in the future is good relationship management. If you’re really attached to an idea that your co-founders are not as keen on, be clear that you may want to run with it in the future, even if that means starting another company. 

  1. Be clear about which IP you’re assigning to the company.

If you have a formal employment agreement with your startup, there’s a good chance you’ve signed something “assigning” any intellectual property developed for the company over to the company. If you already have another business idea that’s in the same general realm or industry as the startup, it would be wise to consult an attorney before signing it. And make sure it’s an attorney that represents you, not the company. (Don’t go to a lawyer on the board of directors or the startup’s outside general counsel.)

  1. Be on the same page before you act – and get it in writing.  

Hopefully if you’ve been clear about your plans all along — or even if you haven’t — having a candid conversation with your cofounders before leaving to start a company in a competing or adjacent space will prevent misunderstandings. Ideally you and your startup will sign a legal agreement that clarifies who owns what before you actually get started on your new venture. Regardless of how things have been handled up to this point, this written agreement is your best protection if your wanting to start a new and potentially competing venture. 

Thanks for reading our series on How to Protect Your Ideas As a Startup Founder! Please note that this is general information not legal advice. If you have questions about your specific circumstances, feel free to reach out for a consultation! 

You are currently viewing How to Protect Your Ideas As a Startup Founder – Part II

How to Protect Your Ideas As a Startup Founder – Part II

In our last post, we talked about whether or not it’s legal for an ex-cofounder to leave and start a competitor using your business idea. This time, we want to talk about big question #2: how can you prevent that?

  1. Make Sure Cofounders “Hand Over” Their Intellectual Property

This is perhaps the best way to prevent a future IP dispute with departing cofounders.  When someone develops an idea, that idea by default belongs to the person that came up with it. So if you want the idea to belong to the company and its owners, in shares corresponding to ownership percentage, you need cofounders to formally hand over — the legal term is “assign” — those ideas to the company. 

Talk to your lawyer about drafting an intellectual property assignment for all the cofounders to sign. (Hot tip: This is also something you’ll want to put in employment agreements and contracts with 1099 employees.)

  1. Mark Information as Confidential.

To qualify as legally protected confidential information in the eyes of the law, among other factors, the relevant information must be reasonably protected and shared in confidence. You can create a paper trail showing your business idea is confidential by marking email correspondence, memos, and other correspondence and related documentation as confidential. Remind cofounders in to be discrete about sharing the business idea unless the company is doing so as part of a mentor relationship or an investor pitch. 

  1. Make Sure Cofounders Sign a Confidentiality Agreement

Having you and your cofounders sign a non-disclosure agreement, or NDA, is another way to provide some level of protection for your business ideas. These agreements bind the signers not to reveal the information subject to the agreement, and they’re enforceable so long as the signer is receiving something of value in return (such as equity). If a cofounder has signed an NDA and then leaves to start a company based on the same idea, you may have a breach of contract claim based on their violating the NDA. 

  1. Have Realistic Expectations 

Be aware that it’s very difficult to entirely prevent someone from taking your business idea. The measures we outline here provide some protection but never guarantee the outcome you want. And even if you’ve done everything right, it may not make financial sense to sue an ex-founder or their company. Courts will require a showing of damages — quantifiable losses related to the theft – and in the early days of a startup, those losses are hard to show. That said, taking the steps we describe here can discourage an ex-partner from stealing your ideas. After all, a lawsuit from your company would be difficult to explain to investors (and certainly won’t help attract more funding!). 

In Part III, we’ll tackle this issue from another perspective. What if you’re the ex-founder, and you want to make sure you didn’t accidentally hand over your million-dollar idea?

You are currently viewing How to Protect Your Ideas As a Startup Founder – Part I

How to Protect Your Ideas As a Startup Founder – Part I

What if your cofounder decides to leave your startup and start their own? What if it’s a competitor? And what if it uses some variation on the same idea at the heart of your original company? 

Is that legal? How can you prevent it? How can you get away with it?

I’d like to address each of these in turn. First, is it legal?

Intellectual Property 101 for Founders 

Intellectual property is a whole legal discipline dealing with ownership rights in ideas. When you’re talking about copyright, trademark, and patents — all those are types of intellectual property. But there is also such a thing as confidential information, including trade secrets, which are not registered with the USPTO but are still protected by intellectual property law. So:

Whether your cofounder’s actions are legal depends heavily on two questions:

(1) Is the idea protectable under the law?

And

(2) Does the idea belong to the company or the individual?

So, first things first: Is your business idea protectable under the law? The best argument for protecting your idea is that the idea is confidential information — meaning it has commercial value, it’s not in the public domain, it is reasonably protected, and it was communicated to others in confidence. Those last two factors are going to be important for founders hoping to protect their idea.

Second, does the idea belong to the company or the individual? This is tricky. If founders never officially “hand over” their ideas to the company, those ideas may still be the property of the individual founders. If the idea was developed through contributions from multiple people, all the contributors potentially have some claim on the value of the idea. If you never took formal steps to assign founders’ IP to the company, it will be an uphill, and likely losing, battle to keep your ex-cofounder from starting a direct competitor. 

So, Question #1: Is it legal for an ex founder to take your business idea?

Maybe. If you never took formal steps to assign founders’ IP to the company, it will be an uphill battle to keep your ex-cofounder from starting a direct competitor.

In Part II:
We’ll cover some steps you can take as a company owner to better protect your intellectual property. 

You are currently viewing New Texas Bill Would Require Workers Compensation in Construction

New Texas Bill Would Require Workers Compensation in Construction

This year at the Texas Legislature, two lawmakers — one in the House and one in the Senate — are proposing a bill that requires construction contractors to opt into the state worker’s compensation system. The bill is likely destined to fail. But even if it passed, it wouldn’t solve the state’s bigger problem: misclassification of employees.

SB 305 (Sen. Sarah Eckhardt)
HB 776 (Rep. Armando Walle)

What is Workers Compensation?

Workers compensation is designed to be a somewhat cookie cutter process to get injured workers paid to cover medical and other costs. It results in lower payouts than a big civil lawsuit win, but the payment is more certain. The process is more bureaucratic than adversarial. There’s no trial, just an application. You’re injured? You’re covered? Then you get paid. 

Texas is one of only two states in the country that allow businesses to “opt out” of the state worker’s compensation program. When a company opts out, it means that when workers get injured, the only thing they can do to recover costs is sue their employer. And if the employer is doesn’t have the funds, then there’s no money at all to cover the costs of injury. 

Worker’s Comp in the Texas Construction Industry

Lack of worker’s compensation is a particularly serious problem for workers in the construction industry, where onsite injuries are relatively common. Many construction contractors opt out of workers’ comp to save on the cost of premiums and keep bids low. As a result, when workers are injured, they end up in hospitals receiving uncompensated care — so ultimately the hospitals (and the local governments that subsidize them) foot the bill. As do the workers themselves, who often end up deeply in debt.

The Shortcomings of SB 305 and HB 776

So would passing this bill help make sure injured construction workers get covered?

Unfortunately, not really. The bill requires contractors to get coverage for their employees. But the vast majority of contractors in Texas classify a huge percentage of their onsite workers as “contractors” as opposed to employees — even though many are, by the legal definition, technically employees. Contractors do this for a variety of reasons, including saving on employment taxes and, not least of all, to be able to hire people without investigating their immigration status. 

To be clear: misclassification of employees as contractors is illegal. But it is a widespread practice.

These bills, if passed, may well result in coverage for more people in the construction industry. But their impact will be severely limited by the number of employees in the industry who are unlawfully misclassified.

Visit our Resources Page to check out our handy legislative search tool and see what other bills have been filed this session!

 

You are currently viewing When Does A Living Trust Make Sense?

When Does A Living Trust Make Sense?

Living trusts have become more popular as estate planning instruments, but are they always the best option?

What is a Trust?

 A trust is one way to attach instructions to a set of assets. For example, you might put funds in trust for your granddaughter with rules for when it pays out: Maybe she has to graduate from a 4-year college and reach age 25 before the trust pays out. Or maybe she gets 1/3 of the funds at 25 and the rest at age 30. The rules are really up to the person who creates the trust and contributes the funds. They can be as simple or as complicated as you like. A revocable living trust is unique because you can still freely access the funds you’ve put in trust for as long as you live.

Trusts in Estate Planning

Because trusts can be used to set aside money with instructions for use, they can be tools for giving away assets after you die. This is especially the case in states where using a will to distribute your assets is more costly. For example, in California, a $500,000 state distributed could cost around $26,000 to distribute with a will. A million-dollar estate would be closer to $46,000. These fees come from a mandatory court process that a will must undergo, called probate.

By contrast, assets distributed using a trust do not need to go through the same probate process, often saving the family time and money. This is one of the reasons trusts have become so popular in states with costly probate procedures.

Living Trusts in Texas

In Texas, probate is often much quicker and more cost-effective than in states like California. In large part, this is because Texas allows for what’s called “independent administration,” which is essentially means that the distribution of assets can happen without the supervision of the court. There must be an initial hearing to show the will is valid, but after that the family can handle the administration without ever going back to court — so long as the will has been drafted correctly and other requirements are met.

So, if probate is easy and cheap in Texas, do we really need living trusts here?

The short answer is no. Trusts are usually more expensive up-front and require a bit more maintenance and attention throughout your life. For many people, it just doesn’t make sense to use a trust when a will can get the job done just fine.

However, that’s not to say that a trust is never the right option. Here are some reasons to consider a trust — beyond just avoiding probate.

Why Choose a Trust?

  • For Privacy. As part of the probate process, a will gets filed in the public record. However, a trust document doesn’t need to be made public in the same way.
  • For a Quick Transition. Even if probate costs are lower in Texas, it still does take some time to probate and then administer a will. A trust instrument is effective immediately on death, meaning beneficiaries don’t have to wait to access funds — unless of course the trust document itself requires it.
  • For Business Continuity. Ownership interests in a business are also part of your estate. If the slow march of probate might inhibit important business decisions, you’ll want to find a way to pass along those interests faster. A trust is one way; a buy-sell agreement is another.
  • For Control. If you don’t want to give assets to someone outright, but instead want to make the funds conditional or earmarked for certain things — like education or housing — a living trust might be one option. However, you can also create a trust in your will, called a “testamentary trust,” to accomplish the same purpose and potentially at less expense.
  • To Deal with Out-of-State Property. Texas wills can govern the disposition of all your property anywhere in the world — except dirt. So an Illinois-based bank account can get distributed with a will, but not an Illinois condo. Your family (or whoever you appointed as executor) will have to go through the probate process in every state where you own real estate. By putting all your real estate in a trust, you can avoid that inconvenience and expense.

You are currently viewing The Life Of A Lawyer By The Numbers

The Life Of A Lawyer By The Numbers

I’m a little bit unusual for a lawyer – I like numbers! While my mental math skills have definitely been on the decline since I started the journey of being a lawyer, my appreciation for them has not. In particular, I like data. Maybe it’s the computer scientist in me that causes my fascination with numbers, functions, and outputs, I don’t know. Whatever the cause, I like having statistics on hand. 


While there are a number of places to find statistics about the practice of law, it’s hard to find one single repository for all of that information. As all of my former law school classmates will probably tell you, if I don’t like something, I’ll try to fix it!


Here is a compilation of statistics about the life of a lawyer, with a heartfelt thanks to each of the organizations responsible for producing the data.


Have a legal statistic you want to update or add? Let me know!


Employment


Employment of legal occupations is projected to grow 7 percent from 2018 to 2028, faster than the average for all occupations, which will result in about 93,300 new jobs. (bls.gov)


According to the American Bar Association’s National Lawyer Population Survey , a compilation of data collected by state bar associations or licensing agencies, there were over 1.3 million resident and active attorneys as of December 2016. (bls.gov)


The lowest 10 percent of lawyers earned less than $59,670, and the highest 10 percent earned more than $208,000. (bls.gov)


In 2020, the number of attorneys nationally decreased from 1,328,692 to 1,352,027, a 1.7% decrease. (americanbar.org)


In 2020, the number of attorneys in Texas increased to 92,833 from 91,244, a 1.7% increase; Texas experienced the third highest attorney growth rate behind Oklahoma and Nevada. (americanbar.org)


In 2020, there was one attorney for every 244 people in the US. (statista.com/census.gov)


Demographics


Representation


In 2019, 36.4% of lawyers were women. (bls.gov)


In 2019, 24% of law partners were women. (nalp.org)


In 2019, 47% of law associates were women. (nalp.org)


In 2019, 37% of law firm counsel were women. (nalp.org)


In 2019, 86.6% of lawyers were white. (bls.gov)


In 2019, 5.9% of lawyers were black. (bls.gov)


In 2019, 5.7% of lawyers were Asian. (bls.gov)


In 2019, 5.8% of lawyers were Hispanic. (bls.gov)


In 2019, 10% of law partners were people of color. (nalp.org)


In 2019, 25% of law associates were people of color. (nalp.org)


In 2019, 12% of law firm counsel were people of color. (nalp.org)


In 2019, 3% of law partners were women of color. (nalp.org)


In 2019, 14% of law associates were women of color. (nalp.org)


In 2019, 6% of law firm counsel were women of color. (nalp.org)


In 2019, 0.46% of law partners were lawyers with disabilities. (nalp.org)


In 2019, 0.59% of law associates were lawyers with disabilities. (nalp.org)


In 2019, 2% of law partners identified as LGBT. (nalp.org)


In 2019, 4% of law associates identified as LGBT. (nalp.org)


In 2019, 2% of law partners were military veterans. (nalp.org)


In 2019, 1% of law associates were military veterans. (nalp.org)


Ideology


In 2017, 68% of lawyers who make political contributions give more money to Democrats than to Republicans. (harvard.edu)


In 2017, 76% of lawyers who attended law school at either the University of Virginia, the University of Chicago, Harvard, Yale, or Columbia and make political contributions give more money to Democrats than to Republicans. (harvard.edu)


Cases


In 2019, the US Courts of Appeals had 48,486 cases filed, a decrease of 1.6% over 2018 and a slowing of the trend to decrease appellate cases. (uscourts.gov)


In 2019, the US District Courts had 297,877 civil cases filed, an increase of 5.3% over 2018. (uscourts.gov)


In 2019, the US District Courts had 92,678 criminal cases filed, an increase of 6.3% over 2018. (uscourts.gov)


In 2019, the US Bankruptcy Courts had 776,674 cases filed, an increase of 0.4% over 2018. (uscourts.gov)


In 2019, there were 128,904 people under post-conviction supervision, a decrease of 0.6% over 2018. (uscourts.gov)


Income


In 2018, 49.6% of reporting recent law school graduates had salaries between $45,000 and $75,000. (nalp.org)


In 2018, the reported average salary of recent law school graduates was $98,150. (nalp.org)


In 2018, the adjusted average salary of recent law school graduates was $91,833. (nalp.org)


In 2019, the average billable hourly rate was $253 nationwide. (clio.com)


In 2019, the average billable hourly rate was $280 in the state of Texas. (clio.com)


In 2019, the average billable hourly rate in Dallas, Texas was $307, and the average billable hourly rate in Houston, Texas was $297. (clio.com)


Public Service


In 2018, the average entry-level salary for civil legal service professionals was $48,000, while those with over a decade of experience were making $69,400. (nalp.org)


In 2018, the average entry-level salary for public defenders was $58,300, while those with over a decade of experience were making $96,400. (nalp.org)


In 2018, the average entry-level salary for local prosecuting attorneys was $56,200, while those with over a decade of experience were making $84,400. (nalp.org)


In 2018, the average entry-level salary for lawyers in public interest organizations was $50,300, while those with over a decade of experience were making $80,500. (nalp.org)


Private Sector


In 2019, the average entry-level salary for lawyers at firms with fifty or fewer attorneys was $98,750. (nalp.org)


In 2019, the average entry-level salary for lawyers at firms with fifty to 100 attorneys was $115,000. (nalp.org)


In 2019, the average entry-level salary for lawyers at firms with 101 to 250 attorneys was $115,000. (nalp.org)


In 2019, the average entry-level salary for lawyers at firms with 251 to 500 attorneys was $160,000. (nalp.org)


In 2019, the average entry-level salary for lawyers at firms with 501 to 700 attorneys was $160,000. (nalp.org)


In 2019, the average entry-level salary for lawyers at firms with over 700 attorneys was $180,000. (nalp.org)


In 2019, the average entry-level salary for all lawyers at firms was $155,000. (nalp.org)


Client Experience


Finding a Lawyer


In 2019, 59% of clients found their lawyer through referrals. (clio.com)


In 2019, 57% of clients found their lawyer through doing their own research. (clio.com)


In 2019, 16% of clients found their lawyer by using referrals and doing their own research. (clio.com)


In 2019, the most common client referral sources were friends and family members, which accounted for 32% of all referral sources. (clio.com)


In 2019, 16% of lawyer referrals were made by another lawyer. (clio.com)


In 2019, 9% of lawyer referrals were made by a professional services provider outside of the legal industry. (clio.com)


Factors in Hiring


In 2019, 77% of clients ranked a lawyer’s experience and credentials as an important factor in deciding who to hire. (clio.com)


In 2019, 72% of clients ranked a lawyer’s typical type of case as an important factor in deciding who to hire. (clio.com)


In 2019, 70% of clients ranked whether a lawyer set clear expectations as an important factor in deciding who to hire. (clio.com)


In 2019, 66% of clients ranked a lawyer’s estimate of the total cost for their case as an important factor in deciding who to hire. (clio.com)


In 2019, 42% of clients said they would hire the first lawyer they spoke to if they liked them. (clio.com)


In 2019, 82% of clients said they want a lawyer who is timely about their communications with them. (clio.com)


In 2019, 64% of clients said they want their lawyer to have a friendly and likable tone. (clio.com)


Firm Operations


In 2019, 89% of lawyers said they respond to requests within 24 hours, but 32% of clients who have shopped for a lawyer don’t expect lawyers to follow up with them, and 64% of potential clients say a law firm didn’t respond to them. (clio.com)


In 2019, 76% of lawyers said they are overworked. (clio.com)


In 2019, 68% of lawyers said they are underappreciated. (clio.com)


In 2019, 69% of lawyers said they love being a lawyer. (clio.com)


In 2019, 82% of lawyers said they enjoy working with their clients. (clio.com)


In 2019, 69% of lawyers who aren’t confident in their ability to handle the operations of a law firm have no business training or experience. (clio.com)


In 2019, 82% of lawyers who are confident in their ability to handle the operations of a law firm had some business training or experience. (clio.com)


In 2019, 57% of client invoices were paid on the same day as they were issued. (clio.com)


In 2019, the average lawyer spent 2.5 hours on billable work each day. (clio.com)


Tech


Cybersecurity


Between 2017 and 2018, 63% of Texas law firms surveyed suffered a data breach. (bizjournals.com)


Between 2017 and 2018, 90% of Texas law firms surveyed had a vendor suffer a data breach. (bizjournals.com)


Between 2017 and 2018, every Texas law firms surveyed identified cybersecurity as one of their top three risks. (bizjournals.com)

You are currently viewing Why Does Internet Privacy Matter

Why Does Internet Privacy Matter

Cue up some Kenny Loggins and some teenage angst, and remember back to practicing dance moves in the mirror. You probably tried some moves you saw on MTV, some moves your best friend showed you, and tried some stuff you came up with on your own.

You probably did a lot of that behind closed doors, but why bother if you have nothing to hide?

Would it have been a big deal if your brother walked in on you and caught it on video? In the grand scheme of things no, it wouldn’t have been. It’s not like your social security number or other sensitive personal information is being posted to Instagram. But let’s imagine things were slightly different. Instead of there being just a slight chance of someone walking in on you, it was a certainty. You may have ultimately decided that you don’t care, you are going to dance in front of the mirror anyway you can still see how someone always watching could be a deterrent for others.

That’s why the fundamental right to privacy matters. Not just because you need to be able to test out your new moves before breaking them out on the dance floor, but for all of those little things you test out over the course of your life which ultimately add up to your identity. The right to privacy is the protection of an individual’s right to decide who they are.

You should be free to read a self-help book without family, friends, and strangers reading over your shoulder. You should have the space to figure out how to be a better father, how to be more outgoing, how to be more mindful. The less privacy you have (the more personal information others have access to), the less space to make those changes happen.

If you think about it, some of the greatest social changes have come about at least partially thanks to privacy. Without privacy, the American Revolution may not have happened. Without privacy, supporting the underground railroad would have been even more dangerous. Without privacy, there is less space for new ideas to breathe and gain support.

How to Protect Your Privacy as an Individual

So you’ve been convinced either thanks to, or in spite of, this article that privacy is an important right, and you probably want to know what steps you can take to keep your data privacy as intact as possible. There are a number of steps that you can take as an individual to protect your online privacy.

Use a VPN

When you’re at home, the use of a VPN is less likely to be useful. Where it’s going to be most effective for data protection is when you’re out and about connecting to public wifi networks. A VPN protects the contents of your traffic from people who would otherwise be able to snoop on that traffic, whether it’s a criminal, a government, or a corporation.

My favorite way to illustrate what a VPN does is the neighbor next door. If you and your neighbor stick your heads out the window and yell out to each other your plans for the weekend, anyone in the neighborhood who cares to listen can find out what those plans are. However, if you and your neighbor instead talk through cans attached by string, then people in the neighborhood might be able to see that you’re talking, but won’t be able to see what you’re talking about. The VPN is the can and the string for data security: it lets people know that you’re talking to someone, but that’s all.

Be Judicious About Installing Apps and Software

What you install matters. Permissions you grant to various vendors aren’t always just in your best interest. When you grant access to the files on your device, that access exists whether relevant to the software or not. While many apps and softwares will treat your devices with some dignity, many others will not prioritize data privacy.

Do some research before clicking on install. Have a trusted source you can look to for guidance on whether a particular piece of software or app is useful and trustworthy.

Use Trusted Browser Privacy Tools

Here’s a good chance for you to ask your trusted source for help. Get good ad and cookie’ blockers to bolster your online privacy protection. A cookie is a tiny file that your browser saves as a way to remind websites who you are. Most websites can’t work without cookies. A cookie let’s you log in to your accounts and see your personal information. Without the cookie, the website wouldn’t know which computer to show your information to.

However, cookies can also be less useful to you, and more useful to other people. Some cookies collect information about every website you visit. Some cookies are there to give you personalized ads. And some cookies are collecting your data to sell it to others. Cookies are often served to your computer alongside ads, so a good cookie blocker can go a long way. Always get a recommendation from a source you trust, but an example solution would be Privacy Badger, by the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Another type of privacy tool you can install is forced HTTPS browsing. HTTPS browsing is the more secure version of HTTP. It kind of works like a VPN does, but on a slightly weaker level. In the VPN analogy, using the cans connected with strings would only let people see that your house is communicating with another house. With HTTPS, while an eavesdropper would not be able to understand the content of your conversation, they would be able to tell which people in the houses were talking. While a VPN might seem like a catch-all, having an HTTPS tool can supplement the security of the VPN. There are a number of ways to accomplish forced HTTPS, but one example solution is HTTPS Everywhere, also by the Electronic Frontier Foundation.

Don’t Take Quizzes that Require a Facebook Login

You might see a fun quiz floating around your social media feed to find out which Game of Thrones character you are, or what dog breed is most like you. If they ask you to log in using a social media profile before you can take the quiz or see your answers, there’s a good chance that the quiz exists solely to get personal information about you and have little concern for your personal data. Not only are you giving the company basic personal information from your profile, but you are also answering a lot of questions which can give data brokers insight into you as a person. While those insights are often used for presenting relevant advertisements, those insights can also be used to provoke emotional responses and take advantage of vulnerable populations.

Scrub Your Devices and Accounts from Time to Time

Every once in a while, look through all of the apps on your phone or computer, and remove any software that you haven’t used in a while. That app that you installed to set up your Austin City Limits schedule is not necessary the other 362 days of the year delete it for now. Leaving unused apps and software installed on your device provides an insight into your life for companies who are not currently offering you any benefit. You’ll also get the bonus of keeping your device uncluttered and performing at a better clip.

If you often log in to websites or apps using Google, Facebook or some other social profile, then go to your relevant account settings and remove authorization for apps and services that are no longer relevant to you. Here are some links where you can review and remove logins for some of the standard social profiles:

Phew! Wow, okay, you’re a few steps closer to ensuring your personal privacy! Yay! Now, how do you go about ensuring your company is protective of the personal privacy of its clients, customers, users or employees?

How to be Protective of Privacy as a Business

When you run a business, you control what privacy options are available to people who interact with it. There are some contexts in which you must share data on people, whether it’s necessary to perform some function, part of the sale of a business, or some other reason, there are plenty of legitimate, consumer-friendly ways to share people’s data. Here are some things you can do to ensure people’s data is treated with respect and simultaneously improve your privacy practices and risk management.

Offer a Lot of Options

There are a number of reasons why customers, users, or employees might share different kinds of personal data with you, and there are a number of reasons why they might change their mind. When building out your processes and services try to integrate personal choice into the mix. For example, give people a privacy settings dashboard where they can delete, change, or add information about themselves give them those options for each individual piece of information. You can also give them choices in your privacy settings about what happens with their data. If you offer marketing emails, give them a way to easily opt out of those emails. Try to think of ways to allow people to easily pop in and out of your system in a variety of circumstances to give them control over their personal information.

Be Privacy-Minded when Using Third-Party Services or Bringing on Partners

Think of all of the services which make your company possible: you probably have an internet service provider, an email server, a database provider, a CRM tool, and more. When you take on a partner to help run your business, you are trusting your data with those partners. Make sure that the partners you choose provide at least as much respect of personal data as your own company does. Make sure that they are using appropriate security measures to prevent unauthorized disclosures of people’s data. Look into whether they have had any security breaches or big privacy scandals in recent years. It’s all fairly straightforward stuff, it just needs to be on your radar.

Take Only What You Need

There are pieces of information that are necessary for providing services to people, such as an email address. But there’s a lot of information that just isn’t necessary to run your brand effectively. You might be tempted to gather more information than you need just in case, or you might be gathering data that used to be integral and no longer has a purpose. Every once in a while, have a team meeting and ask yourselves, what data do we actually need? Practice good risk management – toss the stuff that isn’t necessary for business or legal reasons you can’t accidentally mishandle it if you don’t have it in the first place.

Stay Informed

The tech landscape is changing every day. New tools, new methods, and new laws to deal with privacy are always arising, so what worked last year may not be enough this year. Keep up to date with what’s going on in the world of privacy by following updates to the legal system, podcasts, and blogs (like this one). If keeping up to speed on privacy is outside of your wheelhouse, find someone to help. Privacy rights are identity rights, and data should be treated with dignity.

You are currently viewing The Devil Doesn’t Want You To Read the Contract

The Devil Doesn’t Want You To Read the Contract

Have you ever been about to sign a contract and stopped short when you noticed a particularly nasty term in the fine print? If you brought it up with the other party — an insurance company, a bank, a landlord — they probably did some hand-waving and told you not to worry about it.

“We never actually enforce that provision.”

“It’s just boilerplate.”

“That’s not our policy.”

Right?

Well, beware. According to Texas case law, you can’t rely on oral statements when you have a written contract that addresses the same point.

Take this case: 

Party A agreed to install an oil drill in exchange for some mineral rights from the owner, Party B. The parties heavily negotiated the contract, and one term involved whether or not the drill installer would have the right to resell the mineral rights he received. Initially, the contract said something like, Party A may not assign the mineral rights without the consent of Party B, which shall not be unreasonably withheld.” 

But then, Party B’s lawyers removed that last clause from the sentence, which turned into:

Party A may not assign the mineral rights without Party B’s consent, which shall not be unreasonably withheld.

Party A objected: How can you take that out? Doesn’t that mean you could just keep me from giving away those rights without any good reason? And isn’t that just as bad as saying I can’t assign at all? He wanted the contract changed back.

Party B was quick to reassure. No, no, no don’t worry! If you want to give away your rights, we won’t actually prevent you. We’ll give our consent. So party A signed the new draft.

Baaaaad decision. 

Later the owner prevented the drill installer from selling his mineral rights, the drill installer sued, and the court took the owner’s side. The way the court saw it, the terms of the deal were right there in black and white: you can’t assign without Party B’s consent. That’s what you agreed to. 

The moral of the story? Read your contracts.

Make sure all the terms of the agreement are in there. Push back until the draft says what you want it to say. Don’t take your business partner / vendor / service provider at their word. You just might come to regret it.

You are currently viewing Why Have a Buy-Sell Agreement For Your Business

Why Have a Buy-Sell Agreement For Your Business

A buy-sell agreement is a way to plan for the transfer of shares or membership interests when an owner dies or leaves your company. 

It may seem odd to think about that kind of thing up front, when you and your co-founders are still laser-focused on your new business. But the reality is that at some point, a founder will likely decide to leave, and working out the terms of that departure early on is your best bet for a smooth transition.

(more…)