tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248863093001003125.post8736176493347802830..comments2009-11-20T09:18:07.601-06:00Lihsahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07377484000156287824noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248863093001003125.post-15701812079231539882008-10-28T14:56:00.000-05:002008-10-28T14:56:00.000-05:00Good Comments from Doug. Here's my additional 2 cents.<BR/><BR/>1) If the lawyer's intent is gaining clients, then yes, Twittering is probably advertising.<BR/><BR/>2) Jurisdiction? What's that?<BR/><BR/>3) Greg's second example of "answering questions" is a scary one. In less than 140 characters this lawyer can A - establish an attorney-client relationship, B - waive privilege, and C - become a respondent (the term used by ethics counsel for lawyers in trouble).<BR/><BR/>4) In 2005 Utah adopted the Ethics 2000 model rule updates proposed by the ABA. These weren't even Web 1.0 rules. Catching up hardly seems possible when the ball keeps moving faster and faster and ...Toby Brownhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04805447401908189793noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3248863093001003125.post-61087954248234678282008-10-28T09:47:00.000-05:002008-10-28T09:47:00.000-05:00Greg -<BR/><BR/>You hit on some of the great unanswered questions about lawyers social media. <BR/><BR/>Is it attorney advertising?<BR/>What jurisdiction controls?<BR/>If I can do it in my state of admission, can I do it on the internet?<BR/><BR/>Twitter seems self-limiting. It is hard to pose a legal question and answer the question in 140 characters. <BR/><BR/>It seems to also destroy attorney-client privilege since the information is in a public forum.<BR/><BR/>The Bar is just catching up on email and web 1.0. It will be years before they can catch up to web 2.0.Doug Corneliushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13599519275050428569noreply@blogger.com