I also received a Q&A Sheet from Bloomberg about their acquisition of BNA and what it means for customers of both products.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS RELATED TO BLOOMBERG’S ACQUISITION OF BNA
1. What was announced today?

Bloomberg and The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc. (BNA) today announced that they have entered into an agreement under which Bloomberg will acquire all 25,116,830 outstanding shares of BNA for $39.50 per share in cash for a total purchase price of approximately $990 million. The boards of directors of both companies have unanimously approved this transaction, which is expected to close later in 2011.

2. Why did Bloomberg acquire BNA?

Bloomberg does not make acquisitions very often – we have a strong bias toward organic growth. But the availability of a leading firm such as BNA – who shares so closely our mission and approach – was a rare strategic opportunity.
Together, Bloomberg and BNA will be a unique combination of premium content, deep subject matter expertise, proprietary data and world-class technological capabilities to provide distinctive products and solutions for professionals and decision makers in law, government, business and finance.
This acquisition would immediately strengthen Bloomberg’s offerings in the legal information market by complementing Bloomberg Law – the only legal research system that fully integrates primary research, dockets, company information and proprietary news – with BNA’s trusted legal, tax and regulatory content.
The acquisition would significantly grow Bloomberg’s presence in the Washington, DC area through its multiple operating units, Bloomberg News, Bloomberg Government, Bloomberg Law and BNA — which would work together to provide unparalleled coverage and analysis of U.S. policy and regulatory issues for customers.
BNA will benefit from Bloomberg’s technology and data expertise as well as the significant analytical and news reporting resources of the company, including Bloomberg Briefs, Bloomberg Industries and Bloomberg News, among others.

3. What are Bloomberg’s plans for the company?

Bloomberg has tremendous respect for the legacy of BNA, its employees and management team. Following the transaction, it is our intention that BNA would retain its name and remain a stand-alone subsidiary within the Bloomberg family, operating from its current location under existing management. Bloomberg will honor existing contracts and relationships.

4. Do you anticipate any layoffs at Bloomberg or BNA as a result of this acquisition?

We do not anticipate any layoffs at Bloomberg or BNA as a result of this transaction in the short-term. We anticipate gradual, modest consolidation over an extended period to be achieved largely through natural attrition.

5. What does this mean for Bloomberg and BNA customers?

Until the transaction is completed, customers will receive the same products and services they are accustomed to. After the transaction is completed, we will provide more information on how the Bloomberg-BNA combination will benefit customers and affect our combined product offering.

6. How many acquisitions has Bloomberg made in its history?

Previous acquisitions include Businessweek and New Energy Finance in 2009. Bloomberg has also made a few significantly smaller acquisitions.

7. Is this transaction evidence of a newly acquisitive posture at Bloomberg?

No. Going forward, we expect almost all of our growth to be organic. However, when this rare strategic opportunity presented itself, we were enthusiastic to acquire a leading franchise.

8. To what extent was Mike Bloomberg involved in the decision to buy BNA?

Mike Bloomberg reviewed and supported this transaction in accordance with his agreement with New York City that allows him to maintain the type of involvement that is consistent with his being the majority shareholder of Bloomberg.

9. How will BNA and Bloomberg be integrated?

BNA’s culture is at the core of its success, and a significant reason the company is a great fit with Bloomberg. Going forward, Bloomberg will respect and maintain many of the unique attributes that have enabled BNA to build its leading position. At the same time, this is an attractive transaction because of the potential for the combined entity to be greater than the sum of its parts, so we expect Bloomberg and BNA employees to work together over time to produce innovative products and services for our customers.

10. What is required to close the transaction?

The Bloomberg-BNA combination is a two-step transaction. The first step is a tender for all of the outstanding shares of BNA at a price of $39.50 per share in cash.
The acquisition is subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the merger agreement, including a condition that at least a majority of the outstanding BNA Class A Shares are tendered, that the waiting period under the U.S. Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, as amended, has expired or been terminated and other customary conditions.
The second step is a merger. If the offer is successful, Bloomberg will acquire any remaining shares of BNA common stock through the merger of a company created for the purpose of this transaction with and into BNA with BNA continuing as the surviving corporation and becoming a wholly-owned subsidiary of Bloomberg.
If Bloomberg acquires at least 90% of the outstanding Class A Shares in the tender offer, it will be able to effect the merger under the short-form merger provisions of the Delaware General Corporation Law immediately following closing of the Offer.
If Bloomberg doesn’t achieve 90% ownership through the tender offer, Bloomberg would still own sufficient Class A Shares, without the vote of any other holders of Class A Shares, to satisfy the stockholder approval requirement to approve the Merger. In that case, the Merger will close following the mailing of the requisite information statement to BNA stockholders.

11. When is the transaction expected to close?

Bloomberg anticipates that the transaction will close later in 2011, subject to regulatory approvals and successful completion of the Offer and Merger.

12. Are there potential anti-trust concerns? What if any regulators are involved?

The offer may not close unless pre-merger notification and report forms have been filed with the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission and certain waiting period requirements have been satisfied.

13. How confident are Bloomberg and BNA the transaction will go through?

Bloomberg expects that the offer will be successful and that the Merger will be consummated in a reasonable period of time thereafter. Bloomberg believes it is paying a premium for the shares of BNA and believes the BNA stockholders will determine to sell their shares and support the transaction.
Background

14. What is BNA?

BNA was founded in 1929 and has become a trusted information source for labor, tax, and regulatory lawyers as well as for other accounting, government, and academic professionals. BNA’s portfolio of approximately 250 subscription-based information products includes category leaders such as Daily Labor Report, Daily Tax Report, Labor & Employment Law Library, and Tax Management Portfolios. The Company counts amongst its customers the250 largest law firms, 98% of the top 100 accounting firms, 97% of Fortune 500 companies, and a substantial number of large and mid-sized law firms. In law firms alone, BNA serves over 5,500 firms with an estimated 205,000 attorneys. BNA reported revenue of $331 million in 2010. BNA is completely employee-owned, and is headquartered in Arlington, Virginia, where most of its 1,465 employees are located.

15. What is Bloomberg?

Bloomberg, a leading global business and financial news provider, gives influential decision makers a critical edge by connecting them to a dynamic network of information, people and ideas. The company’s strength–delivering data, news and analytics through innovative technology, quickly and accurately- -is at the core of the Bloomberg Professional service, which provides real time financial information to more than 300,000 subscribers globally. Bloomberg’s enterprise solutions build on the company’s core strength, leveraging technology to allow customers to access, integrate, distribute and manage data and information across organizations more efficiently and effectively. Through Bloomberg Law, Bloomberg Government and Bloomberg New Energy Finance, the company provides data, news and analytics to decision makers in industries beyond finance. And Bloomberg News, delivered through the Bloomberg Professional service, television, radio, mobile, the Internet and two magazines, Bloomberg Businessweek and Bloomberg Markets, covers the world with more than 2,300 news and multimedia professionals at 146 bureaus in 72 countries. Headquartered in New York, Bloomberg employs more than 13,600 people in 185 locations around the world.
The Offer has not yet commenced, and this communication is for informational purposes only and is not a recommendation, an offer to purchase or a solicitation of an offer to sell shares of the common stock of BNA. On the commencement date of the Offer, a tender offer statement on Schedule TO, including an offer to purchase, a letter of transmittal and related documents, will be filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). The offer to purchase shares of BNA’s common stock will only be made pursuant to the offer to purchase, the letter of transmittal and related documents filed with such Schedule TO. INVESTORS AND BNA STOCKHOLDERS ARE STRONGLY ADVISED TO CAREFULLY READ THE TENDER OFFER STATEMENT (INCLUDING THE OFFER TO PURCHASE, THE LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL AND THE RELATED TENDER OFFER DOCUMENTS) AND THE RELATED SOLICITATION/RECOMMENDATION STATEMENT, AS WELL AS ANY AMENDMENTS THERETO AND OTHER RELEVANT DOCUMENTS FILED WITH THE SEC WHEN THEY BECOME AVAILABLE, BECAUSE THEY WILL CONTAIN IMPORTANT INFORMATION. The tender offer statement will be filed with the SEC by Brass Acquisition Corp. and Bloomberg, and the solicitation/recommendation statement will be filed with the SEC by BNA. Investors and BNA stockholders may obtain a free copy of the tender offer statement, the solicitation/recommendation statement and other documents (when available) filed with the SEC at the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. The tender offer statement and other documents filed by Brass Acquisition Corp. or Bloomberg may also be obtained free of charge by directing a request by mail to MacKenzie Partners, Inc. at 105 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016, by calling toll-free at +1 800-322-2885 or by email to tenderoffer@mackenziepartners.com.

Well, we always hear rumors around the time of AALL that someone is buying BNA (usually Westlaw or Lexis), however, it seems that Bloomberg was the one to actually pull the trigger on this acquisition. I just received this press release on the purchase. (More of my personal comments to come…)

SEE: Q&A about Bloomberg/BNA Acquisition

Bloomberg Enters Agreement to Acquire BNA
Combination Propels Bloomberg’s Expansion into Legal Information Market
and Enhances BNA through Bloomberg’s Data and Technology Expertise
Acquisition Increases Bloomberg’s Presence in Washington Market
NEW YORK and ARLINGTON, Va. – Bloomberg and BNA today announced that they have entered into an agreement for Bloomberg to acquire all of the outstanding shares of BNA for $39.50 per share in a cash tender offer followed by a merger for a total purchase price of approximately $990 million.  The transaction is expected to close in 2011. 
BNA, which is wholly owned by current and former employees, provides important legal, tax and regulatory research and analysis and would become a stand-alone subsidiary of Bloomberg. 
Together, Bloomberg and BNA would form a unique combination of premium content, deep subject matter expertise, proprietary data and world class technological capabilities to provide distinctive products and solutions for professionals and decision makers in law, government, business and finance.
This acquisition would immediately strengthen Bloomberg’s offerings in the legal information market by complementing Bloomberg Law — the only legal research system that fully integrates primary research, dockets, company information and proprietary news — with BNA’s trusted legal, tax and regulatory content.  
In addition, the combination would enhance Bloomberg’s coverage and analysis of tax and accounting, labor and employment, healthcare, intellectual property, and telecommunications issues. 
The acquisition would significantly grow Bloomberg’s presence in the Washington, DC area through its multiple operating units, Bloomberg News, Bloomberg Government, Bloomberg Law and BNA — which would work together to provide unparalleled coverage and analysis of U.S. policy and regulatory issues for customers.    
“BNA’s employees have built a superior franchise and we are enthusiastic about a Bloomberg-BNA combination that will deliver more premium content to our professional audiences,” said Dan Doctoroff, CEO and President of Bloomberg.  “BNA research and analysis will make Bloomberg’s products even more valuable, and BNA would benefit from our data and technology expertise.”
“For more than eight decades, we have provided our subscribers with quality products that allow them to do their jobs more effectively and efficiently,” said Paul N. Wojcik, Chairman and CEO of BNA. “We believe this is the start of a new day, where we will join forces with Bloomberg to extend our premium content to an expanded audience.”
“Bloomberg and BNA share many of the same values, including a commitment to deliver high-quality content to customers, employing highly skilled and experienced workers and offering superior customer service,” said Peter Grauer, Chairman of Bloomberg.  “We look forward to welcoming them to the Bloomberg family.”
The tender offer is expected to commence by September 8, 2011.  The acquisition is subject to the terms and conditions set forth in the merger agreement, including a condition that at least a majority of the outstanding BNA Class A Shares are tendered, that the waiting period under the U.S. Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976, as amended, has expired or been terminated and other customary conditions.  If the tender offer is completed, untendered shares of BNA are expected to be converted in the subsequent merger into the right to receive the same US$39.50 per share price paid in the tender offer.
The Offer has not yet commenced, and this communication is for informational purposes only and is not a recommendation, an offer to purchase or a solicitation of an offer to sell shares of the common stock of BNA. On the commencement date of the Offer, a tender offer statement on Schedule TO, including an offer to purchase, a letter of transmittal and related documents, will be filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). The offer to purchase shares of BNA’s common stock will only be made pursuant to the offer to purchase, the letter of transmittal and related documents filed with such Schedule TO. INVESTORS AND BNA STOCKHOLDERS ARE STRONGLY ADVISED TO CAREFULLY READ THE TENDER OFFER STATEMENT (INCLUDING THE OFFER TO PURCHASE, THE LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL AND THE RELATED TENDER OFFER DOCUMENTS) AND THE RELATED SOLICITATION/RECOMMENDATION STATEMENT, AS WELL AS ANY AMENDMENTS THERETO AND OTHER RELEVANT DOCUMENTS FILED WITH THE SEC WHEN THEY BECOME AVAILABLE, BECAUSE THEY WILL CONTAIN IMPORTANT INFORMATION. The tender offer statement will be filed with the SEC by Brass Acquisition Corp. and Bloomberg, and the solicitation/recommendation statement will be filed with the SEC by BNA.  Investors and BNA stockholders may obtain a free copy of the tender offer statement, the solicitation/recommendation statement and other documents (when available) filed with the SEC at the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.  The tender offer statement and other documents filed by Brass Acquisition Corp. or Bloomberg may also be obtained free of charge by directing a request by mail to MacKenzie Partners, Inc. at 105 Madison Avenue, New York, New York 10016, by calling toll-free at +1 800-322-2885 or by email to tenderoffer@mackenziepartners.com.
More information about the transaction is attached to this email and available on Bloomberg and BNA’s websites at:
http://www.bloomberg.com/about/pressroom/
http://www.bna.com
About Bloomberg
Bloomberg, a leader in global business and financial information and news, gives influential decision makers a critical edge by connecting them to a dynamic network of information, people and ideas. The company’s strength – delivering data, news and analytics through innovative technology, quickly and accurately – is at the core of the Bloomberg Professional service, which provides real time financial information to more than 300,000 subscribers globally. Bloomberg’s enterprise solutions build on the company’s core strength, using technology to allow customers to access, integrate, distribute and manage data and information across organizations more efficiently and effectively. Through Bloomberg Law, Bloomberg Government and Bloomberg New Energy Finance, the company provides data, news and analytics to decision makers in industries beyond finance. And Bloomberg News, delivered through the Bloomberg Professional service, television, radio, mobile, the Internet and two magazines, Bloomberg Businessweek and Bloomberg Markets, covers the world with more than 2,300 news and multimedia professionals at 146 bureaus in 72 countries.  Headquartered in New York, Bloomberg employs more than 13,000 people in 185 locations around the world.
About BNA
BNA is the largest independent publisher of news, analysis, and reference products for
professionals. Delivering specialized information to business, legal, and government professionals at every level of expertise, BNA produces more than 300 news and information services, including the highly respected Daily Labor Report, U.S. Law Week, and Daily Report for Executives.  For more information, visit bna.com.
About Bloomberg Law
Bloomberg Law is the first real-time legal research system that integrates innovative search technology, comprehensive legal content, company and client information, and proprietary news all in one place. This collaborative workspace also includes a suite of new tools for more effective legal analysis and more productive client development. For more information, visit BloombergLaw.com.
About Bloomberg Government
Bloomberg Government is the single source for professionals who need to
understand the business impacts of government actions so they can work quickly, decisively and effectively. This comprehensive, subscription-based, online tool collects best-in-class data, provides high-end analysis and analytic tools, and delivers deep, reliable, timely and unbiased reporting from a team of more than 2,300 journalists and multimedia specialists worldwide.  For more information, visit BGov.com.
Forward Looking Statements
This announcement contains forward-looking statements relating to the potential acquisition of BNA by Bloomberg Inc. These forward-looking statements are made within the meaning of and pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The actual results of the acquisition could vary materially as a result of a number of factors, including: uncertainties as to how many of BNA’s stockholders will tender their stock in the offer; the possibility that competing offers will be made; and the possibility that various closing conditions for the transaction may not be satisfied or waived. Other factors that may cause actual results to differ materially include those set forth in the reports that BNA files from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including its annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011 and quarterly and current reports on Form 10-Q and 8-K. These forward-looking statements reflect BNA’s expectations as of the date of this announcement. BNA undertakes no obligation to update the information provided herein.
# # #
Media contact:
Ty Trippet
Bloomberg L.P.
+1.212.617.2443 – office
ttrippet@bloomberg.net

You may agree with me that the best thing about going to a professional conference is finally making it back home and sleeping in your own bed. However, that doesn’t mean we don’t enjoy ourselves while we are traveling to different cities every year and meeting up with our usual set of friends over a round of drinks or a nice dinner. This week, we wanted to know what city you enjoy going to the most, and why that is.

Oddly enough, almost all of the cities were West of the Mississippi (or in one case, directly on the Mississippi). This may upset many of the conference planners because I know they prefer to have the conferences smack-dab on the East coast because of the ease in which all those law firms, law schools and government agencies can send their people to attend the conferences. Nevertheless, these are the wonderful cities you chose to share with us.

Next week’s Elephant Post (embedded form conveniently placed below this week’s contributions) asks what do you think your organization will stop buying in the next two to five years. If something just popped into your head when you read that last sentence, don’t forget to scroll down and let us know what it was!!

Kevin Miles
Guru


Seattle
The conference center itself is well designed and at the epicenter of most of the hotels; the weather is very mild; the Pike Place Market is a great place to wander and relax; for exercise there are the mountains, bike trails and self-guided tours; For cool things to brag about, there are the Space Needle, the Seattle Art Museum, and of course, the Seattle Public Library.

Lisa Rush
Librarian


Monterey, CA
The calm and beauty of it.  Good transportation.  Easy to walk.

Greg Lambert
Library/Records Guy


Eugene, Oregon
So maybe Eugene isn’t on the “big” conference rotations, but I went to a CALI conference in 1998 or 1999 in Eugene and found it to be a wonderful city that rivals Austin, Texas in “weirdness” … but in a cool way. It isn’t just cool in spirit either. It was actually really nice weather for late June.   While I was there, I got to drive out to the Pacific Ocean and watch the sun set, I drove out to Sisters, OR which was like Jackson Hole, Wyoming (without the snobby L.A. actors and hipsters scene), plus I got to watch an Anarchist rally where people were stripping off their clothes and smashing any corporate window (especially those with a Nike Swoosh on them.) Thinking back, however, it seems a little oxymoronic to have an organized Anarchist rally, doesn’t it??  Oh yeah… the CALI conference was great, too!! If it wasn’t for the lack of hotel space and conference locations, I’d suggest that AALL, SLA, ILTA and others go to Eugene every ten years or so.

Stephanie Davidson
Librarian


Chicago!
For me, the best conference city has all the restaurant and arts offerings of a medium-sized or large city, and proximity of the conference activities to the city, and/or excellent public transportation options to venture beyond conference-land. If we could hold the conference at a law school like CALI does, I’d quickly pick Columbus or Seattle or Boulder, but AALL in its current form is most attractive to me when it’s in Chicago or DC.

Donna Williams
Law Librarian


Denver, CO
Location, it’s easy to get to from almost everywhere in the U.S.  The convention center & hotels were right across the street.  It was very clean and the shopping district & restaurants were very close by.

Marilyn Bromley
Librarian


Denver
I love Denver as a conference city. It has great June/July weather, incredible scenery, a nice set of hotels and an up-to-date conference center, and fun eating and shopping.  But most of all I love being there because I feel healthy and alive when I’m visiting, and I can easily imagine living there (as opposed to hot towns like New Orleans and San Antonio, or crowded towns like NY).  Seattle is a close second to Denver for the same reasons.

Sarah Glassmeyer
Director of Content Development, CALI.org


New Orleans
Okay, let’s just get it out of the way.  Yes, New Orleans’ weather sucks (especially if you are attending a conference there in the summer which most librarian conferences are.) It’s hot and muggy in a way that can only be described by referencing Satan or Hell.  And there’s no public transportation. And it smells funny.  And it can be sort of divey and dangerous if you leave the tourist areas.  And the tourist areas are filled with….well, tourists of the obnoxious frat boy variety. EVEN WITH ALL THAT, I love going to conferences in New Orleans!   Visiting NOLA is like traveling to a foreign country. You’ll see things and meet people there that exist no where else in the USA.  There’s always great live music to be found and even better food and drink for those evening post conference adventures with your fellow attendees. From high class super fancy to earthy and street, no matter what your tastes or comfort level, there’s a venue for you.  And maybe the heat encourages you to stay in the cool convention center and attend meetings during the day?  If you want safe and easy, go to Washington, DC. (Which is also obnoxiously hot, by the way.)  I’ll always happily go to NOLA.

Jennifer Stephens
Librarian


Seattle, WA
I’ve been to Seattle twice for AALL conferences, and thoroughly enjoyed it both times. The airport has plenty of shops to keep you entertained while waiting for flights, there is plenty of coffee, and the convention center does not sprawl over multiple city blocks.  Biggest plus: the temperatures tend to be 20 degrees cooler than they are in Texas during the summer. As I recall, it is fairly easy to walk to major attractions (the market, coffee shops, the convention center, places to eat, the underground Seattle tour.)  Biggest drawback: how long it takes to fly there…

Toby Brown
AFA

Las Vegas
Duh.
On a personal note, don’t believe the marketing slogan.

Next Elephant Post:

What Will Your Organization Stop Buying In the Next Five Years?

While listening to one of the ILTA-TV broadcasts this week, I heard a speaker say that she thought that law firms would stop buying PC and Laptops in bulk, and would navigate toward supporting personal devices (mobile, tablet and personal laptops.) Whether that can actually happen or not, it does seem that organizations are under more and more pressure to support items that are normally outside the scope of what the organization buys, could firms leverage that demand and say that they would “support” unique devices, but that the employees are on the hook for purchasing them? Many organizations are already doing this with cell-phone service… so, it may not be too much of a stretch.

Don’t limit your thinking to electronics, however. Are there other services, hardware, software, subscriptions, etc. that your organization currently buys, but may no longer need over the next two to five years? Let us know what you think, and come back this time next week to see what others have contributed as well.

Image [cc] ivyfield

When I was at AALL last month, someone asked me who I though would “win” the e-book format challenge. I think they were giving me a multiple-choice answer between Kindle, iBooks, HTML5, etc. However, my answer was “D — None of the Above.” In my mind, the “winner” doesn’t even exist yet. It may take a few years of weeding through moving “the book” to “the e-book” to actually moving to a format that really takes advantage of everything that is available to us now, and will be available to us in the near future. Now, there are a number of things that are going on right now that are moving in a different direction, and publishers and entrepreneurs should take notice and start thinking of re-purposing and bringing to market.

Make Existing Formats Better!

Take a look at what one of my favorite teaching, Khan Academy, tools is doing to make it’s wonderful YouTube videos better. Sal Khan and e-textbook startup Kno have teamed up to integrate Sal’s video tutorials (which by themselves are awesome) into Kno’s electronic textbooks with “Smart Links.” Kno has set up an algorithm to automatically tag new Khan Academy videos to appropriate e-textbook pages. In a way, making the e-textbooks a living document that changes and improves over time.

Don’t Limit the Format to What Fits in Their Hands!


Many years ago, I remember watching a video of an airplane mechanic that had a virtual mechanic’s manual integrated into a pair of glasses. The idea behind that was that it was actually a safety hazard to lug a five-pound manual up on top of an airplane, and it would be more convenient to leave the mechanic’s hands free to work on the machinery rather than fumbling through a manual while searching for the right page and the right tool at the same time. I couldn’t find a copy of that old commercial, but I did find this YouTube video of a car mechanic with a virtual manual to show that access to information shouldn’t require standing in front of a PC or even holding an iPad.

The Demand Is There — Will You Fill The Need, Or Let Someone Do It For You?


The constant desire for a “more efficient workforce” may not be a strong in the legal market as it should be, but as we continue the mantra of “doing more with less” even law firms will need to find ways to push the right information, to the right people, at the right time. Of course, all of these processes also need to come with an overall improvement in costs to deliver that information. Law firms may want to take a look at an announcement this morning from United Airlines on how they are moving toward the fluidity of information, improving worker productivity, and reducing overall costs at the same time.

United Airlines is converting to what it is calling a “Paperless Flight Deck” by pushing out 11,000 iPads to all of its pilots (both United and Continental) and getting rid of all of its paper flight manuals. The idea is that pilots will have easy access to massive amounts of instructions, as well as the ability to access real-time information at any point in their flight. This isn’t just moving the paper manual to the iPad, it is making that information better by having the ability to update it instantly and push out that information at the right time to the right people. Not only does it improve the ability for pilots to do their jobs better, it also has the added benefit of reducing the amount of paper United uses by 16 million sheets of paper and saving an estimated 326,000 gallons of jet fuel every year.

The “Winner” Still Doesn’t Exist


I still think that the eventual “winner” (however you want to define that) doesn’t exist today. There is some new Steve Jobs / Bill Gates / Sal Khan out there getting ready to drop out of school, or quit their job to start on a crazy idea of how to better put information in front of people in such a unique way that they will end up billionaires for their efforts. I, for one, can’t wait to see what that end result will look like.

Almost all those books…
government created content that someone paid for!

I am a huge proponent of state governments helping their citizens understand the judicial system, and help with the access to justice, but I think that a recent action from the State of Montana is sliding down a slippery slope in its actions to enforce copyright on its forms listed through the State’s Law Library website. The Readers’ Digest version of the situation is that the Montana State Law Library created a legal forms data bank, claimed copyright to those forms and specifically stated that the forms could not be sold in commercial format. Like and any red-blooded American company, an operation out of Helena, Montana took those free forms, repackaged them and sold them for $389. And, as any red-blooded American would do in response, the State of Montana sued the company for copyright infringement. (See the whole story here.)

My feelings are similar to my fellow Texan, Don Cruse:

I agree the forms should be free & that people shouldn’t be misled into paying for free forms. So the intent is noble enough. But it’s still awkward to see a state agency wielding copyright over state-published legal materials.

I think that the State of Montana’s heart is in the right place in trying to protect its citizens against paying for things that it can get for free, but at the same time, there has to be a point in which when citizens are better informed about how to access justice, whether for free or for a fee, trumps the paternalistic view of the State that  it alone should be the educator of its people.

Let me make this point clear — All Government Information Should Be Available To Its Citizens In An Easy-To-Use Format, and Free — however, there should be absolutely no limitation on the public to repackage this information and resell it to those same citizens. In a private email, my co-blogger, Toby Brown says it best:

Companies resell govt content all the time – usually with some value-add like Westlaw. They [the governments] are just upset since stupid people pay them.

Just as you can’t protect your children from making bad decisions, State governments just can’t expect to sue every company for reselling government created content. Yes, your citizens should be better informed that they can get the same information for free, but just as every parent experiences, sometimes you just got to be grateful that they got to the right place, even if they did it in a dumb and costly way.

Claiming copyright on information that was created in the environment of a government action… paid by government officials, either through tax payer money, or filing fee collections… that information belongs to everyone. That includes those that are smart and creative enough to repackage that information and sell it to those that are not smart enough to realize they can get that information for free.

Again, I’m a big believer that government information should be free, but I’m also a big believer that government information should be freely available for anyone to use for private or commercial purposes. As the old saying goes, you can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink. I applaud Montana’s effort to make its information free and accessible to its citizens (or anyone with Internet access), but I think they are entirely mis-guided in thinking that anyone that repackages this same information for profit is a charlatan. I would argue quite the opposite… they are assisting governments in providing access to justices, and should not be punished for that effort.

The news of Google investing in Rocket Lawyer got me thinking about the dynamics of the broader market for legal services. On one end of the market we have the discussion about how BigLaw is broken. There is a long and growing list of broken pieces of BigLaw, including: how fees are billed, how marketing is done, how research is conducted, how documents are created, …. You get the picture.
3 Geeks has previously commented on the need for law firms to shift from a cost-plus business model where all revenue is good (and profitable), to a profit margin model where profit (a.k.a. partner pay) is dependant on cost coming in below revenue. We’re not sure what the new law firm picture will look like, perhaps some sort of Law Factory, but we do know it will not be like the picture we see now.
One piece of the new picture emerging into view is being presented by LPOs. These providers present the option of using much lower cost lawyers to perform lower level legal tasks. For BigLaw this means that a segment of work and revenue is disappearing. Although not purely disruptive on its face, this model is disruptive to the cost-plus law firm business model. Outsourcing copies is one thing, outsourcing lawyer work is quite another.
The rest of the legal market has enjoyed poking fun at BigLaw, feeling immune to this force of change. Well – thanks to Google (and LegalZoom), their day has come, with their portion of the market being attacked by “legal forms” shops.
You can argue over whether legal forms offerings and their add-on services are “first amendment speech” or whether they are the unauthorized practicing of law (UPL), but I think that misses the point. The solo/small firm segment of the legal market has been equally comfortable with the way they provide services whilst change whirls around them. Enter the disruptive force, drawn to an un-served market, offering a needed service at a competitive price point.
The Missouri reaction of claiming UPL against LegalZoom is understandable, but IMHO a bit too late for a couple of reasons. First – the market wants and needs theses services and hasn’t been getting them from lawyers. Without the ability to fill this void, the organized bar will in essence be asking the courts (and legislatures) to reduce access to justice. Second – these services have been around for years, evidenced by Nolo Press. I recall years ago the then Utah Chief Justice commenting that if providing forms and minimal guidance on using them was UPL, then the biggest offender would be the court clerk’s office. The point being – attempting to stem the tide of the market in the courts is futile.
Where do these two market trends leave us? Once these two disruptive forces meet in the middle, they may well own the legal market. It’s a variation on the classic military pincer movement, whereby an enemy is attack from both sides, cut off from reinforcements and escape.
Sun Tzu was not a fan of the pincer movement. He argued that an enemy with no where to run will fight ferociously. But will the lawyers? Suing competitors will only get them so far. At some point, to survive, lawyers will have to fully embrace change and find effective ways to compete in a changing market.
Who would you bet on?
ADDENDUM
After writing this post, thanks to a tweet from Jason Wilson (@jasnwilsn), I found this article on Jacoby and Meyers suing some state bars to allow for non-lawyer investment and ownership in law firms. Wow. Here’s a firm feeling cornered and willing to fight ferociously. And instead of suing competitors, they are suing the regulators holding them back from competing. They want to “increase competition, drive down prices, depress some lawyer compensation, and serve people who don’t even know how useful legal services can be.”
But before you change your bet – realize this will need to make its way through the courts, likely up to the Supreme Court. Which means they’ll have an answer in 5 or 6 years. Still, it is nice to see a firm fighting to be competitive.

I have been playing with Google+, trying to figure out the best way to incorporate it into my social media arsenal. Look out world, @Lihsa is armed and grammarous!
For one, I’m loving being one of the few active Google+ers in a room full of geeks. I am learning a ton. Reminds me a lot of the early Twitter days, before the rest of the world got on the Twitter Train.
But first, I had to install a few tools, otherwise, it was a lot like the avalanche that the Twitter stream created.
· Chrome: makes, sense, right? Google+ works better in Google’s Chrome browser. You can download their browser at http://www.google.com/chrome.
Next, set up your Google profile. There is a big controversy about Google+ requiring real names. But you can work around that. As a female lawyer, I am not inclined to share my personal data. And since my last post on Google profiles, they have made some modifications, allowing you to limit who sees this info to either “You”, “Circles”, “Extended Circles”, “Public” and any customizable set thereof.
· Name: I used my Twitter handle and my last name’s initial. Problem solved.
· Photo: I used my Twitter pic so my Twitter Peeps would recognize me.
· Intro: To be consistent in with personal brand, I copied my Twitter description.
· Bragging Rights: Be funny. Otherwise, you just come off as a pompous twit.
· Occupation: Well, I toyed with this and chose to be more descriptive rather than putting my actual title. Sue me.
· Employment, Education: Because of the privacy options available, I listed my business, but limited to just my circles.
· Location: I just put the states instead of giving addresses.
· Birthday: I put my day (but not the year—you never ask a lady her age!) because I like getting birthday wishes. Hint, hint 😉
Then I uploaded a Chrome Extension called Publish Sync. You can get it on Facebook or in the Chrome Store. Publish Sync gives me the ability to auto-synch postings from Google+, Facebook, Twitter and a few others. Now I don’t have to tediously post in 5 different locations.
Lastly, I installed the latest version of Google+me. It has some great features, which has made it a lot easier to use. The two best features are:
· Status Notice: this resides on the chrome tool bar and lets me know when I have new notifications.
· Collapsible Posts: this is really nice, especially when over-sharers who are hugely popular (the Scobleizer) and have ridiculously long comments section. Keeps my posts nice and tidy.
Oh, and a word about circles. I’ve read some interesting articles about different circle philosophies. Some say limit your circles to batches of no more than 15 folks. Others create incredibly niche categories like “people who think green.” Others let everyone in. Me, I have 14 circles broken out by job titles like tech, marketing and writers. But I’m finding that they all seriously overlap and tend to default to my stream.
I’m finding Google+ to be incredibly robust, falling between Twitter, Facebook and blogging. Lots of great conversations and lots to learn.

So that’s it. No more excuses, guys! It’s time to get on board the Google+ Train before it choo-choos out of this station and leaves you in the dust.

You’ve probably been seeing a whole lot of blog posts and tweets about the upcoming #ILTA11 Conference, and that’s for good reason — the conference is unsurpassed in its ability to combine actionable education with memorable relationship-building opportunities. In addition, one of the unique aspects of the event is its tailoring of certain sessions to different sizes of organizations, recognizing that the needs, resources, and challenges of a law firm with 1000 attorneys are not necessarily the same as those of a law firm with 50.
So here’s a shout out to those of you at small- and mid-sized law firms — ILTA11 has a host of sessions devoted just to you:
Sunday, 4:00 pm, Ryman Studio G
Begin your Conference experience by meeting other Small Firm attendees who are interested in talking about whatever Small Firm topics come to mind. Sodas provided. Conference Badge required.
Monday, 11:00 am, Governor’s B
We’ll examine the tactics that technology partners, firm administrators and IT directors at firms with fewer than 200 attorneys can use to be successful in improving both the value of IT investments and how IT is perceived by the firm.
This session is crowdsourcing! Tweet your questions for the panelists and your topic ideas by using the #ORG1 hashtag.
Tuesday, 9:15 am, Delta C
Ethical walls were once exclusively the concern of large firms, but no more. Smaller and mid-sized firms increasingly must implement ethical walls on a limited budget. We’ll look at the tools available that work with a firm’s ECM system, how to design a matter-centric structure to support ethical walls and the resources required to successfully implement these solutions.
Wednesday, 11:30 am, Governor’s D
Calling all small firms! Come join your small firm peers in a very interactive discussion that will be driven in part by topics you suggest in the Small Firm Listserv prior to conference. Other discussion topics will include cloud computing, SAAS, disaster recovery planning, backups, remote computing, training and helpdesk –– ALL as they relate to small firms. (Part 1)
Thursday, 3:30 pm, Canal C
The conversation continues as you join your small firm peers in a very interactive discussion that will be driven in part by topics you suggest in the Small Firm Listserv prior to conference. Other discussion topics will include cloud computing, SAAS, disaster recovery planning, backups, remote computing, training and helpdesk –– ALL as they relate to small firms. (Part 2)
Image [cc] Cody Simms

It seems that every day for the past month I’ve had someone that I really admire ask me “Are you going to be at ILTA?” Sadly, I will not be traveling to Nashville to partake in the activities, social gatherings, and general awesomeness that looks like will be the case at ILTA 2011. However, I thought that I would at least see which of the talks that others are attending or presenting, and give them a chance to tout them here for this week’s Elephant Post. We had a lucky number of 13 contributions this week. I’ve also notice that others are posting on their own blogs about some of the ILTA sessions that they are presenting as well (so be on the lookout for those as well!)

Take a look at all of the great presentations that are going on and hopefully this will give you the motivation to attend a few listed below. While you are there (you lucky dogs!!), take some notes, and be prepared to answer another Elephant Post in a couple of weeks that explains what you learned at ILTA.

In the meantime, we are posting another Elephant Post question for next week. So, if you are attending ILTA, you better go ahead and fill out the form below before you head off to the airport. Thanks again to all who contributed. Enjoy Nashville!

Anatoly Soyfer
Marketing

Business Integrity, that’s who I work for, Has a kick-ass emerging technology track session on Document Assembly!   We’re actually going to show you how our clients have profited from implementing our ContractExpress products and how EASY it is to author templates right inside Word for attorneys. No template programmers required!!

John Gillies
KM lawyer

The key to success for any KM initiative is having a strategic plan. With one in hand (approved by senior management), whenever someone comes up with what seems (to them) like a brilliant idea, you go back to plan with them and see where it fits with the priorities that are set out there. So, the one session you MUST attend is Creating an Optimal KM Value Strategy.   The panel moderator is Mara Nickerson, and the panelists are Steven Lastres, Patrick DiDomenico, Sally Gonzalez, and myself.

Julia Montgomery
Knowledge Management/Project Management

First, a full disclosure: I am a member of this year’s Conference planning committee.  Now, with that out of the way…  I think it’s a great lineup this year, but I’m especially excited about three sessions which are exploring a non-traditional format. This year, ILTA will offer two half-day Bar Camp sessions — one on Law 2020 and the other on Information Management. Each Bar Camp will focus on six topics, and generate crowdsourced content to be shared.   In addition, the “What Your Attorneys Want You to Tell Them About Social Media” session (#INFO13) will use a “modified  Bar Camp” format which will give attendees a chance for small-group interaction with an all-star lineup of social media pros: Bill Caraher (@WilliamCaraher), Adrian Dayton (@AdrianDayton), Natalie Huha (@legalerswelcome), Scott Preston (@sapreston) and Tony Hartsfield (@tlhartsfield).  I’m genuinely excited to take part in these sessions, and think they’ll deliver some of the most engaging, interactive and high-energy experiences we’ve seen at ILTA.

Carlos Rodriguez
Network Manager

ILTA’s Servers Operations and Security PG is delivering six amazing sessions as part of the Technology Operations track. These are very technical sessions. There are two must see sessions: 1. Deploying Virtual Desktops, #SOSPG5, where you will see how a large firm has successfully deployed over 700 VDs globally, and how two 300+ attorneys firms are using this technology to deliver client facing collaboration & products. 2. Law 2020: A Technology Operations Forecast #SOSPG2. A group of respected Legal Technology leaders will discuss how your firm can prepare for the future of technology operations and gain technology advantage. A brief description of all sessions can be found in ILTA’s website and also this blog post.

Danny Johnson
Law Student – 1L

Tuesday’s 11:30am session on “Mobile Access can Drive Successful ECM Initiatives” featuring a panel with Leonard of NetDocuments and others. Mobile is the next wave in legal technology and this session should get people thinking forward.

Ben Wightwick
IT

I’m not attending ILTA (not through not wanting to) but my good friend and former colleague will be on the panel of ‘SharePoint as a DM/ECM System: Early Adopters Tell All’. Grant is very knowledgeable in this area and candid with it. I’d love to attend this session purely to just to keep him on his toes.!

Chris Hunt
IT Director, ILTA Conference Attendee + Speaker

CTPG5 – Smartphone Shootout. Should be a lively and informative look at the popular smartphone platforms available today, pros and cons of using each one in a corporate environment, along with some discussion about how to manage and secure them without frustrating the users too much. And I’m a speaker (well, that may not be a plus).

Heather Colman
KM Specialist

I am a panellist for the Next Generation Intranets session along with Brian Bawden from Bennett Jones LLP and Joshua Fireman from ii3 and moderated by Deborah Panella from Cravath, Swaine and Moore LLP.    Attend our session to see highlights from Bennett Jone’s award winning intranet and Hicks Morley’s social intranet and their use of employee profiles, blogs, wikis, tags, comments to address Knowledge Management and Information Management challenges.   The session will also include a riveting discussion led by Joshua on the future of intranets including personalization, web applications, mobile access and the semantic web.

Sean Luman
Director, Knowledge Management

As with Julia M., I must admit to being an ILTA2011 (#ILTA11) conference committee member.  The Information Management track has fantastic topics around law firm/law department IM– including Knowledge Mgmt, Risk Mgmt, Records Mgmt, Enterprise Content Mgmt, Business Process Mgmt, and MORE–see for yourself.
If you’re not going this year, go next year–we’re back in DC (Gaylord National).

Toby Brown
AFA

Future-Proofing Your Law Firm on Monday at 11:00 #INFO1. Brought back by popular demand from last year, this sessions takes an interesting and comprehensive look at how firms might re-shape themselves in order to survive.  The All-star panel includes: Michael Mills – Kraft & Kennedy, Inc., Gerard Neiditsch – Mallesons Stephen Jaques, Jeffrey S. Rovner – O’Melveny & Myers LLP and Ron Friedmann – Integreon.

Ron Friedmann
Improving and transforming law practice and business

I am a panelist for Future-Proofing Your Law Firm on Monday at 11:00   #INFO1.   Description below.   I speak for my fellow panelists in encouraging (1) folks to attend and (2) then PARTICIPATE.   We had a great, lively session last year thanks to the audience.   Brought back by popular demand from last year, this sessions takes an interesting and comprehensive look at how firms might re-shape themselves in order to survive.  The All-star panel includes: Michael Mills – Kraft & Kennedy, Inc., Gerard Neiditsch – Mallesons Stephen Jaques, Jeffrey S. Rovner – O’Melveny & Myers LLP and Ron Friedmann – Integreon.

Jeff Fehrman
eDiscovery Consulting and Forensics

I am a panelist for Controlling Litigation Support Costs on Monday at 1:00 PM #LPSPG2. We’ll be covering methods and best practices for controlling the costs of litigation support, including considerations for targeted collection and preservation during discovery, approaches to outsourcing and more.    Moderated by Scott Cohen (Winston & Strawn LLP), panelists include Eric Lieber (Toyota Motor Sales), Dan Regard (iDiscovery Solutions, Inc.), Kevin Behan (Winston & Strawn LLP), and Jeff Fehrman (Integreon).

George Farrall
Discovery Consultant

I am a panelist on LexisNexis: Gaining a Competitive Edge and Economic Advantage in E-Discovery on Thursday at 3:30 PM #LEX3. I’ll be joined by fellow panelists Jennifer Stevenson (LexisNexis) and Miklos Wenczl (Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, LLP) to discuss new strategies and best practices for leveraging internal and external teams to efficiently manage the discovery process, as well as considerations for the use of  e-discovery and litigation management technology. Hope you can join us for what is sure to be an informative session at the conference.

Next Week’s Elephant Post:

What is the Best “Conference City”?? What Makes It So Special?

I think this one should be a pretty easy one to answer. We all have certain places that we like to go for conferences. If you’re like me, most of your conferences are in the heat of the Summer, so I tend to go for some of those “cooler” towns like Seattle, San Francisco, San Diego, or Boston. Many folks like the bright lights of Las Vegas or New York. While some like the convenience of those “East Coast” venues like Washington, DC or Philadelphia. Tell us which is your favorite, and why you like it so much.

I have to admit that I usually think that many of the articles that AALL puts out in its Law Library Journal tend to be too rigid and too academic in style, but the Summer 2011 issue is actually chock full of interesting articles ranging from Ron Wheeler’s Does WestlawNext Really Change Everything? to Gail M. Daily’s tribute to Earl C. Borgeson’s Ten Rules for Law Library Management. However, the article that is near and dear to my heart (and also mentions me a few times) is a joint effort from DALIC (Digital Access to Legal Information Committee) called, Universal Citation and the American Association of Law Libraries: A White Paper. With its introduction by Oklahoma Supreme Court Justice, Yvonne Kauger, this article rehashes the history of the Universal Citation effort in the State Court system of the United States.

As many of you know, I was knee-deep in the movement back in the late 1990’s and early 2000’s, and I have to say that it was probably the job that I loved the most because we all felt like we were doing something special, and that we were making a difference to the public we served. Although, it also felt good that we were snipping the strings of control that big legal publishers had on the core legal research materials… especially the silliness over Westlaw’s pinpoint citations and their claim that those were copyright protected and that no one could use those without paying a royalty to Westlaw first. I had visions in the late 90’s that every court in the nation would adopt this simple, yet so effective, method of vendor-neutral citation. After all, if a state like Oklahoma could do it, it seemed that any state could. Unfortunately, it seems that something happened in the early 2000’s that caused the movement to fail.

The promise, and subsequent failure is stated eloquently in the White Paper:

¶12 Unfortunately, the wave of citation reform crested in 1998. Courts in Arizona, Louisiana, Maine, Mississippi, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania, South Dakota, Tennessee, Utah, Vermont, Wisconsin, and Wyoming, as well as Guam, the Northern Mariana Islands, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, adopted elements of universal citation. However, no jurisdictions, other than Arkansas in 2009 and Illinois in 2011, have moved to do so since the early 1990s. The ABA has regularly reaffirmed its support for universal citation in a resolution, but no other major organization has joined AALL’s efforts with additional support.

While I was moderating a panel at this year’s AALL conference in Philadelphia, all of the emotion that I felt while building a vendor-neutral citation system, and making all of that information available to the members of the Oklahoma Bar, the citizens of Oklahoma, and to anyone else that needed access to the judicial decisions of the State of Oklahoma, came back to me in a rush. There are very few times that those within the legal community can make a true difference in how the public access justice, but this was one of those times. I told the audience that those states that didn’t jump on the band wagon of Universal Citation have let their citizens down, and continue to enable the legal publishing giants to control access to justice. In my opinion, the judicial leaders of those states did not stand up for the people they represent, and have shown a lack of leadership and vision found in the now 18 states that have adopted the system.

I also lashed out somewhat against AALL and its Citation Committee for planting a flag in the early 2000’s, claiming victory, and then moving on to other things. There should have been a major push by the organization to push adoption in other states, especially larger, more affluent states, like California, Texas and New York. I know that those states are difficult to deal with, and tend to not like changing the status quo of their legal systems, but the mission of Universal Citation was not accomplished, and as we can see now, the claim of victory was far too premature.

Can the idea of Universal Citation, free from the grasps of the legal publishers, be resurrected? I have to say that at this point in time, I really don’t know. It takes strong leadership on the state court level; it takes strong advocacy from the ABA, AALL and other organizations to push for reform, and; it will take outside help from the legal publishing community, especially non-Wexis vendors, to step up and help those states willing to take on such reform, just as the (pre-Wolters Kluwer) Loislaw people did for Oklahoma. That’s a lot of ships that have to adjust course in order to change the direction of the Universal Citation movement. It can be done, but it will take a great effort on many parts to breathe life back into such a worthwhile reform.

Read: Universal Citation and the American Association of Law Libraries: A White Paper

NOTE: Also take a look at the new effort from http://www.universalcitation.org — plus, a video of the meeting of this group at Rutgers last month is available at http://camlaw.rutgers.edu/av-request/10711/77aeade1b0