very nice

I would "but" that argument any time.

This article is racist. Please moderate.

Dell Computer Thrown Out Thanks To Customer Support Outsourcing to India

The Post Graduate Diploma in Legal Process Outsourcing (“P.G.D.L.P.O.”) has been developed by the Indira Gandhi National Open University (“IGNOU”) and Rainmaker.

Last date for Registration without late - February 15, 2009
Last date for Registration with a late fee of Rs. 200 - March 15, 2009
Start of Semester 1 of First Session : February 15, 2009.
Start of Semester 2 of First Session : August 16, 2009.
Start of Semester 1 of Second Session : August 16, 2009.
Start of Semester 2 of Second Session : February 15, 2010.

http://www.theonion.com/content/video/more_american_workers_outsourcing?utm_source=a-section

Respek

So no reasonable person could regard statements by a "rap artist" as factual?

Stop teasing my one eyed purple headed yogurt slinger!

This ship be sinking

Then why all the uproar over that "Slumdog" father trying to sell his duaghter, when U.S. firms are allowed to buy Indian lawyers by the truckload?

I hope that jingoistic rhetoric isn't going to do anything to stop the movement of legal tabloid writing offshore.

Anyone who has ever been on the phone with a Dell representative in Bombay knows where this business model is headed.

And settling suits for nuisance value is the American way.

I can't believe the judge would reference the 10 commandments in such an obvious manner. Doesn't the judge know that we are an atheist society that has no knowledge or care for references of religion.

This is much ado about nothing. A tempest in a teacup.

9 - Re-read the remarks. Stop trying to stir up controversy where none exists.

filmdrunk posted this story this morning. ATL sucks

Elie,

Learn to proofread.

9 - I think the Americans handle the call center aspect of law and the Indians handle the law work behind the scenes/programmer type work. That is the biz model.

50% of Latham first years no longer have to worry about having their jobs outsourced to India. How about a story on that?

For years I have observed that foreign based attorneys can do document review as competently as an American educated attorney at a fraction of the cost. Some even have superior writing skills having been educated in England. While we will not be relying on these foreign based attorneys for in court appearances (e.g., oral arguments, mediation, status conferences, etc.), there is a demand for their services due to the bottom line factor. I am currently trying to restructure our firm's hiring model and incorporate more foreign based attorneys into our transactional areas. It is time to end the madness of lockstep salaries and $160K starting salaries to snot nosed law graduates who have no idea how to practice the law.

"Altogether, the program is obviously a spoof of a serious interview program. No reasonable person could think otherwise." Well, the whole point of the Ali G show was precisely making otherwise reasonable people (i.e., the interviewees) think otherwise.

SmithDehn has top notch legal talent at a fraction of the cost to employ no nothing associates from American law schools. SmithDehn will be causing a dent on your precious law school rankings very soon.

Partner Emeritus, another way in which employing Indian lawyers is better than employing their U.S. counterparts is that Indian lawyers, like Indian wives, can simply be set on fire if they disappoint.

I can't WAIT until Elie is replaced by a Paki.

I can't WAIT until Elie is replaced by a Paki.

PE, do you mean "know-nothing?" Just wondering.

The employment of foreign based attorneys means we will not have to deal with title VII lawsuits, sex discrimination claims or the gamut of frivilous complaints from disgruntled terminated associates. Plus, we can reduce our budget for real estate leasing (less bodies equals lesser demands for office space), staff, pension and healthcare plans. Peer firms will be more profitable than ever if they adopt my proposals.

Partner Emeritus is the worst schtick this site has ever seen. It's "know nothing" you fucking retard. NO ONE THINKS YOU ARE ANYTHING BUT A 1L. NO ONE THINKS YOU ARE A PARTNER. NO ONE THINKS YOU NO [sic] ANYTHING ABOUT ACTUALLY PRACTICING LAW. JUST GIVE IT A FUCKING REST

Okay, I didn't see the movie. Who is "Jane Doe"?

This comment is addressed to post no. 27.

Thank you for the correction. This article has me excited as it is further ammunition to my proposal of employing foreign based attorneys to replace American educated attorneys. This is a good day. The editors of this blog are to be commended for their reporting of such groundbreaking news.

Okay, I didn't see the movie. Who is "Jane Doe"?

first year associates to India to function as lackeys in LPPs - "Remuneration scales in the L.P.O. sector are quite attractive. At the fresher level, depending on the organisation and location, a top tier L.P.O. may pay between 15,000 – 25,000/- per month.

better than new york - that is 180,000 to 300,00 p/.a. in rupees.

first year associates to India to function as lackeys in LPPs - "Remuneration scales in the L.P.O. sector are quite attractive. At the fresher level, depending on the organisation and location, a top tier L.P.O. may pay between 15,000 – 25,000/- per month.

better than new york - that is 180,000 to 300,00 p/.a. in rupees.

Good one, 24, even if we'll burn in hell for laughing at it. BTW, I didn't see the movie. Who is "Jane Doe" in real life?

"So no reasonable person could regard statements by a "rap artist" as factual?"

Right.

Your point being?

Good one, 24, even if we'll burn in hell for laughing at it. BTW, I didn't see the movie. Who is "Jane Doe" in real life?

29, it's shtick, not schtick idiot. PE, carry on.

This is much ado about nothing. A tempest in a teacup.

9 - Re-read the remarks. Stop trying to stir up controversy where none exists.

"So no reasonable person could regard statements by a "rap artist" as factual?"

Right.

Your point being?

Are these Indians the same as the ones who killed Custer? Or do they live in Ohio? Either way, the only good Indian is one who speaks English in a way that can be understood by folks who speak American.

Geez 24, talk about a flame.

36/40 - OK, so it should read "no reasonable person SHOULD regard statements by a rap artist." Sentence modified and ended early intentionally.

Are they really trying to say that the US lawfirm wouldn't have done the research work to see if they had a good case for an MSJ, they would have just settled it for X amount? Seriously, I'd love to know how much they really think they could have settled this for as compared to legal fees. the issue wasn't that complex and the brief wasn't that long.

9 -- you're a fucking moron. re-read the quote and then reanalyze any inferences you think the court made.

This is the only time I have ever commented on Mr. Mystal's writing abaility. Do they teach you how to "brief" a case at Harvard?

Imagine this interaction in Cambridge:

Professor: Mr. Mystal, what happened in this case?

Mr. Mystal: The suit alleged that Cohen (performing as Ali G) suggested he had sex with a woman (who is referred to as 'Jane Doe' in the lawsuit) during an 'interview' with Gore Vidal.

Professor: (blank stare)

9 -- you're a fucking moron. re-read the quote and then reanalyze any inferences you think the court made.

This is the only time I have ever commented on Mr. Mystal's writing abaility. Do they teach you how to "brief" a case at Harvard?

Imagine this interaction in Cambridge:

Professor: Mr. Mystal, what happened in this case?

Mr. Mystal: The suit alleged that Cohen (performing as Ali G) suggested he had sex with a woman (who is referred to as 'Jane Doe' in the lawsuit) during an 'interview' with Gore Vidal.

Professor: (blank stare)

You all gotta read it again!

: The suit alleged that Cohen (performing as Ali G) suggested he had sex with a woman (who is referred to as 'Jane Doe' in the lawsuit) during an 'interview' with Gore Vidal.

To 16/39 and 45/47: The judge used the fact that Cohen spoke "in the exeggerated manned of a rap artist" as support for the conclusion that "no reasonable person could consider [his] statements . . . to be factual." I wasn't aware that speaking like a "rap artist," whatever that means, suggests that nothing one says can be regarded as a statement of fact. The rationale has racial overtones. Congratulations to both of you on the duplicate posts, by the way.
--9

45-They went Indian out of respect for the Plaintiff''s meritorious claims

Dear 9,

So what you’re telling me is that we should ignore all the substance that the court put in-between its remark about what reasonable people would think and its description of the character’s style of speech. Right? Like the statement, “it is obvious that the Ali G character is absurd, and all his statements are gibberish and intended as comedy.” This is irrelevant, right? The court merely says “not reasonable, because rap artist (aka black person?),” right?

Comedic intent = worthless.
Ali G being an absurd character = worthless.
Ridiculous outfit = worthless.

Are you sure that the inference we’re supposed to draw isn’t this: “This is clearly comedic and reasonable people don’t take comedy as fact.”

Truly yours,

A reasonable person.

38 - If you're going to correct someone, make sure you are correct yourself, you worthless piece of human filth. And it's blatantly obvious that you are just PE -- who else actually defends that horrible schtick?

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/schtick

52, see 22. Despite everything you mention, Ali G. fooled the interviewees, many of whom most people would be hard-pressed to characterize as "unreasonable." The judge's racist inference cleary tipped the balance.

The end is near!

Marketing executive Heddi Cundle’s self-penned Tribe.net profile describes her as a “[n]atural leader and decision-maker. Ingenious thinker and astute long-range planner. Logical and analytical. Determined, emphatic and exceptional organizer. Strong motivation and work ethics. Decisive and great aptitude for creative problem solving. Shares birthday with Vincent Van Gogh. ” Add to that: determined litigator — and not a bitch, a minger or Sacha Baron Cohen’s baby-mama.

54,

I agree, but don't you think there is a difference between (1) tricking otherwise reasonable people into thinking that you run a legit interview show in order to get them to sign on (i.e. before they see you, hear your ludicrous statements, etc.) and (2) tricking the otherwise reasonable viewing audience?

Also, the thrust of the damages sought were for libel, so what the interviewees thought is unimportant, unless they viewed the program's airing.

52.

Partner Emeritus: While you are hitting early bird specials and watching "Matlock" reruns, I will continue to earn, earn, earn. I am a billing machine. In case you have a hearing aid, I repeat: I AM A BILLING MACHINE!!!

our firm was asked by a client to handle a lawsuit. as part of discovery, our client was shipping out tons of documents. the client was a southern client (not texas with a lexis, but close) that used profanity and colloquial language profusely in pretty much all their communications within the company and to their partners in the industry.

an indian firm was retained by the other side to review the documents. they were clueless as to the contents of some of the most important docs because of the language used. It was hilarious seeing the requests for explanation. We would send it to our client and they would reply with more colloquial language (no profanity). even at I guess around $40 an hour, the language barrier must have cost them a fortune.

even though we won, the other side tried to get us sanctioned because of the constant and repeated requests necessary for explanation, but when our client was questioned by the court, the court dismissed the sanction motion, noting that the client was not replying in any other manner than what the client normally used.

38- either spelling is okay, but you are a dipshit and pathetic douche for bothering to correct another poster.

Ali G wants to know what's so racialist about all this??

Yea man, fucking poser

I take secret pleasure in knowing that PE wastes so much of his time writing tripe that I don't read.

PE is a loser, no one is impressed by him, and it pleases me greatly that the author is not spending that time making money or having sex with females, but instead doing poorly-written shtick on a law blog.

Then again, I'm a bastard.

Hey Elie -- The Indian lawyers represented Channel 4, not Cohen.

The Indian lawyers represented Channel 4, not Cohen.

63- you mean that PE gives you pleasure? I ignore him or her. It was good in the beginning, but its pretty old and worn out now.

66-

No, I meant knowing PE is probably a miserable person gives me pleasure.

A fine distinction.

-66

29, 63 and 66, you are dead-on correct. Partner Emeritus is a wastrel of a sub-human, and a complete fraud. Like I said on another day, he is likely an over-educated biglaw paralegal from a good liberal arts school (e.g. Williams, Bowdoin type) that is sick of taking orders from young associates (maybe some that are younger than him). I cannot wait until he realizes the sorry state of his existence and gives up.

Does anybody care that the factual basis for this story appears to be INCORRECT?

The Indian lawyers helped SmithWhoever to represent Channel 4, another defendant in the case, but did not rep Cohen. Elie, please take a look at the signature block of the pleading to which you linked. Now, maybe Channel 4's MSJ won the day for all the defendants, but I'm guessing Cohen has pricey lawyers.

I would like to outsource my own first year associate position to cheaper labor in india. That way I can dedicate myself to posting on ATL like mr. emeritus while still taking my profit off the top. GO OUTSOURCING!

Can Elie outsource his job to someone who reads the things to which he links?

SDD Global is located in the unfortunately named town of Mysore, India... according to the SJ brief.

Does this make financial sense? 59 suggests, I think correctly, that Indian attorneys require more supervisory time than their American counterparts.

So if this brief took 10 hours of associate time, the Indian lawyers ($40/hour) look a lot better than the American associate ($200/hour); their time cost $400 to the American associate's $2000. But what if the American associate's work requires only one hour of partner review ($600/hour) while the Indian lawyers' work requires 4 hours of review? Suddenly, outsourcing has cost our hypothetical firm $2800, while keeping it in house would only have cost $2600.

fyi, 58, rainmakers don't have to bill...

Ya got that right,,,,they just make it rain so the sun don't shine.

It's the associates who bill, bill bill.

ParTTTner EmeriTTTus.

73 - Your point would make sense, if 59 was big law and this is not apparent from that post. The article indicates the review of the work product was done by SmithDehn and the client would probably have a fit at paying $600 an hour for partner review when the associate pay is $40 an hour. Furthermore, the defense lawyer admitted the Indian way was cost effective.

69 - You guessed wrong. No big law names on that docket.

MONROE THEODORE F. - Attorney for Defendant

ROSEN SABA LLP - Former Attorney for Defendant

SMITH DORNAN & DEHN - Attorney for Defendant

VALLE & ASSOCIATES - Attorney for Defendant

I once stuck me cell phone up me Julie and the aerial fell off and it's still up there. Does you think it will stop the sperms?

Has anyone actually looked at the brief? It's really not very well-written. It was obviously good enough for a case with simple issues, like this one, but this is not something that would (hopefully) ever get turned in by a top firm.

Indian work is always more cost effective, and so is letting my 2 year old daughter scribble with crayons on a paper and submitting that as a brief.

you will never be able to beat the cost of a yugo, and with the quality of work done in india, thats what you get.

81 - You seem angry that you profession is being demonopolized. It must be really hard for someone who bought the idea that price per hour dictated quality. Give the Indians a few years to go beyond process work and to fine tune quality control.

82, not angry, I just know that the rule of law is based heavily in one's culture. think about having an indian draft a divorce case brief, or a child custody brief, or...you get the picture. one of the most important aspects of our job is the skilled use of language and the nuances of english. the briefs in this case written by the indian attorneys were pathetic. the language was weak, weakening any arguments. if the facts were not so heavily in their favor, they would have lost.

I dont know if 59's firm actually does it, but we regularly insert colloquial language into our communications with outside counsel if we know they are using indian attorneys in any capacity. it raises costs for the other side and causes errors on their part. if they want to fight using cheap labor, then we will fight with cheap language.

77, I wasn't necessarily trying to prove that the work wasn't cost-effective in this case. I was simply pointing out that it's very easy to imagine situations where outsourcing is not cost-effective.

-73

83 - I agree that brief writing is an art and not process work. The brief may have not been to a standard that you have in mind but it was good enough to win. Business would look at hiring someone more expensive (someone such as yourself) as a case of diminishing returns and therefore unnecessary. This is the business model that is now applied to the law profession by corporate america and the fat is being trimmed.

83 - Why don't you fight back with your own Indians? Wouldn't it be more cost effective?

85, how do you know before the fact what is "good enough to win?" It seems like constantly trying to find the work product that is just good enough is going to bite people in the ass sooner or later.

87 - The Defendants hired a former Skadden litigation partner to make the initial determination on the merits of the claim (probably cheaper than hiring Skadden). As far as good enough to win, your view suggests that one can never pay enough for quality while corporate america thinks...why overpay?

83, people like you once said that the Japanese will never successfully sell cars in America, since car style appreciation is so rooted in the American culture. How could those Japanese ever produce something up to the American consumers' standards and idiosyncrasies?

You are also way overestimating the importance of linguistic style in a winning brief or any other court production. I bet you also think oral arguments change the minds of judges.

89 - Well put.

#69 - This is interesting. You've stated lawfirms in the brief and all are USA based. Even Smithwhatsits has a New York office. So exactly what outsourcing was done or is this just a way for Smithwhatsits to exploit themselves and pretend they were cost effective? I doubt their team leader was Indian and probably charged $600 an hour. Outsourcing....absolute rubbish!