Google is getting into the browser wars with their new Chrome product.

As Futurelawyer points out, who needs a new browser (besides anybody who still uses IE)? But Chrome is made by Google and Google knows what they are doing so we assume the product will sell.

Take a closer look at the boilerplate Terms of Service Agreement, before you download the browser. We're not sure if Google's lawyers were trying to make hours or just drunk, but if they had their way, Chrome would own everything, everywhere, forever. From Valleywag:

[A]ny "content" you "submit, post or display" using the service -- whether you own its copyright or not -- gives Google a "perpetual, irrevocable, worldwide, royalty-free, and non-exclusive license to reproduce, adapt, modify, translate, publish, publicly perform, publicly display and distribute" it?

Valleywag goes on to list a bunch of other ridiculous rules that you "agree" to when you click "yes" on the internet.

I love it when clients go out of their way to create jobs for IP litigators. It's a faltering economy and everybody should be doing their part.

Update: Google has revised the ToS for Chrome. See here (via a commenter).

The 5 most laughable terms of service on the Net [Valleywag]
Google Chrome - Do We Really Need A New Browser? [Futurelawyer]

Wachtell may be the most prestigious firm out there (according to Vault), but it has the industry's worst Web site, as rated by Jonathan Thrope of the American Lawyer. We're not completely sure we trust his judgment though, since he was "sucked in" by Womble Carlyle Sandridge & Rice's animated dog. We waited for it to do something cool, but it just stretched and yawned.

According to Thrope, law firms are getting more serious about online marketing and using Web sites to create a distinctive brand. In general, law firm sites strike us as fairly dry. And boring. There are a few exceptions, like the Van Winkle Law Firm's split personality bio page. North Carolina-based Van Winkle adds a personal touch to its site with dual bios (and photos) for many of its attorneys: one with professional highlights, and another focused on hobbies and life outside of work.

Other firms experiment with offbeat advertising, but seem to be using it to recruit attorneys, not clients. Like Curtis, Mallet-Prevost, Colt & Mosle's creation of a Facebook page, and Stoel Rives' free-style running promo on YouTube.

Of the assortment of staid sites in the AmLaw 100, five made Thrope's cut for the worst. Check them out after the jump.

* Nationwide Layoff Watch: Nannies. [Dealbreaker]

* Was Findlaw gaming Google? Bad, Findlaw, bad. [Real Lawyers Have Blogs]

* Stupid Patent Case of the Week? [Mendelson's Musings]

* We knew him way back when: a profile of Atlanta AUSA Jon-Peter Kelly (with whom we went to high school and college). [Fulton County Daily Report]

* Blawg Review #173 -- with a swimming theme. [Chicago IP Litigation Blog via Blawg Review]

The embarrassing Google hit is one of the great new fears of the modern age. If the number-one Google hit for your name is your work bio, Corporate Challenge race-time results, or nothing at all, consider yourself lucky. You could have something worse, like, "Kashmir Hill. Is that her real name or her porn screen name?" Or something much worse, like the derogatory comments that spurred the Autoadmit lawsuit.

Seattle lawyer Shakespear Feyissa is in a Google predicament. He wants a ten-year-old article removed from his college newspaper's archives. The school administrators say sure, but the college newspaper editors are adamantly opposed. We love principled undergrads. From the Seattle Times:

While a senior at [Seattle Pacific University] 10 years ago, Feyissa was arrested on suspicion of attempted sexual assault and suspended. He was never charged, but the suspension stuck -- indefinitely.

Feyissa complained that his punishment was more severe because of his race, he told the student newspaper at the time, but an investigation dismissed his claim.

He's a lawyer now, and that article -- still among the first hits for Feyissa's name on Google -- continues to hurt him personally and professionally, he said. So Feyissa, at 33, has been pressuring SPU to help clear his name.

We question his tactics. By going after the school, he has succeeded in getting the original Falcon article knocked back a few pages when Google searching his name. But due to the media coverage of his crusade, he now has tons of hits with the paragraph intro, "A decade ago Shakespear Feyissa was arrested on suspicion of attempted sexual assault."

Read more, after the jump.

We received 629 responses to Monday's ATL / Lateral Link survey on social networking, and it looks like most of you are avid surfers.

Overall, 81% of you use at least one social networking site or maintain a blog. Facebook was the overwhelming winner, as 94% of attorneys who use social networking sites have an account there. LinkedIn was a distant second, used by 46% of these respondents. Myspace was third with 21%.

A surprising number of attorneys are also blogging. Just over 9% maintain an account with blogger, and just under 3% use Livejournal. One percent wrote in that they use Wordpress.

Despite the occasional employer attempts to block access, about 91% of social networking attorneys log in from the office at least once or twice a month, and 61% log in at least daily. One in three attorneys logs on to his or her Facebook or LinkedIn accounts, from the office, more than twice a day.

While they may do it from the office, however, most attorneys are using their online accounts for fun, not for profit. Almost 97% of respondents with social networking accounts are using them "to keep in touch with friends", 56% are using them "for fun", and 9% are using them "to look for new friends." But less than 7% are using them "to look for jobs", and only 5% are using them "to look for clients."

More findings, after the jump.

See the links below for more details. Also note this, from Marc Randazza of the Legal Satyricon:

For anyone who is curious, I have personally spoken to the University of Texas adjunct who happens to bear the [same name as the formerly anonymous defendant known as :D].

He IS NOT the person in question. I would appreciate it if any readers would keep that in mind, and educate anyone who might hold this mistaken belief. I can confirm with 100% certainty that the [individual identified as :D] in the complaint is not an attorney and is not a law professor.

It has been a while since our last posting about the AutoAdmit lawsuit, so feel free to discuss the latest developments in the comments. If you're not familiar with the case, peruse the postings collected here.

Another Amended Complaint in the Auto Admit Case [Legal Satyricon]
Yale Students' Lawsuit Unmasks Anonymous Trolls, Opens Pandora's Box [Wired]
Yale Students Name Austinite Who Allegedly Defamed Them [keyetv.com]
Lawyers for 2 Female Students at Yale Law School Learn Identities of Anonymous Online Attackers [Chronicle of Higher Education]

Bloggers tend to be so hyper-connected that being away from Internet service for more than two hours can feel like an eternity. Due to the numerous e-mails flying around law firms, and the expectation of rapid response, lawyers tend to have a similar connectivity addiction. The Blackberry is the sweet, sweet drug that feeds the need.

We know how dedicated you all are to your Blackberries. What if you were forced to give it up in order to really go on vacation and get away from the firm?

UK-based Linklaters is doing just that, reports Law People.

Linklaters is reported having decreed, in a fit of concern for work/life balance, that lawyers leave their Blackberrys at home while on holiday (vacation to us).The order is designed to insulate associates, in particular, from the relentless rat race for a few sweet weeks a year, according to management. "Sometimes it's the small things that count," one partner averred. While another lawyer confessed that "I feel naked without my Blackberry and there are times when you just have to be reachable." Whether the firm is successful in enforcing this edict is not yet clear.

We think this will just result in compounding of guilt, as attorneys feel the shame of obsessively checking their Blackberries while "on holiday," and the need to hide the illicit Blackberry checking from the firm. What do you think about the policy?

No, there's no decimal point missing. Computer virus fighter McAfee Inc. wants to quarantine the legal fees of WilmerHale, alleging that the firm overbilled the company. It finds WilmerHale's $12 million bill to be simply unacceptable.

From Niraj Chokshi of The Recorder:

The Santa Clara, Calif., company is embroiled with Wilmer, Cutler, Pickering, Hale and Dorr over $12 million in legal fees incurred in the trial of former McAfee Chief Financial Officer Prabhat Goyal. The company is accusing WilmerHale of fraud, theft, negligence and breach of fiduciary duty.

"[WilmerHale] intentionally overworked and churned the representation of Goyal; shamelessly employing over 100 WilmerHale timekeepers in the feeding frenzy," McAfee alleged in a complaint filed in the Eastern District of Texas earlier this year. "Defendant's bills reflect at least 16 partners, 34 associate attorneys, 10 legal assistants and 49 staff personnel -- how else could they amass this enormous trove of cash?" the complaint read.

On the one hand, $12 million is a sizable chunk of change. Did William DiSalvatore bill time to this matter?

On the other hand, big cases are, well, big. And part of the reason you hire Biglaw shops to tackle them is the ample supply of warm bodies to throw at the problem. Racking up an eight-figure legal bill is not unheard of in a long-running, large-scale white collar case involving top corporate executives.

More after the jump.

We recently reported on Winston & Strawn making iPhones available for its attorneys. Will other firms follow suit?

Some already have. This morning, Sheppard Mullin announced that it will be "adding the iPhone as a selection in our mobile device program," as of mid-September. Full memo, after the jump.

One firm that's not phalling for the iPhone: Latham & Watkins."Latham isn't going for the new version or the new software," a tipster tells us, "because of a lack of 'whole-device encryption.' They posted [a message] on the Latham [intranet]." That message, also after the jump.

Earlier today, we noted that Debevoise & Plimpton just slipped from the top spot in the American Lawyer's A-List rankings. One Debevoise associate has a solution, proposed in this open letter:

Dear Rick [Evans, Presiding Partner],

By now you have no doubt seen the AmLaw rankings. You will have been as horrified as I to see Debevoise drop from #1, a position it has held for four years now, to #5. More dramatic, though, is the drop in the Associate Satisfaction score -- we shed 90 points out of 200. Luckily, I have an effective, easily implemented solution to offer: iPhones. That's right - iPhones. For just $200/associate, you can infinitely increase our satisfaction, as well as get some great press on Abovethelaw.com.

Think about it, Rick. iPhones. Debevoise can be "that" firm -- you know, the hip, modern, generous, lifestyle-caring-about firm that law students buzz about and want to work for.

Let's reclaim our destiny. With iPhones.

Best,
[redacted]

In other iPhone news, John Carney asks over at our sister site, Dealbreaker: "Has Apple Sold So Many iPhones It Crashed Its System?"

The Sheppard Mullin and Latham iPhone announcements, after the jump.

Their personal identity information gets compromised by data breaches. From the Washington Post:

Sometime late last year, an employee of a McLean investment firm decided to trade some music, or maybe a movie, with like-minded users of the online file-sharing network LimeWire while using a company computer. In doing so, he inadvertently opened the private files of his firm, Wagner Resource Group, to the public.

That exposed the names, dates of birth and Social Security numbers of about 2,000 of the firm's clients, including a number of high-powered lawyers and Supreme Court Justice Stephen G. Breyer....

A spokesman for Breyer said the justice had no comment on the security breach, which came to light after the reader notified Security Fix and the blog alerted some of the Wagner clients.

Eh, but who cares about lowly -- or low-paid -- Supreme Court justices? Lordly law firm partners were also victimized: "'This may explain why two weeks ago I got a $9,000 cellphone bill from AT&T,' said Steven Agresta, a partner with the law firm Alston & Bird."

Or maybe a certain A&B summer associate got a hold of Agresta's cell phone, and decided to call his homies back in Croatia. Did Agresta also get charged for a small fortune in necktie purchases?

Update: Some of you have asked for an update about Divljan Shatterhand Steele. He's still a summer associate at Alston & Bird, where he is doing well and has become something of a minor celebrity.

Justice Breyer Is Among Victims in Data Breach Caused by File Sharing [Washington Post via Drudge]

The controversy surrounding Chief Judge Alex Kozinski is rapidly dissipating -- and with good reason. He has recused himself from the Ira Isaacs obscenity trial, and he's called for an investigation of any potential misconduct on his part. So, to quote his website, "Ain't nothin' here. Y'all best be movin' on, compadre."

We've read tons of Kozinski coverage (so you don't have to). Here are three of the most important posts:

1. The wife of Chief Judge Kozinski has come to his defense, over at Patterico's Pontifications:

My name is Marcy Tiffany. I have been married to Alex Kozinski for over thirty years and we have raised three sons together..... [T]he LA Times story, authored by Scott Glover, is riddled with half-truths, gross mischaracterizations and outright lies. One significant mischaracterization is that Alex was maintaining some kind of "website" to which he posted pornographic material.

Obviously, Glover's use of the word "website" was intended to convey a false image of a carefully designed and maintained graphical interface, with text, pictures, sound and hyperlinks, such as businesses maintain or that individuals can set up on Facebook, rather than a bunch of random files located in one of many folders stored on our family's file server. The "server" is actually just another home computer that sits next to my desk in our home office, and that we use to store files, perform back-ups, and route the Internet to the family network. It has no graphical interface, but if you know the precise location of a file, you can access it either from one of the home computers or remotely.

Using the term "website" also gives the impression that Alex was actively aware of all of the material, when, in fact, it had accumulated over a number of years and he didn't even remember that some of that stuff had been stored there or whether it had been put there by him or one of our sons, who also have access to the server.

That's just an excerpt; read the whole thing over here.

2. Professor Eugene Volokh, a former clerk to Chief Judge Kozinski, offers his thoughts over at the Volokh Conspiracy. Money quote:

Kozinski has a quirky sense of humor, and keeps some joke pictures and videos on his computer rather than throwing them away. I'm sure they aren't the kinds of things some people would enjoy seeing. But he wasn't trying to show them to those people! He was just minding his own business, keeping some files on his own private server. And now it's a national news story.

Enough already.

3. Professor Volokh's post concludes by quoting the analysis of Professor Lawrence Lessig, another leading legal academic and cyberlaw guru. Professor Lessig writes:

When it comes to government invasions of our privacy, we are (and rightly) a privacy obsessed people. We need to extend some of that obsession to the increasingly common violations by private people against other private people. There is nothing for Chief Judge Kozinski to defend because he has violated no law, and we live in a free society (or so he thought when he immigrated from Romania). A free society should feed the right to be left alone, including the right not to have to defend publicly private choices and taste, by learning not to feed the privacy trolls.

That's just the tail end of a long and thoughtful post. Read it in full by clicking here.

Alex Kozinski's Wife Speaks Out [Patterico's Pontifications via Volokh Conspiracy (Jonathan Adler)]
Alex Kozinski [Volokh Conspiracy (Eugene Volokh)]
The Kozinski mess [Lessig Blog (Larry Lessig)]

As bloggers, internet addiction is a job requirement, but we hear it's a bad thing for "normal people." We've noticed quite a few articles recently on cell phone addiction and Web abuse. We think lawyers more than most may be prone to technological addictions, due to their nifty firm-supplied tech toys, many billable hours spent in front of computers, and the ever-present blackberry/crackberry.

Wired reports that one influential psychiatrist has proposed adding internet addiction to the manual of mental disorders:

In the March issue of the American Journal of Psychiatry, Jerald Block proposed that Web abuse be added to his field's bible, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders. Block cites research from South Korea, where, he says, the affliction is considered a serious public health problem, and the government estimates that 168,000 children may require psychotropic medications. In China, the Beijing Military Region Central Hospital puts the number of teenage pathological computer users at 10 million.

Like other addicts, users reportedly experience cravings (for better software, faster machines), withdrawal (logging off may cause irritability), a loss of sense of time (wee-hour fixes), and negative social repercussions (it's so much easier to date an avatar).

Check. Check. Check. No check -- our social life is just fine, thank you.

There are your warning signs for internet addiction, so look out! We wonder if carrying a PDA is the equivalent of chewing nicotine gum.... More discussion of addictions and how the love of the iPhone can lead to robbery at gunpoint, after the jump.

Too... much.... information. Yes, we're talking about the controversy over Chief Judge Alex Kozinski of the Ninth Circuit, who's presiding over the Ira Isaacs obscenity trial in Los Angeles, and who uploaded some materials to a shared family website that contained some sexual images (among many other things).

This controversy is "TMI" in more ways than one. There has been such a torrent of news and legal blog coverage that we're still getting up to speed. We'll have more detailed thoughts later. Our extensive past coverage appears here, here, and here.

In the meantime, here's an open thread for discussion, plus some material to keep you occupied: (1) an extensive collection of links related to this matter, to both mainstream media sources and blogs, as well as selected material obtained from Chief Judge Kozinski's site; and (2) a pair of reader polls (one from yesterday, still open, and one new, prompted by comments like this one).

NEWS COVERAGE
Judge suspends L.A. obscenity trial after conceding his website had sexual images [Los Angeles Times]
Porn Stash Puts Obscenity Case Judge in Awkward Spot [New York Sun]
Chief Judge Contributed to Racy Web Site [New York Times]
Report: Smut-case judge posted explicit images [AP]
Judge Assailed Over Sexually Explicit Images on Web Site [Washington Post]
Obscenity Trial Suspended After Report That Judge Posted Sexual Images [WSJ Law Blog]

BLOGOSPHERE COVERAGE
The L.A. Times's Tipster on Kozinski's Porn: Cyrus Sanai [Patterico's Pontifications]
More on Cyrus Sanai's Campaign Against Judge Kozinski [Patterico's Pontifications]
The L.A. Times's Tipster [How Appealing (Howard Bashman)]
The Kozinski Circus [Convictions / Slate (Emily Bazelon)]
Should Litigants in Obscenity Case Before Judge Kozinski Moo-ve for a Mistrial? [Legal Blog Watch (Carolyn Elefant)]
Judges Gone Wild [Concurring Opinions (Kaimipono Wanger)]
News judgments about Kozinski's porn [LawBeat (Mark Obbie) via How Appealing]

COLLECTED MATERIALS FROM CHIEF JUDGE KOZINSKI'S WEBSITE
[Warning: NSFW]
What "Stuff" was on Judge Kozinski's Personal Website? [Celebrity Justice / USLaw.com]
Exclusive: Kozinski's Porn -- Images from Judge Alex Kozinski's Web Site [Patterico's Pontifications]
[Warning: NSFW]

Earlier: Prior ATL coverage of Chief Judge Alex Kozinski (scroll down)

Lawyers seem to cluster at two extremes when it comes to technology. Some are true tech geeks, who wet themselves over every shiny new gadget; others are technophobes, who are intimidated by two-sided printing.

After Apple unveiled the new iPhone yesterday, we received several emails from readers in the first camp. For example:

In light of Apple's release of software making the iPhone compatible with corporate Microsoft Exchange servers, I think the iPhone merits a "Biglaw Perk Watch" post. Which firms are now allowing use of the iPhone? Which firms are paying for it?

Now that iPhones are compatible with Microsoft Exchange servers, perhaps Skadden will no longer frown upon lawyers spending their technology allowances on iPhones.

A second tipster tells us that at least one large law firm is jumping on the iPhone bandwagon:

Just watched the Apple keynote address today from MacWorld in San Francisco (watch it at apple.com). In the first 10 minutes, Steve Jobs shows a video about enterprise users adopting the new iPhone. Sonnenschein is one of three or four different companies they profile -- including Genentech, Disney, and some army thing.

Pretty cool! Looks like Sonnenschein will adopt iPhones! Are any other firms doing this?

Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal has been going through a rough patch lately. But if shiny new iPhones are on the way, things are looking up.

If you know about your firm's policy with respect to the iPhone, please chime in, in the comments. Thanks.

P.S. We know of at least one Biglaw partner who is an iPhone fan: noted Supreme Court litigator Tom Goldstein, of Akin Gump. To find out what he keeps on his iPhone, click here.

The New IPhone Is Ready for Business [Business Technology]
Apple Aims for the Masses With a Cheaper iPhone [New York Times]
Tom Goldstein's iPhone [SCOTUSblog]

Earlier: A Clarification About iPhones at Skadden
Skadden Raises To... iPhones!
Waiting for the iPhone: An iWitness Account

The legal and tech blogs are abuzz with the news that retired Supreme Court Justice Sandra Day O'Connor is diving into the gaming world. From Wired's Game Life blog:

Delivering the keynote address Wednesday at the annual Games For Change conference at Parsons the New School For Design, O'Connor detailed a project she is spearheading called Our Courts, which she described as an "online, interactive civic education project for seventh- and eighth-graders" that familiarizes students with the legal system. O'Connor believes that America's youth aren't learning enough about civics, and thinks that the educational power of videogames is just the thing to change that.

"Only one-third of Americans can name the three branches of government," O'Connor said, "but two-thirds can name a judge on American Idol."

Executive, legislative, judicial -- boring! Crazy tales of Paula Abdul molesting Idol contestants -- exciting! We hope SOC realizes there needs to be an excitement factor if she wants to engage the kiddies. With this in mind, we suggest the following for the video game cover:

Sandra Day O'Connor: Game Designer [Wired]
Former Supreme Court Justice Switches to Video Games [Slashdot]
In Surprise to Herself, Justice O'Connor Makes Foray Into Digital Gaming [WSJ Law Blog]

That's a question that our friends at the ABA Journal are planning to tackle in a forthcoming article. Perhaps you can help?

Some background, from reporter Richard Acello:

We're looking to do a story on law firms' tech savvy or lack thereof. At a recent technology conference, some IT people complained about how their technological requirements were just not accepted by the older partners. But the young lawyers, used to more advanced technology, had no problem adapting when changes were made.

We're looking for some examples from associates, as well as suggestions for new associates who come in and are appalled at how backward the tech is at their law firms. Yes, we will allow anonymity.

You can email Rich Acello, the writer on the story, at richace at cox dot net. Also feel free to comment on this post if you have some thoughts on law firms and how "with it" they are when it comes to tech.

If Winston & Strawn ends up merging with Heller Ehrman (or any other firm), here's a question to consider: Whose instant-messaging policy will prevail? A tipster tells us:

"Winston has blocked Meebo, Gchat, and all other possible chat clients."

We checked with sources at Winston, who report that this policy is nothing new. Instant messenger programs have been blocked at Winston for quite some time (at least several months).

But we still found the policy interesting, especially in light of recent blogosphere discussion of website blocking. It got us wondering: What other law firms prevent their employees from using instant messaging?

Instant messaging can be a huge time suck. Workplaces that ban IM'ing, at least between their employees and outsiders [FN1], are probably more productive. Most people would rather IM with a law school classmate about the evilness of Katherine Mayfair on Desperate Housewives than plow through a stack of sale/leaseback agreements.

But a ban on instant messaging -- especially if accompanied by other measures, like preventing people from accessing non-work email accounts from the office (hello, Goldman Sachs) -- could lower employee morale. We're reminded of how Allen & Overy faced a mini-revolt after banning Facebook in its London office (a policy it quickly reversed).

ATL readers: Any thoughts? Does your firm prevent you from using an instant-message client? If so, does it tick you off? If not, do you wish it did, à la Odysseus wanting to be tied to the mast?

[FN1] We're not counting the internal IM systems that some firms -- e.g., Kirkland & Ellis (if memory serves) -- have in place. These networks probably still transmit a lot of gossip, of the "omg have you seen the new para's outfit" variety. But when you're limited to IM'ing with your co-workers, a lot of your talk will be about.... work.

A fascinating article in the Washington Post explores new uses for DNA tests in the legal system. (We mentioned it yesterday in passing, but thought we'd say a bit more.)

Everything that's written on genetics has an obligatory section on eugenics. But after getting that out of the way, the piece turns to the more interesting possibilities for DNA. One is as a predictor of criminal behavior:

Rather than simply proving, for example, that the blood on a suspect's clothes does or does not match that of a murder victim, these "second generation" DNA tests seek to shed light on the biological traits and psychological states of the accused. In effect, they allow genes to "testify" in ways never before possible, in some cases resolving long-standing legal tangles but in others raising new ones.

Already, chemical companies facing "toxic tort" claims have persuaded courts to order DNA tests on the people suing them, part of an attempt to show that the plaintiffs' own genes made them sick -- not the companies' products.

In other cases, defense attorneys are asking judges to admit test results suggesting that their clients have a genetic predisposition for violent or impulsive behavior, adding a potential "DNA defense" to a legal system that until now has held virtually everyone accountable for their actions except the insane or mentally retarded.

For example, researchers have identified a genetic mutation in a brain enzyme that causes increased violent behavior. Could genetic predisposition towards violence one day be a possible defense by excuse?

As Vanderbilt's Nita Farahany -- an expert in behavioral genetics and the law, who has previously appeared in these pages (second photo) -- rightly points out, finding the cause for a behavior does not excuse a crime. But it could influence sentencing. [FN1]

Another possibility for DNA test applications is measuring life span, to determine awards in civil cases:

Many genes contribute to longevity; just last month, researchers announced the discovery of more than a dozen genes newly suspected of helping determine a person's life span. Even if all of them were known, they could at best provide a probabilistic estimate. But as those estimates become more accurate, said Hoffmann, the Maryland associate dean, they will force judges and jurors to think hard about a question that has long dogged legal scholars: Should damage awards be linked to projected life span at all?

"If it's for compensation, then yes, that means you'd want to fine-tune it to the details of the individual and their personal life expectancy," Hoffmann said. "But if damages are about deterrence, then that says you don't get off the hook just because you were lucky enough to hit someone who had a short life expectancy."

It's all speculative for now, as these tests are still in their early stages and not yet at the level of admissibility. But when they get to that point, there will be some interesting new possibilities and challenges for legal application.

[FN1] Earlier this month, Professor Farahany wrote an extremely interesting opinion piece for the Washington Post , imagining a world in which "police officers can read the minds of potential criminals and arrest them before they commit any crimes." It's not as far-fetched as it might sound: "various government agencies are funding the development of technology to detect brain activity remotely and are hoping to eventually decode what someone is thinking."

DNA Tests Offer Deeper Examination Of Accused [Washington Post]
The Government Is Trying to Wrap Its Mind Around Yours [Washington Post]

For a society that has embraced litigation and the digital age, there will soon be a new website to love, SueEasy.com. It's like Match.com for lawyers and litigants.

The site promises to revolutionize legal service. There are three easy steps:

1. Register your case.
2. View attorney responses.
3. Choose an attorney.
4. Instant legal bliss.

We are not making step four up. "Instant legal bliss" sounds pretty sweet to us. These guys know how to market their stuff.

Tort reform advocates are not fans of the idea. From UPI:

Darren McKinney, spokesman for the American Tort Reform Association, said the site is the "latest distillation" of an attitude promoted by trial lawyers.

"It's an attitude that runs against personal responsibility and seems to promote the notion that whatever negative happens in your life somebody else can be blamed and thus sued," McKinney told Legal Newsline.

There are some interesting class action suits up on the site now. They include Hot Dog and Bun Mismatch filed by oscarmayer and Circumcised without Anybody's Consent filed by Frank OHara on behalf of one million infant boys.

Oscarmayer's complaint: "Currently buns are sold in packages of 10 but hotdogs come in packages of 8." While certainly annoying, does it really warrant a lawsuit?

Web site makes suing easy [United Press International]
SueEasy — Hey Tort Reform, This One’s For You [WSJ Law Blog]
SueEasy.com [Overlawyered]

In case you hadn't noticed, earlier this week we launched AboveTheLaw 2.0 -- a redesigned, retooled version of ATL, the legal tabloid site you've come to know and love. There have been a few technological hiccups associated with the relaunch -- e.g., most of yesterday -- and there will surely be more in the days (and weeks) ahead. But we will muddle through. Thanks again for your continued patience.

On the question of design, opinions will differ, as they always will on matters aesthetic (and more on that later). But on an objective level, the new site offers several cool new features not available on the old site:

1. Community Section: This is ATL's version of a message board. Annoyed that we haven't yet used your idea for an open thread? Start up the thread yourself! The Community section is open to any readers who wish to post discussion topics of their choosing. To access this part of the site, just click on the "Community" box in the upper right-hand corner (or click here). [FN1]

2. Past Precedents: One of the problems with a blog-style, purely chronological format is that the newest post always goes above the old, regardless of relative importance -- and when a post scrolls off the ATL front page, it's sometimes as if it never existed. So in the "Past Precedents" box on the front page, we draw your attention to recent notable stories and classic ATL items that no longer grace the main page.

3. Comment Capabilities: If you want to take ownership of your most witty or insightful comments, now you can, by registering for a commenter username and password. This is how internet celebrities are born! E.g., Loyola 2L.

But if you prefer to comment anonymously, you can still do that, just as you could on the old site. Simply click on the "Comment as a guest" link, and have at it.

(One minor note: the byline for guest commenters will always read "guest." So if the humor of your comment inheres in the byline, you need to incorporate that into the body of your comment -- which you can easily do by "signing" your comment inside the box provided for comment text.)

4. Hot Topics: Self-explanatory. Certain popular or noteworthy subjects discussed on ATL will be highlighted in the "Hot Topics" band at the top of the page.

And now, the promised word on design. Although some of us are nostalgic for the old design, which had a certain amateurish charm -- we kinda miss the demonic-looking judge of the old site logo -- we've been told that there's no turning back. The new design -- by the professionals over at Concentric Studio, who redesigned our sister sites, Dealbreaker and Fashionista -- is here to stay. (But a few tweaks may be made here and there; feel free to offer constructive criticism, in the comments to this post, or in this Community thread.)

Nevertheless, just out of curiosity -- because we've received both rants and raves, and don't know whether the emails and comments are representative of the readership as a whole -- please take our poll:

We hope that you enjoy the new look and features of the revamped ATL. We'll continue to work hard to make it, in terms of both form and content, a delightful site, informative and entertaining at the same time. Welcome!

[FN1] Please note that we will moderate the Community section, just as we moderate comments on regular posts, primarily to remove spam and other problematic material. Unfortunately, due to%2