Compliments of Mark Anderson of Andertoons
Bid-for-Placement: what does it mean? Why do we need it?
A bid is a sum of money that a lawyer offers for the opportunity of talking to a client, to receive his contact information and discuss his case (the minimum amount you can bid on is 6 law dollars).
It’s important to remember that a lawyer’s bid on a case determines where in the list of competing, “bidding” lawyers their profile will be displayed to the clients, who posted the case. The profile with the highest bid will be displayed first and the lowest, respectively, the last.
Why should a lawyer bother to write an outstanding biography and why is it the most important part of the lawyer profile? It’s so simple!
A bio is a snapshot of a lawyer’s professional experience:
who they are,
what they do,
specialist expertise and
examples of client work.
A good biography “sells” their expertise to potential new clients.
What is an Elevator Pitch?
An “Elevator Pitch”, also known as an elevator speech or statement, is a short summary used to quickly define a person, product, profession or organization and its Value Proposition. The name “elevator pitch” conveys that the person who is delivering the message has about the same time that it takes the typical elevator to go from the ground floor the top floor to convince their audience about their proposal. A well designed elevator pitch should be between 30 and 60 seconds.
How to Write a Good Elevator Pitch
The “Elevator Pitch” on Legal Bistro is five lines (500 words maximum) of text that are displayed to potential clients in what we call the “Short Profile Preview”. This is the very first thing that a potential client will see about you and your law firm so you should give a lot of thought to what you would like to say.
Do you need a lawyer but are intimidated by the legal process? Are you concerned that professional legal services may be financially out of reach? Perhaps English is not your native language and you are having trouble finding a qualified attorney with whom you can effectively communicate. Don’t worry, if you answered yes to any of these questions you are not alone.
We built Legal Bistro because we were inspired by the contribution that Lending Tree made to the process for finding a mortgage lender. Lending Tree used the power of the Internet to bring online competition in the mortgage application process. Equally important is that Lending Tree’s website has helped consumers to better understand the process of applying for a home loan. We hope that Legal Bistro can achieve similar results in the legal services market.
When Lawyers Compete, You Win!
The single biggest reason why consumers love our service is because Legal Bistro facilitates lawyers competing online to serve the client. Our Company motto is that When Lawyers Compete, the Client Wins! Frankly, we believe that both lawyers and consumers win when the competitive playing field has been leveled.
Are you happy with the current Return on Investment (“ROI”) for your online legal services marketing dollars? Are you spending too much of your time qualifying leads? Do you know anything about the visitors to your law firm’s website besides their IP Address and the date and time of their visit? More specifically, are you being provided with case specific facts that will help you evaluate their legal needs?
If you have answered yes to some or all of these questions then perhaps you will appreciate why lawyers love Legal Bistro.
YOU ARE IN CONTROL
You decide what cases you see based on the Practice Groups, Case Types and Tag or Key Words used when defining your Areas of Practice.
In a recent article posted on the Forbes website entitled: Google Glass Has Already Been Hacked By Jailbreakers, is reported that just some days after its release Google Glass headset has been hacked by a well-known hacker Jay Freeman “Saurik”, who created the widely-used app store for jailbroken iOS devices known as Cydia.
Google Glass is a wearable computer with a head-mounted display (HMD) developed by Google. Google Glass displays information in a hands-free format like a smartphone. It can interact with the Internet via natural language voice commands. Google is considering partnering with sun-glass retailers such as Ray-Ban or Warby Parker, and may also open retail stores to allow customers to try on the device. The Explorer Edition cannot be used by people who wear prescription glasses, but Google has confirmed that Glass will eventually work with frames and lenses that match the wearer’s prescription; the glasses will be modular and therefore possibly attachable to normal prescription glasses.
In the first of what we expect will be a long term successful series of Blog Postings of Interesting Attorneys, Legal Bistro is pleased to present Jonathan Plaut of Chardon Law Offices. Our goal for this series is to highlight lawyers who are doing interesting things in their personal lives.
Besides being a highly skilled litigator and criminal defense attorney, Jon is also an accomplished musician. He is the lead singer and base player in a band called The Learned Hands. His musical influences include Bob Dylan, Paul Simon, Dan Bern, Jackson Browne, Joni Mitchell, Michelle Shocked, Rush, Van Halen and AC/DC.
Jon recently played rhythm guitar at the BB King Blues Club in Manhattan backing up Carmine and Vinnie Appice (of Black Sabbath, Ozzy, Rod Stewart and Jeff Beck fame), and played viola for the great troubadour rocker Michelle Shocked during seven of her shows in New York, Virginia, Pennsylvania, Maine and Massachusetts. He has played at various rock venues throughout the Northeast.
Jon speaks and writes Japanese, and he has represented numerous Japanese citizens and businesses in a variety of matters including corporation formation, civil lawsuits, criminal defense and governmental investigations. He served as a foreign legal associate at the firm of Anderson Mori in Tokyo, Japan where he represented numerous multinational corporations.
Jon has taught courses in criminal law and environmental law at Tufts University and Boston College. Jonathan has also taught spoken and written Japanese at several secondary schools including Choate Rosemary Hall and the Kent School.
For additional information about Jonathan Plaut, please visit Jon’s complete Legal Bistro Profile.
EU watchdogs’ decision in March is to consolidate 60 privacy policies into one agreement. It allows to combine the data from all their products, such as YouTube, Google+ and smart phone system Android.
CNIL (French data privacy regulator), which led to the inquiry, said that Google had “months” to make changes. Google has been told to give the information about what data is being collected, for what purpose and also to give users more control over how the information is combined.
Therefore, if there is no action taken, CNIL would have to appeal to court. However, Google said it needed more time to figure out the details. Peter Fleischer, global privacy counsel, said that they have received a report. Thus, Google has been accused of providing “incomplete” details. All of that raises concerns about data protection.
CNIL carried out the investigation. 27 members of the European Union agreed on that, but Greece, Romania and Lithuania have not yet signed up. By the way, non-EU states Croatia and Liechtenstein have participated.
After revising Google’s policy in details, it was discovered that Google has failed to place any limit on the “scope of collection and the potential uses of the personal data”. That means, there was no distinсtion between search engine queries, typed-in credit card numbers or telephone communications.
The following changes were proposed by EU data protection laws:
- Reinforcing users’ consent. It suggests allowing its members to choose how data was combined by asking them to click on dedicated buttons.
- Google should offer a centralised opt-out tool allowing users to decide which services provide data about them.
- Google should adapt its tools in order to limit data use to authorised purposes. It should be able to use a person’s collated data to improve security.
Isabelle Falque-Pierrotin, the CNIL’s president, said the company had “three or four months” to make the revisions.
UK campaign group Big Brother Watch welcomed the news. “It’s absolutely right that European regulators focus on ensuring people know what data is being collected and how it is being used,” said the organisation’s director, Nick Pickles.
“Unless people are aware just how much of their behaviour is being monitored and recorded it is impossible to make an informed choice about using services”.
There is a new unified search tool of Google that works across several of its products. Gmail, Google Calendar and Drive cloud storage services are now in a trial version for users.
For more information, please visit the link: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-19959306
In a recent article written by Eriq Gardner entitled: MPAA Suffers Legal Setback in Big Copyright Decision is said that a social video bookmarking site, myVidster was sued by the owner of gay erotica. The case aroused interest of such big organizations as the MPAA, Google and Facebook. The 7th Circuit Court of Appeal has passed on a decision in a case dealing with copyright infringement on the Internet.
The appellate circuit has vacated an injunction issued against myVidster in a unanimous decision Thursday in Flava Works, Inc. v. Gunter authored by Circuit Judge Richard Posner. That permitted myVidster users to post embedded links to video streams.
Hence, Posner has disallowed claims against website operators alleged to be facilitating copyright infringement.
Flava Works sued Margues Rondale Gunter, the operator of myVidster in 2010. The injunction was issued that the website wasn’t eligible for safe harbors under the Digital Millenium Copyright Act because the site hadn’t acted beyond minimum requirements.
Gunter appealed the decision and it bacame one of the hottest cases around.
Such companies as Google and Facebook maintained that the «continued development and progress of web technology» was at stake with the need for more clarity on direct and secondary liability. The Rights-holder advocates as MPAA pointed to performance rights and concepts like «willful blindness» and supporting strong action against «an unlicensed on-demand, Internet-video service that generated advertising and other revenues by attracting an audience for infringing content.»
Posner compares myVidster to a «telephone exchange connecting two telephones» and states that the website is just connecting the server that hosts the video and the computer of myVidster’s user. However, myVidster is bypassing the pay wall of the erotica company by offering access to an embedded video. The judge analyzes that as «stealing a copyrighted book from a bookstore and reading it.»
Posner doesn’t see any evidence that myVidster is participating in violation of performance rights. MyVidster displays only adresses of videos hosted elsewhere on the Internet and according to the judge’s believes, Gunter «isn’t increasing the amount of infringement.»
However, the case goes forward and myVidster operators may be found to be infringers at the end of the day, according to MPAA statement.