It's hard not to snicker when your client attempts to give you a "Blogging 101" lesson: "EG, I don't know how familiar with weblogs, or "blogs," but it's this way of updating your website with items that post in reverse chronological order. The really neat thing is that people can comment on your posts. You can even use these things called "tags" to organize your entries into custom categories."
I have to preface my recommendations with "Based on my experience in advising on online content related matters..." since I'm not sure I want my clients to know that I blog. Or use the term "blog" as a verb, for that matter. It's sort of neat to have to provide blog-related legal advice, but there really is no case law on the specific subjects on which I'm asked to advise. This is where the legal profession becomes somewhat of an art form that is involves a certain amount of divination--cast your stones out and see what the pattern yields.
God, that sounds horrifying. I am apparently the office "new fangled technology" expert. I have actually run tutorials on MySpace, Friendster and, yes, blogging. It was awful. Hysterical, but awful (imagine 8 grey haired old men in pinstriped navy blue suits, french cuffs and braces sitting in a wood paneled boardroom facing front eraptured by "what those kids are doing".
Posted by: brooke at May 24, 2006 08:02 AM