At iPhone J.D. the ever-helpful Jeff Richardson explains an app to allow access to PACER on the iPad and iPhone.
Monthly Archives: February 2014
Jim Calloway likes Google’s Chrome web browser and devotes a column to resources to help lawyers make the switch.
Baffled by Bitcoin? Bob Ambrogi and J. Craig Williams are joined by two distinguished guest experts in a podcast:
Vote in Lawyerist’s Best Law Firm Websites Competition, 2014 Edition. The only criterion suggested is notable:
Responsive web design turned out to play a big factor in getting to the top ten. A responsive website should look good on any screen, from a big desktop display to a smartwatch. Law websites still have a way to go on this, though. Many great-looking nominations — including some websites built in the last year — wound up in the discard pile because they are not responsive.
According to Business Insider, Google’s own redundant backups ensure that you will eventually reclaim all your data. You can rely on this or implement your own recovery plan. [Hint: implement your own plan].
Pretty good hint! Beverly Michaelis goes on to explain exactly what to do and how to do it.
Lots of things to like about the Oregon Law Practice Management blog, including the elegant and effective “About” page, which has given me some ideas for upgrading mine. My favorite part is the use of Flickr photos showing the natural beauty of that wonderful state.
Did the Department of Justice unwittingly cause the current pathetically weak condition of U.S. computer security weakness?
Some would say that the Department’s treatment of leading encryption advocate Phil Zimmerman in the 90s, the government created a sort of cloud around the use of this common sense security practice. Through threats to prosecute those who developed and distributed strong encryption, the government discouraged vendors from making their products secure.
The case of United States v. Boyajian, 2013 WL 4189649 (C.D. Cal. 2013) (summary) is a great example. The issue was whether use of encryption meant it was more likely that the defendant had committed criminal acts?
The court decided that the encryption evidence carried a substantial risk of unfair prejudice to the defendant because it tended to prove that his character was dishonest and he did not respect the law due to the suggestion that defendant had a character trait for secretively flouting rules and social norms.
Wow! If I put a lock on my front door, it means I don’t want people, especially malefactors, entering at will. It doesn’t mean I’m a criminal. Encrypting my computer is no different.
The ill-considered DOJ policies from the 90s have left a legacy of ugly attitudes that have facilitated the wave of computer crime that threatens to engulf us today.