FCC enacts $200M telehealth initiative to ease COVID-19 burden on hospitals — from techcrunch.com by Devin Coldewey

Excerpt:

The FCC has developed and approved a $200 million program to fund telehealth services and devices for medical providers, just a week or so after the funding was announced. Hospitals and other health centers will be able to apply for up to $1 million to cover the cost of new devices, services and personnel.

The unprecedented $2 trillion CARES Act includes heavy spending on all kinds of things, from direct payments to out-of-work citizens to bailouts for airlines and other big businesses. Among the many, many funding items was a $200 million earmarked for the FCC with which it was instructed to improve and subsidize telehealth services around the country.

 


Also see:

#telehealth#telemedicine#telelegal

 


 

Law by Design — a book by Margaret HaganLaw by Design -- a book by Margaret Hagan

Excerpt:

Why combine law with design? Even if these two fields have traditionally not intersected, I see three main points of value in bringing them together.

  1. Experimental Culture: To be more forward-thinking in how we as legal professionals generate solutions for problems in the legal sector;
  2. User Centered Innovation: To put greater focus on the client and the lay person who has to use legal systems, to deliver them better services tailored their function and their experiential needs;
  3. New Paths for Legal Work & Serving Justice: To build a new set of professional paths and opportunities for people who want to work in law — and especially those who see that traditional ways of being law students and lawyers do not enable them to make the positive changes in society that originally drove them into law.

Also see:

Design and the law with Margaret Hagan -- a podcast out at the Legal Talk Network

 

From DSC:
Normally I don’t advertise or “plug” where I work, but as our society is in serious need of increasing Access to Justice (#A2J) & promoting diversity w/in the legal realm, I need to post this video.

 
 

 

US falls out of top 20 in Rule of Law Index, while global declines continue — from abajournal.com by Debra Cassens Weiss

Excerpt:

For the first time, the United States fell out of the top 20 countries for adherence to the rule of law in an index compiled by the World Justice Project.

The United States dropped to No. 21 in the index, while Spain moved in to the top 20, according to press releases here and here and a summary here. The index is based on national surveys of more than 130,000 households and 4,000 legal practitioners and experts around the world.

 

AI laws are coming — from forbes.com by Kathleen Walch

Excerpt:

The pace of adoption for AI and cognitive technologies continues unabated with widespread, worldwide, rapid adoption. Adoption of AI by enterprises and organizations continues to grow, as evidenced by a recent survey showing growth across each of the seven patterns of AI. However, with this growth of adoption comes strain as existing regulation and laws struggle to deal with emerging challenges. As a result, governments around the world are moving quickly to ensure that existing laws, regulations, and legal constructs remain relevant in the face of technology change and can deal with new, emerging challenges posed by AI.

Research firm Cognilytica recently published a report on Worldwide AI Laws and Regulations that explores the latest legal and regulatory actions taken by countries around the world across nine different AI-relevant areas.

 

 

38 states have adopted the duty of technology competence — from lawsitesblog.com by Bob Ambrogi

Excerpt:

In 2012, something happened that I called a sea change in the legal profession: The American Bar Association formally approved a change to the Model Rules of Professional Conduct to make clear that lawyers have a duty to be competent not only in the law and its practice, but also in technology.

More specifically, the ABA’s House of Delegates voted to amend Comment 8 to Model Rule 1.1, which pertains to competence, to read as follows:

Maintaining Competence
To maintain the requisite knowledge and skill, a lawyer should keep abreast of changes in the law and its practice, including the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology, engage in continuing study and education and comply with all continuing legal education requirements to which the lawyer is subject. (Emphasis added.)

 

“Strategy is about folding the future back – it’s not about pushing the present forward!”

Vijay Govindarajan, keynote speaker
at today’s Law 2030 event;
also see the recording here

Law 2030

You can also find video of Day 1 here and Day 2 here.
The PowerPoint slides from each presenter are available at https://www.law2030.org.

From DSC:
The keynote at this morning’s Law 2030 event was done by Vijay Govindarajan, Coxe Distinguished Professor at Dartmouth College’s Tuck School of Business. Vijay offered up a great presentation that reminded me to:

  • THINK BIG!
  • Establish a sizable possibility gap!
  • Have unrealistic goals!
  • Don’t limit your future accomplishments with current expectations!
  • Strive to live to your potential!

His keynote made me think of this graphic from a while back:

We need to think big!

Below is one of the slides from his talk:

Also see the Law2030 hashtag over on Twitter.

 

It is high time to reform the rules that govern the practice of law — from legalservicestoday.com by Ralph Baxter

Excerpt:

Current regulations create a closed system
The current regulatory model has created a closed legal services system. It limits who can participate in legal services in two fundamental ways.

First, only those who undergo the time and expense of law school and become licensed as “lawyers” are permitted to deliver legal services. It is a crime for anyone to do work that falls within the deliberately vague definition of “the practice of law” unless they have a lawyer license.

Second, only lawyers are permitted to participate in the financial rewards of a law firm. Investment by others is forbidden, as is sharing profits within a law firm with personnel who are not lawyers.

The consequences of these limitations are clear and profound. The first limitation causes the cost of legal service to be much higher than it otherwise would be; it also causes the law firm workforce to have less diverse backgrounds (as other businesses have) resulting in less creativity and agility.

The second limitation limits the capital law firms can raise, which, in turn, makes it harder for them to invest in new processes and technologies. The most successful firms in this closed system command high enough fees that they can generate their own capital. The majority of firms, however, would benefit from greater access to capital. This is particularly acute for firms which serve individuals and small businesses; in these practices the economic stakes of matters are relatively small, warranting lower fees, making the need for outside capital even greater.

Also see:

 

Looking for something?

Use the form below to search the site:

Still not finding what you're looking for? Drop a comment on a post or contact us so we can take care of it!

© 2020 | Daniel Christian