Being a Paralegal – What it Entails : Guest Posting by Donna Mitchell

Being a Paralegal – What it Entails

It has been rated as the 17th best job in the USA, a lofty position indeed when you consider the fact that the list had 200 jobs. And the reason the paralegal profession was able to secure this place was because it required relatively little education, involved a lower amount of on the job stress, and because the demand for paralegals is on the rise and expected to continue to go up. But surveys aside, what do paralegals really do? What does a typical day in the life of a paralegal entail?

• A paralegal may not be a lawyer, but they still have to understand all the complexities of any case they are working on.
  
  
• Some paralegals may have to work with clients as well, depending on the nature of the case. They are involved in talking to people and getting information relating to the case from them.
  
  
• They are involved in routine work that includes following various procedures and filling a large number of forms.
  
  
• At the same time, they may also be involved in sorting out complex cases and organizing data and information pertaining to the case.
  
  
• Paralegals are usually involved in detail work, the likes of which some people may look at as grunge work. They need to be meticulous and capable of holding their concentration so that they don’t get their facts mixed up or wrong.
  
  
• They must be good at organization and be able to process the information needed from a mound of facts and figures related to the case.
  
  
• Paralegals are not secretaries who are involved in routine and mundane work. They are often entrusted with tasks that involve a greater amount of responsibility that must be carried out meticulously with no room for errors.
  
  
• They spend most of their time doing research on cases on the Internet, which means they need to have good search skills.
  
  
• They must be able to know what the attorneys who are working on the case require and be prepared with the relevant information when needed.
  
  
• Paralegals are generally expected to do whatever is necessary in the preparation of a case and in the line of routine office work.
  
  
• They should be willing to take a backseat to the lawyers, even if they’ve done most of the groundwork on a case.
  
  
• A good and successful paralegal is not someone who knows everything, but someone who is willing to learn on the job, ask questions when they’re not sure so that they don’t make mistakes and work constantly on improving their skills so that they become more efficient at their jobs.
  

By-line:

This guest post was contributed by Donna Mitchell, who regularly writes on the topic of online paralegal schools. She welcomes your comments and questions at her email address: donna.mitchell@rediffmail.com

Guest Postings at LawPundit

If you have a particular law-related guest posting that you would like to see featured at LawPundit, just contact me at my email address which you will find - centered - near the bottom of every LawPundit blawg page. Such a guest posting is featured in the next LawPundit posting.

User Consent to be Required for Internet Cookies in Europe by the EU Revised ePrivacy Directive : Website & Blog Ads & Counters Implicated

A new EU law passed as part of the revised ePrivacy Directive of the European Union will require user consent for Internet cookies in Europe. Only some formalities remain in the way of this becoming the law in force in Europe.

The possible implications are enormous for the advertising industry and for any website and blog that uses any kind of affiliate service that uses cookies or counters of any kind - that is just about everyone.

One can only hope that future clarifying government laws and regulations of Member States put a sensible face on this law and permit broad scale browser-based opt-ins and opt-outs for certain types of cookies without being bombarded by consent requests from nearly every Internet web page or blog visited by the user. The conception that "counts" of visitors somehow "invade privacy" is a ludicrous concept and it is hoped that this is excluded from the "consent" category.

The EDPS (European Data Protection Supervisor) issued the following Press Release on November 9, 2009:

"ePrivacy Directive close to enactment: improvements on security breach, cookies and enforcement, and more to come

Following last week's agreement on the EU telecoms reform, nothing stands in the way for the ePrivacy Directive to enter into force. The formalities required for formal adoption will be undertaken in the coming weeks. The revised ePrivacy Directive ^(*), as amended by the European Parliament and adopted by the Council must be implemented by the Member States within 18 months.

The new provisions will bring vital improvements in the protection of the privacy and personal data of all Europeans active in the online environment. The improvements relate to security breaches, spyware, cookies, spam, and enforcement of rules. The EDPS cooperated closely with the European Parliament, the Council and the European Commission on the legislative work leading to the final text ^(**).

Peter Hustinx, EDPS, says: "I welcome the many improvements in the protection of privacy in the revised ePrivacy Directive. But it is now crucially important to broaden the scope of the security breach provisions to all sectors and further define the procedures for notification. Also, the new rules must be effectively enforced. I note in particular the emphasis on more effective enforcement of the rules on spyware and cookies. This has special relevance where privacy rights must be protected in relation to so called targeted advertising."

The changes introduced include:

• for the first time in the EU, a framework for mandatory notification of personal data breaches. Any communications provider or Internet service provider (ISP) involved in individuals' personal data being compromised must inform them if the breach is likely to adversely affect them. Examples of such circumstances would include those where the loss could result in identity theft, fraud, humiliation or damage to reputation. The notification will include recommended measures to avoid or reduce the risks. The data breach notification framework builds on the enhanced provisions on security measures to be implemented by operators, and should stem the increasing flood of data breaches;
  
  
• reinforced protection against interception of users' communications through the use of - for example - spyware and cookies stored on a user's computer or other device. Under the new Directive users should be offered better information and easier ways to control whether they want cookies stored in their terminal equipment;
  
  
• the possibility for any person negatively affected by spam, including ISPs, to bring effective legal proceedings against spammers;
  
  
• substantially strengthened enforcement powers for national data protection authorities. They will for example be able to order breaches of the law to stop immediately and will have improved means of cross-border cooperation.
  

__________
[Footnotes]
(*) Directive 2002/58/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the processing of personal data and the protection of privacy in the electronic communications sector (Directive on privacy and electronic communications)

(**) EDPS first (pdf) and second (pdf) opinions on the ePrivacy Directive review [LawPundit comment: the pdf links were not active]
__________

For more information, please contact the EDPS Press Service at:

press@edps.europa.eu

EDPS - The European guardian of personal data protection
www.edps.europa.eu"

Read reports about this development at:

Out-Law.com (Pinsent Masons) - Hat tip! - Consent will be required for cookies in Europe - where Struan Robertson, editor of Out-Law.com, writes in an editorial:

"EDITORIAL: A law that demands consent to internet cookies has been approved and will be in force across the EU within 18 months. It is so breathtakingly stupid that the normally law-abiding business may be tempted to bend the rules to breaking point.

The fate of Europe's cookie law became improbably entwined with a debate over file-sharing. To cut a long story short, it broke free. On 26th October, it was voted through by the Council of the EU. It cannot be stopped and awaits only the rubber-stamp formalities of signature and publication...." more....

ComputerWeekly.com - EC gets tough on spammers, data breachers and snoopers, where Ian Grant writes:

"The directive provides for the mandatory notification of personal data breaches for the first time in the EU. Any communications provider or ISP who is involved in a breach of individuals' personal data must inform them if the breach is likely to hurt them. This included events where the loss could result in identity theft, fraud, humiliation or damage to reputation....

The directive also reinforced protection against interception of users' communications through spyware and cookies on a user's computer or other device....

The directive will also make it easier for consumers to take spammers to court, including those in other countries." more....

Marisa Taylor of Digits at Wall Street Journal WSJ Blogs writes in Europe Approves New Cookie Law:

"[O]nce the law goes into effect, users must provide consent to cookies being stored on their computers, meaning that they could be bombarded with annoying pop-ups or pages asking for permission. The new legislation does offer an exception for when a cookie is “strictly necessary” — for example, if a user is shopping online, a cookie can go from a product page to the checkout page without the need for consent. The law could have broad repercussions for online ads. "Almost every site that carries advertising should be seeking its visitors’ consent to the serving of cookies,” wrote Struan Robertson, a lawyer specializing in technology at Pinsent Masons and editor of Out-Law.com. "It also catches sites that count visitors — so if your site uses Google Analytics or WebTrends, you’re caught."" [emphasis added by LawPundit] read more ...

Winter Casey, reporter at BroadbandCensus.com headlines his article European Union Says It’s Up To Users If They Want A Lot Of Cookies and writes;

"The European Union’s independent supervisory authority devoted to protecting personal data and privacy said Monday that member states will soon be required to implement new privacy rules including requirements that users be offered easier ways to control whether they want cookies stored on their computer equipment."

See also

Clickz.com

Individual.com - EDPS supports revised European ePrivacy Directive

ITBusinessEdge.com - EU Green Lights ePrivacy Directive

What is Patentable? Bilski Patent Case Oral Argument Heard at the United States Supreme Court : We Hope for Adoption of the Transformative Standard

On Monday, November 9, 2009, the U.S. Supreme Court heard oral argument in the Bilski patent case, the judicial resolution of which is bound to have far-reaching consequences on the way that the United States and the rest of the world view and treat patents (see the original transcript of the arguments here - hat tip to Kevin E. Noonan at PatentDocs in Supreme Court Bilski Argument).

Although the Supreme Court may decide the case narrowly with respect to the particular facts of the Bilski business method patent case, the reasons which the Supreme Court sets out as the basis for its decision will nevertheless have broad application in law, for the Supreme Court can not duck the pressing legal patent issues and must provide a flexible standard NOW, inserting stability into a system currently ruled by chaos.

Joe Mullin at The American Lawyer in Supreme Skepticism Over Bilski Claims Puts Method Patents on Shaky Ground writes in this regard that:

"For the first time in almost 30 years, the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday considered the issue of what types of technology should be eligible for patent protection when it heard oral arguments in Bilski v. Kappos.

Across the board, the justices indicated a deep skepticism toward the invention described in the patent application at issue, which was rejected by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office and describes a method for trading commodities. Some of the justices went even further--expressing both a fair amount of disdain for the idea of granting broad "method" patents and a concern that ruling in favor of the petitioners would lead to patent grants on fundamental ways of conducting business or organizing human behavior. "

We have posted about the landmark Bilski case from the very beginning and our line of reasoning - prior to the court decisions - anticipated what the courts decided:

In re Kubin : Hitting the NAIL on the Head : Sequencing Poor Federal Circuit Court Decisions out of the Biotechnology Patent Genome via KSR and/or Bilski Reasoning

In re Bilski : Patentable Subject Matter : Federal Circuit Overturns Pure Business Method Patents : Requires Machine Process / Physical Transformation

Federal Circuit to Review Business Method Patents for Future Viability : There is a Great Likelihood of a New Upcoming Legal Standard

The Patentability of Business Methods and the Upcoming Federal Circuit Hearing en banc in Ex parte Bilski

For our part, we hope that the standard adopted is the transformative one. Transformation is the operative element that is common not only to patents but also to copyright law, for it is "transformation" which is the inventive step.

A copyrighted work is after all - in most cases - simply a unique transformation of commonly used words of the language or languages written. Since nearly every word is in a sense "copied" from prior art, and since many elements of any written work are common to many works due to the linguistically identifiable rules of grammar and syntax, almost any truly transformative work still necessarily contains many copied "elements". It is therefore the transformative nature of a work as a whole which must be judged and not its individual parts per se.

As far as patents are concerned, the same reasoning applies. Any transformation of "matter" or of a more abstract element of technology such as software or medical knowledge necessarily "copies", i.e. it relies on many elements of prior art to reach a new discovery. An inventive step is never taken in a vacuum and can therefore as good as never be divorced from the environment in which it takes place.

An invention is the whole work and it is entirely conceivable to imagine a fantastic new written work or invention made up totally of otherwise copyrighted or patented parts - for which the copyright or patent holders of those parts should in the case of such an invention nevertheless get nothing, because a transformation has taken place in the new whole.

A transformative standard can also be equally applied to software products (as a whole) or to new medical advances (as products), i.e. the transformative software (as a product) should be patentable, but NOT elements of the software code, and similarly, transformative medical discoveries should be patentable, but NOT the methods used to achieve them, e.g. transformative new ways to synthesize a gene should be patentable, but not the gene itself.

In the case of business methods, a transformative software product implementing a particular business method should be patentable - but NOT the business method itself. Until a business method is APPLIED, no transformation has occurred. Therefore, only a product which performs such a transformation can be patented.

We see no serious problems with a transformative standard - which need not be tied to machines or any other technology. The inventive step should be universally recognizable as a reproducible transformation.

The view voiced by some commentators and also expressed by some judges and also U.S. Supreme Court Justices that the Bilski patent might be rejected as being merely "an abstract idea" is an intellectual cop-out and begs the question of drawing the necessary line between "an abstract idea" and "an inventive step". WHERE that line is to be drawn is the job of the U.S. Supreme Court to determine and the Supremes therefore can not avoid the establishment of a standard simply by rejecting Bilski's business method as "an abstract idea".

The question is, when does a non-obvious abstract idea become an invention? And that question, the Court must answer. They have little choice.

We suggest that the only viable answer is the transformative standard.

Limited-Edition Design Sneakers are the Status Symbols of Choice : CNN : Sneakerheads pay big bucks for rare kicks : Shoes and More

Do you know any young lawyers who wear "design" sneakers to the office? There may be a good reason. Limited-edition design sneakers are status symbols of choice among many young people.

See 'Sneakerheads' pay big bucks for rare kicks at CNN.com

"kicks" is jargon for "shoes"

In part because of what has been labeled "the Great Magazine Die-Off of 2009",
online websites and bloggers dominate this market.
See AdWeek's "Sneakerheads Rule".

Web frontrunners include such websites as NiceKicks.com and Sneakerhead, plus also more general fashion websites that concentrate big on sneakers such as HypeBeast or UBIQ Life.

The Complex Sneakers Blog is probably the most popular blog in this field, but we warn you of the many pictures and videos of pinup girls. I personally checked out the site - all in the interest of our readers, of course - and everything looks to be hunky dory.

Other blog and website examples in this field are:

First Pullover

Sneakart

KicksOnFire

sneakers Collected

9-11 in Germany is 9 November 1989 The Fall of the Wall in Berlin : Today Celebrating the 20th Anniversary of a New Era with an All-Star Cast

Today, 9-11-2009 (the manner in which dates are written in Europe, putting the day before the month), is the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall, and the heads of state of nearly all the world's leading nations are present, with Hillary Rodham Clinton representing President Barack Obama.

The New York Times writes:

"SNAKING ALONG, cutting through fields and streets, yards and gardens, the 28-mile-long Berlin Wall stood as a border between East and West Berlin from 1961 to 1989.

That all changed on Nov. 9, 1989, when an inexact translation, a confused border guard and a natural longing for a better life opened a hole in that wall that would eventually end the Cold War. Related Coverage | Article"

It was a momentous day in history, certainly one of the most significant in our lifetime. Once again, democracy and freedom had emerged victorious over tyranny - as they always do. Civilization prevails.

We pay due homage and respect to the fallen and to the families of the fallen of the 9/11 in the United States - may their memories live in the hearts of all - but the German 9/11 will most likely have the longer-term impact on world affairs. Perhaps then, even a mesh of both dates might be the optimal viewpoint, since both events remind us all not only of the enemies of civilization but also of the ultimate victory of freedom and democracy in the world.

Deutsche Welle writes:

"Opinion:

November 9th was Germany's - and the world's - lucky day.

People should celebrate reunification, not critique it.

While Germany is busy celebrating twenty years as a unified country, some are critical of the reunification process. But DW's Marc Koch believes November 9th deserves to be made into a national holiday.

It is a day of evocative pictures and touching accounts, and of pathos and platitudes as well. Yet more than anything, November 9, 1989, was the most auspicious day in modern German and European history.

Not only did it symbolize the end of an ailing and unjust system, and the reunification of a country after 40 years of division, it was also the day on which everyone could experience the long-evoked values of unity, justice and freedom. A moment of triumph in which society could celebrate itself."

Victor Sebestyen writes at the Guardian that The Berlin wall was the real 9/11:

"The heady events in Berlin in 1989 had far more impact than the rise of Islamism.

Today is the real 9/11. This is not meant as a quibble about dates. Future historians will remember 9 November 1989 as far more significant than that terrifying day in September eight years ago. Countless long-forgotten events have been marked in headlines as the day we shall all remember. But nobody can doubt that the world changed on that wonderful night in Berlin.

When the Berlin Wall fell, communism died. Events have moved on fast since then. A new clash of civilisations – or in many ways an old one – began to surface. Now it is hard for anyone under about 40 to remember communism. To recap: it was that once idealistic, inspirational creed promising equality, freedom from exploitation and the creation of a new perfect humankind. The problem was that people had an annoying refusal to be perfected.

Almost always communism was imposed at the point of a gun and created labour camps and bread queues. The Stalins, Mao Zedongs and Pol Pots turned communism into the bloodiest social experiment of all time. History will mark 9 November 1989 as the day it was seen off as a miserable failure....

9 November was gloriously happy. Anything seemed possible that night. 11 September was a day that sparked panic and fear. I know which is a better 9/11 to remember."

Read the rest here.

Gene Patents : If there is a God, Genes were invented by Creation, otherwise, Genes developed via Evolution : Should a Gene be patentable?

Yes, Virginia, if there is a God ...
then God invented genes, by creation.
There is very little doubt about that logic.

On other hand, if there is no God,
or if God is more in the nature of a Supreme Principle of the universe,
then all things developed by evolution, over the course of time,
especially the genes,
and surely no human ever "invented" them.
There is also very little doubt about that logic.

Is the day of judgment in terms of "Patent Armageddon" now approaching gene patents?

As reported in PatentlyO, gene patents issued by the USPTO have been challenged as unconstitutional by the Association for Medical Pathology:

"The federal lawsuit argues (1) that the genes are not patentable because they are "products of nature" and (2) that the patentee's use of patent rights to limit scientific research on the genes violates constitutional First Amendment protections."

JS-Kit's ECHO is a Useful Application for Website and Blog Publishers Which Integrates User Comments and Photos in a Social Media Networking Style

Google Wave - now in beta - is coming as one example of a new way to deal with information on an interactive social media networking basis. Lesser known is the new online application from JS-Kit called Echo which we are going to add to one of our online sites and see how it works, because it appears to us to be a blockbuster application in permitting social media type networking comments and interaction to website pages and blog postings.

See JS-Kit Community Wiki / Echo - For Publishers

Introducing Echo from JS-Kit on Vimeo.

SU - Dr. Jays Blog: Concerns About Privacy Online?

SU - Dr. Jays Blog: Concerns About Privacy Online?

Lawyers Must Change With the Times : Legal Industry Facing Unprecedented Change : Unbound by David Galbenski Examines Legal Services Today

Lawyers must change with times as Jim Middlemiss notes at the Financial Post:

"That's the conclusion in a new book that examines the enormous change sweeping the profession, Unbound: How Entrepreneurship is Dramatically Transforming Legal Services Today by American writer David Galbenski (www.unboundlegal.com)-- a must-read for lawyers and law students who want to build successful law business."