I thought that some of you lawyers might be interested in this article from
the the New York Times.
Edwin

February 7, 1999

Possible Legal Software Ban Raises Free Speech Issue

      By BARBARA WHITAKER

     H OUSTON -- It may look like a computer disk, but in the eyes of a
     federal judge in Texas it behaves too much like a lawyer.

     In a ruling last month thought to be the first of its type in the
     country, Judge Barefoot Sanders of U.S. District Court in Dallas
     found that [5]Parsons Technology Inc., which publishes Quicken
     Family Lawyer and Quicken Family Lawyer '99, goes too far in the
     assistance it provides consumers, resulting in an unauthorized
     practice of law in the state.

     The state's Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee, which sued
     Parsons, says it will seek to ban the sale of the software in
     Texas, raising First Amendment concerns. In addition, the case is
     highlighting arguments about whether the committee is protecting
     the public from shoddy legal practices or further alienating
     consumers already priced out of the market for lawyers.

     The Quicken software provides more than 100 different legal forms,
     instructions on how to fill them out and assistance in tailoring
     the documents to the user's situation.

     Parsons, based in Berkeley, Calif., and a unit of Broderbund
     Software, argued that it had not engaged in the unauthorized
     practice of law because there had to be some form of contact
     between publisher and consumer for that to happen. Parsons also
     said that interfering with the sale of its software would be a
     violation of the First Amendment right of free speech.

     But Sanders found that "Parsons, through Q.F.L., has gone beyond
     publishing a sample form book with instructions, and has ventured
     into the unauthorized practice of law." He also found that although
     there was some restriction on free speech, it was in keeping with
     the state's interest in protecting "the uninformed and unwary from
     overly simplistic legal advice."

     Mark Ticer, a lawyer for the committee, said he would move to have
     the company banned from selling Quicken legal software in the
     state.

     Darrell Jordan, who represented Parsons, said he would offer more
     information and ask the judge to reconsider his position once the
     injunction was requested. If that failed, he said, he would seek to
     delay sales limits during appeals.

     Software publishers said Texas was alone in its aggressive scrutiny
     of legal self-help material. But the case is being watched closely.
     Some software dealers say they steer clear of the state.

     The case has also focused attention on whether the Unauthorized
     Practice of Law Committee is serving the people's interests.The
     panel, responsible for enforcing the practice-of-law statute, is
     made up of six lawyers and three nonlawyers, appointed by the
     Supreme Court of Texas.

     "Most of the people who buy this program cannot afford to go to a
     lawyer," said Jane Winn, an associate professor specializing in the
     law of electronic commerce at Southern Methodist University in
     Dallas. "If you take this program away from the people who are
     using it today, what access do they have to information about their
     rights?"

     Walt Borges, director of Court Watch, a project in Austin that
     monitors the courts, criticized the committee for promoting a
     "monopoly of law" and for operating in secret. "Before anybody bans
     a self-help product they need to be darn sure that this will harm
     the public," he said.

     The committee's secretive operations are already being challenged
     in the Texas Supreme Court by Nolo Press, which publishes a number
     of self-help legal manuals.

     Ticer defended the committee's right to operate with
     confidentiality, explaining that the members do their own
     investigations and could be hampered if their identities were
     known.

     He also countered accusations that the committee was simply trying
     to protect lawyers' interests in the state. "We don't have an
     agenda," Ticer said. "We just carry out the statute."


VICUG-L is the Visually Impaired Computer User Group List.
To join or leave the list, send a message to
[log in to unmask]  In the body of the message, simply type
"subscribe vicug-l" or "unsubscribe vicug-l" without the quotations.
 VICUG-L is archived on the World Wide Web at
http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/vicug-l.html