As discussed here, most of my fellow bloggers have already signed on in support of Ben Cowgill, a solo specializing in legal ethics in Kentucky. Ben’s been dealing with some archane Kentucky ethics laws that, among other things, consider blogs advertising – and charge a $50 fee to review any change to an ad. As Ben describes, the impact of the Kentucky rule would make blogging financially infeasible since he’d be paying $50 a post.
My colleagues have criticized the Kentucky rule on grounds such as First Amendment issues or deterring the educational role that blogs serve. Predictably, I oppose the rule because of the disparate impact that it has on solos. As I just wrote here, it’s solos and small firms who are leading the way with weblogs and reaping their benefits, in part because of the simplicity and low cost of blogs. When the bars take away this option from us – or make it prohibitively expensive, and the bars impact our bottom line. Moreover, larger firms aren’t similarly affected, because they have other means available to obtain exposure and web presence (in fact, many could probably afford to pay the $50-per-post fee!)
So,to the Kentucky bar, I urge – don’t pull a Maryland. Balance the benefits that the bar’s present rule brings to ethics (none that I can see) against the adverse impact of the policy on the solo and small firm bar members who serve the majority of individuals and small businesses as well as the harm to the public which will be deprived of the resources that blogs offer (especially a blog as robust as Ben’s).
Update: For a full list of everyone who’s commented so far, visit this link at David Giacalone’s f/k/a.
Related posts:
- Second Career for Disbarred Lawyer
- First Amendment Challenge to Restriction on Lawyer’s Blog Likely to Flounder – And Bring Other Blogs Down With It
- No malpractice insurance for blogging firms?
- Are You Committing Any of These Ethics Violations?
- Impact of Blogging on Solo and Small Firm Practitioners
