Image via CrunchBase

A few times each month I highlight web or mobile apps that are useful to lawyers. Sometimes the apps are developed specifically for lawyers and other times they are non-legal apps but are nevertheless useful for lawyers.

Today’s app is Fastcase. Fastcase is a company that offers lawyers an affordable online legal research alternative to the traditional mainstays of legal research, Lexis and Westlaw. But the focus of this post isn’t Fastcase’s traditional legal research plans–it’s the mobile app.

Why you want it: This is a can’t-miss app–not only because it allows you to conduct legal research on the go using your iPad or iPhone–but because the app is free. And you don’t even need a subscription to Fastcase to use it.

The reviews:

• Fastcase Mobile App Now Syncs With Desktop (Lawsites, February 2012)
• The Fastcase iPhone App Delivers the Goods for Legal Research (Technologist, January 2012)
• Review of the Fastcase iPhone app (Legal Geekery, January 2010)
• App Review: Legal Research with Fastcase (Walking Office)

The good: This app is easy to use and allows you to conduct legal research on the fly–for free. You can’t beat that.

The bad:  This app is free and thus isn’t intended to be a full fledged research solution, so you’re not able to print or email cases via the app. If you have a Fastcase subscription, you can sync documents from the app to your desktop, at which point you can then print the documents. But if you’re not a MyCase subscriber, then you’re out of luck in that regard.

The nitty gritty:

• iPad and iPhone app
• Free at iTunes

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Last week, I asked whether the lawyering process could be automated. First, I explained that I strongly believed that lawyers who incorporate innovation and new Internet-based and mobile tools will have a distinct advantage over those who turn a blind eye to emerging technologies. I then noted that automating the practice of law can oftentimes be a difficult proposition, especially when it comes to litigation. As such, I concluded that, while technology could replace certain aspects of lawyering, the legal advice and advocacy of a trusted advisor was a decidedly human factor that was irreplaceable.

My post lead to an interesting discussion on Twitter between Jeff Brandt, Toby Brown, Keith Lipman, Greg Lambert, and I regarding the feasibility of automating the practice of law. I was in the minority, arguing that automation of all functions was unlikely. As a direct result of our Twitter discussion, Toby drafted a post at 3 Geeks and a Law Blog, The First Time I Saw a Computer Practice Law, in which he argued that the legal profession has done very little to even attempt to automate legal functions. He then offered an example from a program that he used in the 1980s that effectively automated the intake process of an estate client and then provided actionable legal advice.

After reading the post, I asked (on Twitter) for an example of automation in a litigation practice. In response, Toby offered the following example in the comments to his post: using a computer program to draft a Complaint based on the specific facts of a case whereby the output would be:

 A draft document where: 1) a portion of the claims will always be included, 2) another portion will be included based on the client’s situation, and 3) some claims will be excluded since they don’t meet the client’s situation, or they conflict with other claims the client is making.

I found that example, as well as the following example offered via Twitter by Keith, to very illuminating:

(R)isk analysis on settl(ing) v(ersus) litigat(ing) in particular subject areas could be developed.

Both of these proposed scenarios were very helpful to me, since they gave me concrete examples of litigation processes that could be replaced by computer automation.

Greg then posted follow up commentary in this 3 Geek’s blog post: “The Next Generation of Computers Practicing Law,” and included this very interesting video which provides additional examples of computer automation of law practice, in the form of apps created by Georgetown Law students:

Aside from being impressed by the innovation and enthusiasm of the students in the video, what struck me most was the irony evident when one of the students discussed the “Same Sex Marriage Advisor App” in the middle of the video. She explained how it would “replace the associate.” In other words, the law students were creating apps that were designed to effectively eradicate entry level positions–their future jobs–by replacing the job functions of associates with technological innovation.

Of course, many would argue that replacing the “functions” of lawyers is exactly the point. In fact, in the comments to the original post at 3 Geeks, Jordan Furlong did just that:

We risk creating problems when we use terms like “replacing lawyers” and “automating lawyers” in this discussion, because they pit human against machine and create a larger and more dramatic context than we require for this issue.

I think we should be focusing instead on the identification and performance of lawyer functions. What do lawyers do? Make a list: in any practice area you choose, it’ll be extremely lengthy. Then ask: which of these functions can be performed at least in part with an automated process or system? The answer, I think, is: virtually every one of them. And that includes the supposedly safe old standbys like “strategy” and “counsel”: huge databases of business and legal intelligence will be able to provide increasingly reliable indicators of how various tactical approaches will pan out.

I agree with much of his analysis and particularly appreciate the way that he re-framed the question, since it was of great assistance to my understanding and broke down the issues quite nicely.

That being said, I continue to disagree with the assertion that machines will be able to replace “virtually every” function performed by attorneys.

Here’s just one example of something machines can never replace–an attorney’s intuition and knowledge of the parties involved. Years ago, as an assistant public defender assigned to a specific courtroom, I had the home court advantage over other attorneys. I knew the judge and the assistant district attorney well. I knew what their pet peeves were, I knew what was going on in their lives, if they were in a rush on a given day, and, importantly, they knew me. There was a level of trust and camaraderie that no computer could ever hope imitate and which served me very well in representing my clients.  Predictive analysis could never duplicate the whole of my experiences, all of which served as a backdrop for each action and decision that I made while advocating on behalf of my clients.

Simply put, despite all of the interesting and helpful examples offered by my esteemed colleagues, I still remain steadfast in my belief that technology cannot replace the human aspect of lawyering and and therefore, many aspects of lawyering–especially those performed in litigation–will always be performed by human beings rather than machines.

But don’t take it from me. Instead, consider the wisdom of my all-time favorite philosophers, the characters from Star Trek: The Next Generation:

(After La Forge has suggested an alternative way to get out of an energy trap instead of letting the computer fly the ship)
Captain Jean-Luc Picard: Have you analyzed the risk factor?
Lt. Commander Geordi La Forge: The numbers say it’s even money. It’s no better than turning it over to the computer, but no worse either. But I say forget the numbers! There’s no way the computer can compensate for the human factor, the, the intuition, the experience.
Captain Jean-Luc Picard: And the wish to stay alive.

-Niki Black

(Photo credit: AJC1)

A few times each month I highlight web or mobile apps that are useful to lawyers. Sometimes the apps are developed specifically for lawyers and other times they are non-legal apps but are nevertheless useful for lawyers.

Today’s app is Zite, one of my favorites. It’s a personalized news magazine with a very user-friendly and interactive interface. Zite is a free app and is available for the iPhone, iPad, and is also now newly available for Android phones.

Zite does a great job at locating content that you’ll find interesting. It seeks out relevant content based on your preferences in two ways. First, it synchs with your Google Reader feed. Then, it prompts you to choose pre-set topics that interest you and allows you to create custom topics as well.

Once you’ve done so, Zite serves up stories based on your interests and then learns even more about your preferences as you interact with the app. You indicate via a “thumbs up” or “thumbs down” whether you like a particular story. You can also indicate whether you would like to learn more about a particular topic, thus giving the app even more information about the content that is most relevant to you.

Zite also connects with your social media accounts, making it easy for you to share articles across your networks. You simply click the “share” button, choose the social network you’d like to use, and then Zite automatically creates a summary, which includes the title of the article or blog post, the source and a shortened link to the website. Next, you add your own commentary and then click “send,” at which point the summary will appear in your timeline on your chosen social network.

This is one of my favorite apps and I use it daily. Apparently I’m not the only one, since Apple selected it as the #1 news app for 2011.

You can download the iPhone and iPad apps here and the Android app here.

-Niki Black

(Photo credit: rkrichardson)

Legal futurists spend their time studying, analyzing, and predicting the future of the legal profession. And, unfortunately, their collective assessment is that the future isn’t bright lawyers unwilling to innovate and embrace technology.

Anyone who has followed my writings knows that I tend to agree with this dire prediction. I truly believe that over the next few years, lawyers who embrace and utilize technology effectively–in particular Internet-based and mobile tools–will undoubtedly have an edge over their less tech-savvy colleagues.

But can technology actually replace the services provided by some lawyers, or will it instead supplement their practices, allowing them to operate more efficiently and better serve their client’s needs?

This is something I’ve pondered often over the years and I found myself revisiting this issue after reading a Fast Company piece about Tim Hwang, a 25-year-old non-lawyer, former research associate at Harvard’s Berkman Center, and founder of a satirical website, Robot Robot & Hwang.

As explained in the post, Hwang believes that the antiquated legal field  is one of the last remaining holdouts of the 21st century technological revolution:

One thing that got me intrigued about law was that industry-wide it has the same kind of structure as older industries that have been disrupted by technology: a small class of people that’s based on control of information, protected by regulations. Law hasn’t had its Napster moment yet, though everyone recognizes it’s an incredibly inefficient structure now and the legal profession is in incredible disarray.

While I agree with his assessment of the legal profession’s arguably sluggish acceptance of technology, I find myself disagreeing with his conclusion (and the conclusion of many other legal futurists) that technology has the potential to replace many aspects of the practice of law:

What if I turned Robot Robot & Hwang into an actual legal practice? It would have to be nimble in the way it’s organized; people would have to develop technology or use it to create efficiencies. Imagine a law firm running more like a startup–that’s going to require a more nimble approach to law…

Every time I read something like this, I’m perplexed. How can the services provided by lawyers be equated with the sale of widgets or the development and sale of an iPhone app? Lawyers “sell” fact-specific analysis, advice, and advocacy, not goods or simple services. The unique nature of the services provided by lawyers necessarily limits the structure of the platform–ie. the law firm–through which those services are delivered.

Perhaps the source of the disconnect is my background as an attorney serving consumer clients. My experience as an attorney has always involved litigation matters, whether criminal defense or civil and commercial litigation. Accordingly, my job has been to provide fact-specific analysis, advice, and advocacy–tasks which are not readily commoditized. Thus, for lawyers with my legal background there is oftentimes a disconnect and predictions that technology replacing their position as a trusted advisor seem overblown and unrealistic.

However, as Jordan Furlong explains in his recent post at Law21, it is transactional lawyers whose jobs will be most affected affected by technological innovation, not litigation attorneys.  According to Jordan, the lawyers who will be most affected include “most lawyers in midsize and large firms…(g)overnment and public-sector lawyers…(c)orporate law department lawyers…(l)aw school lawyers…(j)udicial system lawyers…(and) (a)dministrative agency lawyers.” Those who will be least affected include “private-practice lawyers…independent professionals who contract directly with purchasers without the involvement of an organizational middleman.”

As someone who has never practiced the types of law that futurists like Jordan and Richard Susskind predict will be partially supplanted by technology, I’ve found Mitch Kowalski’s new book, Avoiding Extinction: Reimagining Legal Services for the 21st Century, to be particularly helpful in enhancing my understanding. In it, Mitch envisions a world in the very near future where a typical BigLaw firm discards traditional practices and embraces alternative billing and ownership structures, reduces overhead costs by outsourcing, and utilizes technology and collaboration to efficiently and effectively serve its clients.

I’m halfway through the book and it’s already helped me to better understand how technology and outsourcing can replace certain aspects of the transactional legal services provided by large firms and other legal service entities. Mitch adeptly explains this concept in a recent interview for YourABA:

Legal process outsourcers have been a big game changer. The success of Pangea3 and others have caught the profession by surprise. Never before in history has so much legal work been given to non-law firms.

The number of in-house lawyers has grown exponentially over the last 25 years—legal costs are no longer necessary evils and are being managed more than ever before.

However, even with that newfound understanding, I still have a difficult time envisioning a future where more efficient processes effectively supplant the human element of lawyering, even for transactional lawyers. Sure, technology can automate and even replace certain aspects of lawyering, but at the end of the day, the legal advice and advocacy of a trusted advisor is a decidedly human factor–and, in my estimation, it’s something that simply cannot be replaced.

–Niki Black

(Photo credit: allerleirau)

We here at MyCase love to read and learn everything there is to know about law practice management. So we make it a point to follow blogs that focus on law practice management in the 21st Century. And, every few weeks, we’ll share some of the posts that we found to be most interesting.

So now, for your reading pleasure–our wrap up of some of our favorite posts from the past few weeks:

•  Is there such a thing as too General (Practitioner?) (Jennifer Ellis JD blog)–Jennifer expands on Matt Homann’s thoughts about the practicalities of being a general practitioner
• iPad transforming business development and business intelligence for lawyers (Real Lawyers Have Blogs)–Kevin O’Keefe explains how the iPad is changing the practice of law
• How Will You Prepare for Jurors of the Future? (Lawyerist)–Sam Glover wonders how lawyers will be able to reach jurors who have technology-induced attention spans that are equivalent to that of goldfish
• An All-New WordPerfect, Now With Bates Numbering (Lawsites)–For those lawyers who stubbornly insist on being WordPerfect holdouts, Bob Ambrogi shares the latest and greatest Wordperfect features
• Digital legal research: solo or collaboration folders? (rethinc.k)–Jason Wilson ponders whether collaborative legal research will catch on
• Law Firm Attorney Pages vs. LinkedIn Pages (3 Geeks and a Law Blog)–Greg Lambert examines and contrasts the information lawyers provide for their LinkedIn profiles to the information found on their bio page at their firm

(Photo credit: Aray Chen)

Last week, Google announced the release of Google Drive, its native cloud storage service, which allows users to store up to 5 GB of data online for free.

By all accounts, Google arrived late to the game of cloud-based storage and was preceded by DropBox, iCloud, Amazon Cloud Drive and others. With the added competition, much of the discussion following the release of Google Drive centered around comparisons of the features offered by the various services. This is because as new cloud storage platforms are added to the mix, it becomes all about the features that differentiate the various products. For most users, it boils down to choosing the platform that offers the best features for their needs.

The legal cloud computing market is no different. There is already a wide selection of offerings and, as cloud computing is becoming more familiar and accepted, new platforms are being introduced into the legal marketplace at record speed.

So, what’s a lawyer who has made the decision to move to the cloud to do? How do you choose between the different cloud-based legal providers? How do you go about choosing the right platform for your law firm’s needs?

Features

First, you need to decide what type of cloud computing product you’re looking for. Are you in the market for a full scale law practice management system that offers contact management, calendaring, billing, invoicing, and document management–the works? Or are you simply looking for a single purpose system, such as one that offers only billing, document management or online storage?

Once you decide which type of platform you need, you’ll have to examine the features offered by the different legal cloud computing platforms. Compare the basic features of each system and narrow your search down to two or three platforms that offer most of the features you’re looking for.

But don’t rule out one platform just because it doesn’t include every feature you need. One major advantage of cloud computing systems is how easy it is for the developer to implement changes based on user feedback. Oftentimes, legal cloud computing providers roll out new features every few weeks. So don’t eliminate an otherwise strong contender simply because the platform lacks one or two features that are on your wish list. Contact the provider and ask about the missing features. It’s entirely possible that the provider intends to add those features in the very near future.

Interface

The interface is extremely important, since you’ll be spending lots of time using the platform. Is it intuitive? Does it make sense or do you find yourself constantly struggling to figure out how to add and manipulate information in the system? Can you dive right in and use it or does it seem as if you’ll need multiple webinars to figure out how to even get started?

The usability of the interface of the interface is extremely important. Make sure that the interface works for you and your staff.

Price

Price is also an important consideration, but it shouldn’t be a deal breaker. To an extent, as the old adage goes–you get what you pay for.

That being said, one of the benefits of moving to a cloud-based system is that it’s supposed to be more affordable than owning and maintaining your own servers and paying for the annual licensing fees of server-based software. So if the monthly fees of one legal cloud computing company are higher than those of competitors’ products which offer similar features, you might want to think twice before signing up.

Compatibility with pre-existing systems

Consider how difficult the process of transitioning to the new cloud-based system will be. Will it be easy to import data into the platform from existing programs? Will you have to manually enter pre-existing data into the system and if so, how long will that take? Is the cloud computing platform compatible with other cloud-based systems that your law office already uses? Will you need to continue using those other cloud services or does the new system effectively replace them, thus making compatibility a non-issue?

Customer support

Customer support matters–a lot. If you run into an issue, you want it resolved quickly and efficiently. If you’re routinely unable to reach a representative from your new cloud computing provider, then you’ll find that your frustration levels will go through the roof. Customer service is extremely important and can make or break your legal cloud computing experience.

Which brings me to the next area of consideration: customer satisfaction.

Customer satisfaction

Find out what current (and past) customers think of each legal cloud computing product that you’re considering.

In this day and age, it’s not difficult to find customer reviews and feedback about the major legal cloud computing products available. Run a search for blog posts which review the different products and make sure to read the comments to the post, if any.

Join some of the major online forums for lawyers, such as MiloGroup, Lawyerist’s LAB, and the ABA’s Solosez listserv. Post on these sites and seek feedback from users or simply run searches of the archives using the names of the products that you’re considering to locate past reviews and posts about each product.

Sign up for a free trial

Finally, sign up for a free trial. Most legal cloud computing providers offer a no-strings-attached 30-day free trial. Ideally, starting the trial should be simple and hassle-free. Sign up and dive in.

If the interface is user-friendly, it shouldn’t be too difficult to get started with the platform on your own. Spend some time testing it out. And, if others in your firm will be using it, make sure that they try it out, too. If you have questions, call the provider and get answers. If the interface appeals to you, consider scheduling a webinar, so you can learn more about the nuances of the platform.

You’re on your way 

Once you’ve followed these steps, you’ll be ready to move your firm to the cloud. It’s a big decision–and it’s not an easy one. But if you carefully consider your options and do your research ahead of time, you’ll be well on your way to choosing the right legal cloud computing product for your law firm.

–Niki Black

An unexpected change of plans

Craig quickly realized that engineering wasn’t for him: “I wanted more excitement instead of just sitting in a lab all day.” And, since he’d always had an interest in the criminal justice system, he decided to attend law school.

After graduating from law school in 1999, he joined a small firm with another attorney. But, two years ago, after his partner retired, Craig went solo. He formed his own firm, Craig Greening Law, and continued to expand his already thriving criminal defense practice in Bryan, Texas.

Fighting injustice, case by case

Growing up, Craig was bothered by the inequities of the criminal justice system. A few of his high school friends experienced injustices which stayed with him. So when he graduated from law school, he was drawn to criminal defense. It was his way of leveling the playing field.

Craig’s practice is located in a college town and as a result, many of his clients are college students who had a lone run in with the law. Helping his young clients make the best of a bad situation is what drives him to get up every day. According to Craig, he often advises his clients that “my goal is to resolve this case favorably for you so that you won’t have a conviction following you around for the rest of your life. But I also hope you learn from this experience–that it’s a turning point for you.”

That’s because for Craig it’s all about making a difference and having a positive impact.

MyCase makes it easy

According to Craig, MyCase makes it easy to do just that because it helps to simplify his law practice. Everything is in one place and clients can easily access their files and important information, like their next court date: “My clients love MyCase. Many of them log in every day. I leave them notes about the status of their case and they feel up to date instead of neglected. Because my clients know what’s going on every step of the way, they call less frequently. So, MyCase makes it easier for both me and my assistant.”

Craig explains that another benefit is that information about a case can be made easily accessible for everyone involved in a case, not just his clients and assistant, but also co-counsel and investigators: “In more complex matters, such as a murder case, I include co-counsel and investigators as contacts in a case. That way they can upload and access important documents, such as photos or autopsy reports. We can communicate about the case via MyCase. Everything is in one place and everyone knows exactly what’s going on.”

MyCase offers security

Craig started using MyCase in November of 2010 after carefully considering all of the cloud-based law practice management solutions available to him. After carefully vetting the various cloud providers, Craig had no reservations about moving his client’s data into the cloud via MyCase: “Some lawyers don’t understand the security issues, but I do since I come from an engineering background. I’ve never had any concerns about using MyCase to store my firm’s data.”

MyCase is a selling point

Not only does MyCase securely store his data and simplify his practice, it makes his practice more profitable. He explains that some of his clients have hired him, in part, because his firm uses MyCase: “I’m retained by at least one client a month because of the MyCase platform. For example, last month I was retained by a client from Boston who was charged with a DWI while visiting Texas. He switched to my firm after initially hiring another lawyer in town. My client switched because he was having problems getting hold of his former lawyer and while visiting my firm’s website, he noticed that I used a client portal. He later told me that he was extremely happy with his decision to switch and that he loved the MyCase platform because it made me so accessible to him.”

And, that client is not alone. According to Craig, for many of his clients, the MyCase interface makes all the difference: “My clients are comfortable using MyCase. The interface is similar to the social media sites they’re used to. They want 24/7 access to information about their case and MyCase’s client portal allows me to offer them exactly that. If I couldn’t give them that, they’d hire someone else who could.”

Serving clients better

If nothing else, the practice of law is all about helping clients and MyCase helps Craig do just that. It provides an affordable, secure platform for creating and organizing case documents and communicating with clients and others about a case. “All of the information about a case is easily accessible in one place. I’m really happy with MyCase. It helps me to better represent my clients and that’s what really matters.”

Craig’s favorite part about being a criminal defense attorney is making a difference in his client’s lives: “I love coming into work every day. I represent people from all walks of life and make a difference in their lives. That’s all I really want to do. I hope that at the end of the day, people say, ‘He put it all on the line for his clients and gave 100% every time he walked into the courtroom.’ If that’s what they say, I’ll be happy.”

-Niki Black

Today’s app is a legal app: Trial Pad. TrialPad is one of the first trial presentation apps developed for lawyers and was first released over one and a half years ago.

Why you want it: TrialPad is designed to provide an affordable alternative to expensive trial presentation software or trial consultants. The idea is that using TrialPad, lawyers can organize, manipulate, and annotate documents for presentation at trial using only an iPad.

The reviews:

• Tech Review – TrialPad 2.1 for iPad (Starting Out Solo by Gabriel Cheong, November 2011)
• TrialPad, Exhibit A, and RLTC Evidence– A Comparison of Lawyer Trial Presentation Applications for iPad (The Hytech Lawyer by Bill Latham, September 2011)
• iPad Apps for Lawyers: TrialPad 2.0 Reviewed (Court Technology and Trial Presentation by Ted Brooks, June 2011)

The good: For most solos and small firms trying criminal cases, personal injury matters, and small business contract disputes, hiring trial technology consultants or using expensive trial presentation software simply isn’t feasible. Apps like TrialPad fill the void, leveling the playing field and making solos and small firms more competitive. And, according to the reviews listed above, TrialPad has a leg up because it arguably provides a more comprehensive feature set than its competitors.

The bad: Most iPad apps are a work in progress and TrialPad is no exception. It’s not perfect, but it’s improving every day as TrialPad’s developers respond to user feedback, add new features, and tweak the interface. Another drawback: it’s the most expensive trial presentation iPad app avialable, but as explained above, comes with the most robust feature set. And, compared to traditional server-based trial presentation software which can costs thousands of dollars annually, it’s a bargain at just $89.99 for a one-time download and lifetime access.

The nitty gritty:

• iPad only app
• $89.99 at iTunes
• Import documents via Dropbox, iTunes, or email

Today’s app is a non-legal app and is perfect for anyone who travels frequently. It’s called “Gate Guru” and it’s one of my favorites. It’s available for both iPhones and Android phones.

This app is great when you’re stuck at a long lay over in an airport. Gate Guru tells you everything you need to know about the airport and terminal that has suddenly become your home away from home.

It provides maps of major airport terminals, including restaurants and stores, along with citizen reviews of various businesses located in the terminal. So, no longer will you be stuck eating an inedible meal or wondering where the closest latte can be had. Just consult the Gate Guru to locate a nearby restaurant, skim over the user reviews, and you’ll be on your way!

Trust me. It’s a life saver and will make your traveling experience much less stressful and far more enjoyable. And, best of all–it’s free!

You can download the iPhone app here and the Android app here.

-Niki Black

Dr. Evil (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Approximately a year and a half ago, in October of 2010, a photo sharing service launched–one of many available at the time. Using this service and their smart phones, users could apply digital filters to images to make them look like Polaroids or antique photos and then share them with friends and family members using their social networks.

Doesn’t seem like a particularly innovative concept, does it? Definitely not a game changer, right? And it certainly doesn’t sound like an idea worth one thousand dollars, let alone one billion.

And yet, last week, Instagram was purchased for $1 billion–and by Facebook, of all companies.

How did this even happen? And what significance does this hold for the legal profession, if any?

The significance can be gleaned by first examining why 30 million people signed up for Instagram in the first place and then by looking at Facebook’s motivations for acquiring this company.

The latter inquiry is the easy one. The reason Facebook chose to acquire Instagram is simple–the 30 million users. That’s a lot of users. Not to mention it’s a service easily integrated into Facebook, as Zuckerberg explained in a blog post:

This is an important milestone for Facebook because it’s the first time we’ve ever acquired a product and company with so many users…(P)roviding the best photo sharing experience is one reason why so many people love Facebook and we knew it would be worth bringing these two companies together.

But why did so many people flock to Instagram in the first place–and in such a short time? That’s the tougher question, but the answer is actually quite simple.

First of all, image-based interfaces, as opposed to text-based interfaces, are simply more appealing, both visually and viscerally. Look no further than the tremendous popularity of the newest social media darling, Pinterest, for confirmation of that fact.

Even, so, there’s more to Instagram’s appeal than just photo sharing. What separates Instagram is its interface. It’s simple to use and the end product makes the user look good. That’s the key to Instagram’s success. Using the simple, intuitive interface, amateur photographers can quickly and easily share their photos while at the same producing more appealing photos by masking the defects in the low quality smart phone images with trendy, artsy filters.

In other words, Instagram offers an easily accessible and intuitive interface that gives the user a sense of control and pride over the outcome.

And therein lies the lesson for the legal field. Legal consumers are no different than any other type of 21st century consumer. Clients, especially the younger generation, want easy, instantaneous access to their lawyers and information about their case through an interface that is familiar and intuitive.

They want to have control over their case and its outcome. This sense of control is gleaned from the ability to determine when and how they obtain the information they need, whether by phone, email or an online client portal.

In other words, clients want to be able to interact with their lawyers on their own terms. The key is to give them a variety of acceptable options, all the while ensuring that you choose methods that allow you to be responsive, but simultaneously control the information overflow.

So, the lesson to be learned is that in order to stay competitive, lawyers must be willing to experiment with new ways to provide their clients with better legal services. Innovate or risk stagnation or even extinction.

Don’t end up like Poloroid, a company that, as explained in this New York Times article, could have in theory been Instagram, but in reality never stood a chance:

In a 2008 talk at the Yale School of Management, Gary T. DiCamillo, a former chief executive at Polaroid, said one reason that the company went out of business was that the revenue it was reaping from film sales acted like a blockade to any experimentation with new business models.

So what’s it going to be? Is your firm going to follow the path of Instagram–or Polaroid?

–Niki Black