Twittering lawyers space out on disclaimers
Sep 21st, 2009 by Mark Cohen
I have noticed the increasing frequency with which local lawyers are using Twitter, the social-networking tool. Some are using it in a business manner, sending out posts that link to new interesting fare on the Web in their area of legal expertise (e.g. “Check out this new article on patents on new apple breeds!). Others are using Twitter mostly for personal fare (e.g. “I am at the Farmer’s Market. Lots of good fruit here!”). Perhaps not surprisingly, no one seems to be giving much substantive legal advice on Twitter. Twitter’s 140-character limit for each “tweet” is at least partly to blame. I mean it takes some lawyers that long to say, “Hello.”
It is interesting, though, that law firms are apparently OK with letting their lawyers send out tweets without the long and mind numbingly boring disclaimers the firms require on every e-mail that its lawyers send out. Here’s an example of one local firm’s disclaimer:
NOTICE: The foregoing message (including all attachments) is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,18 U.S.C. Sections 2510-2521, is CONFIDENTIAL and may also be protected by ATTORNEY-CLIENT or other PRIVILEGE.]
If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you are hereby notified that any retention, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Please reply to the sender that you have received this message in error, then delete it. Thank you.
One likely reason that legalese disclaimers have not made their way onto Twitter is the length issues they would they create. The above disclaimer would take up more than half the 140 characters that a Twitter user is allocated. Another reason is that fellow Twitter users would find it pretty dang annoying if lawyers’ tweets were more than 50 percent disclaimer.
I am not even sure that those disclaimers serve any real purpose in the e-mails. How many judges would actually think that a disclaimer makes one iota of difference in determining what should be done with an inadvertently sent e-mail containing confidential information How many of us even read those disclaimers? Yet there they sit, the modern equivalent of a magic talisman to protect us from evil. (On the other hand, website disclaimers about the information not being intended to be legal advice or to create an attorney/client relationship arguably does some good.)
But so many law firms have those elaborate e-mail disclaimers that there must be something to them, right? But that’s just my opinion, it’s not the opinion of Minnesota Lawyer, its owner, Finance and Commerce Inc., its parent company, Dolan Media or any of its subsidiaries or affiliates, including, but not limited to its officers, board members, shareholders, employees and their pets.
I think your message is correct. Larger firms will start monitoring or stopping their employees from using it.
It’s only a matter of time until there is a big incident that will change the innocence of Twitter and Facebook. People are starting to catch wind of it.. it seems like tehy haven’t realized that EVERYTHING you post is, or has, the potential to be a static webpage that will be online forever, indexed page which is easily found through a search engine too.
I’ve seen the disclaimers in emails too. Most of the time the emails are personal notes or messages and the disclaimer is just an eyesore and nothing else. Who sends out legal advice in an email? I guess it’s just a way another method of precaution.
The message goes to everyone that follows you and depending on your settings may or may not be viewed by anyone that goes to your page. I don’t see how the disclaimer fits. It would be like adding it to the things you yell at a Viking game.