online world

COVID-19: The catalyst of emerging technology in the legal profession

The COVID-19 pandemic was a catalyst for emerging technology in the legal arena. Specifically, it encouraged the legal workforce to develop efficient research strategies to search for, organize, and evaluate legal information for their clients while working virtually. The nature of proceedings also shifted during COVID-19, with virtual proceedings and electronic document filing becoming the norm. Although some of the changes are now being reversed in British Columbia (i.e., online hearings), there are important lessons to draw from the digitization of workflows during the pandemic.

Litigation and Technology

As a result of the pandemic, pre-litigation and litigation steps were proceeding online on platforms such as Zoom or MS teams, and chambers proceedings were taking place online up until recently. While some of these virtual proceedings are returning to in-person appearances, online workflows have important implications for creating a more accessible legal system.

The benefit of digitization in law is that an online workflow can provide an overview of the analytical process that has led to a particular result or outcome. In a paper-based system, individuals can only see the product of their work rather than how it interacts with other cases or tasks of a similar nature.[1] There would be a great benefit in shifting many of the legal processes completed by paper to an online platform as it would give individuals an idea of the logic underlying a particular result and streamline the resolution of simpler cases. For instance, the Online Divorce Assistant[2] by the Ministry of Justice in BC can assist individuals with filling out the forms necessary to file for divorce. If eligible, the assistant can streamline the resolution of more straightforward cases by automatically populating the documents on your behalf based on your answers.

An online workflow that maps out the tasks and procedures required to resolve specific legal issues will create a more accessible justice system for the public. For instance, the solution explorer[3] at the Civil Resolution Tribunal (“CRT”) has digitized the process for making a CRT claim. This online workflow allows you to visualize the different steps that need to be completed to reach a particular outcome. As such, the process is easier to understand and navigate for individuals who find themselves overwhelmed by the legal system and the process of making a claim.

Technology and Legal Research

According to Thomson Reuters, one of the leading legal research engines, “online research databases have replaced law books, digital contracts have replaced physical copies, and countless other advancements have transformed the legal industry.”[4] Research databases such as Lexis Nexis, WestlawNext, CanLII, and Google Scholar allow legal professionals to find cases and statutes efficiently and quickly without having to flip through hundreds of pages to locate the answer to a legal issue.

After completing advanced legal research and writing, I recognized the importance of online search databases in legal practice. Online research platforms allow you to track your previous research, access reliable and up to date case-law and information, reduce overhead costs through free online legal information, and draw inferences by mapping out your research process. Adopting Boolean operators, citation searching, keyword searching, and truncated/wildcard searching is a cost and time-effective strategy for finding a resolution to a legal issue.

Online research databases can transform how professionals complete legal research. It is my experience and understanding that COVID-19 has led to developments in search databases such as Lexis Nexis and Westlaw. These platforms have introduced more user-friendly options to encourage lawyers to complete their research online (i.e., changes to Westlaw’s Practical Law or Lexis’ Practical Guidance). Although transitioning to a fully digital workflow may be difficult for lawyers who have developed their practice around a paper-based system, it can streamline the analytical process associated with resolving a case and build a more accessible legal system for the public [5].

[1] Thomson Reuters, “Lessons Learned in Courts Digitisation” (2015), online: <https://static.legalsolutions.thomsonreuters.com/index/pdf/lessons-learned-in-courts-digitisation-whitepaper.pdf>

[2] See generally Ministry of Justice, “e-Divorce: Intro,” online: <https://justice.gov.bc.ca/divorce>

[3] See generally Civil Resolution Tribunal, “Solution Explorer,” online: <https://civilresolutionbc.ca/solution-explorer/>

[4] Thomson Reuters, “Technology in law is the new norm” (2021) at para. 1, online: <https://legal.thomsonreuters.com/blog/technology-in-law-is-the-new-norm/>

[5] Thomson Reuters, supra note 1, at pp. 4-5.

Indigenous Digital Equity: The barriers Indigenous communities face accessing internet

I spent most of my 2L year back on my home reserve in Southern Alberta. It’s about a 45-minute drive to Lethbridge. My internet connection was a challenge when trying to listen to lectures or have a strong connection for a zoom call. Internet connectivity for Indigenous Peoples in Canada has long been difficult to implement due to many environmental and socio-economic factors such as remoteness of communities, difficulty gaining first-mile access, unreliable networks, slow speeds, expensive equipment, and high data costs.

Compared to the other infrastructure problems faced by Indigenous communities, the internet might not seem like a big problem. But COVID-19 has shown that when people don’t have equal access, they lose the same opportunities. Remote learning is now crucial to getting a quality education, but poor internet connections or a lack of a connection in the first place are holding many Indigenous children behind their peers.

A lack of internet also affects those looking for work. COVID-19 has led to many layoffs, and the internet had become one of the only reliable sources to find emplpoyment. This lack of resources is one of the reasons why unemployment is already higher in Indigenous communities than in the population at large. Even the transition to working from home means a greater need for high-speed internet, but this poses another disadvantage for rural homes that cannot access a connection to telecommute. The province says 61 percent of B.C. Indigenous communities lack access that meets the standard, although the council notes that number may count communities with just one broadband access point, meaning there is one place in town with adequate Internet, but it’s not in every home, school, or office. [1]

The geography of remote and northern Canadian communities implies transportation access problems, long cable builds, and harsh climate. Building sustainable broadband infrastructure capable of telehealth delivery in northern and remote Indigenous communities is and will continue to be costly. [2] The economic situation combined with the high cost of connectivity suggests that that many remote and northern Indigenous communities and community members may be struggling to pay the high costs of using digital technologies. At the same time, Indigenous community members and Indigenous communities have demonstrated that they are eager users of digital technologies and they will adopt them when they are affordable, reliable, and meet their needs. [3]

The UN has declared access to the internet a human right. This declaration is formed on the basis that having access to the internet means being able to exercise other fundamental human rights and freedoms (e.g. right to freedom of speech). For Indigenous people, the internet is a tool for cultural survival, acting as a hub for Indigenous languages and traditional stories. Without leaving their community, Indigenous youth and adults are able to learn skills, meet Indigenous role models, obtain a degree/diploma, access healthcare, and share their stories with the world. [4]

The inclusion of Indigenous voices on important issues can’t be accomplished if Canada doesn’t work to close the connectivity gap. The plans must be done in coordination with Indigenous governments, letting them lead any project or policy that may affect their communities or land. Without access to broadband, Indigenous peoples will continue to be left behind.

[1] Katie Hyslop, “Closing BC’s Indigenous Internet Gap” The Tyee (12 December 2019) online: https://thetyee.ca/News/2019/12/12/Closing-BC-Indigenous-Internet-Gap/

[2] O’Donnell, Susan “Digital technology adoption in remote and northern Indigenous communities in Canada.” Canadian Sociological Association 2016 Annual Conference. University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada. 2016.

[3] ibid 

[4] Emma Greenfield, “Digital Equity for Indigenous Communities” Social Connectedness (7 July 2020) online: https://www.socialconnectedness.org/digital-equity-for-indigenous-communities/

Avatar Justice and the Virtual Frontier

As a lowly 2L – only just returned (sort of) from my summer escape – my experience with law school has been overwhelmingly virtual. Obviously 1L is a challenge (regardless of what “mode of delivery” one engages in), but for me, I found that the digital interface allowed me to participate and interact in a manner that I find in-person actually doesn’t (due to my anxious tendencies and so on).

In a way, my virtual-self was liberating and – perhaps – was a more accurate representation of who I could be (in the hallowed halls of Zoom U).

[1]

This got me thinking; in our electronic age, we now have countless games and platforms that allow us to project boundless versions of ourselves out into the digital universe.  More importantly, these versions we create and share may offer the most authentic and original take of “who” we are.

So what does this have to do with a law blog you ask? Hopefully I can decode some 1s and 0s below.

At some point in the future, we will have next-next-generation Second Lifes, World of Warcrafts, and other massive multi-user platforms that begin to blur the lines of what “real” is for an individual.

Even if we aren’t already in a simulation, as Elon would has us believe, The Matrix gave us a chance to ponder what that reality would be like – and importantly – whether we would prefer to exist in the simulated world, or take our chances fighting squidy-machines outside (I can see why Cypher chose the steak).

Applying a legal lens to this scenario, the issue of proper jurisdiction quickly comes into focus: these worlds will likely  have their own law-making and systems of governance, leading to possible conflicts with the established rules on the outside.

In fact, we already see this occurring in settings such as Minecraft, where users operate realms and administer justice for wrongs that are both familiar and novel (see griefing). [2]

[3]

This opens up quite the legal quandary, namely, whether physical courts can (or should) interfere with the organization and nation-building of digital worlds.

A potential “test case” for this idea emerged in the now almost-vacant Second Life (SL) landscape: a dispute first originating within the virtual domain – concerning intellectual property rights – eventually made its way to a physical proceeding in the District Court of New York.

The avatar Amat Juris, acting for a client who claimed ownership over the use of the word “SLART” (as evidenced by a US trademark), sent another avatar, Victor Vezina, a “cease and desist” notification within Second Life, hoping to make the latter change the name of his virtual art gallery. When this didn’t work, a complaint was formally filed in the real world, dragging the creators behind SL into the legal debacle as well.

While the identity of Vezina remained unknown throughout the entire process, the sign displaying the word in question was finally “removed”, due to the Court’s decision to enforce the trademark. [4]

Much like piercing the corporate veil, it seems, for now, there is recourse for physical courts to manifest their legal muscle within a digital ecosystem.

But what about in-world lawyering and digital practice?

Second Life may have lost its lustre for many, as users and businesses left for greener (and less pixelated) pastures, but it gave us a window into where things are likely headed (sorry Zoom).

Amat Juris could easily have been a practicing member of the Second Life Bar Association (SLBA), working diligently for clients from the confines of a computer-generated office, earning viable income for services rendered.

This may sound a bit far-fetched, but many real and credible firms did just that: setting up virtual spaces to better facilitate representation and access to legal communities outside of their customary reach. Ross A. Dannenberg, an IP attorney at Banner & Witcoff, Ltd., goes as far as calling such environments the great leveler, as they provide “the ability to reach out and connect with people in any country in the world…very easily” (referencing his firm’s use of SL to locate and work with a solo practitioner in China). [5]

With the recent news that Mark Zuckerberg is looking to redefine the Facebook brand as a metaverse company, we may not have to wait long to expand on the SL experience.

Facebook is looking to become an online world where users interact with content, but also engage from the “inside” (through the use of virtual reality headsets such as the Oculus). Zuckerberg envisions a space that on-boards a substantial chunk of an individual’s life – allowing one to both attend a concert for a favorite artist, and welcome customers into a virtual storefront to purvey goods and services. [6]

There’s a solid chance then, that the next iteration of the SLBA will be found here; firms will once again be setting up shop and opening their “doors” to the masses, but this time around, the client-pool – of users and businesses – will dwarf anything that has existed previously.

This alone should be reason enough for most to explore a new paradigm of legal practice, but there are more incentives than just dollar signs; the metaverse promises to be a rapidly changing immersive experience, blending legal considerations of the past with new and uncharted waters of advocacy, representation and what it truly means to offer value to a client or customer.

In summary, the pandemic has shown us how badly outdated our current landscape really is; perhaps the way forward comes not just from a reworking of our legal systems, but a complete re-rendering of who were are – as individuals and professionals.

SOURCES:

[1] “I am not a Cat” Screenshot by Amanda Kooser/CNET

[2] u/xReyjinx “Ideas for realm rules?”, Reddit.com (2019) Online: https://www.reddit.com/r/Minecraft/comments/b4ve8w/ideas_for_realm_rules/

[3] “Minecraft Castle” by Mike_Cooke is licensed under CC BY-NC 2.0

[4] Victor Keegan, “How an Avatar on Second Life sparked a real-life court case”, The Guardian (Nov 25, 2008) Online: https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2008/nov/25/second-life-internet

[5] Thai Phi Le, “Are Second Life Residents Subject to Real Laws?”, DCBar (March 2013) Online: https://www.dcbar.org/for_lawyers/resources/publications/washington_lawyer/may_2013/virtual_game

[6] Casey Newton, “Mark in the Metaverse”, The Verge (July 22nd, 2021) Online: https://www.theverge.com/22588022/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-ceo-metaverse-interview