The Court Of Public Opinion

Electronic communication enables us to expedite communications and quickly exchange information. Yet, there is a price to pay for ease of use. Most companies typically have well established guidelines regarding hard copy documents. There are policies that guide the communication as well as destruction and retention. Electronic communication presents a different type of challenge for companies but one that they cannot afford to ignore.

To frame the discussion one must first consider the sheer volume of electronic communications. In example if a company has10,000 employees and each employee sends only one email per day that would result in 200,000 emails per month! Prior to the availability of email, employees were not so prolific. It is hard to imagine that any one company would have typed and mailed 10,000 letters per day.

The volume alone represents a unique challenge. Electronic documents including email are generally discoverable in lawsuits. As such there is a need for clear cut use and retention policies. Email can be the final nail in a legal coffin. How does a corporation control such a massive amount of information to ensure that they are not unduly exposed to legal risks? What policies govern the use of company email? How long should electronic documents be stored and subsequently open to discovery in a legal dispute?

Corporations are still evolving in their approach to the email dilemma. The solution will depend on the company culture, its risk profile and their available resources. Companies have every right to establish policies that limit email communication to business only. While this may seem unfair to employees, it is the company that will bear the full impact of litigation that results from or involves employee email communication. Some companies have gone as far to block internet access, enforce business use only policies and monitor email communications. Others have no policy or one that is not clearly enforced.

Implementing and monitoring email use can be a difficult challenge. Ultimately, it requires employees to comply with the established policies. Some employees feel it is an undue burden to completely restrict email to business use. They may argue that they may need to communicate with family members, sitters or even take care of personal business during the work day. Again, each company will have to set forth policies that are appropriate for their company culture.

One of the unique problems of electronic communication is the prevailing casual attitude toward them. People often hit the send button without considering that electronic communication does not vaporize into cyberspace but lives on in perpetuity. In no other media is it so clear that your words can come back to haunt you. People do not generally exercise the same amount of caution as they would in hard copy documents. Can you imagine someone taking the time to copy an off color joke and mailing it to all of their friends on the company?s stationery? Yet, this goes on everyday in the typical business environment. Many employees may not understand the risk of inappropriate communications. Companies may also not realize the potential exposure. During the Hurricane Katrina crisis, then head of FEMA, Michael D. Brown was thrust into the public spotlight due to email communication. His inter company emails which focused on his attire rather than the crisis at hand cast FEMA in a negative light and ultimately forced Brown to resign from his position. In the famous Microsoft case, the justice department used emails written by Bill Gates to support allegations that Microsoft was unfairly using its monopoly to drive away competition. In lesser known cases, employees have brought sexual harassment and racial discrimination lawsuits against their companies with email as a key component of their claim.

As electronic communications are discoverable in a lawsuit, the question of retention also needs to be addressed. How long should a company store emails? Most organizations have opted to retain email for thirty to ninety days. Here again, it will largely depend on the company culture. In limiting the retention, you are also limiting the discovery of potentially harmful information. Unlike hard copy documents which are often stored for several years, company servers inherently limit the time that emails can be stored. However, a company should have a clear written policy that is specific to electronic retention. A few email programs enable you to set reminders that documents will be deleted. This however, will only apply to electronic documents stored on the company?s email server. If employees have moved emails to a hard drive or removable media, this use of technology will not help. The company policy should include guidelines about moving and storing documents outside of the company server.

And most companies routinely backup servers and archive those backups offsite. This is good IT policy but creates another point of legal vulnerability. Backup retention policies must also be clearly defined. And, contrary to popular belief, when you hit the ?delete? button, your email or document isn?t really gone. Using readily available technology, ?deleted? files can be easily recovered unless the storage medium was ?wiped? clean.

Lastly, make sure employees understand that they have no right of privacy for email any more than they do for letters and calls. Those emails to your boyfriend or girlfriend can be read by your superiors with no explanation necessary!

In the post-Enron world, companies must have a clearly defined and monitored policy around electronic communication use and retention. It is equally important to ensure that employees understand the need for compliance. As with all risk management, it must become embedded in the company culture to have the highest rate of success and compliance. Finally, policies must evolve to keep pace with the growth of the technology itself. As organizations extend the access of electronic communication to mobile devices, it is certain that new challenges will continue to arise.

Electronic communication enables us to expedite communications and quickly exchange information. Yet, there is a price to pay for ease of use. Most companies typically have well established guidelines regarding hard copy documents. There are policies that guide the communication as well as destruction and retention. Electronic communication presents a different type of challenge for companies but one that they cannot afford to ignore.

To frame the discussion one must first consider the sheer volume of electronic communications. In example if a company has10,000 employees and each employee sends only one email per day that would result in 200,000 emails per month! Prior to the availability of email, employees were not so prolific. It is hard to imagine that any one company would have typed and mailed 10,000 letters per day.

The volume alone represents a unique challenge. Electronic documents including email are generally discoverable in lawsuits. As such there is a need for clear cut use and retention policies. Email can be the final nail in a legal coffin. How does a corporation control such a massive amount of information to ensure that they are not unduly exposed to legal risks? What policies govern the use of company email? How long should electronic documents be stored and subsequently open to discovery in a legal dispute?

Corporations are still evolving in their approach to the email dilemma. The solution will depend on the company culture, its risk profile and their available resources. Companies have every right to establish policies that limit email communication to business only. While this may seem unfair to employees, it is the company that will bear the full impact of litigation that results from or involves employee email communication. Some companies have gone as far to block internet access, enforce business use only policies and monitor email communications. Others have no policy or one that is not clearly enforced.

Implementing and monitoring email use can be a difficult challenge. Ultimately, it requires employees to comply with the established policies. Some employees feel it is an undue burden to completely restrict email to business use. They may argue that they may need to communicate with family members, sitters or even take care of personal business during the work day. Again, each company will have to set forth policies that are appropriate for their company culture.

One of the unique problems of electronic communication is the prevailing casual attitude toward them. People often hit the send button without considering that electronic communication does not vaporize into cyberspace but lives on in perpetuity. In no other media is it so clear that your words can come back to haunt you. People do not generally exercise the same amount of caution as they would in hard copy documents. Can you imagine someone taking the time to copy an off color joke and mailing it to all of their friends on the companys stationery? Yet, this goes on everyday in the typical business environment. Many employees may not understand the risk of inappropriate communications. Companies may also not realize the potential exposure. During the Hurricane Katrina crisis, then head of FEMA, Michael D. Brown was thrust into the public spotlight due to email communication. His inter company emails which focused on his attire rather than the crisis at hand cast FEMA in a negative light and ultimately forced Brown to resign from his position. In the famous Microsoft case, the justice department used emails written by Bill Gates to support allegations that Microsoft was unfairly using its monopoly to drive away competition. In lesser known cases, employees have brought sexual harassment and racial discrimination lawsuits against their companies with email as a key component of their claim.

As electronic communications are discoverable in a lawsuit, the question of retention also needs to be addressed. How long should a company store emails? Most organizations have opted to retain email for thirty to ninety days. Here again, it will largely depend on the company culture. In limiting the retention, you are also limiting the discovery of potentially harmful information. Unlike hard copy documents which are often stored for several years, company servers inherently limit the time that emails can be stored. However, a company should have a clear written policy that is specific to electronic retention. A few email programs enable you to set reminders that documents will be deleted. This however, will only apply to electronic documents stored on the companys email server. If employees have moved emails to a hard drive or removable media, this use of technology will not help. The company policy should include guidelines about moving and storing documents outside of the company server.

And most companies routinely backup servers and archive those backups offsite. This is good IT policy but creates another point of legal vulnerability. Backup retention policies must also be clearly defined. And, contrary to popular belief, when you hit the delete button, your email or document isnt really gone. Using readily available technology, deleted files can be easily recovered unless the storage medium was wiped clean.

Lastly, make sure employees understand that they have no right of privacy for email any more than they do for letters and calls. Those emails to your boyfriend or girlfriend can be read by your superiors with no explanation necessary!

In the post-Enron world, companies must have a clearly defined and monitored policy around electronic communication use and retention. It is equally important to ensure that employees understand the need for compliance. As with all risk management, it must become embedded in the company culture to have the highest rate of success and compliance. Finally, policies must evolve to keep pace with the growth of the technology itself. As organizations extend the access of electronic communication to mobile devices, it is certain that new challenges will continue to arise.

More articles at database for articles

The Association of Trial Lawyers of America (ATLA) has decided to change their name to The American Association for Justice, to better suit what they do rather than who their members are. The name change is an attempt to help others see that a lawyers job is to fight for the people, and to change the perception of boastful lawyers who sit back and collect exorbitant trial fees.

A firm’s reputation is an extremely valuable asset for creating and building status and often times is worth more than actual profitability. If in fact a true image change is to occur for the ATLA or American Association for Justice, more than a name change is required. Improved organizational practices over client confidentiality as a PR branding strategy should be considered.

Trust in Branding

Branding trust for a legal organization involves careful deliberation about where the new brand will live, who the brand affects, the strengths and weakness of the new brand, and examining barriers and opportunities the new name and image may bring forth.

If consistency does not exist on all levels, no benefits will come from re-branding the ATLA or American Association for Justice.

Branding Confidence and Trust in Client Confidentiality

Many firms have vulnerabilities that can lead to potential data leakage via email breach, with no defense implementation in place. At any given time in a firm, lawyers aren’t the only one’s handling client information. Assistants, front desk workers, and paralegals at the office may have access to sensitive information like clients names, banking information, location of assets and social security numbers. If any of this information would escape the firm into opposing council’s hands, malicious thieves, or even to the press, a firm’s reputation would be jeopardized.

Showing a commitment to the prevention of email theft and misuse can do much to brighten the AAJ’s public perception. Within a legal office, lawyers can extend this image of trust by assuring their clients that their information remains in the protected walls of the practice.

Small and Large firms alike should consider implementing email anti-theft solutions and/or data encryption of sensitive email and documents. This will not only show the industries commitment to confidentiality but will also protect client and case information from being misused by co-workers, assistants, and other attorneys. It’s like putting a stamp of trust on the document itself, assuring the sender and recipients of email that the information is well protected.

Instead of looking for a written statement to put an end to their public humiliation and degradation, by implementing secure email practices, the ATLA can show a sincere intention to incorporate and complete this holistic branding process. Because a lawyers’ livelihood is based entirely on their reputation, it is reasonable and plausible that the industry would be eager to lighten public scrutiny and to do so in a manner that is quick and shows real intention.

In reality, many more trust-building activities need to take place with clients to prevent further brand erosion. Lawyers need to be more careful in safeguarding client and case information and practices should not involve an over-exaggerated concern with billable hours. To complete a full 180, the ATLA needs to provide their lawyers with new guidelines for their practice and also provide the tools and resources necessary to gain back customer trust and satisfaction.

For the new American Association for Justice to surpass the principles and values set forth by the former persona the ATLA, adopting a robust client email privacy solution in their firms is a solid first step.

More articles at articles host

The Association of Trial Lawyers of America (ATLA) has decided to change their name to The American Association for Justice, to better suit what they do rather than who their members are. The name change is an attempt to help others see that a lawyers job is to fight for the people, and to change the perception of boastful lawyers who sit back and collect exorbitant trial fees.

A firm’s reputation is an extremely valuable asset for creating and building status and often times is worth more than actual profitability. If in fact a true image change is to occur for the ATLA or American Association for Justice, more than a name change is required. Improved organizational practices over client confidentiality as a PR branding strategy should be considered.

Trust in Branding

Branding trust for a legal organization involves careful deliberation about where the new brand will live, who the brand affects, the strengths and weakness of the new brand, and examining barriers and opportunities the new name and image may bring forth.

If consistency does not exist on all levels, no benefits will come from re-branding the ATLA or American Association for Justice.

Branding Confidence and Trust in Client Confidentiality

Many firms have vulnerabilities that can lead to potential data leakage via email breach, with no defense implementation in place. At any given time in a firm, lawyers aren’t the only one’s handling client information. Assistants, front desk workers, and paralegals at the office may have access to sensitive information like clients names, banking information, location of assets and social security numbers. If any of this information would escape the firm into opposing council’s hands, malicious thieves, or even to the press, a firm’s reputation would be jeopardized.

Showing a commitment to the prevention of email theft and misuse can do much to brighten the AAJ’s public perception. Within a legal office, lawyers can extend this image of trust by assuring their clients that their information remains in the protected walls of the practice.

Small and Large firms alike should consider implementing email anti-theft solutions and/or data encryption of sensitive email and documents. This will not only show the industries commitment to confidentiality but will also protect client and case information from being misused by co-workers, assistants, and other attorneys. It’s like putting a stamp of trust on the document itself, assuring the sender and recipients of email that the information is well protected.

Instead of looking for a written statement to put an end to their public humiliation and degradation, by implementing secure email practices, the ATLA can show a sincere intention to incorporate and complete this holistic branding process. Because a lawyers’ livelihood is based entirely on their reputation, it is reasonable and plausible that the industry would be eager to lighten public scrutiny and to do so in a manner that is quick and shows real intention.

In reality, many more trust-building activities need to take place with clients to prevent further brand erosion. Lawyers need to be more careful in safeguarding client and case information and practices should not involve an over-exaggerated concern with billable hours. To complete a full 180, the ATLA needs to provide their lawyers with new guidelines for their practice and also provide the tools and resources necessary to gain back customer trust and satisfaction.

For the new American Association for Justice to surpass the principles and values set forth by the former persona the ATLA, adopting a robust client email privacy solution in their firms is a solid first step.

More articles at articles host

The Association of Trial Lawyers of America (ATLA) has decided to change their name to The American Association for Justice, to better suit what they do rather than who their members are. The name change is an attempt to help others see that a lawyers job is to fight for the people, and to change the perception of boastful lawyers who sit back and collect exorbitant trial fees.

A firm’s reputation is an extremely valuable asset for creating and building status and often times is worth more than actual profitability. If in fact a true image change is to occur for the ATLA or American Association for Justice, more than a name change is required. Improved organizational practices over client confidentiality as a PR branding strategy should be considered.

Trust in Branding

Branding trust for a legal organization involves careful deliberation about where the new brand will live, who the brand affects, the strengths and weakness of the new brand, and examining barriers and opportunities the new name and image may bring forth.

If consistency does not exist on all levels, no benefits will come from re-branding the ATLA or American Association for Justice.

Branding Confidence and Trust in Client Confidentiality

Many firms have vulnerabilities that can lead to potential data leakage via email breach, with no defense implementation in place. At any given time in a firm, lawyers aren’t the only one’s handling client information. Assistants, front desk workers, and paralegals at the office may have access to sensitive information like clients names, banking information, location of assets and social security numbers. If any of this information would escape the firm into opposing council’s hands, malicious thieves, or even to the press, a firm’s reputation would be jeopardized.

Showing a commitment to the prevention of email theft and misuse can do much to brighten the AAJ’s public perception. Within a legal office, lawyers can extend this image of trust by assuring their clients that their information remains in the protected walls of the practice.

Small and Large firms alike should consider implementing email anti-theft solutions and/or data encryption of sensitive email and documents. This will not only show the industries commitment to confidentiality but will also protect client and case information from being misused by co-workers, assistants, and other attorneys. It’s like putting a stamp of trust on the document itself, assuring the sender and recipients of email that the information is well protected.

Instead of looking for a written statement to put an end to their public humiliation and degradation, by implementing secure email practices, the ATLA can show a sincere intention to incorporate and complete this holistic branding process. Because a lawyers’ livelihood is based entirely on their reputation, it is reasonable and plausible that the industry would be eager to lighten public scrutiny and to do so in a manner that is quick and shows real intention.

In reality, many more trust-building activities need to take place with clients to prevent further brand erosion. Lawyers need to be more careful in safeguarding client and case information and practices should not involve an over-exaggerated concern with billable hours. To complete a full 180, the ATLA needs to provide their lawyers with new guidelines for their practice and also provide the tools and resources necessary to gain back customer trust and satisfaction.

For the new American Association for Justice to surpass the principles and values set forth by the former persona the ATLA, adopting a robust client email privacy solution in their firms is a solid first step.

More articles at articles host

The Association of Trial Lawyers of America (ATLA) has decided to change their name to The American Association for Justice, to better suit what they do rather than who their members are. The name change is an attempt to help others see that a lawyers job is to fight for the people, and to change the perception of boastful lawyers who sit back and collect exorbitant trial fees.

A firm’s reputation is an extremely valuable asset for creating and building status and often times is worth more than actual profitability. If in fact a true image change is to occur for the ATLA or American Association for Justice, more than a name change is required. Improved organizational practices over client confidentiality as a PR branding strategy should be considered.

Trust in Branding

Branding trust for a legal organization involves careful deliberation about where the new brand will live, who the brand affects, the strengths and weakness of the new brand, and examining barriers and opportunities the new name and image may bring forth.

If consistency does not exist on all levels, no benefits will come from re-branding the ATLA or American Association for Justice.

Branding Confidence and Trust in Client Confidentiality

Many firms have vulnerabilities that can lead to potential data leakage via email breach, with no defense implementation in place. At any given time in a firm, lawyers aren’t the only one’s handling client information. Assistants, front desk workers, and paralegals at the office may have access to sensitive information like clients names, banking information, location of assets and social security numbers. If any of this information would escape the firm into opposing council’s hands, malicious thieves, or even to the press, a firm’s reputation would be jeopardized.

Showing a commitment to the prevention of email theft and misuse can do much to brighten the AAJ’s public perception. Within a legal office, lawyers can extend this image of trust by assuring their clients that their information remains in the protected walls of the practice.

Small and Large firms alike should consider implementing email anti-theft solutions and/or data encryption of sensitive email and documents. This will not only show the industries commitment to confidentiality but will also protect client and case information from being misused by co-workers, assistants, and other attorneys. It’s like putting a stamp of trust on the document itself, assuring the sender and recipients of email that the information is well protected.

Instead of looking for a written statement to put an end to their public humiliation and degradation, by implementing secure email practices, the ATLA can show a sincere intention to incorporate and complete this holistic branding process. Because a lawyers’ livelihood is based entirely on their reputation, it is reasonable and plausible that the industry would be eager to lighten public scrutiny and to do so in a manner that is quick and shows real intention.

In reality, many more trust-building activities need to take place with clients to prevent further brand erosion. Lawyers need to be more careful in safeguarding client and case information and practices should not involve an over-exaggerated concern with billable hours. To complete a full 180, the ATLA needs to provide their lawyers with new guidelines for their practice and also provide the tools and resources necessary to gain back customer trust and satisfaction.

For the new American Association for Justice to surpass the principles and values set forth by the former persona the ATLA, adopting a robust client email privacy solution in their firms is a solid first step.

More articles at articles host

The Association of Trial Lawyers of America (ATLA) has decided to change their name to The American Association for Justice, to better suit what they do rather than who their members are. The name change is an attempt to help others see that a lawyers job is to fight for the people, and to change the perception of boastful lawyers who sit back and collect exorbitant trial fees.

A firm’s reputation is an extremely valuable asset for creating and building status and often times is worth more than actual profitability. If in fact a true image change is to occur for the ATLA or American Association for Justice, more than a name change is required. Improved organizational practices over client confidentiality as a PR branding strategy should be considered.

Trust in Branding

Branding trust for a legal organization involves careful deliberation about where the new brand will live, who the brand affects, the strengths and weakness of the new brand, and examining barriers and opportunities the new name and image may bring forth.

If consistency does not exist on all levels, no benefits will come from re-branding the ATLA or American Association for Justice.

Branding Confidence and Trust in Client Confidentiality

Many firms have vulnerabilities that can lead to potential data leakage via email breach, with no defense implementation in place. At any given time in a firm, lawyers aren’t the only one’s handling client information. Assistants, front desk workers, and paralegals at the office may have access to sensitive information like clients names, banking information, location of assets and social security numbers. If any of this information would escape the firm into opposing council’s hands, malicious thieves, or even to the press, a firm’s reputation would be jeopardized.

Showing a commitment to the prevention of email theft and misuse can do much to brighten the AAJ’s public perception. Within a legal office, lawyers can extend this image of trust by assuring their clients that their information remains in the protected walls of the practice.

Small and Large firms alike should consider implementing email anti-theft solutions and/or data encryption of sensitive email and documents. This will not only show the industries commitment to confidentiality but will also protect client and case information from being misused by co-workers, assistants, and other attorneys. It’s like putting a stamp of trust on the document itself, assuring the sender and recipients of email that the information is well protected.

Instead of looking for a written statement to put an end to their public humiliation and degradation, by implementing secure email practices, the ATLA can show a sincere intention to incorporate and complete this holistic branding process. Because a lawyers’ livelihood is based entirely on their reputation, it is reasonable and plausible that the industry would be eager to lighten public scrutiny and to do so in a manner that is quick and shows real intention.

In reality, many more trust-building activities need to take place with clients to prevent further brand erosion. Lawyers need to be more careful in safeguarding client and case information and practices should not involve an over-exaggerated concern with billable hours. To complete a full 180, the ATLA needs to provide their lawyers with new guidelines for their practice and also provide the tools and resources necessary to gain back customer trust and satisfaction.

For the new American Association for Justice to surpass the principles and values set forth by the former persona the ATLA, adopting a robust client email privacy solution in their firms is a solid first step.

More articles at articles host

Today, many law firms overlook security measures, either because of complexity or expense. Whether in fields of family law, prosecution, defense, intellectual property, or tax law, law firms request a great deal of personal data that most other highly regulated industries would have to keep under lock and key.

When a lawyer begins building a case, he/she collects a significant amount of personal information about their client, from credit card information to financial acquisitions. The information is then placed into a database within the firm’s records. This common scenario of gathering personal information and storing it in a database is similar to banks and credit card companies. Databases in the legal industry are hazardous because too often minimal requirements are placed on legal firms to install adequate IT security systems.

Sensitive electronic data such as financial documents or emails can be exceptionally damaging if they fall into the hands of the opposing counsel or motivated cyber criminals. Integrity, quality and fostering relationships are goals that every law firm strives to achieve with their clients. However, the uncontrolled leak of client data could shatter all of these positive ambitions.

The attorney-client privilege is the most important concept in the legal field because it protects communications between attorneys and their clients. If clients are constantly worried about the whereabouts of their information, it is not likely that positive progress on a case will occur. Attorney-client privileges must be established to pursue a successful outcome for a client’s case.

Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Information Center, in Washington stated, It’s very important to enforce our existing privacy laws and bring these types of cases because the government and the private sector seem to be doing such a poor job of safeguarding people’s information. (1) More can be done to safeguard client’s information in this technology-driven age.

The legal industry, steeped on confidentiality, needs to reexamine how it traditionally deals with electronic client information. According to a study conducted by Millard Brown IntelliQuest, of all factors driving technology investments in law firms, 77% feel that attorney’s demands are very important while 62% consider their client’s demands very important. Both statistics identify the importance of using integrated systems for communication. Law firms must emphasize their clients because it is their data which is left vulnerable if a breach occurs within the firm.

The American Bar Association (ABA) is responsible for principles governing the legal industry. While the ABA has strongly advised firms to implement tougher electronic security measures, they have never fully written laws regarding the issue. In their formal opinion (No. 99-413) concerning email encryption, the ABA stated:

The Committee concludes, based upon current technology and law as we are informed of it, that a lawyer sending confidential client information by unencrypted e-mails does not violate Model Rule 1.6(a) in choosing that mode to communicate. This is principally because there is a reasonable expectation of privacy in its use.

These statements seem outdated because security issues are so prominent today. Motivated criminals and opposing counsels will do whatever it takes to infiltrate a company in order to gain access to email content and stored data.

The legal industry has made some strides in data protection by using basic virus and spyware programs, but has yet to address issues of outbound email protection. Dennis Kennedy of NetTech, Inc. claims, It is not uncommon to find attorneys who receive well over a hundred new e-mails messages a day.(2) Hundreds of unencrypted e-mails a day containing case strategies and potentially personal information cannot continue to float through cyberspace waiting for someone to illegally intercept them.

How can this problem be fixed? The solution to dealing with email and electronic data involves two things, implementing email encryption software and seeking knowledge about potential email and data threats. Email encryption with rights management applied allows attorneys to send and receive emails without clients having to worry about their privacy. In the past, lawyers have solely relied on email disclaimers in their emails, such as DO NOT FORWARD THIS EMAIL. Email disclaimers are often ignored and are simply not enough in todays high risk digital age. Law firms also need to know what’s going on in the technology world and wisely update their security practices to protect client’s data, as well as encrypt emails to make their clients feel safe when communicating online. Attorney-client privileges mean a lot in the legal industry, and in order to retain that trust, lawyers need to do what they can to secure their relationships.

Legal firms must strive to stay ahead of those who would profit from snooping on email communication. Who knows what the legal industry could turn into if firms dont change their security ways? There have been many debatable court decisions over the past quarter century, such as the OJ Simpson trial and Enron cases that have left Americans skeptical about the attainment of some data used in the trial. By implementing email encryption, the legal industry can once again communicate with their clients with complete confidence and be sure that their clients have the same assurance that they will have in the court room.

- – - – - -

End Notes

1.Hines, Matt. Data Losses May Spur Lawsuits. Security IT Hub. June 8, 2006. 26 Jun 2006 .

2.Kennedy, Dennis. Taming the Email Tiger. Dennis Kennedy Blog. October 14, 2005. 6/10/2006 .

Nathan Kully is an employee at Essential Security Software, Inc., a provider of email and document security solutions for small businesses and accounting professionals, in Bellevue, WA. He is also a contributing editor to the TechKnowBizzle.com. Nathan is currently a student at Cornell University in Ithaca, NY, where he is studying Applied Economics and Management.

More articles at www.articles-host.com