<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>mathewingram.com/work &#187; lawyer</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mathewingram.com/work/tag/lawyer/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work</link>
	<description>... at the intersection of media, technology, business and the web</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 09 Jul 2011 15:34:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>Stupid lawyer tricks, part two</title>
		<link>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/06/15/stupid-lawyer-tricks-part-two/</link>
		<comments>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/06/15/stupid-lawyer-tricks-part-two/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 16 Jun 2007 03:17:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Mathew</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Blogs]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Dell]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Social networks]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[blog]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lawyer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/06/15/stupid-lawyer-tricks-part-two/</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Not to get on a rant against lawyers or anything (see previous post about Avvo being sued), but I couldn&#8217;t help mentioning the little brouhaha Dell got into recently with the Consumerist blog, after a lawyer for the company company wrote the website an email asking them to take down one of their posts &#8212; [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<div class="tweetmeme_button" style="float: left; margin-right: 10px;">
			<a href="http://api.tweetmeme.com/share?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mathewingram.com%2Fwork%2F2007%2F06%2F15%2Fstupid-lawyer-tricks-part-two%2F"><br />
				<img src="http://api.tweetmeme.com/imagebutton.gif?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mathewingram.com%2Fwork%2F2007%2F06%2F15%2Fstupid-lawyer-tricks-part-two%2F&amp;source=mathewi&amp;style=normal&amp;b=2" height="61" width="50" /><br />
			</a>
		</div>
<p>Not to get on a rant against lawyers or anything (see previous post about Avvo being sued), but I couldn&#8217;t help mentioning the little brouhaha Dell got into recently with the Consumerist blog, after a lawyer for the company company wrote the website an email asking them to <a href="http://consumerist.com/consumer/backend/dell-demands-takedown-of-our-22-confessions-of-a-former-dell-sales-manager-269127.php">take down one of their posts</a> &#8212; specifically, <a href="http://consumerist.com/consumer/insiders/22-confessions-of-a-former-dell-sales-manager-268831.php">this post</a>, which contained 22 suggestions from a former Dell employee about how to get good deals and/or good service. I encourage you to <a href="http://consumerist.com/consumer/insiders/22-confessions-of-a-former-dell-sales-manager-268831.php">read the whole thing</a> and email it to your friends.</p>
<p><img class="left" src='http://www.mathewingram.com/work/wp-content/uploads/snipshot_e4pt1ajvq9k.jpg' alt='snipshot_e4pt1ajvq9k.jpg' />In the letter, which is quoted verbatim on Consumerist, Tracy Holland of Dell says that the spot in question <em>&#8220;contains information that is confidential and proprietary to Dell,&#8221;</em> and that this is <em>&#8220;in violation of his or her employment agreement and confidentiality obligations.&#8221;</em> As I was reading, I imagined the editor of Consumerist reading the letter and wondering &#8220;and all this relates to me how exactly?&#8221; Which is pretty much what the lawyer for the blog said<a href="http://consumerist.com/consumer/backend/dell-demands-takedown-of-our-22-confessions-of-a-former-dell-sales-manager-269127.php"> in her response</a>: <em>&#8220;We came by this material entirely legally: we were provided it by a third party voluntarily, we did not use any improper means to solicit any Dell employee to breach any agreement he may have had with you.&#8221;</em></p>
<p>One of the funny parts is when the Dell lawyer sends a second email at about 2 a.m., saying <em>&#8220;Thank you. Note, though, it has been almost nine hours since we made the request, yet the posting is still up.&#8221;</em> In her response, the Consumerist lawyer starts with: </p>
<blockquote><p>&#8220;Despite some suggestions to the contrary among some of our fellow beings, most humans need to sleep. Some of us also receive hundreds of emails a day and have to deal with every one of them. I received this email at 12am last night. It is 7am now. That&#8217;s a pretty good turnaround.&#8221;</p></blockquote>
<p>Hilarious. I have a feeling my friend Lionel Menchaca, the head blogger at Dell &#8212; who we had on a panel at <a href="http://www.meshconference.com">mesh</a> a couple of weeks ago and who is a wonderful guy, and the architect of Dell&#8217;s successful blogger outreach program &#8212; would cringe if he read any of that exchange. <b>Update:</b> In fact, Lionel has cringed (or at least it reads that way) and has responded with a mea culpa <a href="http://direct2dell.com/one2one/archive/2007/06/16/18397.aspx">here</a>. Much props to him for doing so.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.mathewingram.com/work/2007/06/15/stupid-lawyer-tricks-part-two/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>4</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

