Ken,
 
I apologize for being so late in letting you know how much I enjoyed—and learned from—your webcast series this summer. As a practitioner for more than 25 years, I have always enjoyed the challenge of drafting agreements and disclosure documents. But at the same time I was sometimes puzzled by the mysterious lore attached to the drafting process and the stilted language so often used.
 
I never really took the time to investigate my questions, and too often assumed that there were valid reasons why we transactional lawyers say things the way we do. Then I discovered MSCD2, and I found the answers to all of my questions–and many more that I should have asked along the way but didn’t.
 
Congratulations on debunking myths in MSCD2, and on bringing portions of MSCD2 to life through the webcasts. I particularly enjoyed watching you (in the virtual sense) redrafting provisions in Part 5; skewering the way we transactional lawyers misuse and overuse various words and phrases in Part 4; and the way you analytically broke down the categories of what practitioners (and judges) generically refer to as “ambiguity” in Part 3.
 
Years ago I adopted what you call “frontloading” (placing the most important terms at the beginning of a contract) as my personal style and I was happy to hear you make the case for that practice in Part 1. 
 
In sum, Ken, I think your book and the webcasts are both great. At my firm I conduct some training for our youngest lawyers on the subject of “working with contracts,” and as a result of your webcasts I am able to introduce even more of your concepts to them. 
 
Thank you so much for your efforts in to improve the contract drafting process, and best wishes for your continued success. I look forward to meeting you at one of your new and improved seminars in 2010.
 
Regards,

Gary

The seminars cover the same topics as the webcasts—that’s why the seminars and webcasts will, by 2010, share the same title, “Drafting Clearer Contracts.” Furthermore, currently the seminars and webcasts use the same materials, as it would have taken me a few months to develop entirely new materials for the webcasts. The result is that if you attend one of my current series of seminars after having seen the webcasts, you might find it less interesting than you had hoped. But otherwise I’m OK with the sameness, as I developed the webcasts primarily for those who don’t have the time or inclination to make it to one of my seminars.

For 2010 I’ll be overhauling the examples I use in my seminars. That should make the seminars more appealing to those who have seen the webcasts, although I will continue to address the same topics in both.

I can understand the urge to attend a seminar after having seen the webcasts. After seven hours of one-way discussion, anyone who has watched the webcasts might have the urge to engage directly with me. I’d do my best to make that worthwhile.

The topic is “Automating the Contract Process.” I discuss with a panel of experts how companies and law firms can use information technology to help improve contract language and, more generally, streamline the contract process. Taking part will be:

• Tim Allen, chief executive officer of Business Integrity, the developer of ContractExpress DealBuilder, the leading document-assembly solution.
• Chris Boyd, senior director of professional services at Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, a law firm to technology and growth enterprises worldwide and the investment banks and venture capital firms that finance them.
• Nancy Jessen, a managing director with Huron Consulting Group who works with legal organizations on a variety of strategic and operational issues, including managing the contract process.

Click here for more information.

This webcast consists of my conversation with Bryn Vaaler, longtime partner at Dorsey & Whitney LLP and their director of professional development. Bryn and I discuss the current state of contract language, the benefits of clarity, and the prospects for change.

Bryn is thoughtful, articulate, and engaging, and it think we succeed in filling the hour with an insightful, buck-the-conventional-wisdom survey of the issues. I’ll eat my hat if you find a webcast or panel discussion anywhere that offers anything comparable.

Webcast 5 is the final webcast devoted to topics explored in MSCD. In the second half I consider how I’d redraft some contract extracts to reflect the MSCD approach to contract language. Webcasts 6 and 7 are devoted to policy issues, and I’ll be joined by others.

These webcasts have been unlike any other form of speaking I’ve been involved in. For one thing, for the first five I’ve been on my lonesome, speaking for an hour without interruption. That’s very different from seminars before a live audience, or panel discussions.

And because the audience is remote, with interaction being limited to questions submitted during any “live” webcast, it’s hard to get a sense of how useful people have found them, even though West considers them a great success. So far the only comment left by a participant is “Adams is a terrific speaker.” That’s gratifying, given how tough I found the process, but I’d be interested to hear more.

So if you’ve participated in any of my webcasts, I’d be please to receive your thoughts.

Because I had prerecorded the webcast, the broadcast was a zero-stress affair. Consistent with the live format, I was on hand afterwards to reply in writing to questions submitted.

As regards turnout, West thought the numbers were very impressive for a first run. They’re now describing the series as “an instant hit.” Sounds good to me, but it’s less important that whether those participating found the webcast useful—I’d be pleased to receive feedback.

The first webcast is now available on demand here. The second webcast will run live at 1:00 p.m. EDT on June 17, after which it too will be available on demand; for mor information go here.

So if you want to sample my expertise beyond what’s on offer in my blog, you have three options: you could buy the book; you could attend one of my live seminars (and receive the book too); and you could watch my webcasts.

What do I think of the merits of those alternatives? If you have a choice between attending the live seminars or watching the webcasts, which is the better choice is entirely a function of how you learn and what you enjoy—seminars and webcasts are very different.

Another question is, why not just make do with the book? That’s an entirely reasonable approach. Again, it’s all a question of how you prefer to learn.

That sounds simple enough, but it’s not the norm in the webcast world. Webcasts for the most part consist of phoned-in audio or talking-head video. If there’s a PowerPoint presentation, the audience is invited to view it on-screen or print it out, then go through the slides as prompted by the presenter.

I knew that that approach wouldn’t work for me, for two reasons:

• Given that my topic is so text-based, I use text-heavy PowerPoint slides, so I knew I’d need a way to link my audio more closely to the PowerPoint presentation.
• Speaking for an hour non-stop is very different from giving a live seminar. I wanted to be able to edit the webcast, if only to ensure that I covered the territory in an hour and no longer.

I was able to address these issues by using two technologies. I’ve been using one for over a year; the other was new to me.

Wacom Graphire Tablet

The first is my trusty Wacom Graphire tablet. I use it in my live seminars to write on my PowerPoint slides so the participants can see. I use it to highlight a give word or phrase, or show the changes I’d make to a bit of traditional contract language.

The tablet is light, inexpensive, and does exactly what I need it to do. It has a Bluetooth connection to my laptop, so I can roam around the seminar room at will. And I’ve programmed the stylus so that with one click I can delete all my annotations on a given slide.

Because the tablet is simply a flat plastic surface rather than a screen, I watch the screen when I write, rather than the tablet. It requires the sort of hand-eye coordination that I imagine is required for arthroscopic surgery, except that a wobbly line on the screen poses less of a concern than a slip of a miniature scalpel.

Camtasia Studio

The other technology is Camtasia Studio, a software that allows you to record your PC screen. In particular, it allows you to record PowerPoint presentations. Camtasia comes with a PowePoint add-in in the form of a toolbar in PowerPoint that you use to initiate your recording.

By using Camtasia, I was able to capture my PowerPoint annotations. And I was able to edit, and do take (after take after take) of a given slide, until I was satisfied.

Another benefit is that the audio is crytal clear, compared with phoned-in audio.

***

The result of using these two technologies is that in terms of making a lot of information readily accessible, these webcasts are exceptional.

Of course, that has no bearing on whether yours truly is worth listening to. But there’s enough information on this site, and in my book, for you to draw your own conclusions on that score.

I’m pleased to announce that starting June 11, I’ll be offering through West LegalEdcenter a series of seven video webcasts entitled “Drafting Clearer Contracts.”

Each webcast will be an hour long. They’ll be rolled out one by one through the second half of July. Five of the webcasts will explore topics discussed in my book A Manual of Style for Contract Drafting and will consist of annotated PowerPoint presentations plus crystal-clear audio. The remaining two webcasts, which you will be able to view free of charge, will consist of conversations with others, with accompanying PowerPoint presentation. The first will be on the benefits of clarity and how to effect change; the second will be on contract automation. Here’s the complete list, with links to the relevant West LegalEdcenter page:

• The Front and Back of the Contract
• Categories of Contract Language
• Defined Terms; Ambiguity
• Select Words and Phrases
• Drafting as Writing; Layout and Typography
• The Benefits of Clarity; Effecting Change
• Automating the Contract Process

On the day it’s first offered and sporadically thereafter, each webcast will be offered “live,” which means I’ll be on hand to respond, online, to any questions. (Whether or not a webcast is live has CLE implications in some U.S. states.) In addition, after it’s run live for the first time, each webcast will be available for download on demand.

Individuals can register and pay with a credit card the US$99 per-webcast price for the first five webcasts. If five or more people in your organization would like to watch a webcast as a group, discounts are available; please email the sales department of West LegalEdcenter to find out more. Contact them too if you’d like to find out about subscribing to West LegalEdcenter—your subscription would include my webcasts.

I’m delighted to be offering these webcasts. It’s long been clear to me that given the commitment involved, those attending my live seminars represent a small fraction of the potential audience for what I have to offer. I hope that making my instruction available online and in one-hour installments will serve to make it much more accessible, particularly to those for whom travel to one of my U.S. or Canadian seminars isn’t an option. I’d be grateful if you’d spread the word, particularly outside the U.S.

In coordination with West LegalEdcenter and my other seminar partner, Osgoode Professional Development, I’m using launch of the webcasts as an occasion to rebrand my seminars. Starting this fall or beginning 2010, they’ll be given the same name as that given the series of webcasts—”Drafting Clearer Contracts.” For more about my West LegalEdcenter seminars, go here; for more about my Osgoode seminars, go here.

Another development is that my webcasts and my seminars will be sponsored by Business Integrity, developer of ContractExpress DealBuilder, the leading document-assembly solution for company law departments and law firms.

Longtime readers will know that I’ve long had a close relationship with Business Integrity and its CEO, Tim Allen, and that in my writings I’ve often referred to DealBuilder. For more about my relationship with Business Integrity, see this news release on BI’s website.

For those who are squeamish about the notion of sponsorship, BI’s sponsorship will have no effect on the content of my offerings. And more generally, BI’s sponsorship reinforces something that I emphasize constantly—fixing contract language requires fixing the contract process. Business Integrity and I are essentially fighting the same battle, and having them sponsor me is just another way of acknowledging that.