I was interested to learn, via @martinertl, of an article on Slate.com by Jessica Olien (@jessicaolien) entitled Inside the Box: People Actually Don’t Like Creativity (here). I recommend that you read the entire article, but here are some bits that caught my eye and seemed relevant to what I’m trying to do: This is the thing about creativity that is … Read More
We know that in general, BigLaw contract drafting leaves a lot to be desired. We also know that when it comes to changing how they draft contracts, law firms face greater obstacles than do companies. (See this article.) But change is possible: at least one Australian law firm that I know of, Mallesons Stephen Jaques (now King & Wood Mallesons), … Read More
In this post I quote Tim Hadley’s email to me regarding how the other side to a transaction responded to his MSCD-inspired drafting. An interesting additional aspect to Tim’s interaction with counsel representing the buyer was the cover note he added to the draft. Go here to see a PDF copy. Tim was prompted to add his cover note by … Read More
For purposes of implementing clearer contract language and a more efficient contract process, change at the level of the organization allows change to happen more quickly. But given that inertia holds sway at most organizations, I suspect that change is mostly being implemented by individuals, whether operating on their own or within organizations. Last week I encountered an example of … Read More
Isaac Newton defined inertia in his first law of motion. Here’s how his Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica describes inertia: The vis insita, or innate force of matter, is a power of resisting by which every body, as much as in it lies, endeavours to preserve its present state, whether it be of rest or of moving uniformly forward in a straight line. If I … Read More
There’s been a lot of chatter recently about the relative prospects of traditional law firms (“BigLaw”) and competitors such as Axiom (“NewLaw”). Much of that discussion was prompted by this post by George Beaton, an Australian consultant. It’s a discussion that I’ve had no trouble steering clear of. That’s because as I see it, there’s nothing much to choose between … Read More
In response to a cri de coeur from @FlemingMF, in this 2009 post I introduced a notion aimed at preempting pushback from traditionalists bewildered by clear contract language. I suggested that when you send out a first draft that complies with MSCD, you could include a cover note asking that the other side refrain from making comments that don’t pertain … Read More
I noted with interest the article Lock-Up Creep. It’s by Steven M. Davidoff, the least of whose accomplishments is the fact that he’s my webcast co-presenter, and Christina M. Sautter, of LSU Law Center. The article is in the most recent issue of the Journal of Corporation Law, but currently the best online source for it is SSRN (here). What are lock-ups? … Read More
Today’s New York Times contains a column by Thomas Friedman (here) about innovation at a General Electric research lab. Here’s what Friedman says about such research centers generally: These centers are places where scientists and engineers from dozens of nationalities are using collaboration and crowd-sourcing to push out the boundaries of medical, manufacturing and material sciences, where possibilities seem infinite, … Read More
Via this post on Legal Informatics Blog, I learned of an article entitled Modularity and Innovation in Contract Design: A New Path for Transactional Legal Practice, 18 Stan. J.L. Bus. & Fin. 177 (2013). It’s by Associate Dean George Triantis of Stanford Law School. But apparently that article isn’t yet available—the SSRN link (here) in the Legal Informatics Blog post is to a Stanford … Read More
