iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Bianca Bosker
GET UPDATES FROM Bianca:

Legal Hackathon Challenges Lawyers To Think Like Hackers

Posted: 04/17/2012 10:40 am Updated: 04/17/2012 12:59 pm

Legal Hackathon
A participant works on a laptop on the first day of the 28th Chaos Communication Congress (28C3) - Behind Enemy Lines computer hacker conference on December 27, 2011 in Berlin, Germany.

Don’t just follow the law. Hack it.

That was Jonathan Askin’s challenge to an auditorium of law students, lawyers and entrepreneurs at the first ever Legal Hackathon, a day-long event held Sunday at Brooklyn Law School to help lawyers, traditionally the guardians of rules, think more like hackers, the mischief makers and problem solvers of the tech world.

“We’re 'yeah, but' lawyers in a 'why not' world,” said Askin, the director of Brooklyn Law School’s Brooklyn Law Incubator and Policy Clinic (BLIP) and one of the organizers of the hackathon. “What I’m hoping to get at today is to figure out how we as lawyers stop being roadblocks and how we participate in a world moving rapidly around us.”

The answer may rest with hackers. Seen by some as insidious actors, they have been touted by Silicon Valley types and even management gurus as quick-moving innovators who come up with creative solutions to seemingly impossible tasks.

The Brooklyn Law School event highlights how traditional fields are being reshaped by new technology that requires professionals to look outside established venues to update their skills. It also showcases the extent to which hacker culture is infiltrating even the most conservative industries. The hacker ethos is being applied not only to law, but also food, education and local government.

For lawyers, the “hacker way” means abandoning the fax machines and risk-averse naysaying and mastering new online tools, as well as familiarizing themselves with the policy issues hackers have raised, said Askin. He argued that by understanding emerging technology that allows for increased collaboration and taking a cue from entrepreneurs' go-for-it mentality, lawyers can avoid becoming “wallflowers” who are “sidelined” in the information revolution brought about by the web.

“When I look around at my peers, I see 40-year-old lawyers who are still communicating via snail mail and fax machines and telephones and appearing in physical space for negotiations. That slows the legal process and makes us less relevant and makes society doubt our ability to play a quick, effective role in resolving issues,” said Askin, whose students nicknamed him MC Splinter in an homage to the ninja master who trains the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. “The goal is to morph and evolve the law on one hand to better serve technologists, enterprises and society, but also harness technology so that lawyers can better service their clients.”

Jason Schultz, director of the University of California, Berkeley’s Law, Technology and Public Policy clinic, said he agrees with Askin’s assertion that many lawyers need to upgrade their technological know-how. But the same could be said for any field, he countered, and the legal world already boasts its fair share of innovators and pioneers who are pushing the limits in areas of tech policy.

“Lawyers need to understand tech better, but so do educators and so do firefighters. There are lots of different professions that you could make statement about,” said Schultz. “I think this is a way people demonize lawyers to say, 'you’re in the way, get out of the way.'”

The Legal Hackathon opened with a series of discussions, such as “From e-Gov to WeGov” and “A Primer on Crowdsourced Policymaking and Fostering Civic Engagement Through Technology,” aimed at framing the ways the web can be used to craft policy, engage voters, and serve people in need of legal advice. Brooklyn Law School student Warren Allen unveiled “Hack the Act,” a collaborative online platform that allows people to “remix” a law. It allows individuals to edit and recraft a bill, then share it with others and invite them to make their own changes. Matt Hall, co-founder of Docracy, demonstrated how lawyers could use his site to post top-notch legal documents that entrepreneurs or individuals could download, use and trust.

The afternoon’s seminars were all about “taking off the training wheels,” in Askin’s words, pushing attendees to lend their legal and technical knowledge to rethinking digital issues. WhyNot CEO Emil Stefkov asked a lecture hall of entrepreneurs and aspiring lawyers how New Yorkers might work around existing legislation to crowdsource a candidate for mayor of New York. Though the audience didn't present a solution, they suggested ways Stefkov might improve his website, with features such as questionnaires prospective candidates would fill out showing where they stand on policy issues.

A representative from the Wikimedia Foundation explained how lawyers could contribute to crowdsourced online encyclopedia Wikipedia in one session. In another, BLIP Clinc members solicited feedback on PriView, an online privacy policy rating system they had developed. Tellingly, while the audience at the Legal Hackathon debated how subjectivity or defamation fears could affect PriView’s utility, the tool was being built elsewhere that very afternoon at the Wall Street Journal’s Data Transparency Weekend for programmers in downtown Manhattan.

In comparison with traditional tech hackathons that challenge engineers to build features within strict time limits, Sunday’s event featured more lawyers than coders, more suits than startup-emblazoned tees, more notetaking than coding and more Q&A than collaboration.

“This is more like being at South by Southwest and going to panels than going to a startup weekend and creating something,” said Zeb Dropkin, founder and CEO of RentHackr, a real estate website that shows what tenants are paying for their places. “I found today to be much more information immersive. It seems like it might be trying to hand the solution phase off to another time, whereas a lot of technical hackathons are specialized upfront so that the solving of whatever the problem is happens right on premises.”

Yet despite the differences, some of the attendees, which ranged from students and former Hill staffers to startup CEOs and venture capitalists, argued lawyers and hackers already have a great deal in common. Hackers wield code where lawyers wield words, but both seek to bypass limitations put in their path, said Rutgers School of Law student Lea Rosen.

“Hacking in the legal sense is probably a lot like hacking in the computer sense,” said Free Press policy director Matt Wood during a panel discussion. “You’re not building something, but getting around restrictions or things you were prohibited from doing before.”

FOLLOW TECH

From our partners


Don’t just follow the law. Hack it. That was Jonathan Askin’s challenge to an auditorium of law students, lawyers and entrepreneurs at the first ever Legal Hackathon, a day-long event held Sund...
Don’t just follow the law. Hack it. That was Jonathan Askin’s challenge to an auditorium of law students, lawyers and entrepreneurs at the first ever Legal Hackathon, a day-long event held Sund...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 35
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
01:16 AM on 06/30/2012
Lawyers, look what they've done to the Constitution? Besides writing it, you mean?
Tim The Enchanter
Gary Johnson 2016
09:30 AM on 04/18/2012
Law-iars are the original hackers.

Look at what they've done to the Constitution.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
BravoFour
10:12 PM on 04/17/2012
Instead of thinking like “hackers” how about they start thinking like engineers instead.

Lawyers argue cases, they don’t compromise. The theory is that after both sides present their case, the truth will somehow be evident to the impartial viewer. Congress is full of lawyers, so it’s no wonder they get nothing done, they were only trained to argue.

Engineers don’t argue, they work together in teams to solve problems. Lawyers could learn a little something, but they are looking in the wrong place.
Tim The Enchanter
Gary Johnson 2016
09:32 AM on 04/18/2012
Law-iaring is all about one person arguing that the sky is red, the other that it is green. Neither has the truth, neither is interested in the truth, only in convincing someone that their argument is reality and all other realities should be disregarded.
11:36 AM on 04/19/2012
@Tim The Enchanter
I think many of the conference attendees would agree with your assessment if you limited it to 'litigation'. Whether or not this phenomenon is a necessary component of our adversarial system is a big conversation.

However, the hackathon wasn't really about any of that– There is a lot more to the legal profession than litigation. Check it out http://legalhackathon.johnrandall.com
10:03 AM on 04/25/2012
Tim, fair point. Propose a new system, or some sort of guiding principle, for when two parties disagree and need to resolve their differences.

We have a bad system, but it's better than most. And the issues with litigation are only a small part of what consists of "the law".
11:32 AM on 04/19/2012
@BarvoFour We are using "hack" in the iterative-solution-finding, clever-engineering sense of the word... This conference is EXACTLY about working together in teams to solve problems, often with collaboration technology.

"Lawyers argue cases, they don’t compromise." ...Litigation is only one aspect of lawyering. There are many environments that are not so contrarian. If you actually take a look at what went on at this conference, I think you will be pleasantly surprised. It was about collaborative problem solving. (I'm pretty sure that none of it was litigation centric.) Check it out. http://legalhackathon.blipclinic.org

-John Randall (conference organizer) twitter: @johntrandall
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:19 PM on 04/17/2012
No need to create your own laboratory to understand unethical behavior and the concept of hacking. How about studying Wall Street finance.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dngrwill
set the phasers for 'fun'!
09:05 PM on 04/17/2012
LOL - how about teaching lawyers to think like ethical-human-beings?

We got enough legal hacks as it is....
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
authorized-user
macho macho man
04:27 PM on 04/17/2012
I can't understand how lawyers could become anymore accomplished at hacking.

They spend all their time devising plans to separate property from the rightful owners already.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
brflux
Leftist
01:02 PM on 04/17/2012
this is dangerous. The Bush administrations lawyers hacked the law to justify torture and illegal war.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:41 PM on 04/17/2012
No. They actually just ignored it and, sadly, have been able to rely on politics to ensure that nobody is prosecuted up through now.

The name of this "hackathon" makes it sound a lot sexier than it actually was. The long and the short of it was that something needs to be done to get the old-timer lawyers to embrace technology rather than relying on past dated practices. That's not really "hacking." For example, a number of attorneys I know still do not digitize all the documents in their files. Client and case files can grow quite expansive over the years and, quite often, paralegals will end up being assigned to go through the whole things to find relevant documents. That can add days or weeks to a process. Digitizing everything I create or receive, however, makes it as simple as a keyword search for me to get the ball rolling without having to deal with a team of paralegals. You'd think this would be common sense by now. But, it isn't.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Leadsled
Love-child of the ghosts of FDR and Napoleon
02:50 PM on 04/17/2012
Nope, they didn't ignore it. Remember the torture memos?

Digitizing things are useful, but it is also quite problematic. I cannot tell you the number of times i've encountered mistaken disclosures due to files being digitized. A key document in a case was once emailed to me when it clearly wasn't supposed to be because the file name was somewhat similar to that of the file that I was supposed to be sent.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Leadsled
Love-child of the ghosts of FDR and Napoleon
10:43 AM on 04/18/2012
What part of "that they even made any memo on the subject necessarily means they didn't ignore the law" don't you understand?

The issue is the likelihood of error. I never said don't digitize anything, I said that there is utility in hard copy under specific circumstances.
Tim The Enchanter
Gary Johnson 2016
09:33 AM on 04/18/2012
They simply did what FDR did. They didn't teach you about that in school? How about when Lincoln jailed anyone he viewed as a threat to him?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
brflux
Leftist
10:52 AM on 04/18/2012
rut roh? I forgot about that pesky little thing called history. Damn it. You win this one Tim The Enchanter. Well played sir or madame.