Blank Page Law
Blank Page Law. Did it exist 30 years ago? Does it exist today?
Richard W Smith posted, the other day on LinkedIn, a link to a post by Seth Godwin that, as Richard put it, is “about how professions have changed over a 30 year period in less than 100 words.”
Seth Godwin’s post reads:
Redefining a profession
Pharmacists used to mix chemicals by hand to create prescriptions.
Opticians used to grind lenses from scratch.
Lawyers used to start with an empty page.
Graphic designers needed to know how to draw.
All of these jobs are still important. None of them are the same as they were thirty years ago.
In your work, are you fighting the change or leading it?
It’s hard to see us going back.
Is Blank Page Law more apt today than 30 years ago?
I commented:
I never started with a blank page 30 years ago. There were always templates/styles to kick off with. Usually a lot shorter and more straightforward than today’s versions!
And is it not now (30 years later) that they are telling us we should start with a blank page and get ChatGPT to fill it in for us! 😉
I think Seth may be a tad confused about the evolution of legal practice over the past 30 years 🙃
What do you think?
What do you think?
Do you ever start with a blank page?
Did you do that more 30 years ago than today?
Can you recall shorter documents/contracts 30 years ago than we see today? Is that perhaps down to technology (word processing) making longer documents more acceptable today than 30 years ago?
Do you think commentators on legal practice and the use of technology sometimes miss the mark?
Reactions on Blank Page Law
On LinkedIn the following comments have been made:-
David Gilmour (cynic, affiliate at Mundo Cognito Ltd, author of “Privacy Architecture – guided by TOGAF®”):
“Opticians used to grind lenses from scratch.”
Now they can’t even grind a scratch from a lense.
Me:
Indeed. I was offered insurance on my last pair of glasses to cover that! We should perhaps be concerned by the loss of skills that Seth highlights!
David Gilmour:
Indeed – over 10 years my late brother hand-ground a 10″ astronomical telescope concave reflector from a 11″ porthole glass [obtained from the ship breakers at Burntisland]. It was tested by Barr & Stroud who said it was the most accurate they had ever seen.
To practise, he did a 6″ over the preceeding couple of years.
I still use the tailings of his cerium oxide for polishing out diddy scratches in glass.
I wouldn’t have the patience for much more.
-+-+-+-+-+-
Robert (Rob) Lankester (Automating legal documents so your lawyers can focus on what matters. Fast track your project with RLegal Engineering Ltd.):
Starting with a precedent or template, even if not automated, has been the practice throughout the last 16 or so years. As has the presence of case management systems generating letters etc automatically. The main difference now is tech is more user friendly, more ‘low code’ so you don’t need a team of ‘developers’ and you dont need to build your own software at signicant cost.
Me:
Surely longer than 16 years ago when not automated? I hear that many law firms are still (in 2024) using Ctrl C and Ctrl V rather than automation, but without starting from a blank page 😉
Robert (Rob) Lankester:
Yup, but I’ve only been in the sector 16 or so years so figured I should be specific. My first firm had fully fledged case management systems doing this stuff before ‘document automation’ or ‘legal tech’ were even in the lexicon. And they’d been in existence probably 10 year already when I joined the firm.
But I played analyst and there was a whole team of developers needed back then for maintenance and changes etc.
Me:
Ah! The reference to 16 years makes sense now 🙂 I’m old enough to remember a good bit beyond Seth Godwin’s 30 years. I remember my first summer jobs in legal (nearer to 40 years ago) and a lot of pre-prepared / printed documents, with blanks to fill in by typewriter, in use.
Robert (Rob) Lankester:
Ah so you already knew the answer to the question. But still well worth raising. It’s crazy these discussions still go on and it’s still necessary.
Me:
Indeed! Although different solicitors will no doubt have different experiences. That was no doubt as true 30 years ago as it is today.
Trainee Solicitors starting their careers in law firms this month will have a variety of processes and technology at play depending on the firm they are training with.
Some will experience document automation. Many others probably something less sophisticated than that.
-+-+-+-+-+-
Alex Smith (Global Search & AI Product Lead (Senior Director) at iManage):
There was the Encyclopaedia of Forms and Precedents from the 1930s I seem to remember …
Me:
Google tells me that the First Edition was published in 17 volumes from 1902 to 1910: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopaedia_of_Forms_and_Precedents
That’s a lot of not very blank pages from a long while ago. And they wonder how we managed without ChatGPT! I see it is still on the go at 90+ volumes!
-+-+-+-+-+-
Kyriacos Kourtellos (Lawyer, Director at Kourtellos & Co, Cyprus):
Where to start Brian! Drafting a SHA or SPA from scratch? Would we bill on weekly basis?
Me:
You’ve just started a new term: The Billable week! The value pricing gurus will not be happy 😉
-+-+-+-+-+-
Kyriacos Kourtellos (Lawyer, Director at Kourtellos & Co, Cyprus):
Where to start Brian! Drafting a SHA or SPA from scratch? Would we bill on weekly basis?
Me:
You’ve just started a new term: The Billable week! The value pricing gurus will not be happy 😉
Kyriacos Kourtellos:
Not at all… transaction though could take years!
Rob Saccone (CTO @ Lega // advisor // investor):
Kidding aside, in all my years offering pro services I’ve never billed by the hour. Only by month or year, and rarely by week. Pretty standard outside of law, IME.
Me:
And we have to remember that although referred to as the billable hour it is, in reality, the billable 6 minutes!
-+-+-+-+-+-
Graeme Johnston (once a lawyer… | now doing software stuff):
Precedents and templates seem to have been a thing since almost the start of law. The modern English law multi-volume collections (Encyclopedia of Forms and Precedents, Atkin’s Court Forms) date only from the early 20th century but still well before that thirty year range. And there were many more over the centuries. Many lawyers were in fact notorious for just copying precedents without applying their minds. Then as now.
Me:
Thanks Graeme. Indeed. It would have been strange if that were not the case. And the concern today should be that lawyers might instead use ChatGPT and still not apply their minds. Which could be a worse combination!
Jane Clemetson FRSA (Freelance lawyer working with media and creative businesses | Business Affairs | Clause Whisperer: Contracts Are My Bread | Speaker | #girlyswot | Resourceful):
Indeed – there are some intersting examples in the library at Lincoln’s Inn – and no doubt the other Inns as well & the Law Society too. Because never mind the “blank page problem”, what’s the point in reinventing the wheel every time?
Graeme Johnston:
Yes, the very type of thought that leads to law in the first place (there’s a pattern in events which should be regulated) leads very quickly to such documents!
Jane Clemetson:
Yes – so true.
Me:
And strangely those wanting us to adopt ChatGPT for drafting rather than using pre-existing Precedents are, in effect, suggesting we should reinvent the wheel every time!
Jane Clemetson:
Indeed – I’ve not got my mind round the lawyer (?GC) from Klarna saying they use ChatGPT as is quicker – and thinking “do you not have precedents for pretty much everything”?
Me:
I’ve commented on the Klarna story, in a similar vein to your thoughts, here: Moving House, Automation, Lawyers and GenAI
-+-+-+-+-+-
Mitch Kowalski (European/Canadian, Senior Commercial Legal Counsel (20+ years) – Admitted in Canada and USA):
😍😍😍😍
