Kim Wilford, J.D.

Probably 70% of my recruiting practice is for BigLaw. That may be lower than many of my MLA colleagues. Why do I do so much work with mid-sized and smaller firms? A few reasons. In California we are spoiled for choice when it comes to boutiques -- both subject matter focused firms, and full-service boutiques are local institutions here. So, there are a lot of options! A lot of people don't want to work in BigLaw anymore/again/ever. My job is candidate-focused, so it's my job to find a role that matches what people want. It's definitely not my job to wedge them back into BigLaw because I don't have other options to offer them. In the last week MLA has begun a relationship with 3 new boutiques in Northern California, and the list grows all the time. Smaller firms allow associates to broaden out their practices -- their litigation teams do ALL kinds of work, because they don't have critical mass to have specialist strike teams. This model exists across corproate too - smaller firms' corporate teams may include M&A, ECVC, funds, tech trans... Being a generalist is appealing on its face but is also a great path to an in house role. Many, but not all, smaller firms offer better work/life balance. They may also be a more comfortable format for lawyers who want to know their colleagues more closely. So, don't rule out a smaller firm -- you may be surprised if you speak to them at just how much it sounds like the right fit.

38

2 Comments

I have reviewed hundreds if not thousands of job postings for legal counsel in my almost 25 years of practice, and so many of those postings continue to expect the applicant to be both extremely detail oriented, and to manage a large volume of agreements within very short deadlines. There simply is no such beast - at least I have never met one. I highly recommend the job posters use "Smart enough to identify the risks involved, and experienced enough to know whether those risks are real." That nets realistic candidates with the right skills, in my opinion.

9

I presented yesterday at the Legal Innovators California conference with a challenge to the audience - to think about the "why" behind urging AI adoption at their firms. What are you doing to inspire legal professionals to take time out of their busy schedules to learn how to use AI? Providing opportunities for attorneys and paralegals to participate in pro bono work can be a powerful motivator. There's also a business case for offering AI tools to attorneys for pro bono work. In 2022, the AmLaw 200 performed 5 Million hours of pro bono work. The American Lawyer compiled a ranking of the top firms based on pro bono hours, and these were at the top of the list: Covington & Burling LLP, Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP, Jenner & Block, Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, Arnold & Porter, WilmerHale, Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP, Hughes Hubbard & Reed LLP, Dechert LLP, and Hogan Lovells. Pro bono is also a major factor in attorney retention, and if you ask any GenZ lawyer about the factors they are using to select a firm you will hear the research they've done into pro bono opportunities at their future company. Pro bono work also presents a moment when both senior and junior attorneys alike are open to learning. I've observed this firsthand in working with major law firms and companies like Microsoft who are offering Clearbrief.ai as a tool for specific pro bono efforts involving analyzing large volumes of factual documents to improve efficiency and accuracy. When attorneys experience the power of technology to achieve time savings and excellent work product in a pro bono case, it opens their eyes to how they can be using it on their regular matters. They're both helping their community and learning new skills. And that's how you inspire AI adoption. Is your company leveraging AI tools to give back? If you're interested in a playbook for how to get this started at your firm, please reach out. #ai #litigation #law Clearbrief.ai #probono

74

4 Comments

“Under the hood, these new legal #AI tools use retrieval-augmented generation (#RAG) to produce their results, a method that many tout as a potential solution to the #Hallucination #Problem. In theory, RAG allows a system to first retrieve the relevant source material and then use it to generate the correct response. In practice, however, we show that even RAG systems are not hallucination-free.” https://lnkd.in/eZMVcQ46

1

SCRAPE THE WORLD. If you want to prevent scrapers from collecting publicly accessible user data on your site, your job just got harder. In a decision last week (link in comments), the Northern District of California’s Judge Breyer dismissed X’s claims against scraper Bright Data, stating: “Our court of appeals has held that giving social media companies “free rein to decide, on any basis, who can collect and use data — data that the companies do not own, that they otherwise make publicly available to viewers, and that the companies themselves collect and use — risks the possible creation of information monopolies that would disserve the public interest.” hiQ Labs, Inc. v. LinkedIn Corp., 31 F.4th 1180, 1202 (9th Cir. 2022). With that in mind, this district court carefully considered each of the claims asserted. It now concludes that none of the claims passes muster.” Judge Breyer held that X hadn't sufficiently alleged damages from Bright Data accessing the site and that claims based on selling scraped data were preempted by the Copyright Act. On the latter, the judge provided a spicy take: “X's state-law claims based on Bright Data's scraping and selling information would allow X — as a nonexclusive licensee of its users' content — to prevent others from doing the same, despite that its users gave X a license to make their content publicly available. ... X Corp. is happy to allow the extraction and copying of X users' content so long as it gets paid. To the extent X Corp.'s state-law claims are based on scraping and selling of data, they 'amount[] to little more than camouflage for an attempt to exercise control over the exploitation of a copyright.'" (hat tip to Ahmed Eissa for flagging)

37

6 Comments

I’m joining a great panel this Weds to talk about how AI has impacted IP, and what it means for companies looking to innovate. Hope you can join us for a great conversation!

49

2 Comments

For a lean in-house legal team, keeping an eye on wage and hour issues may seem technical and out of reach. But this can be an area of major liability for the company. Here are some high-level questions a generalist can ask to mitigate pay-related risk • Have we sufficiently trained our employees on our policies? Policies are table stakes. Poorly written policies can create major headaches. But policies aren't worth the paper they're written on if no one knows how to use them. Legal can support Payroll and HR by being a second set of eyes for training materials and policies. • How do the time and pay records look, at a high level? Don't assume HR and your payroll provider have scrutinized the records. Spot-checking time and pay records at a high level can go a long way. While having a proper audit by employment counsel is ideal, you can show value by taking a critical eye and asking whether the records would make sense to a lay person. • Arbitration Agreements Even the most seasoned payroll teams sometimes make a mistake. Arbitration agreements can be a powerful strategic tool in defending against wage and hour claims. They're not airtight and the law changes frequently (especially in CA) so these need to be reviewed and revisited often. And review other employment agreements (like confidentiality agreements) to be sure they are aligned with the arbitration agreement (you'd be surprised at how often this gets botched) • Review offboarding materials to be sure they address sleeper wage and hour issues If you have employees in several states, HR and payroll need to keep on top of laws requiring timely pay upon termination. Make sure there's a process for HR to check this before jumping into terminating employment. This gets particularly tricky when there are outstanding bonus or commission payments. • Record retention By the time a company hires its first in-house counsel, many HR and payroll practices are already set. And a company that was primarily in-person in 2019 and now has hybrid or remote workers all over the country may have a new set of multi-state recordkeeping obligations that hasn't been accounted for. A high-level review of record retention policies can have outsized impact.

15

5 Comments

Thanks to Law360 for publishing our article on the new privacy litigation trend in California -- Song-Beverly Credit Card Act claims based on online transactions. And thanks to Desirée Hunter-Reay for helping write it. Hopefully, we can nip this trend in the bud before it turns into another CIPA Pen-Trap situation. https://lnkd.in/gvgyrFMz

11

The description includes #technologylaw, #privacylaw and #productcounsel type work, which is all interesting #inhousecounsel work (says me).

30

2 Comments

Lots of interesting observations about how hallucinations/confabulations can be reduced by certain architectures in this article, but here's what I'm wondering about this morning: Suppose the models do end up solving these problems through what is, in effect, a division of labor: Models are specialized to answer queries within a defined subdomain. Do we then develop new models that are good at integrating answers across subdomains into a full solution that represents the best answer across domains? Even if we do, it seems like it will have to be humans that are playing that role in the near term. +1 for those who are good at context recognition and integrating perspectives across different domains — specialists in generalization. https://lnkd.in/g5RMaEx6

13

5 Comments

Tips for Efficient Legal Research in California When it comes to legal research in California, staying organized and strategic is key. Here are some practical tips I've found helpful: 1. Define your research question: Before I start my search, I always clarify the specific legal issue I'm tackling. This helps me choose the right search terms and sources. 2. Utilize online legal research tools: I often rely on platforms like Fastcase or CaseText for free access to primary law in California, such as statutes and court opinions. For more in-depth resources, paid services like Westlaw offer comprehensive tools and secondary sources like analysis and commentary. 3. Start with primary sources: I focus on relevant California codes and court opinions available on official state websites or through legal research platforms. These platforms help refine searches and ensure I find the latest cases. 4. Shepardize or KeyCite your cases: After finding relevant cases, I make sure to Shepardize or KeyCite them to verify their legal standing. This shows whether a case has been overturned or modified by later decisions. 5. Explore secondary sources strategically: While secondary sources like legal treatises and law review articles provide valuable insights, I use them to understand the law and analyze cases—not as standalone legal authority. 6. Take advantage of free librarian resources: Public law libraries often offer free legal research assistance and workshops. Librarians are pros at navigating legal databases and finding relevant materials. 7. Bonus Tip: Leverage technology for efficiency: Online research platforms offer advanced search features that help narrow down results. Additionally, exploring legal research AI tools can suggest relevant content and predict your research needs. Have more tips to share or questions about legal research? Let's discuss in the comments! #californialaw #employmentlaw #labourlaw #legal #law #legalinsights #legalassistance #legalresearch #legalupdates

14

1 Comment

A right to disconnect?! I cannot imagine such a world, but the State of California is contemplating such a law for exempt and non-exempt employees alike. Check out this piece from my colleagues Ari Hersher, Scott Mallery, and Clara Lane Rademacher for more details, and how this might impact your business. #employmentlaw #remotework #teamseyfarth #worklifebalance

26

3 Comments

I was honored to have the opportunity to speak with TechCrunch about the impact of the #FTC #Noncompete ban on the startup community specifically. Much of the the employer-side commentary on the ban has been negative, but I believe that #startups would uniquely benefit on the whole from a ban. Many of the startup-heavy jurisdictions are already accustomed to noncompete bans or limited enforcement opportunities. And elsewhere, noncompete litigation (whether offensively or defensively) is often prohibitively expensive for an early stage company. In my experience, fear of litigation expenses has deterred otherwise potentially transformational hires even where the likelihood of actual litigation was low. Investors expect to see restrictive covenants where allowable in #fundraise rounds but realistically the ROI of enforcement against a departing employee through litigation is always problematic. I still personally believe the ban won't survive legal challenge, but certainly some will be winners if it does. Cooley LLP

51

3 Comments