Second Life Bar Association Meeting Transcript
Oct. 11, 2008

Transcript taken by Cat Galileo

 
        

[10:02] Solomon Cortes: Hi everyone
[10:02] Didier Doflug: /wave
[10:02] Lexis Looming: Hello all
[10:03] ArtWorld Market: Hi Solomon
[10:03] Ida Recreant: brb
[10:03] Juris Amat: Hi Art :) long time no see
[10:04] Solomon Cortes: Thanks everyone for coming today. It's great to see you.
[10:04] ArtWorld Market: Hi Juris!
[10:04] Solomon Cortes: I'm aiming to make sure our time management is really good today.
[10:04] Didier Doflug: Thanks for hosting this.
[10:05] Solomon Cortes: First, we have a presentation by Cat at 11.30am, so I want to giver her plenty of time between the end of the session and her seminar
[10:06] Solomon Cortes: And second, I've just had my cousin (a pilot who normally flies USA / India) call and say he's in London - he's just this moment come through the dor, and we need to catch up!
[10:06] You: nice :)
[10:07] Solomon Cortes: So, this is to formaly start our meeting - and remind everyone that it is a public meeting; the transcript will be posted afterwards on our SLBA web site.
[10:07] Juris Amat: real life just keeps going
[10:07] Solomon Cortes: (Thanks Cat - I'm afraid it will mean I'll miss your session though - please forgive me).
[10:07] You: you're forgiven - it will focus pretty much on US and Cal. law anyway
[10:07] Solomon Cortes: So, in case you have not yet seen our agenda (my bad) here it is:
[10:07] Solomon Cortes: 1. Upcoming Seminar Series
2: Careers Fair
3: Credentialling
4: Strategic Planning
5: AOB

Upcoming Seminar Series

[10:08] Solomon Cortes: Cat / Geri - would you like to provide a brief update on our forthcoming seminars?
[10:08] Geri Kuhn: Sure I can
[10:09] Geri Kuhn: October 28, at noon, you will be speaking , Solomon, I hope
[10:09] Geri Kuhn: on Virtual worlds and fraud
[10:09] Solomon Cortes: Yes, I will!
[10:10] Geri Kuhn: November 8, at 12:00 noon , Ben will be speaking on Ethics of practice in virtual worlds
[10:10] Geri Kuhn: And then on November 22, at 12:00 noon, Kate will be speaking on web 2.0 for lawyers
[10:10] Geri Kuhn: This is what we have so far.
[10:10] Rose Springvale: Hi Morgandy
[10:10] Geri Kuhn: If anyone else is interested in speaking, please send me a note.
[10:10] Geri Kuhn: Thanks.
[10:11] You: We have a potential speaker on Legislative history / ethics who I have not lined up yet. That will not be related to SL or virtual law though.
[10:11] Solomon Cortes: Thanks Geri. Any questions - or more volunteers?!!!
[10:11] You: but it will give that all important Ethics MCLE!
[10:11] You: (for you califonians)
[10:12] Legal Writer: Everyone needs ethics, so I think we can all appreciate that.
[10:12] Solomon Cortes: Well, thanks again to Cat and Geri for their continuing hard and excellent work in arranging our programme of seminars, and keeping the momentum going.
[10:12] MystiTool HUD 1.0.23: Entering chat range: Sam4 Courtois (8m), Ida Recreant (10m)
[10:12] You: everyone needs ethics but Californians NEED ethics, by feb 1, if their name starts with H-M
[10:12] Geri Kuhn: last names...
[10:13] You: right
[10:13] You: grin
[10:13] Solomon Cortes: For those of you that haven't already attended a seminar, I should mention that they're high calibre (I'm not talking about my sessions of course), well-attended, and not only good for CLE, but also excellent for networking afterwards.
[10:13] Legal Writer: Ethics hours are always hard to get.
[10:13] Solomon Cortes: I hope you'll all consider coming to them.

Careers Fair

[10:14] Solomon Cortes: The next item on the agenda, is the careers fair. Those of you who attended the last meeting will remember that Zoom Galthie and I had agreed to take forwards a proposal for an international careers fair to be held next year.
[10:14] Solomon Cortes: We will be working on preparing a detailed plan and submitting it for approval by the exec and the membership.
[10:14] Solomon Cortes: In the meantime, I'd just like to talk about timing.
[10:15] Solomon Cortes: Zoom suggested September next year, on the basis that this ought to be the best timing in the US, subject to comments from other members based-abroad...
[10:15] Solomon Cortes: What are people's views?
[10:15] Jayson Watkin: who are the proposed targets of the career fair?
[10:15] Rykk Ferraris: That would be wonderful....I should graduate next December
[10:16] You: law firms / employers, particularly with high tech focus. There are a couple of US firms that have expressed interest - Ben knows more about that
[10:16] Solomon Cortes: (I need to check how this would work from a UK perspective - I think arguably it might be better for us if it were before the Summer - but I'm more than happy to go with the majority view).
[10:17] Jayson Watkin: I meant, who are the potential employees, only law students, lawyers, all legal staff?
[10:17] You: ah
[10:17] Solomon Cortes: God point Jayson - we were thinking primarily law students and junior, qualified lawyers, plus perhaps professional support.
[10:18] Rykk Ferraris: I'm very non-traditional...and will need creative employment avenues. Over 40, currently working in in-vitro diagnostics
[10:18] Solomon Cortes: But I guess I'd be happy for the SLBA to take commission on our first partner move, as well!
[10:18] Juris Amat: Im more inclined to say that fall is best, even though Im also outside the US
[10:18] Solomon Cortes: *good
[10:19] Solomon Cortes: Anyone else with comments on timing?
[10:19] You: maybe we can have tracks for different career stages
[10:19] Jayson Watkin: September does match with other on campus interviewing, which might be good or bad
[10:19] Ida Recreant: Would it be too complicated to have a trial in the spring, with a few employers, with a followup in the fall?
[10:19] Didier Doflug: would it make more sense for these law firms to have an ongoing presence here rather than a one-and-done fair?
[10:19] Ida Recreant: Didier, I think we're thinking along the same llines. . .
[10:20] Juris Amat: wouldn't want to loose that initial enthusiasm though
[10:20] Lexis Looming: A fair like this would be a good hook to get them started
[10:20] Solomon Cortes: Didier - that's a good point, but not the key focus for the fair. However, maybe we should be considering whether the SL BA should be offering facilities / premises related services to law firms interested in mioving in - I guess that's a whole other project!
[10:20] Morgandy Muircastle: I'd be happy to have them, but it's probalby not worth their time with how small of a group we are
[10:20] Jessica Holyoke: perhaps after Ben's speech on the 8th
[10:21] You: we might work with beathan on that, after all, this building is focused on legal occupants.
[10:21] Didier Doflug: I suppose each law firm will have to decide how worth it this is to their goals!
[10:21] ArtWorld Market: If they are interested in virtual law they might prefer a small group at first to learn how this procedure will work here
[10:22] Solomon Cortes: Alright - well Zoom and I will start working on a plan, with a view to having the event (or the main event, if we decide that it makes sense to have a primer event in the Spring) in the Fall.
[10:22] Ida Recreant: Yes, and I like c'at's idea that some are interested already--it wouldl require marketing to the right groups
[10:22] Morgandy Muircastle: yeah, if their coming here, they are probably thinking beyond the second year from a 1st tier school
[10:22] You: how about a job posting/jobs seeking portion of the web board for current assn members?
[10:23] Solomon Cortes: As we said at the last meeting, we'd appreciate volunteers to assist. This could be a great event, but it will require lots of effort and planning, and we'd like to make it as successful as possible.
[10:23] You: (a slightly different topic sorry)'
[10:23] Juris Amat: jobs posting! wow thats a great idea Cat :)
[10:23] Didier Doflug: Also, we shouldn't necessarily be promoting the view the only law firms will handle virtual law? Isn't there a role for the small practicioner?
[10:23] Solomon Cortes: I suggest we put this up as a separate section on the forums, so people can volunteer, provide comments and input on planning etc.
[10:24] Juris Amat: good suggestion Sol
[10:24] Jai Baxter: :P
[10:24] You: one issue with that, Didier, is that SL requires some time inveestment, anyone who will come needs to be at least interested in virtual worlds -- no necessarily practice virtual law tho
[10:24] Solomon Cortes: Alright - any further comments on this? I don't want to cut anyone off in mid-inspiration!
[10:24] Jai Baxter chortles at the "only the big firm" business
[10:24] You: BUT
[10:25] You: the big firms might cough up $ for a booth :D
[10:25] Soro Dagostino: Ahemmm, considering the implosion of several big firms, maybe it won't be an issue . . . :)
[10:25] Jayson Watkin: well, how much are you looking at booth cots?
[10:25] Juris Amat: lol
[10:25] Jayson Watkin: or costs
[10:25] You: no idea, if anything
[10:25] Jayson Watkin: so it might be a better time for smaller firms or solo practitioners
[10:25] You: not anything that would be an obstacle I should think
[10:26] Solomon Cortes: Jayson - perhaps we'll do that is by different costs depending on size of employer
[10:26] Ida Recreant: Charging something is a good idea just to encourage seriousness
[10:26] Solomon Cortes: I get the impression there's a lot of enthusiasm for this in principle.
[10:26] Juris Amat: yes a sliding scale sounds appropriate
[10:26] Didier Doflug: I think the money-at-issue matches up better with small firm or solo fee expectations
[10:27] Didier Doflug: as far as legal issues in virtual worlds
[10:27] Solomon Cortes: Can I ask if you are keen to help shape the plan and be involved that you do volunteer on the forums.
[10:27] Lexis Looming: not necesarily by size of employer but how much the booth renter is willing to pay..bigger booth and display for bigger fee
[10:27] Rose Springvale: wait.. you are thinking of charging people to come into SL to make contacts with SLBA members for a job fair? Isn't that sort of self defeating?
[10:27] Juris Amat: i think everyone should get the same size booth
[10:27] You: maybe donation / sponsorship but not charge for booths
[10:28] You: not een sure it would be booths.... lots to think about
[10:28] Juris Amat: maybe there should be the possibility of purchasing more than one though I suppose
[10:28] Juris Amat: connected or whatever
[10:28] Ida Recreant: hmmm. Rose . . interesting point; I'm just thinking that charging a minimal fee encourages people to take us more seriously
[10:28] Didier Doflug: i agree with the same size booth. its up to the entity to decorate it as extravagantly as they wish
[10:28] Juris Amat: i guess then you end up with different sizes dont cha :)
[10:28] Lexis Looming: well not with prim limits
[10:29] Rose Springvale: it isn't an easy system to come into.. if they come at all, i suspect they are taking it seriously.
[10:29] Solomon Cortes: Okay - well, I can see there are lots of views: Ben and I (plus any volunteers who want to assist with the planning) will come back with some proposals and we can take things forwards from there...
[10:29] Ida Recreant: Tath might be true Rose . . I guess i'm thinking of non-serious users on SL
[10:29] Jessica Holyoke: it may not be that different than buying space on a program, but seriously, if we look at virtual worlds as lowering costs, how much *should* it cost?
[10:29] Lexis Looming: You can count on my assistance for this project Sol
[10:29] Solomon Cortes: Any pressing key high-level suggestions / points at the moment, before we move on?
[10:29] Solomon Cortes: Thanks Lexis!
[10:29] Jai Baxter: hmmm - Isa Il bnot sure that open/free culture as it's developing - and as is increasingly pervasive in young lawyer generation now - really still opbeys that musy-pay-forit maxim :)
[10:30] Solomon Cortes: opbeys?
[10:30] Jai Baxter: :) sorry - o b e y s
[10:30] Juris Amat: lol
[10:30] Jamie Palisades waves an apology for lateness and sits
[10:30] Solomon Cortes: ; 0
[10:30] Lexis Looming: lol I cnat type either
[10:30] Juris Amat: i was ondering about isa ll bnot
[10:30] Juris Amat: :)
[10:30] Ida Recreant: Interesting . . .put me down as a . . .helper . .. as time permits . ..
[10:31] Solomon Cortes: Also, musy-pay?
[10:31] Solomon Cortes: !!!!
[10:31] Didier Doflug: I'll help with the fair also.
[10:31] Juris Amat: *wondering
[10:31] You: i like the open source concept
[10:31] Solomon Cortes: Of course, there won't be a single typo from me now for the rest of the morning.
[10:31] You: we'lll be watching
[10:31] Solomon Cortes: Let's move on!
[10:31] Juris Amat: LOL
[10:31] Ida Recreant: lol . . solomon . . me neither . . .lol
[10:31] Jai Baxter: sigh :) IU left behind my proofreader obsession from Wall Street at the SL door, Sol.
[10:31] Lexis Looming: knee meither
[10:32] Jai Baxter: anyone who wishes to cling to theirs is welcome :)

Credentialling

[10:32] Solomon Cortes: Item 3 - credentialling
[10:32] Solomon Cortes: So - in summary...
[10:33] Solomon Cortes: the ball in terms of taking this forwards was firmly in my court...
[10:33] Solomon Cortes: And, like many of you, I'm sure, I have been wildly busy this past few weeks (economic melt-down hasn't quite hit us yet, though I'm not complacent....)
[10:34] Solomon Cortes: Anyway, I decided I better get my act together and have made some god progress today.
[10:34] Solomon Cortes: Aaaaaghhhhh
[10:34] Solomon Cortes: *good#
[10:34] Didier Doflug: could you explain what "Credentialing" refers to for those who might not know?
[10:34] Jai Baxter: :) God progress - yes I remember that mindset - but I got better eventually
[10:35] Solomon Cortes: Didier - yes, there's lots on it on our forums. Cat, could you provide Didier with a link?
[10:35] Didier Doflug: great thanks
[10:35] Lexis Looming: http://slba.info/forum/YaBB.pl
[10:35] Solomon Cortes: So - for credentialling to work, as well as the process, there are four key elements:
[10:35] Solomon Cortes: 1. The application form.
[10:36] You: whoops Lexis beat me to it, thanks
[10:36] You: http://www.slba.info/forum/YaBB.pl?board=verification
[10:36] Solomon Cortes: 2. The confirmation from the SLBA that a person has been credential checked.
[10:36] Solomon Cortes: 3. Mandatory wording for credential-checked avatars to include in their SL profiles.
[10:36] You: Basically a structured process to verify that SL avatars are owned by a RL lawyer - voluntary - and a fee-based service from SLBA
[10:37] Didier Doflug: very nice
[10:37] Solomon Cortes: 4. A clear and publicly available description for all those interested in the service explaining what it is, and what it does and does not mean to be credential-checked.
[10:38] Solomon Cortes: Lexis Looming and I have been working on this, and a number of you have also provided very helpful input.
[10:38] Solomon Cortes: In terms of progress, we have:
[10:39] Solomon Cortes: 1. The application form - this was finalised and agreed some time ago. (We have also agreed the charge for the service, and a payment system has been built, though not deplyed yet, until we're ready to launch)
[10:39] Solomon Cortes: 2. The confirmation form, confirming that an individual has been credential checked. I have drafted that now, and will put it up on the forums after this meeting.
[10:37] Solomon Cortes: 4. A clear and publicly available description for all those interested in the service explaining what it is, and what it does and does not mean to be credential-checked.
[10:38] Solomon Cortes: Lexis Looming and I have been working on this, and a number of you have also provided very helpful input.
[10:38] Solomon Cortes: In terms of progress, we have:
[10:39] Solomon Cortes: 1. The application form - this was finalised and agreed some time ago. (We have also agreed the charge for the service, and a payment system has been built, though not deplyed yet, until we're ready to launch)
[10:39] Solomon Cortes: 2. The confirmation form, confirming that an individual has been credential checked. I have drafted that now, and will put it up on the forums after this meeting.
[10:40] Solomon Cortes: If anyone would like to review it while we talk now, I am happy tp drop it into a note card, and perhaps give it to Cat (if that's okay) to give to any of you who want. Let me know if you'd like me to do this.
[10:41] You: I can take the card, for anyone who wants it
[10:42] Solomon Cortes: 3. The profile wording. Lexis and I have also prepared a draft of this. At the moment, we're generally happy with the draft, but it's a little long. Lexis, Cat and I are going to work on shortning it, creating a website URL link for the key information. BTW, it's not pages and pages long, but it is probably too long in light of the 500 word limit in SL profiles. However, we should have this worked up fairly soon.
[10:43] Lexis Looming: 500 character limit lol
[10:43] ArtWorld Market: why not have a very short phrase for profiles with a link to a web-based detail page or notecard dispenser
[10:43] Solomon Cortes: Lastly, we need the public description of the service.
[10:44] Jai Baxter smiles and raises hand for question - but no rush
[10:44] Solomon Cortes: This can draw heavily from the confirmation document (as this sets out in detail what the process involves, and what it does / does not confirm).
[10:44] Solomon Cortes: Thanks Jai - I won't be a sec.
[10:44] Jamie Palisades: (happy to give quick read to the confirmaton text if you drop it on me, Solomon)
[10:44] You: that's the plan artworld :) working otu wording
[10:45] Solomon Cortes: As I've timed out for the rest of the day, Cat and Lexis have kindly agreed to work on the draft of the final document.
[10:45] Solomon Cortes: I see this one as key, since it needs to plainly describe the service, but also make it very clear to individuals who may have been meeting with a credential-checked avatar exactly what the check tells them.
[10:46] You: please IM me if you would like Notecard of the Confirmation wording as drafted
[10:46] Solomon Cortes: We do need to be careful that it is not seen as an endorsement - or even that the individual is necessarily qualified to practise at the time of any meeting with a potential client.
[10:46] Solomon Cortes: It just means they were checked on the date of thecheck.
[10:47] Solomon Cortes: I think Cat will aim to have a draft of this document up in the next couple of days.
[10:47] Soro Dagostino: When do we expect roll-out?
[10:47] Solomon Cortes: I suggest that we then ask for any final comments within a week of posting all of the docs. Subject to any necessary final changes or discussions, I am excited to say we'll be ready to launch the service.
[10:48] Solomon Cortes: So, there's no reason why we shouldn't have launched I hope before the next general meeting.
[10:48] Solomon Cortes: Alright - I'm ready for questions!
[10:48] Jai Baxter: We chatted a while ago about "referral service" liaibility, andcrafting this activity avoiding it. ceratinyl an issue under California law for example - and god forbid people should view all SL activity as venued in California :) but I wouldn't discount that risk .. so ...
[10:48] Jai Baxter: .. how are we grappling with that?
[10:48] Jai Baxter: .. how are we grappling with that?
[10:49] Solomon Cortes: Jai - I think the principal way we are seeking to deal with that is by being very clear what being credential-checked involves and actually means.
[10:49] Solomon Cortes: I'm not sure if you have seen the confirmation docusment draft - this may help.
[10:50] Solomon Cortes: *document
[10:50] You: it certainly does read like it was written by a lawyer :D
[10:50] Morgandy Muircastle: how does an avatar find out someone is credentialed?
[10:51] Jai Baxter: SO far as I am aware, several jurisdictions have statutorily defined rules, or ethics pronouncements , about what does and does not crate liability for a referrer .. can I suggest that we invite SLBA members to take a look at our plans from the perspective of their local rules? That's all :)
[10:51] Jai Baxter: that's "create" Sol :)
[10:51] Solomon Cortes: Well, we assume a credentail-checked avatar will want to tell people. It will also be in their profile. I guess we could also keep (and periodically publish?) a register. What do people think about a register?
[10:52] Legal Writer: A register makes sense.
[10:52] Juris Amat: good sugesstion Jai. I think all of this must be viewed from the perspective of what is required in ones own jurisdiction
[10:52] You: click blue box for notecard
[10:52] Morgandy Muircastle: if you have a disclaimer at the entrance to the register, that would probably do it for CA
[10:52] Lexis Looming: I think we should as a counter check against any one claiming credentials that has not received them
[10:52] You decline 'Credential Confirmation' ( http://slurl.com/secondlife/Malfelonius/204/40/62 ) from Object.
[10:51] Solomon Cortes: Well, we assume a credentail-checked avatar will want to tell people. It will also be in their profile. I guess we could also keep (and periodically publish?) a register. What do people think about a register?
[10:52] Legal Writer: A register makes sense.
[10:52] Juris Amat: good sugesstion Jai. I think all of this must be viewed from the perspective of what is required in ones own jurisdiction
[10:52] You: click blue box for notecard
[10:52] Morgandy Muircastle: if you have a disclaimer at the entrance to the register, that would probably do it for CA
[10:52] Lexis Looming: I think we should as a counter check against any one claiming credentials that has not received them
[10:52] You decline 'Credential Confirmation' ( http://slurl.com/secondlife/Malfelonius/204/40/62 ) from Object.
[10:53] Solomon Cortes: All these points are very sensible, and I agree.
[10:53] Ida Recreant: REgister is a good idea; that would be abackup.
[10:53] Juris Amat: *suggestion
[10:53] Lexis Looming: The profile language will state the SL Bar Ass'n will provide the information so we have to have a way to do so
[10:53] You: register could also offer as a benefit to credentialling lawyers, a link to site or promotional info
[10:53] Jamie Palisades: didn't quite follow that Lexis - check which?
[10:53] You: and/or slurl
[10:54] Morgandy Muircastle: it's like checking the RL bar page to see if someone is really listed. I would think someone hiring a credentialed atty would want to go look at the register.
[10:54] Lexis Looming: If an avatar wants to verify that a lawyer claiming credentials really has them, Jamie
[10:54] You: so if they say SLBA credentialled, the avatar looking to consult with them can come to our website and confirm/deny
[10:55] Ida Recreant: I ike the idea of links to urls/slurls but they can sometimes be problematic because we'd want to periodically check whether the links are valid or not . . .
[10:55] Rose Springvale: query?
[10:55] Solomon Cortes: I think that's right...so the profile wording should contain a link to the register URL
[10:55] Lexis Looming: Yes Cat, and it would be consistent with the language we are requiring the lawyer to put in his/her profile
[10:55] You: as comunications VP I can do that, but don't necessarily want to bequeath something that's a hasssssle to my sucessor
[10:55] Jamie Palisades: ahhh - got it, thanks, 15 watt lightblub appeard over my head now
[10:56] Solomon Cortes: Jamie - got what (or should I say 'watt'?)
[10:56] Lexis Looming: thanks for keeping the watts down and not blinding us
[10:56] You: Jamie is a "green" avatar
[10:56] Juris Amat: smiles
[10:57] Solomon Cortes: Alright - we're getting close to session end.
[10:57] Solomon Cortes: Any further questions / comments re credentialling?
[10:57] Rose Springvale: the card implies that the slba will give the credentialed avatar's information upon request by a client.. .how do you ascertain that a client relationship exists before disclosing?
[10:57] You: it will be public info
[10:57] Solomon Cortes: Rose - I think we'd go to the named avatar.
[10:57] You: ?
[10:58] You: shouldn't that be potential client?
[10:58] Solomon Cortes: If they said the request was not from a client, we'd go back to the requester with that information.
[10:58] Rose Springvale: i'm confused
[10:59] Rose Springvale: i'd say go ahead and confirm credentialling
[10:59] Solomon Cortes: Rose - go ahead, please?
[10:59] Rose Springvale: but i think we get into trouble giving out rl info to even potential clients
[10:59] Rose Springvale: taht should be between the attorny and client
[10:59] Morgandy Muircastle: is it ethical to practice as an avatar and not disclose your RL identity? I understand SL privacy of avatars RL identities, but don't you give that up if you're practicing law in world?
[11:00] Lexis Looming: The applicant agrees by asking for credentials
[11:00] Jayson Watkin: if the RL info is already in the 1st life tab, then there is no liability
[11:00] Jayson Watkin: well, ToS liability
[11:00] Rose Springvale: i dont' believe we actually do practice in sl toe the exclusion of 1L
[11:00] You: agreed, sl is a platform but not an independent practice
[11:00] Solomon Cortes: Surely in principle not a problem if as part of the application the attorney has confirmed we can provide the information on request? The only gating issue would be if the attorney avatar has confirmed the individual is a client
[11:00] Rose Springvale: there is no SL law license.. if i'm crededtialed it is in 1L
[11:01] Jai Baxter: :) good distinction Jayson, and exactly the point I think Rose is making about collateral liability to SLBA :)
[11:01] Lexis Looming: A lawyer is a lawyer is a lawyer wherever and whenever under Oklahoma Ethics rules
[11:01] Morgandy Muircastle: ahhh
[11:01] Rose Springvale: but i dont' take everyone who wants to be my client
[11:01] Rose Springvale: here or "there"
[11:01] Jessica Holyoke: now that's a great thing to research, when is a lawyer not a lawyer
[11:02] Lexis Looming: Rose so you would be asked before the inormation would be given
[11:02] Sam4 Courtois: I'm curious as to whether an attorney practicing law in SL is practicing where he (or she) is physically, where the client is, or where the server is?
[11:02] Didier Doflug: physical location
[11:02] Rose Springvale: and i sure don't want to give out my rl info to anyone in sl... and Lexis, i'm sorry, but that seems to defeat the purpose of independant credentialing...
[11:02] You: where are you practicing if you do a phone consult with someone out of state?
[11:02] Jai Baxter: great concern to keep in mind, Sam :)
[11:02] Rykk Ferraris: Just like on the phone. SL is merely a communications medium.
[11:03] Jessica Holyoke: Credentialling isn't mandatory, its only for those who want to give out their information
[11:03] Solomon Cortes: Given the time, can I suggest that we move on. Perhaps we can discuss points of detail after the close of formal proceedings?
[11:03] Legal Writer: I have been reading some Virginia authority saying that physical location is controlling for phone conversation.
[11:03] Didier Doflug: whats the real difference between posting real info in SL or on your website?
[11:03] Lexis Looming: Rose I will be happy to answer any questions after the meeting
[11:03] Jessica Holyoke: Terms of Service
[11:03] Sam4 Courtois: When I give advice over the telephone, it is about Alaska or Washington law where I am licensed
[11:03] Jessica Holyoke: oh Didier, Terms of Service
[11:03] Solomon Cortes: So, last item on the agenda...
[11:03] Jai Baxter: Sol, how about an elective session for those who want to further kick this issue around?
[11:04] Solomon Cortes: Jai - that would be fine. Do you mean immediately after close, or another time?
[11:04] Jai Baxter: that would step on Cat's CLE :)
[11:04] You: we certainly have plenty of room to our right for subgroups today :D
[11:04] Solomon Cortes: Well - it depends on the length of the session!
[11:05] Jai Baxter: ah - sure, why not :)
[11:05] Solomon Cortes: Jai - please feel free to propose a time immediately after close for all those interested and we can confirm scheduling then,

Strategic Planning

[11:05] Solomon Cortes: So - last item>
[11:05] Solomon Cortes: Strategic plannning.
[11:05] Solomon Cortes: Legal - would you like to speak on this?
[11:05] Legal Writer: Yes
[11:06] Legal Writer: I have been planning a path forward for our strategic planning process to assist in our thinking about what the association should do in the next 3-5 years.
[11:06] Legal Writer: My thinking is that we should finalize a mission statement, which I introduced at the last meeting.
[11:07] Legal Writer: SInce then, I have worked on a statement of goals.
[11:07] Legal Writer: The statement is brief, but we can use it to flesh out a strategic plan over time.
[11:07] Legal Writer: So my proposal would be to post in a new "strategic planning" part of the forum our proposed mission statement and goals.
[11:08] Legal Writer: We can vet them first with the executive board, and then post them.
[11:08] Legal Writer: If everyone agrees with this process, we can say that folks should comment on the statement and goals, so that we get all input by the next meeting.
[11:09] Legal Writer: We can then create a group of people to consider the plan and what we want to say in it.
[11:09] Legal Writer: What do people think about this process?
[11:09] Lexis Looming: I agree the forums is always a good place to start
[11:09] ArtWorld Market: good idea
[11:09] Rykk Ferraris: Works for me
[11:09] Didier Doflug: sounds quite democratic! good plan
[11:09] Morgandy Muircastle: i agree
[11:10] Solomon Cortes: And agreed from me!
[11:10] Legal Writer: Are there particular people who want to help develop the strategic plan?
[11:10] Juris Amat: I'll volunteer to assist
[11:10] Didier Doflug: i'll offer to help out
[11:10] Solomon Cortes: Legal - I'd be happy to input. I would think Ben will be interested in doing so, too.
[11:11] Lexis Looming: Count me in
[11:11] Legal Writer: OK, great!
[11:11] Cat Galileo never wants to see another 'mind map' again
[11:11] Jamie Palisades makes polite slightly skeptic noises about the scope ... plan and process sounds good .. but an ambition to be simple and not too baroque might fit the spirit of the group :) maybe should wait to see what size and desnity of text is contemplated
[11:11] Legal Writer: Thank you all.
[11:11] Legal Writer: Jamie, I hope not too dense either.
[11:12] Legal Writer: OK, great
[11:12] Jai Baxter: Legal, happy to be on a team of brainstormers if you like
[11:12] Morgandy Muircastle: I'm interested, as well.
[11:12] Jamie Palisades: I'm on same page as Cat :) simplicity good
[11:12] Legal Writer: Thank you for helping. I have written down your names.
[11:12] Solomon Cortes: Thanks Legal, and everyone else.

Any Other Business

[11:12] Legal Writer: Solomon, can I follow up on the tax issue from last month?
[11:13] Solomon Cortes: Cat - do you mind if we run on slightly?
[11:13] You: I have a brief announcement/reminder about the website(s), especially for newer folks, too
[11:13] You: sure why not, maybe people will stick around for my cle :()
[11:13] Legal Writer: Real quickly
[11:13] Juris Amat: I'm sorry but I must bid my good byes...bedtime in Croatia...at least for my toddlers...
[11:13] Solomon Cortes: Cat if we can go on for a couple more minutes, let please have Legal and your other business.
[11:13] Solomon Cortes: Thanks.
[11:14] Legal Writer: Solomon, you asked me whether taking in $ for CLE might be taxable.
[11:14] Solomon Cortes: (Thanks Juris - and bye for now).
[11:14] Lexis Looming: Bye Juris
[11:14] Legal Writer: Looking a little bit into it, it appears that Congress is considering taxation of solely in-world income.
[11:15] Legal Writer: So under that possibility, if we are taking in L$ for CLE, would could be potentially taxes.
[11:15] Legal Writer: Taxed, that is.
[11:15] Legal Writer: But the sense of a committee looking into the tax issue, is that the US is NOT ready to actually tax in-world activity today.
[11:15] Lexis Looming: can we pay in L$?
[11:15] You: yes
[11:16] Lexis Looming: I mean the taxes
[11:16] Legal Writer: From a Cal. perspective, we can have an "unincorporated association" that has a charitable purpose.
[11:16] Jayson Watkin: but there is the option of paying in other currencies?
[11:16] You: oh - probably not lol
[11:16] Legal Writer: So we do not need to incorporate to be exempt.
[11:16] Lexis Looming: L$ are not money
[11:16] Lexis Looming: they are a license
[11:16] Lexis Looming: according to the tos
[11:16] Legal Writer: But we may bear personal liability for our activities for the assoication, which would be a risk minimized by incorporation as a nonprofit.
[11:17] Jayson Watkin: other than server location, is there a reason why the SLBA would be a california association?
[11:17] Legal Writer: So I think we're not at risk from a tax perspective, but that will change.
[11:17] Jayson Watkin: and then if we can pay in L$, US $ or Euros, wouldn't there be a tax avoidance issue?
[11:17] Legal Writer: At the last meeting, we talked about a Cal. nonprofit -- in part because I could incorporate it for free.
[11:18] Jai Baxter: hmmm
[11:18] Jai Baxter: I have to admit
[11:18] Jai Baxter: A lot of SL institutiosn I know resist that course
[11:18] Legal Writer: I also would say that our risk of personal liability for what we do is low at the moment.
[11:18] Jai Baxter: for global reach reasons :)
[11:18] Solomon Cortes: Thanks Legal - I still favour incorporating if we can afford it. If only for the liability limitation point. If you can incorporate it for free, I think we should seriously consider this. Any reasons in your mind NOT to do this?
[11:18] Solomon Cortes: If none, I would move that we incorporate.
[11:18] Jai Baxter: isn;t SL already plently over-anchored in US law?
[11:19] Legal Writer: When I say free, I mean free of attorneys' fees. There are still may be filing fees.
[11:19] You: incorporating bears certain ongoing requirements for corporate record keeping
[11:19] Sam4 Courtois: Since we are global, shouldn't we incorporate in a tax free jurisdiction like Grand Cayman
[11:19] Jai Baxter: But if this is a majority UISA crowd, maybe not an issue to the assoc membership
[11:19] You: not sure what Cal Sec of State charges for non profits
[11:19] Lexis Looming: and informational returns
[11:19] Legal Writer: And more formality of our documentation.
[11:19] Jai Baxter: it's nonzero, Cat :)
[11:19] Rose Springvale: its 25 usd in texas
[11:19] You: i figured
[11:19] Rose Springvale: pluse you have the ongoing reporting
[11:19] Jayson Watkin: and there is an issue that we have a california attorney now, but what about in the future?
[11:19] Soro Dagostino: Annual reports to the AG.
[11:19] Lexis Looming: and we would have to have a registered agent
[11:20] Jai Baxter: aye and there's the rub rose :0 we see a lot of started-ten-abandoned RL corpoate critters in SL :)
[11:20] Rose Springvale: yep... i think its a mess
[11:20] Solomon Cortes: Legal, could you (or could anyone else) incorporate us and provide a basic co sec service at minimal cost - in return for the undying and eternal gratitude of the group?
[11:21] Rose Springvale: i'm still not sure what we gain Solomon
[11:21] Soro Dagostino: I agree.
[11:21] ArtWorld Market: In some states, I believe Vermont is one, you can have your primary place of business in a virtual world.
[11:21] Legal Writer: I would be willing to incorporate and be registered agent.
[11:21] Soro Dagostino: Potential risk seems minimal.
[11:21] Legal Writer: But I think we should be sure that the paperwork and documentation is worth it.
[11:22] Legal Writer: If we faced tax liability right now, it would be urgent.
[11:22] You: CA fee for Articles of Incorporation (Domestic Nonprofit Mutual Benefit, Public Benefit or Religious Corporation) $ 30.00
[11:22] Jai Baxter: um :)
[11:22] Legal Writer: Right now, it's not urgent. But I think if the group decides that it wants to do it, we can do it.
[11:22] Lexis Looming: If we have liability risks in other areas..e.g. credentialing, would incorporation tie us to a certain jurisdiction's law?
[11:22] Rose Springvale: sorry, but .. really? what kind of net income do we have?
[11:22] Geri Kuhn: We have about L$90,000
[11:22] Solomon Cortes: To answer the questions quickly, I favour incorporating because I believe that we do have some risks (not huge, but not negligible) which, unless we incorporate, the officers and members would potentially be exposed to personally.
[11:22] Legal Writer: I just want to make sure we are sure we want to do it.
[11:22] Jessica Holyoke: depends on how much we charge for booths
[11:22] Jai Baxter: mr president can I suggets that any incorporation act occur after (a) statement of costs/duties to group then (b) vote?
[11:23] Rose Springvale favors eliminating income with expenses to further the mission
[11:24] Didier Doflug: perhaps incorporation is best put off to the next meeting so we have time to investigate some of these questions
[11:24] Solomon Cortes: Absolutely. legal - could you prehaps confirm costs of incorporating and any necessary ongoing costs, so we can work out (a) if we can afford it and (b) if so, whether to go ahead (though - subject to affordability) I think I've said my piece on that!
[11:24] Jai Baxter: :) as they say, to a child with a hammer, ecverythign is a nail.. just want to make suire that to a group of lawyers and law students, everything is not automatically a corporation :)
[11:24] Legal Writer: the $30 USD sounds right.
[11:24] Solomon Cortes: Okay - thanks everyone.
[11:24] Lexis Looming: Are there Non Profit LLC's in california
[11:24] You: Folks, I hate to rush us but if people start arriving for the class, I would like to have spac for them and to help them set up their audio, etc
[11:24] Legal Writer: No, Lexis.
[11:24] Solomon Cortes: Any other business?
[11:25] Lexis Looming: ty
[11:25] You: announcement from me
[11:25] Jai Baxter raises hand fro a quick good-of-the-house agenda point, looking at his watch
[11:25] Jai Baxter: Cat first :)
[11:25] Solomon Cortes: Jai - go ahead.
[11:25] Jai Baxter: ?
[11:25] You: please check out our website, forums, and networking site at slba.info
[11:25] Solomon Cortes: Sorry - Cat: go ahead!
[11:25] You: that's it
[11:25] Solomon Cortes: Thanks. Jai?
[11:25] Jai Baxter: Ok. I suggets an informal group meet a week from today, here, same time slot, to further that credneitialing liabilities disussion. Make ense?
[11:26] Jai Baxter: (having run out of time today, no worries, we need to get the CLE started)
[11:26] Jai Baxter: or two weeks, whatever :)
[11:26] Rykk Ferraris: Unfortunately, I have a previous engagement
[11:26] Rykk Ferraris: ciao for now
[11:27] Jai Baxter: Sol, do the SLBA web boards have enough participation and use to have a threaded chat ther feaible, instead?
[11:27] Lexis Looming: Great Meeting Sol Thank You.
[11:27] Jai Baxter: I dunno what percentage of our actives actually go there, frankly
[11:27] You: IMO, not really
[11:27] Solomon Cortes: Can I suggest people let Jai know when might be good for a discussion, if they want to participate, so he can try to work on a time and get an announcement out.
[11:27] Jai Baxter nods at Cat
[11:27] Jai Baxter: OK, good, will do. And I will message the Board, thanks, Sol, done
[11:28] Solomon Cortes: Right - well, I feel bad as I'm normally good on time management, but made a big point about ti today and blew it.
[11:28] Solomon Cortes: Sorry Cat - thanks for your patience.
[11:28] Solomon Cortes: And thank you as ever to everyone who attended.
[11:28] Legal Writer: Sorry, also. It was partly my fault.
[11:28] Solomon Cortes: It was great to see you.
[11:28] Sam4 Courtois: TY Solomon

[11:28] Solomon Cortes: This meeting is closed!

  

---

Created on ... September 13, 2008