Who Let the Dogs Out? (Let Sleeping Dogs Lie)
The Florida Bar recently ruled that the ad put up by law firm Pape and Chandler is an affront to the legal profession (read the Reuters article here). The ad features a drawing of a pit bull with a spiked collar used as the logo of the firm (see the ad below). An earlier article touching on this appeared in law.com while discussing the crackdown on lawyer ads.
Speaking as a dog-lover first and a lawyer only second, I say this ad is an affront to pit bulls and apologies (to the dogs) are in order. In fact, my source of concern is not the logo
or its use of the pit bull as their symbol. Rather, I think the Florida Bar should be more concerned with the firm’s web site and the pictures there (see a sample image to your right [no, not to your right side, I mean the right side of the screen …. facing you …. just look at the darn picture]). With every sort of pun intended, the state bar appears to be barking up the wrong tree especially considering that an earlier decision by a Florida judge declared said advertising as protected free speech. Here’s a link to the PDF copy of the decision. Legal ethics and good taste are distinct issues but are sometimes mixed up. Better stick with the former (which, however lacking, should be innate to lawyers) where the rules are set rather than the more nebulous concept of what is tasteful (and which, unfortunately, does not come as naturally to members of the bar). The rule of thumb would be, if there is disagreement such that opinions vary and the bar is divided – it would most probably be because we’re dealing with matters of taste rather than the ethical standards of lawyers. I’d like to think, this time speaking as a lawyer first, that we have a fair amount of understanding with regard to what is unethical – or at least enough to agree on something. The rest can be treated as white noise.
Speaking as a dog-lover first and a lawyer only second, I say this ad is an affront to pit bulls and apologies (to the dogs) are in order. In fact, my source of concern is not the logo
or its use of the pit bull as their symbol. Rather, I think the Florida Bar should be more concerned with the firm’s web site and the pictures there (see a sample image to your right [no, not to your right side, I mean the right side of the screen …. facing you …. just look at the darn picture]). With every sort of pun intended, the state bar appears to be barking up the wrong tree especially considering that an earlier decision by a Florida judge declared said advertising as protected free speech. Here’s a link to the PDF copy of the decision. Legal ethics and good taste are distinct issues but are sometimes mixed up. Better stick with the former (which, however lacking, should be innate to lawyers) where the rules are set rather than the more nebulous concept of what is tasteful (and which, unfortunately, does not come as naturally to members of the bar). The rule of thumb would be, if there is disagreement such that opinions vary and the bar is divided – it would most probably be because we’re dealing with matters of taste rather than the ethical standards of lawyers. I’d like to think, this time speaking as a lawyer first, that we have a fair amount of understanding with regard to what is unethical – or at least enough to agree on something. The rest can be treated as white noise.
posted by male73 at 9:39 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home