First up is Chair of the SCL Trustee Board,
Mark O’Conor. Mark is a Partner & Chair of the London
Client Group at DLA Piper UK LLP in London
What makes IT law different from other
areas of law and why did you choose to work in this sector?
For me it’s the crossroads of essential
contract law, dashes of competition law, knowing enough to be dangerous in IP,
together with a changing and increasingly essential aspect of our lives; the
way we use and deploy technology to function in life, business, and education.
Plus I think we have a real responsibility to ensure that we demystify the
issues, ensure that we are business enablers, and help to get the balance right
between freedom and regulation.
Why did I choose to work in this? I found
myself studying Law and Information Systems, and it coalesced in a thesis
concerning software copyright and alternate ways of protecting software…next
thing I knew I was applying for a training contract with firms who advised on
tech, IP and telecoms, ending up at Bird & Bird (renowned at the time as
the only law firm where associates each had a PC…but that was ’92).
How did you get your start in the sector?
Sneakily I decided to interview partners at
the law firms I was applying for, to add their thoughts into my Uni thesis. I
was then able to make a nuisance of myself by sending them copies, hoping to
demonstrate a real interest in the sector. When I was about to qualify, I was
taken for a drink by a really well-meaning corporate partner who asked me if I
was really sure that I wanted to do ‘this computer stuff?’ saying that there
was a risk that it would disappear in a few years. Ah well…
What is the single biggest issue facing IT
law over the next 10 years and what is the most exciting tech law development
on the horizon? Are they the same?
Tricky to focus on a single issue and data
has to be part of any answer here; ownership of data, use of data, profiling,
theft of data and so on will continue to exercise lawyers and business alike.
However I am most interested in the developments in AI and machine learning and
the legal, ethical, financial, social impacts as we move (to a greater or
lesser extent) to what some are calling the ‘post-job era’.
You’re asked to reapply for your job. If
you’re unconvincing, you’ll be replaced by a robot. What would you say?
I’d be delighted to see that I’d failed the
Turing Test.
Who is your tech law hero and why?
Richard Stallman of MIT every time. I love
the eternally recursive GNU’s Not Unix and the whole copyleft and free software
foundation piece. I saw him speak passionately against a software patent in the
90s and was blown away.
Sue McLean, partner in the IT/Commercial
Practice Group in Baker McKenzie’s London office, gives us her answers.
What makes IT law different from other areas
of law and why did you choose to work in this sector?
I love working in tech law because the law
is always playing catch-up. New technology means new legal issues and
challenges, which means that I’m always learning. When I started my career, the
internet was new. Then we had to grapple with the emergence of cloud and social
media. Five years ago, it was the internet of things, robotics. Today it’s
blockchain and AI. There’s also a huge variety in my work. In the same week, I
can be working on a multi-million pound IT outsourcing deal, advising a
technology company on the legal implications of rolling out its new business
model across Europe and advising a blockchain start-up on its licence terms.
How did you get your start in the sector?
I spent the last six months of my training
contract at Pinsent Curtis in the IP/IT department. When I wasn’t supporting a
major patent trial and other contentious IP work, I was involved in negotiating
a major outsourcing project with a government department and advising clients
about this new-fangled thing called ‘e-commerce’. I didn’t have a tech
background but found the tech work fascinating and didn’t look back.
What is the single biggest issue facing IT
law over the next 10 years and what is the most exciting tech law development
on the horizon? Are they the same?
There are so many ethical, legal and policy
issues with exciting new technology like blockchain and AI. I am fascinated to
see how our legal frameworks flex to deal with these challenges and how the
legal sector adapts. I’m not fatalistic; my instinct is that code will not
replace law, and lawyers will not be replaced by AI, but I have no doubt our
roles are going to change as the technology matures.
You’re asked to reapply for your job. If
you’re unconvincing, you’ll be replaced by a robot. What would you say?
Smart contracts are not smart, nor
contracts. I can tell you why.
Who is your tech law hero and why?
My colleague, Harry Small. Not only is he
one of the founding fathers of tech law in the UK, he has been a tireless
champion for LGBT+ rights in the legal sector and beyond. It was terrific to
see him recognised last year when he was named Stonewall’s Global Senior
Champion.
Consultant Solicitor at Keystone Law and
Chair of the SCL Editorial Advisory Board, Simon Deane-Johns addresses the
questions
What makes IT law different from other
areas of law and why did you choose to work in this sector?
I arrived in the sector with my first job
in the UK, in the Reuters legal department in early 1995, and never left it. I
think the difference with other sectors may be that following the technology
and data can take you into the widest possible range of countries, industries,
activities and scenarios. Other specialisms, such as insolvency or corporate, may
have a similar exposure, but the focus in those cases, for example, will be
more on the corporate entity itself rather than the operational aspects of its
activities.
How did you get your start in the sector?
I arrived in London in late 1994 as a Sydney
barrister of four years’ call but without a job here. A friend who was then a
senior lawyer at Reuters suggested I try for a short-term consultancy in the
Reuters legal department to help with overflow work, to tide me over while I
looked around the market, and she introduced me to the UK legal director. I
started on a one-month contract with a week’s notice period in February 1995,
helping negotiate software and data licences for Reuters’ financial information
services. By May 1996 I was employed in Reuters’ New York office negotiating
Reuters’ agreements with investment banks and other customers (including a news
deal with AOL). In July 1997, I landed a job as an Associate in the
Communication & Technology group at DLA back in London where I was asked to
focus on ‘information services’, which quickly became known as ‘e-commerce’.
What is the single biggest issue facing IT
law over the next 10 years and what is the most exciting tech law development
on the horizon? Are they the same?
How to make distributed ledgers work
reliably and cost effectively.
You’re asked to reapply for your job. If
you’re unconvincing, you’ll be replaced by a robot. What would you say?
I would emphasise all the discretionary
elements of my role, which require, for example, engagement with humans and the
assessment of human behaviour and potential sources of dissatisfaction amongst
customers and suppliers, as well as decisions on how to pre-empt or resolve
those behavioural issues – as opposed to aspects of my role that might rely more
on data or the ability to engage with data or machines. I would also try to
infuse every aspect of the re-hiring process itself with as much positive
evidence of the human approach as possible. But I would also look for another
role in parallel…
Who is your tech law hero and why?
Nicholas Negroponte, the founder and
Chairman Emeritus of Massachusetts Institute of Technology’s Media Lab. I was
given his 1995 book Being Digital by the General Counsel of Reuters NY in 1996.
His thinking inspired me to focus on IT and IT services that support people’s
actual or desired activities, rather than technology or services that will only
be adopted if people change their behaviour; and has driven countless decisions
since then.
Managing Director of Decoded Legal and SCL
Trustee, Neil Brown gives us his answers.
What makes IT law different from other
areas of law and why did you choose to work in this sector?
It’s dead simple: I love being close to the
technology, and close to businesses doing interesting and exciting things.
When I look at a service which someone is
using, or a product in someone’s house or on someone’s phone, and think ‘I had
a hand in shaping that’, that’s a great feeling.
‘IT law’ covers a multitude of sins, and I
spend most of my time working on reasonably geeky Internet, telecoms and
technology stuff — geeky from both legal and technical perspectives. I don’t
find working on contracts much fun, and I wouldn’t want to be a litigator, but
if someone wants a hand with their communications network or service, or is
wondering about the legal implications of some exciting new product, or just
wants some pragmatic, grounded advice on how to solve a business problem
they’ve got, count me in.
I also love the breadth of issues to
explore and learn and shape — I’m always finding that there’s ‘something else’
to think about. The downside, of course, is that I feel perpetually ignorant,
and that, the more I read and research, the more I realise I don’t know…
How did you get your start in the sector?
When I was at university, I was pretty sure
that I wanted to be a family lawyer. I had done all my work experience in
family law firms, and was writing my dissertation on a family law topic.
And, one evening, I had an epiphany and
thought ‘this really isn’t what I want to do for my career’.
I switched my dissertation to the liability
of communications providers for content transmitted over what was then the
nascent 3G cellular networks, and wrote to communication companies asking if
they might offer me some work experience in their legal team.
Vodafone replied, interviewed me, and
offered me a summer’s work experience. Then work experience at Christmas. And
then a training contract. And I stayed there for 10 very happy years, getting
the most amazing grounding in tech law.
What is the single biggest issue facing IT
law over the next 10 years and what is the most exciting tech law development
on the horizon? Are they the same?
I’ve no idea! My general feeling, though,
is that while the pace of technological change is rapid, the skills of an ‘IT
lawyer’ are unlikely to change too much. Clearly, keeping up to date with the
technology and its implications, and on the (more slowly) shifting legal
environment, is a necessity but, beyond that, who knows…
I’m pretty cautious about knee-jerk
reactions to technological change, and demands for new, technology-specific,
laws — this tends to lead to legislation which is outdated very quickly and
impedes innovation, and which is, at best, inconsistent with established legal
principles. So, whatever changes might happen, step back, see how things pan
out, and apply common sense and existing frameworks, rather than falling for
the ‘something must be done’ fallacy.
You’re asked to reapply for your job. If
you’re unconvincing, you’ll be replaced by a robot. What would you say?
‘Don’t be stupid.’
There’s plenty written about jobs being
taken by robots but, in the foreseeable future at least, I see robots
supporting lawyers, not replacing them.
Who is your tech law hero and why?
Far too many to list.
Caroline Wilson, whose IT law course at
university started me down this track, and Ian Lloyd, Steve Saxby and David
Mellor, from whom I’ve learned so much since. Lilian Edwards, too, for her
numerous articles and insights, and fascinating conversations over the years.
Larry Lessig, without whom, I’d question
whether we would have ‘computer law’ as we know it today. His writings on the
need for copyright reform helped me appreciate that challenging the status quo
is not just acceptable but is vital, and his discourse on ‘code as regulation’
— built on by Yochai Benkler and Andrew Murray (whose explanation of the
concept of ‘regulatory pinch points’ remains the best available, in my opinion)
— influenced my thinking about regulation, and the role of technology in
society, massively.
James Boyle, for his clear elucidation of
the public domain and the dangers of tacit acceptance of the barbed wire of
‘digital rights management’, and David Bollier on the concept of a ‘commons’.
It is imperative that, in a time of increasing attacks on platforms, defending
a space for innovation, expression and sharing of thoughts and ideas against
the encroachment of private rights is fundamental.
There are plenty of practising lawyers,
colleagues, and friends whom I admire greatly too, and there is always the risk
that, in naming names, I inadvertently offend someone, so I’m not even going to
try.
