Quantum Leap? Development of new tech gives lawyers plenty to think about

Episode Notes

Transcript

Announcer:

Welcome to the ABA Journal, Legal Rebels Podcast, where we talk to men and women who are remaking the legal profession, changing the way the law is practiced and setting standards that will guide us into the future.

Victor Li:

I don’t know about you, but I still have nightmares about high school physics. Newton’s law, Pascal’s laws, velocity and vectors, electricity and magnetism. All of that was like French to me. And I guess in Palos Cal’s case, that was literal. Once I finished that year, I never took another physics class again. So I never even got close to learning about quantum mechanics. And I suspect many lawyers are probably in the same boat as me. Well, we all might want to start learning about it. Quantum mechanics stands out as an area with significant legal implications, particularly in the emerging field of quantum computing, which has yet to reach full commercial viability. Proponents believe it will eventually be able to solve complex problems that remain beyond the reach of traditional computers. Opening the door to breakthroughs across a wide range of fields. Maybe it could deepen our understanding of diseases and lead to more effective treatments or cures.

Maybe it can organize complex logistics and supply chains, enable the design of new materials and enhance generative AI and machine learning. Perhaps most critically, its impact on cybersecurity could be profound, as quantum computing may render current encryption standards obsolete and necessitate the need for more advanced security methods. My name is Victor Li and I’m assistant managing editor for the ABA Journal. My guest today is Paul Steimers. Paul is a partner in the Washington DC office of Holland &Knight, where he serves as co-lead of the federal government affairs practice. He focuses on emerging technology, including commercial space flight, quantum tech, and AI. Paul is here to talk about issues relating to quantum technology and what we can expect from a legal standpoint and how it could help lawyers down the line. Really, he’s just going to talk about what the heck quantum computing is, because I sure as hell don’t know.

Welcome to the show, Paul.

Paul Stimers:

Thank you, Victor. It’s a pleasure to be here.

Victor Li:

I just gave the very quick elevator version of your bio. Can you tell me a little bit more about yourself and your background?

Paul Stimers:

Sure. Thank you. For the last 25 years or so, I’ve been working at the intersection of advanced and disruptive technology and policy. And whether that’s been nanotechnology and helping create the National Nanotechnology Initiative in the early 2000s, or working with the commercial space flight industry from its inception through today, or founding the Quantum Industry Coalition back in 2017 and working on quantum policy issues straight through, now into AI policy. It’s always been a matter of understanding new and important technologies and helping policymakers both understand and figure out what to do about them.

Victor Li:

So what drew you to the emerging technology and those kind of fields of study? I mean, that’s not a very obvious area of study for a lot of lawyers. What was it that drew you to that?

Paul Stimers:

I like the opportunity to do something new. Almost everything that humanity does is about subsistence. It’s about staying alive, and that’s obviously very important, but every once in a while we unlock a new capability. We do something that we’ve never, ever been able to do before, whether that’s leave the ground and then leave our planet or solve entirely new kinds of problems through new computing. And it appeals to me not just because that’s a new ability and a new capability for us as humans, but it’s also something that unlocks new areas of law and policy that we have an opportunity to create and hopefully try to get right so that we can develop farther and faster than we otherwise might have.

Victor Li:

So I mean, obviously with lawyers, I mean, the stereotype, and I kind of alluded to this in the intro, is that they don’t really … They may not be the most tech savvy, they may not be the most science savvy. The joke is there’s a reason why we all went to law school, right? Because we didn’t do well in science. And that obviously wasn’t case for you, but that was definitely the case for me. But has it been your experience dealing with lawyers and just people in the legal profession that there has been that kind of resistance to either embrace technology or give it a chance or maybe just be a little more suspicious or risk averse when it comes to that?

Paul Stimers:

Well, I’ve been fortunate in that the firms I’ve been involved with, and in particular Holland and Knight, have had very strong intellectual property practices with lawyers who are extremely technical and also good lawyers. And so I think we’ve benefited from a cadre of colleagues who really know what they’re talking about, have done the science, have done the work to understand all of this. And so we don’t necessarily approach things with a level of trepidation. Now, quantum technology tends to have a little bit more of a barrier to entry than some of the others. And part of that is because it is so very different from everything that we’re used to at the scale in which we live. Things at the subatomic level where quantum forces and quantum rules operate are just very, very, very different from anything that you’d expect based on your own lived experience.

But second, there’s been a sort of conceit about quantum that if you think you understand quantum, you don’t understand quantum. And everybody has a tendency to almost stop there and not press forward a little bit. So part of what I’ve done over the last couple decades of my career is really take that next step and say, okay, assuming the science is hard, assuming the math is hard and whatever this field happens to be, how do I nonetheless understand it and then explain it to people? And I don’t necessarily have to get into the equations or the experimental results, but I do have to be able to articulate what’s going on and again, why it matters and what to do about it.

Victor Li:

Yeah. Well, yeah, so we’ve talked about, I mean, obviously the theme today is quantum computing. So how would you explain it to someone like me who doesn’t really understand it, who has kind of a very kind of a … Maybe I had to Google it before we talked like I don’t have a physics background. My understanding of quantum is probably from like Marvel movies. So how would you explain it to someone like me and what is it and why is it going to be a big deal?

Paul Stimers:

Well, the Marvel movies have been helpful up to a point, but then very, very unhelpful beyond that point. So

Victor Li:

Beyond shrinking me down to like … And allow me to go back in time, just

Paul Stimers:

Let’s

Victor Li:

Focus on the actual

Paul Stimers:

Applications.

That’s where it gets unhelpful. So looking first of all at quantum computing, and my organization, the Quantum Industry Coalition, deals with quantum computing, quantum sensing, quantum networking and quantum cryptography, and those are each important and different aspects of quantum technology. But looking specifically at quantum computing, which is where most people are focused, there’s a tendency to think of a quantum computer as a faster computer than we currently have. That’s not really what it is. A quantum computer is a computer that will be able to attack problems that a classical computer simply cannot do in any reasonable time scale. These are problems that would take an ordinary computer like the one I’m sitting at right now, longer than the age of the universe to tackle. So we’re not really talking about a speed up, we’re talking about a fundamentally different tool. And so the kinds of problems that these quantum computers will be able to tackle

Are problems that get much more complex with each new variable. So there are some problems that as you add new information, the problem gets a little bit harder, but not a lot harder. And it’s just like if everybody’s standing in a line and you add a new person to the line and they have to shake the hand of the person that they stepped in line behind, that doesn’t get harder over time. And even if everybody had to shake the person in front of them’s hand, every time somebody joined the line, that still wouldn’t be appreciably harder. But if you were to add somebody new to the line and every time you added somebody new to the line, everybody had to shake the hand of everybody else in the line in every combination available, that would get rapidly more difficult. And by the time you’ve gotten to a hundred people, the complexity of that would be just overwhelming to a traditional computer because a traditional computer using only ones and zeros on and off as their bits, a traditional computer can only be in a certain state at once, right?

The bit can only be either on or off, and each of its bits can only be in that situation. And so, as it’s proceeding through an algorithm to solve a problem, it has to proceed in essentially a linear fashion. And it can get very fancy at that, but at the end of the day, it has to be sequential.

A quantum computer, on the other hand, uses quantum bits. And a quantum bit, unlike a traditional bit that’s either off or on, either zero or one, a quantum bit is like flipping a coin. And when you’re flipping a coin and the coin is in the air, spinning around, it doesn’t make sense to think of it as heads or tails. It doesn’t make sense to think of it as zero or one because it’s just not. It’s in a state of potentiality and it’s not until you catch it and look at it, that it resolves itself into heads or tails. And so a quantum computer uses that principle of this potentiality that’s called superposition and it uses another principle called entanglement where you can make two of these or more, two of these qubits, quantum bits or more, act as if they’re the same thing, as if they’re fundamentally part of the same entity, even if they’re very, very far apart from each other, even if they’re at opposite ends of the universe.

The combination of those two capabilities enables a quantum computer to hold more information states. And by more information states, I mean, it’s able to hold essentially a number of information states that every time you add a new qubit, you’re doubling the amount of information it can hold.

And by the time you get to about a hundred qubits, you’re able to hold as many information states simultaneously as there are atoms in the entire known universe, which is, that’s a lot.

And the way a quantum computer works is it resolves all of those information states into essentially the lowest energy information state. That is, it almost relaxes into the answer. And that has to do with the way, if you throw a rock into a pond and you throw another rock into a pond, the ripples from those two rocks landing in the pond can either reinforce each other or cancel each other out. And if you do that across a whole bunch of different rocks, eventually you’ll see places where the water is for a moment relatively high and others where it’s relatively low or flat. And a quantum computer can find that without having to take steps and go through every single possibility for the entire length of time that the universe has been alive. So what that results in is you can have these very, very complex situations that get resolved into the optimal answer very, very quickly.

So what’s the application of that? One set of really interesting problems for quantum computing is in optimization. How do we manage a very, very large logistical challenge like the US Postal Service trying to get to every single address in the United States in the most efficient way? That turns out to be a very challenging problem, but it’s one where quantum computing can help with an answer. That doesn’t sound like that exciting a problem until you realize just how much fuel the post to service expends every day or-

Victor Li:

And people that complain about their mails,

Paul Stimers:

They’re

Victor Li:

Not getting there on time.

Paul Stimers:

It’s

Victor Li:

A big deal for people. Yeah.

Paul Stimers:

Yeah. Or if you look at airlines, if there’s a disruption like a thunderstorm in Atlanta, that can totally disrupt the very carefully planned schedules of the entire US air fLit across all of our airlines. Quantum computing can help get that back on track very quickly and with optimal efficiency in a way that classical computers struggle to do well right now. Another opportunity is simulating very large molecules. So all of the interactions between atoms in molecules happen at the quantum scale, and it’s very difficult for classical computers to simulate a molecule larger than about four or six atoms. And when you’re dealing with molecules with dozens or even hundreds of atoms as we are with modern pharmacology, you really need to have a quantum computer to be able to simulate those interactions. And the exciting part about that is instead of doing laboratory trials with mice and then humans and just running experiments over a very long period of time with potential negative impacts on the humans or animals that you’re running the experiments on, you can do that all in the computer much, much faster.

So we’re potentially unlocking a tremendous acceleration of pharmaceutical research.

Victor Li:

Obviously, just talking to you about this, this isn’t going to be something that you can just buy at a computer store. So what kind of hardware are we looking at here? Is it something like a supercomputer that would have to be housed in a special type of, like an entire room and it has to be maintained by academics and stuff like that? Or what are the kind of hardware requirements that we’d be looking at for this?

Paul Stimers:

There are a number of companies that are working on developing quantum computers of a scale that can do this kind of useful work, the kind of calculations that current classical computers can’t do. And they’re taking a variety of different approaches based on the architecture of the quantum bits. Some are using superconductors and those need to be cooled to near absolute zero and then they become superconductors and you can measure which way the current is flowing in a cubit that is an electrical circuit. There are others that are using ion traps where they’re holding an ionized atom in basically in a cage made of laser light, and then using that as the qubit. There are others that are using neutral atoms and so forth, and each one has different advantages and disadvantages. But the main challenge that we’re trying to solve right now is you have to isolate these qubits from the rest of the universe as much as humanly possible in order to prevent them from being jostled or interacted with in any way that might introduce an error.

And then you have to interact with them in order to see what they’re doing. And that’s a very hard problem to perfectly isolate something and then interact with it. And so figuring out how to do that and to account for and reduce the number of errors that these qubits come back with is very important. And then having the qubits remain together as a coherent entity for any length of time and a second would be a tremendously long period of time here. That’s another big challenge. So as companies are working toward this, they’re trying to figure out how do we get the most computing power out of the fewest qubits and then how do we either cool them or hold them steady and then how do we shrink that computer into the size where it can be useful? There are companies right now who have computers that are on the forefront of the hardware right now that are call it eight by eight by eight foot cubes.

We think that some companies are going to need room sized computers for the foreseeable future, but again, these are not going to be computers that the average American is going to need in the near term.

Victor Li:

Gotcha. Before we continue, let’s take a quick break for word from our sponsor. And we’re back. So let’s look at some individual legal areas that could be impacted by quantum computing. So let’s start with cybersecurity. I talked a little about it in the intro, how quantum computing could help, could do a couple of things could render current encryption standards obsolete, but then it could also lead to more advanced security methods for people who embrace it. Can you talk a little bit about cybersecurity and what are some implications that quantum comuity might have on that?

Paul Stimers:

Absolutely. And this is a huge area where quantum computing is going to have and is already having a major impact. And it’s something that everybody listening to this podcast should be aware of and working on. Quantum computers will be able to break RSA security. And the reason for that is that RSA security and other similar security relies on the fact that it’s very easy to put two very, very, very large numbers together to multiply them, but it’s very hard to take the resulting very, very large number and figure out what two numbers were multiplied together to create it. But for a quantum computer, because of the way it operates, it’s very easy for a quantum computer to figure out what those two numbers were, if it’s sufficiently powerful. And we’ve known this since the 90s when an algorithm was developed that would do this. We just haven’t had a powerful enough quantum computer yet to actually execute the algorithm.

And the algorithm’s called Shores Algorithm. It was devised by Peter Shore. So what we need to do is replace RSA Security with a different kind of math that’s as hard for quantum computers to do as it is for classical computers to do. So I think of it like putting the numbers together and then trying to get them apart again is like dumping salt and pepper together. Really easy to do that. But if I hand you a pair of tweezers and say, “Get me the salt back or get me the pepper back,” it’s going to take you a while to do that. Quantum computing is like dumping water on that pile. And of course the salt dissolves and you’re left with the pepper. What we need instead of the salt and pepper is we need to replace that salt and pepper with red and green glitter.

And there, if I say get the red glitter out, you’re going to have just as hard a time dumping water on that as you would using tweezers to pick out every piece of red. Interesting. So that’s what needs to happen. So the reason it needs to happen right away is any organization, whether it’s the government or a company, a law firm, any organization that has sensitive information that will still be sensitive whenever a quantum computer comes along, needs to move to post quantum cryptography, needs to move to that glitter based approach immediately because adversaries are currently stealing our encrypted data

And just holding onto it until they get a quantum computer and then they’re going to go through it and find the most interesting data that they expect to find if they decrypt it, decrypt it. And if it is still interesting, then the damage will be done at that point. So that’s been going on for some time now. The People’s Republic of China, for example, has been acquiring a tremendous amount of encrypted data from the United States, both from the government and from the private sector, and presumably prioritizing what to decrypt when it can. So the good news is that we now have post quantum cryptography standards promulgated by the National Institute of Standards and Technology NIST, that we believe are robust enough to prevent a quantum computer from decrypting what we’ve encrypted that way. And those have been rolled out and companies and the government are working to upgrade our security, but anything that has already been grabbed in encrypted form, in the old encryption, it’s already gone.

We just haven’t suffered the damage from that yet, but it’s already gone. So the trick now is stopping the damage as soon as possible. And so organizations should be doing that right now.

Victor Li:

Okay. Okay. Now you freaked me out a little bit.

Paul Stimers:

I hope so. I hope so.

Victor Li:

What about for artificial intelligence? Because obviously that’s all the rage now, especially in the legal industry and with lawyers and whatnot. What are the implications this could have on the field of generative AI, for instance?

Paul Stimers:

Quantum computing and AI are going to go together very nicely. And one of the things that quantum computing is able to do or will be able to do is use a much smaller set of training data and extrapolate much more effectively from that smaller set than is currently possible. And that’s going to speed things up. That’s going to reduce the power requirements for AI and potentially make AI more nimble as it happens on an ongoing basis. So that’s something that we see coming down the pipe when it’s not clear exactly when that will arrive. We need to do more work on the quantum side, and that’s going to take at least a couple of years and probably longer, but it’s definitely on its way.

Victor Li:

Well, you talked earlier about errors and stuff, and that kind of got me thinking about just with AI, because obviously with hallucinations and with bad data and things like that, if it’s train on data that’s not correct or whatnot, could that have an impact on how quantum works with it or is that completely independent from that?

Paul Stimers:

I think there are some similarities. Certainly we don’t expect to see from quantum computing the kind of hallucinations that have led unwary attorneys to rely on made up case law.That’s not exactly … And believe me, that’s the kind of thing that’s kept me up at night, but we don’t expect exactly that sort of thing, but part of what we’re seeing both from AI and eventually from quantum is at some point, if it’s sufficiently powerful, it’s going to be very hard for us to audit and to understand exactly how the computer came up with the result that it did. And so figuring out the legal regime around that fact is going to be important. How do we treat results that came from an AI analysis or an AI and quantum hybrid analysis or hybrid quantum and supercomputing analysis where there are probabilistic outcomes or other things that we just can’t interrogate after the fact and developing the jurisprudence around that is going to be important and it’s an interesting and very much emerging area of law.

Victor Li:

Gotcha. How about from the intellectual property standpoint? Obviously, a lot of big companies are in this space, as you talked about before. I’m sure many of them would run a race to the patent office to see who can get that protection and establish dominance in the field. Have we seen a lot of litigation in this area or even kind of like IP disputes and whatnot? Is that already happening?

Paul Stimers:

We have begun to see some of that. Absolutely. There’s been one company in particular that tried to join the Quantum Industry Coalition some years ago and the current members of the coalition decided against allowing them to join because their patent claims that they were making were very aggressive. They were essentially seeking patents for things that could have applied to just about any kind of quantum calculation, for example. And so one challenge for the patent and trademark office is going to be understanding the technology well enough to know what is a reasonable claim and what is not. And understanding how these claims interrelate with each other and what will create an IP thicket and what will not. These are issues that quantum companies are pursuing vigorously. They are pursuing them often in parallel. I mentioned the different kinds of architectures. Each of those architectures has one or two leaders in the space, and the IP aspect of their leadership is definitely an important one.

Victor Li:

And then are there any other areas of law that maybe people have been kind of sLiping on or haven’t really talked as much about some of these other areas, like something that quantum computing could definitely have an impact on, but maybe people aren’t paying attention to?

Paul Stimers:

It’s not an area of law so much, but I think one interesting aspect of this is the federal government is a customer for quantum, both computing, networking, sensing, and cryptography. And we’re seeing a lot of interest within the federal government in purchasing these capabilities, in developing these capabilities. That brings up not only the IP issues surrounding co-development with the federal government, but also federal contracting issues and a variety of related challenges. The government recognizes that this is a transformational technology, both for the economy and for national security. War as a matter of logistics. Logistics are one of the places where quantum computing will be helpful. The issues related to sensing and cryptography are also of obvious interest to the military. So that’s definitely an area we’re seeing a great deal of effort. And then the federal government is working to, first of all, reauthorize the National Quantum Initiative, which we helped authorize in 2018.

And then we expect a quantum executive order to come out very soon, very much along the lines of recent semiconductor and AI executive branch activity.

Victor Li:

Okay. And just talking logistics and whatnot, I mean, do you see court systems or dockets or judges and thinking about having interest in this kind of technology as well? Because I would imagine that, especially for overloaded dockets or logistics of getting people to court and coordinating bail and things like that, do you think that there would be a pretty good application in that sense?

Paul Stimers:

I say this with love and respect for the judiciary. I don’t see the judiciary as necessarily leading on quantum adoption, but what I do see is that the problems that are susceptible to quantum solutions are not necessarily going to be problems that people ask a quantum computer as such. And what do I mean by that? Very quickly, we’re going to see that the quantum computer resides on the back end of either a cloud solution or something else. And what the user, what the customer will say is not, “I have a quantum computing problem.” They’ll say, “I have a problem.” And they will present that problem to their solution provider and their solution provider will solve it using a mixture of classical computing and quantum computing and AI and maybe some guy with an abacus. It doesn’t matter to the customer how that problem is solved, they just want it solved.

So quantum computers will start to occupy a space in a toolbox that is relatively unimportant and even unknown to the customer. The customer just wants an answer. And so if a court is able to end up using a scheduling software or some kind of logistical framework that relies in part on quantum computing, that’s great, but the court’s not going to care.

Victor Li:

Gotcha. All right, let’s take another quick break for word from our sponsor and we’ll be right back. And we’re back. So we talked a little bit before the break about possible judicial applications or in this case, maybe not. What about for lawyers practicing law? I mean, is there an application for quantum computing to help them practice law more efficiently, or is this kind of thing where that’s so advanced that they don’t really need to worry about this until everyone else is using it?

Paul Stimers:

We are not yet to the point where lawyers are ready to start using quantum computers or more correctly, quantum computers are not yet to the point where lawyers are ready to start using it and Not long ago, the quantum computing world got very excited about a quantum computer that could factor the number 21. And for those of you who like me would perhaps need a moment, that’s seven times three. That’s the answer there. So this is definitely still a very nascent capability and not one where the applications have been developed to support a consumer level use of quantum computing, let alone the fact that the hardware isn’t ready yet. So it’ll be a little while, but the legal issues that we’ve identified already do exist.

Victor Li:

Gotcha. And their clients will probably have more access to this technology, especially if they’re representing big companies and big financial institutions and governments. So it would behoove them to learn about this anyway, right?

Paul Stimers:

Right. And there are companies in those spaces, financial services, logistics, drug discovery, et cetera, who are already working with quantum companies on specific solutions to specific problems. And there are ways in which quantum computers right now are already providing responses and answers and solutions that classical computers can’t provide. And that is only going to increase and increase dramatically in the next several years.

Victor Li:

Gotcha. Well, let me ask you, because we talked about generative AI earlier and whatnot. I mean, I think one of the reasons why it caught on with lawyers is because it’s very intuitive, it’s very easy to use. It doesn’t take a lot of understanding as far as technical or from a technical standpoint or from a scientific standpoint or whatnot, you just entering your query and then you refine it and whatnot. But do you think that quantum technology is different in the sense that because it’s so complicated and it’s so kind of scary, to be honest, from a comprehension standpoint or from an understanding standpoint, do you think that will cause lawyers to not want to learn about it or to not embrace it? Or do you think it’s the case where as it becomes more integrated into things, then they’ll still start using it just without even knowing it?

Paul Stimers:

I think that lawyers are a generally curious bunch and eager to see the next thing as it comes along. So I do think that people will be looking for those opportunities. I think though that first we’ll need to see some consumer level and sort of B2B level capabilities being developed on the application side that attorneys can start using. I think there will be in many ways early adopters, but at the end of the day, that’s going to be developed in partnership with some of the cloud providers and some of the other access providers that are the real gateway to the quantum computer, which the computers themselves still need some expert programming and managing to work. I think a lot about Back to the Future and how the DeLaurian was powered by a Mr. Fusion. It may be the case that we get to small in the modular reactors and things like that, that are scattered throughout the countryside, but it’ll be a while before quantum computers are similarly in every home and sort of taking the same approach that the personal computer has taken and that Mr. Fusion might have.

Victor Li:

So you heard it here first listeners. Time travel is possible.

Paul Stimers:

Yep. That’s exactly what I said. That’s correct.

Victor Li:

So if lawyers or just anybody wants to learn more about this, what would you recommend that they do? Because I mean, this isn’t something that you could just read about or just learn about it. I mean, you would have to learn from the right people or take the right classes or whatnot. Or how would you recommend that they go about doing that?

Paul Stimers:

Yeah, there are some good explainers available on the internet. There’s a lot of, I hate to say it, but there’s a lot out there that doesn’t really do a good job yet. And I think we’ve … Actually, a friend and a member of the Quantum Industry Coalition did one of the Four Dummies books, Quantum for Dummies, and that’s been a reasonably good place for people to get a handle on it, but it can be a little bit daunting. And I think the best thing to do is really to try to understand how it is being developed by the companies. The companies involved in the quantum space have an interest in explaining it as accessibly as possible, both to potential customers and potential investors. And for a handy list of some of the leading companies in the space, please visit the Quantum Industry Coalition’s website and look at its membership list.

Victor Li:

Or they could always reach out to you, I guess, right?

Paul Stimers:

They certainly could. Happy to have a conversation anytime.

Victor Li:

So if our listeners do want to reach out to you to ask you questions about it, what’s the best way to do that?

Paul Stimers:

I’m available by email at paul.stimers, S-T-I-M-E-R-S at hklaw.com. The Quantum Industry Coalition’s website is quantumindustrycoalition.com. And always happy to have a conversation about quantum technology, quantum policy, and disruptive technology policy more broadly.

Victor Li:

Great. Thank you again for joining us. I appreciate it.

Paul Stimers:

Thank you, Victor. It’s been a real pleasure.

Victor Li:

Yeah, it’s been a pleasure. I enjoyed it. If you enjoyed this podcast and would like to hear more, please go to your favorite app and check out some other titles from Legal Talk Network. In the meantime, I’m Victor Li, and I’ll see you next time on the ADA Journal Legal Rebels Podcast.

Announcer:

If you’d like more information about today’s show, please visit legalebels.com, legaltalknetwork.com. Subscribe via iTunes and RSS. Find both the ABA Journal and Legal Talk Network on Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn, or download the free apps from ABA Journal and Legal Talk Network in Google Play and iTunes. The views expressed by the participants of this program are their own and do not represent the views of, nor are they endorsed by Legal Talk Network, it’s officers, directors, employees, agents, representatives, shareholders, and subsidiaries. None of the content should be considered legal advice. As always, consult a lawyer.

Continue Reading