Untangling the Wicked Web: The Marketing of Legal Services on the Internet and the Model Rules

To deal with the problems of artificially increasing web search engine relevancy scores through misleading keyword stuffing, invisible keyword stuffing, and meta-tags, an amendment should be added to Rule 7.1. This amendment should prohibit misleading communications, even if they are not readily apparent.l22 A comment could be included stating that the use of the name of a lawyer unaffiliated with the firm responsible for the web site, the mention of a practice area the firm or lawyer does not participate in, and the repetitious use of otherwise acceptable words through meta-tags or invisible keyword stuffing would all be examples of such communications.

C. GLOBALREACH

Rule 8.5(b) should be amended so that any advertising on the Internet is governed by the rules of the jurisdiction in which the lawyer was present while creating the advertisement. This change would provide certainty for the lawyer and remove the burden of trying to figure out where the predominant effect of action on the Internet would take place.

CONCLUSION

The growth of the Internet has created a world of unprecedented connection. The Internet should be used as a powerful tool to provide the public with information about legal services. However, instead of treating the Internet as simply another medium of communication, albeit an extremely powerful one, the Model Rules should recognize that the Internet's unique nature also creates unique challenges. A blend of the traditional methods of regulating the marketing of legal services and an understanding of these unique challenges is required to effectively advance the goals of pursuing the administration of justice and maintaining respect for the practice of law.

CHRISTOPHER HURLD*

* J.D., Georgetown University Law Center (expected May 2005); B.A., Bates College, 2000. The author would like to express his heartfelt thanks to his family and friends for their incredible support.

Copyright Georgetown University Law Center Summer 2004
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved