I've been away for the past 2 weeks, on holiday. It was a much-needed break. Hence the hiatus in postings. I will get around to posting my PQs from May over the next week.
Meanwhile, I came across this blog through Tomorrow.sg -- very well-written, very funny. It reminded me of what my life used to be like in private practice, why I left private practice (very necessary, since many of my peers are beginning to make much more than me), and what is really important in life (no, it's not work). Work-life balance is not a myth -- you just need to understand, and accept, that a balance inevitably means compromise as well.
Showing posts with label lawyer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label lawyer. Show all posts
Sunday, 17 June 2007
Friday, 30 March 2007
That blog spat: A*Star tells why it wanted to sue student
An article in today's Straits Times (available on Asiaone) on the AcidFlask incident, quoting my blog posting on it.
When the Sunday Times reporter first called on Wednesday, I was really busy with work. So I just referred her to my blog and told her she could quote anything she wanted from it, and could call me again if she needed anything else.
I was quite amused when she called again yesterday. She said she had gone through their internal database, and she just wanted to clarify with me how to describe me, because I have -- over the years, when being quoted in my professional capacity -- been described as both a "technology lawyer" and an "intellectual property lawyer". I told her "technology lawyer", and that's what she did.
The fact is, I'm both. And in today's digital world, you can't really be one and not the other. Well, you can, and I know plenty of lawyers who are, even if they claim otherwise. But I think that prevents them from being complete lawyers in either field, and that would stand in the way of giving comprehensive advice in many circumstances.
Anyway. Just a minor aside at the start of what will hopefully be a civilised day ("civilised" to me meaning no unreasonable demands!), despite it being the effective last day of the financial year. I've closed or am near to closing all of my deals, so I'm hoping to take it a little easier today.
When the Sunday Times reporter first called on Wednesday, I was really busy with work. So I just referred her to my blog and told her she could quote anything she wanted from it, and could call me again if she needed anything else.
I was quite amused when she called again yesterday. She said she had gone through their internal database, and she just wanted to clarify with me how to describe me, because I have -- over the years, when being quoted in my professional capacity -- been described as both a "technology lawyer" and an "intellectual property lawyer". I told her "technology lawyer", and that's what she did.
The fact is, I'm both. And in today's digital world, you can't really be one and not the other. Well, you can, and I know plenty of lawyers who are, even if they claim otherwise. But I think that prevents them from being complete lawyers in either field, and that would stand in the way of giving comprehensive advice in many circumstances.
Anyway. Just a minor aside at the start of what will hopefully be a civilised day ("civilised" to me meaning no unreasonable demands!), despite it being the effective last day of the financial year. I've closed or am near to closing all of my deals, so I'm hoping to take it a little easier today.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)