Bob Ambrogi had a useful recent blog about the new Massachusetts opinion concerning the ethics of cloud computing. To date, he lists 12 states (including Massachusetts) that have published opinions. He omits two: Maine and New Jersey.
Perhaps more interesting, the ABA has also just released proposed changes to its Model Rules. The most important element is that the comments would not require attorneys to be competent concerning technology. The proposed Comment 6 states:
"To maintain the requisite knowledge and skill, a lawyer should keep abreast of changes in the law and its practice, including the benefits and risks associated with relevant technology, engage in continuing study and education and comply with all continuing legal education requirements to which the lawyer is subject." (Changes noted with italics.)
In a useful article in Law Technology News, Michael Arkfeld and Stephanie Loquvam argue that this may be “too little too late” to be of any practice use.
Carolyn Elefant takes a similar line, complaining that the bar associations “discriminate” against the cloud and noting that most of the ethics opinions are mainly a CYA operation:
“So rather than do what real scientists do in the face of uncertainty (gather data, learn more and adapt course to new developments), the bars do what lawyers do (after all, regulators are lawyers!) which is to figure out a way to CYA.”