What we need to remind the attorneys is that they ...

2008-08-01T15:57:00.000-07:00

What we need to remind the attorneys is that they should not be making decisions about PR without the help of the PR professional. Would we make legal decisions without contacting the lawyers?

While PR may not be the first thing a lawyer thinks about when helping a client make a decision, but it should be at least on the short list of things to consider. In some cases, it may cause more damage than bag legal judgement.

This reminds me a bit of the story of IBM v. The B...

2008-07-31T08:35:00.000-07:00

This reminds me a bit of the story of IBM v. The Big Blue Diner*. This occured many moons ago.

IBM brought suit against the diner, which had been around for quite some time, for trademark infringement. The diner was forced to change its name.

It sounds cold-hearted, but there are these rules regarding trademarks, and if a company doesn't defend its trademark, it runs the risk of its competitors using it. That's the law.

Now, if I were the marketing director for IBM (and it's a good thing for IBM that I'm not), I might suggest doing something creative, like making the diner a subsidiary of IBM, or some such thing -- and doing it just so the company didn't seem like a big mean machine. But then some lawyer would probably tell me that -- while creative -- the idea was really stupid (because of X, Y and Z).

PR is one thing and lawyering is quite another. We don't expect marketeers to be litigators, and we shouldn't expect litigators to be marketeers. Should we?

*The Big Blue Diner

Comments on The Legal Watercooler: Attorney Needed Course in P.R.

What we need to remind the attorneys is that they ...

This reminds me a bit of the story of IBM v. The B...