Two posts on the blog of one of the leading offshore companies, Pangea3, raise points worth noting. First, Pangea3 takes umbrage at those who question whether the use of offshore law-related services trigger any practice of law issues. The post takes the position that stuck-in-the-mud opponents of change are simply trying to raise FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) about a “dislocative industry.” The company will send you an opinion prepared in early 2005 by Professor Geoffrey Hazard, an authority on legal ethics, to back up the propriety of their services.
The second post attacks a competitor for copying Pangea3’s website material, and makes a deeper point. With so many competitors swarming into this offshore legal space, some law departments are likely to choose a service provider that falls short of expectations. When that happens, the entire niche gets a black eye. Some form of industry association and standards, Pangea3 believes, will be necessary to police the frontier of legal process offshoring.