Lawyers, be afraid ... be very afraid!

Lawyers need to watch their back … and their front for that matter.

For those who don’t know, I took the California bar exam this past July. In an effort to decompress and give me some time to reflect, I took a month-long trip to Southeast Asia. While I knew that this trip would change my perceptions of society and politics, I did not know that the trip would also challenge my profession as well.

This trip was the first time I had spent a considerable amount of time outside of the United States and I was having a little trouble finding my sense of space in the global environment. It all began with a trip to the Suria KLCC Mall in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. For those who have not been to Kuala Lumpur, the Suria KLCC Mall is situated at the base of the world famous Petronas Towers. The mall is as flashy and decadent as the towers. Suria KLCC is floor after floor of high-end boutiques such as Louis Viutton, Gucci, and others of such ilk.

I really had a hard time digesting the whole scene. Here I am in Malaysia, literally a world away from home and I felt as if I was in Beverly Hills. Confused, bothered, and bewildered, I had to do something. After making a left at Bvlgari, a right at the Cartier, and just a jog past the Tod’s (which makes a really cool looking loafer by the way) I found Kinokuniya, the Malay version of Borders. I wanted to find a book that would help me make sense of "wtf?" that I was feeling. I decided on two books: “The End of Poverty” by Jeffery Sachs and “The World Is Flat” by Thomas L. Friedman.

Both of the books I bought are absolutely amazing accounts of how the world works and how it could change for the better. While I do not mean to ignore Sachs (it merits a discussion on its own), the Friedman book gave an explanation as to why the developing world was growing in ways only previously seen in the western world.

Friedman’s basic premise is that the rest of the world is catching up to the United States in terms of economic competitiveness and growth. Technology has removed many of the barriers to entry that once existed for developing countries. Friedman’s work provides anecdote after anecdote of people in India or Russia taking what used to be an “American” industry and making it better, more efficient, and more cost-effective.

However, Friedman does not think that all is lost for the American worker. In his chapter aptly titled, “The Untouchables,” Friedman describes the types of American worker that will succeed in the new global economy. I read this chapter quite intently. After all, I don’t want to put all of my social capital in a career or profession that only going to get shipped overseas. Friedman does not specifically mention lawyers, but instead names categories of people that will be successful, like “collaborators” or “localizers.” I read the chapter thinking, “Lawyers collaborate, check! Lawyers localize, check!” I was feeling pretty good about my future job security.

Then the fell the hammer: “Manhattan Work at Mumbai Prices: Inside India's hottest legal outsourcing team.” That’s right, lawyers (at least in the way we know them) are about to get whacked.

The October 2007 issue of the ABA Journal featured Pangea3, the Mumbai-based legal outsourcing team that has taken the legal world by storm. The business plan is simple: American firms and corporations take work that is not cost-effective to handle themselves and send it to firms like Pangea3. Due to the low cost of labor (and accessibility to high-speed internet access), Pangea3 is able to take unprofitable American and turn it into profitable Indian work. The disparity in labor costs is staggering:

“A newly minted J.D. from a top 10 school in India can expect to earn about $6,000 to $7,000 a year … While this sounds alarming in com­parison with the $160,000 per year earned by some of their Ameri­can counterparts, it does translate to an annual purchasing power of $30,000-$35,000. And that goes far in a country where the average annual per capita income hovers around $500.”

Take a second to look at what is happening. Low-end legal work is becoming cheaper, but high-end legal work is becoming more expensive. Neither trend shows signs of slowing down. Indian lawyers will become more acclimated to the American legal system and will soon start targeting more complex forms of legal work. But things will not end up where you think they might. Don’t expect Pangea3 to achieve parity with the top flight U.S. firms. However, do expect Indian attorneys to achieve parity with attorneys who provide services to mid-market clients. Small and medium sized firms might shed new attorneys (who are notorious for being unprofitable) and start directing work overseas.

Well, I suppose I can rap for a living.

"Arrest this man, he talks in maths ..."

Much has been made of Radiohead’s latest business experiment. For those who haven’t kept up with the latest industry-destabilizing event, click here. If you are too lazy to link to another site, then here is the skinny: Enigmatic rock giants Radiohead snubbed the record industry and retailers by releasing their latest album, “In Rainbows,” on the Internet. Not only did they release the album directly on the Internet, Radiohead also allowed customers to name their own price. You could either pay nothing, or as in one case, pay a whole lot more. As if this affront to the record industry was not enough, the album is available in a DRM-free format. Download it, burn it to CD, put it in your ipod, burn 57 cds, share it ... the possibilities are endless.

Folks, I need the late pass. I know what you are thinking: “Vic, this story is old. Everybody has written and blogged the hell out of this. You need to put your J.D. to work and write about Britney’s custody battle or T.I.’s legal problems.” Well, that is not going to happen anytime soon. I really want to take a look at how Radiohead’s business move will or won’t change the game. Such an exercise requires a bit of temporal distance. No longer content with taking modern music to new and dizzying heights, Radiohead is now doing the same with how the record industry does business.

When I first read of this experiment, I was excited. No, you don’t understand I was really excited. I knew the music was going to be hotter than a twelve pack of Bud Light forgotten in the trunk of a car. What really got me going was the fact that you could name your own price. For an unemployed graduate student who just blew nearly every cent on a trip to Southeast Asia, this was welcomed news.

I don’t know about you all, but I pretty much stopped stealing music via the internet. Aside from fears of getting popped by some RIAA hit men (a.k.a. intellectual property lawyers), I really started feeling bad for the artist. What if I had spent time writing a brief for a client and then I found a website that offered the same work for free? What client in their right mind would pay me when you can get it for free?

So here comes Radiohead to save me from my newfound guilt. I could get new music for free and not feel guilty because it would not be stealing. Imagine going to the store and picking up something off the shelf and then having the option of paying or not paying for it. Whatever you do, it’s all good.

After trying to access the “In Rainbows” website for the better part of two days, I finally hit pay dirt. There I was, on the threshold of downloading a completely free (and legal) album. I don’t know what happened next, but a weird feeling came over me. I could not bring myself to type “0.00” in the £ box. The guilt came back in a tsunami-like wave. Was I really going to stiff the band that gave me so much? Could I be capable of such disrespect to a group of individuals that have written a considerable part of my life’s soundtrack? I am a law school graduate, but even I could not be that big of a jerk.

Then came the next equation in my twisted moral calculus: “How much?” There I was, feeling like a sack of crap for even considering taking the album for free. I thought, “Enough with the self-loathing Vic, how much are you going to cough up?” Emboldened and empowered, I set out to get my credit card. I don’t know what came over me, but at that moment I felt the need to check my bank account. The self-loathing returned when I saw my balance: “$13.86” I then opened my wallet and found a single ten spot. Bank account, plus wallet, equals $23.86. Awesome! Someone tell Carlos Slim he isn’t the only Mexican with money.

After some quick calculations, I thought that I would give Radiohead three bucks for the album. So what if your coffee this morning cost more than that? At the time, three bucks represented a whopping 12.5% of my total wealth. That number would climb up to 14.4% when you factored in the service charge. I know it wasn’t much (probably didn’t cover the cost per album), but it was something. I felt really good knowing that I contributed something. It is similar to the recipients of micro-finance loans. The loan is small and terms of repayment are also small, but the people take pride in paying the debt. I might not have paid a whole lot for the album, but I feel good about what I did pay. I call this the “micro-purchasing of music” theory. Remember folks, you heard it here first.

Will this new way of selling music take hold? I think so. Radiohead has cornered the market thoughtful and guilty consumers like me. Will it be profitable? Sure, but probably not for Radiohead. There is a price to pay for being a maverick. While I think Radiohead got a good response on their website, some potential customers had trouble logging on to the site. This had the effect of leading people back to Bit Torrent and other file sharing sites.

Whether in business or in music, Thom Yorke and company have always been a strong member of the avant-garde. People may not comprehend the music or the concept of a free album, but once Radiohead acts, people cannot help but to emulate. Observers of music and intellectual property stay tuned. In two or three years when artists release albums directly on the net with an open pricing scheme and are profitable at doing so, don’t credit the MBA or the bean counter who optimized this business model. Just remember that Radiohead, was and will always be, the “jigsaw falling into place.”

Welcome to Zocalo Angelino!

What's up folks? Thanks for stopping by my new blog, "Zocalo Angelino."

This has been a project that was long in the planning, but quite short on the action. It was about time that I stopped the woofin' and got with the writing. I have always enjoyed writing and I thought that this would be a good step to a lifetime of Pulitzer Prizes (jokes).

You might be wondering what is a "Zocalo Angelino." Well, "zocalo" is Spanish term that describes a city's central plaza or square. The zocalo is a central part of daily life as it is usually bordered by the cathedral, government buildings, and a central market. The most famous zocalo, unimaginatively called "El Zocalo," can be found in Mexico City. "Angelino" is just a term that describes a person or a thing located in Los Angeles.

Is the phrase "Zocalo Angelino" an oxymoron? Is there anything central to the urban patchwork that is Los Angeles?

My take is that L.A.'s decentralized orientation has created a bunch of "mini" zocalos all over the city. Although it is usually in the form of a busy street, each neighborhood and city has their own little central plaza, their own center of daily life. Neighborhoods like Little Ethiopia, Thai Town, Pico-Union, and Little Tokyo all converge on one street where all the action happens. This idea of the "mini-zocalo" is what drives this blog.

If you accept my theory of the "mini-zocalo," (if you don't, just go with it, you are ruining my great introduction ), then you can see how the L.A. cityscape acts a great big zocalo that houses all of these different ways of life. Sure, the big zocalo is often polluted and congested, but if you look hard enough you can find people putting their individual twist on life. This diversity is electrifying.

In some small way, I want my blog to function in the same way. I have always felt that I floated in and out of different scenes. Sometimes you could find me in a heated tax policy debate with a law school friend (yes, I am that nerdy). Other times, you might find me arguing that DJ Quik is the most underrated rapper of all time (yes, I am that gangster). I admit that I really like foie gras, scallops, and whiskey. I also admit that chorizo con huevo might be the world's most perfect meal.

I want this blog to be a big zocalo where all of these "mini-zocalos" like rap, tax, and food can be discussed on a daily basis. This blog is my feeble attempt to consolidate "inbetweeners" like myself. So if you are a tax lovin', rap listening, eclectic food eating, alcohol drinking, politico like myself (or any variation thereof), then welcome home.

P.S. - and for all you Spanish language scholars, I am working on getting the accentuation right on the word "zocalo." Gimme a minute to get this HTML thing down.