C. Misleading Material

It is already illegal for a lawyer to include false or misleading material in advertisements.[73] The use of electronic media such as the internet increases the amount of material that may be disseminated and thus requires that more specific direction as to what types of material may be provided be given.

Current restrictions on the inclusion of information on specific cases provide too much opportunity for abuse. Individual cases are so unique that there use in advertising is inherently misleading. For example, consider the section above regarding the Alexander Law Firm and California's restrictions. How is one to know whether the synopsis complies with the restrictions? Note that there are no "losing" cases included. Unless the firm has never lost a case, isn't this in itself inherently misleading?

The prohibition of false and misleading material should be expanded to include the following rebuttable presumptions (taken partially from California law) regarding material that is or is not misleading:

A. There exists a rebuttable presumption that the following information is inherently misleading:

1) The inclusion of information of specific cases won.

2) The inclusion of amounts recovered for any specific case or for any type of case. This includes any indication of the average amount recovered for a type of claim, either in specific numbers or in multiples of another number such as "six times medical damages."

3) Any statements by the attorney or anyone else regarding the level of skill the attorney or firm advertising has in relation to other attorneys.

4) Any characterization of fees except for the specific charges for routine services, or the firm's hourly rates.

B. There exists a rebuttable presumption that the following information is not misleading:

1) Information regarding professional degrees earned.

2) Number of cases handled in a general area of law.

3) Number of cases brought to trial in a general area of law.

4) Scholarly articles written.

5) General, accurate, and reasonably complete statements of the law.

D. Direct Solicitation

Direct solicitation of clients is inherently subject to abuse. The restrictions should also be applied to real time electronic conversation.

Direct solicitation of clients either in person, via telephone, or through real time electronic exchange is prohibited. Direct solicitation includes the provision of legal advice if the attorney subsequently establishes an attorney-client relationship with the individual. This paragraph does not apply if the discussion of legal issues is prompted by the prospective client.

E. Records

The rule which requires attorneys to keep copies for a number of years (four years in Georgia[74]) of all advertisements as they were disseminated is unworkable as to web sites. There is no way to take a "snapshot", if you will, of a web site as it is viewed by persons who use the Internet. What is able to be saved for future reference is the attorney's "html" file which generates the web site. Also, web sites are changed very frequently as new information becomes available. Generally information is not deleted from the site; instead it is added to the site. The current rule should be amended to require attorneys to save a copy of their web site every six months, or prior to the deletion of any material, or prior to a substantial change to the site. The computer file copy could then be kept for the appropriate number of years.