Podcasts about lawyers

As Andrew puts it, Chief Justice John Roberts is “cherry-picking.” He's flying solo in this short edition of Main Justice (more to come with Mary in the next episode). Andrew gives a quick briefing on several of the Supreme Court's most consequential end-of-term rulings, starting with the decision not to hear an appeal in the E. Jean Carroll case. Andrew also touches on the Court's decision to uphold a Mississippi law to allow mail-in ballots that are sent by Election Day to be counted but saves his deepest analysis for two similar cases with opposing decisions: the firings of Lisa Cook and Rebecca Slaughter. While the Court ruled that the Trump administration must have cause to dismiss Cook from the Federal Reserve, it allowed the government to fire Slaughter from the Federal Trade Commission, a decision which Andrew calls deeply flawed showing the conservative majority's support for a “unitary executive.”  And finally, Andrew breaks down the Court's narrow decision to uphold birthright citizenship, and why the tight 5-4 split is the story. Sign up for MS NOW Premium on Apple Podcasts to listen to this show and other MS podcasts without ads. You'll also get exclusive bonus content from this and other shows. Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

OA1274 - Can you sue if someone posts something nasty about you online? I mean maybe, but not like this. In today's episode, Lydia introduces us to the wild world of “Are We Dating the Same Guy?” and Jenessa walks us through a lawsuit that trips over its own feet while trying to take them down. It's a great opportunity to learn about some interesting Illinois laws against doxxing and your right to your likeness, and why the plaintiff failed miserably at mobilizing those laws in his favor. …Also, it wouldn't be a modern drama-filled lawsuit without attorneys using AI and failing to fact check. Tune in to hear a judge rage against the lying machine, and the lawyers that used it. D'Ambrosio v Meta Platforms, Inc., No. 25-2231 (7th Cir. 2026) Oral arguments Docket Permalink to Marc Trent's website Sanction laws: Fed. R. Civ. P. 11. Fed. R. Civ. P. 38. 28 U.S.C. § 1927 28 U.S.C. § 1912 Check out the OA Linktree for all the places to go and things to do!

Another day, another moment to break down all the facts in the ever changing Milania, Teresa, Louie arrest mess.  Milania has lawyered up and entered rehab. Pictures of Teresa with a black eye have surfaced all over the internet. Louie leaks more info to The Sun and fans are left turning to us to help separate fact from fiction, truth from untrue.  Pinky Cole's shockingly low monthly income is revealed as her bankruptcy case moves forward.  Last, but not least, Dorit trashes the F out of PK with a special message for Father's Day earlier this week. Boy George retaliates and proves what a messy queen he is by sharing a message of his own for the one and only Ms. Kemsley. Now this is the feud our beloved little 80's hearts cannot get enough of. Karma Chameleon that! @behindvelvetrope  @davidyontef BONUS & AD FREE EPISODES Available at - www.patreon.com/behindthevelvetrope  BROUGHT TO YOU BY: TUMBLE - Tumbleliving.com/VELVET (10% Off Plus Free Shipping On The Most Beautiful Inexpensive Rugs Which Are Spill Proof)  MYFITNESSPAL - podcasts.myfitnesspal.com (Use Code VELVET, All Upper Case Letters, For 15% Off The Premium App That Will Change Everything For You Regarding Fitness & Nutrition)  PROGRESSIVE - www.progressive.com (Visit Progressive.com To See If You Could Save On Car Insurance) ZENNI OPTICAL -  zenni.com/podcast (Use Code Podcast15 For 15% Off Your First Order Of The Most Affordable, Stylish Glasses and Sunglasses)  ADVERTISING INQUIRIES - Please contact David@advertising-execs.com MERCH Available at - https://www.teepublic.com/stores/behind-the-velvet-rope?ref_id=13198 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

My co-host Ken Suzan and I are welcoming you the episode 176 of the IP Fridays Podcast. Today's interview guest is returning guest Franklin Graves, who is a senior counsel at Linkedin and teaching IP law at Emerson College. With my co-host Ken Suzan he is discussing how the law for creators has dramatically changed in the past years. Franklin Graves is expressing his personal views and not the views of Linkedin or Microsoft. He is talking about the paper “Upload Complete” before he joined Linkedin. Bio: https://www.linkedin.com/in/franklingraves/ Paper: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5271442 Website: https://creatoreconomylaw.com/ But before we jump into this interview, I have news for you! Richard Meade, a judge on the UK High Court and one of the most prominent figures in European patent law, was appointed Lord Justice of Appeal at the British Court of Appeal on June 12, 2026. Meade played a key role in numerous landmark British patent decisions, particularly in the area of standard-essential patents (SEPs) and FRAND licenses. In Insulet Corp. v. EOFlow Co., No. 2025-1807, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit completely overturned the original $452 million judgment (which had already been reduced by the District Court to $59.4 million) in favor of Insulet. In its decision of June 2, 2026, in the case of Fujifilm v. Kodak, the UPC Board of Appeal provided comprehensive clarifications regarding so-called “long-arm jurisdiction”—that is, the question of whether the UPC can also rule on national patent claims outside the UPC territory (such as in the United Kingdom). In 14 guiding principles, the judges established specific procedural rules for various categories of cases. There is no automatic UPC jurisdiction over national patent claims outside the UPC territory. The Munich Regional Court has issued an arrest warrant against the managing director of Polytech Health & Aesthetics GmbH because he is alleged to have continued to exploit the Brazilian company Silimed's patent for breast implants despite a preliminary injunction. A number of IT and automotive industry associations—which are among the most frequent users of Inter Partes Reviews (IPR) at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office—have filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court, urging the Court to grant Google's certiorari petition. An attorney for a Las Vegas performer has asked a California federal judge to temporarily prohibit Taylor Swift from using “The Life of a Showgirl” as a trademark while the trademark lawsuit is pending. Swift's attorney called the lawsuit baseless. And now let's hear Ken discuss creator law with Franklin! AI, Platform Law, and the Creator Economy: What Businesses Need to Know Now Franklin Graves has spent his entire career watching digital content move through systems that most people never see. He started in marketing at a major music label right out of law school, then represented individual creators on YouTube in a pro bono capacity, then moved to the platform side at Eventbrite, and today works as Senior Product Counsel at LinkedIn, where he focuses on AI, data, and the regulatory questions that come with both. His recently published law review article, Upload Complete: An Introduction to Creator Economy Law, is the first academic paper to address the creator economy as a distinct legal field. In a recent episode of the IP Fridays podcast, he spoke with host Kenneth Suzan about responsible AI development, platform regulation, and what it actually means to own your audience in a world where the rules keep changing overnight. From Content Creator to Platform Lawyer The through-line in Graves’ career is a genuine understanding of how content moves from an idea in someone’s head to an audience on a screen. That experience, he argues, is precisely what in-house counsel needs right now. Lawyers working on AI and product development cannot afford to sit at a distance from the technology they are advising on. They need to use the tools, experience them as a creator or end user would, and understand the nuances of how a product actually operates before it reaches the public. Understanding the product first is the precondition for everything else. That philosophy translates directly into how he approaches responsible AI implementation. The landscape of AI standards is crowded: NIST frameworks, the EU AI Act, sector-specific guidance, and a growing body of industry-adopted best practices. The challenge for in-house counsel is not knowing that these standards exist. It is making them actionable for the engineering and product teams they support. Abstract principles need to become concrete controls and workflows. Graves offers one practical shortcut: most companies already have open source software review processes that involve the right stakeholders, the right sign-off levels, and the right security checks. Layering the specifics of generative AI or large language models onto those existing processes is far more efficient than building something new from scratch. A Fragmented Regulatory World The geopolitical dimension of AI regulation is something Graves thinks about constantly in his role at LinkedIn. The EU AI Act, shifting US executive orders, and country-specific approaches to data privacy have created a regulatory environment that can change the rules of the game without warning. His analogy is instructive: creators have long understood what it means to build a community on a platform they do not own. An algorithm change, a policy update, or a government ban can wipe out years of audience-building overnight. Businesses deploying AI tools globally now face a structurally similar problem. The response, for creators and for platforms alike, is to build resilience rather than rely on stability that may not last. TikTok is the clearest recent example. When the platform faced the prospect of being shut down in the United States on national security grounds, it triggered a broader conversation about platform dependence that had been building for years. Creators who had invested their entire business in one platform suddenly confronted the possibility that their audience could simply disappear. The lesson is not that platforms are bad. It is that concentration of any kind, whether it is your audience, your data pipeline, or your regulatory compliance strategy, creates fragility. What Is a Creator, Legally Speaking? One of the central contributions of Graves’ law review article is definitional. The terminology matters more than it might seem. When courts and regulators talk about creators without a shared understanding of what that word means, the resulting legal analysis tends to miss the mark. Graves draws a distinction between users who post content, creators who post with the intent to build an audience and eventually monetize it, and influencers, a subset of creators who are actively running a small business through their content. The difference is intent. A parent posting family photos on Facebook is a user. Someone building a subscription community around their professional expertise is running a business, and the legal framework that applies to them should reflect that. That distinction matters practically when it comes to liability. As more creators build their own platforms, whether through custom membership sites, open source tools like Ghost, or federated social networks, they take on obligations that previously fell to large platforms: content moderation policies, privacy notices, terms of service, and compliance with data regulations across multiple jurisdictions. A creator in Tennessee running a membership platform with subscribers in Germany is operating a global business, whether they think of themselves that way or not. Protecting Children Online: A Question Without a Clean Answer The tension between age verification and privacy is one of the more difficult problems in platform law right now. Australia, several European countries, and a growing number of US states have introduced or passed minimum age requirements for social media accounts. The technical challenge is real: verifying age online requires collecting identifying information, and collecting identifying information creates privacy risk, particularly for the young people the laws are designed to protect. Who should bear the responsibility for that verification is also unresolved. Is it the platform? The app store? The mobile operating system? Graves does not pretend there is a clean answer, but he points to the mobile layer as an underexplored option. The Apple App Store and Google Play Store already have significant leverage over which apps reach users on their devices. Whether that leverage should extend to age verification is a question that deserves more attention than it currently receives. The Right of Publicity in the Age of AI Voice cloning, digital replicas, and AI-generated synthetic media have pushed the right of publicity into territory that traditional IP law was not designed to cover. Trademark law, copyright law, and existing publicity rights each capture part of the problem but none of them covers it completely. The result, as Graves describes it, is a period of experimentation: lawyers filing trademarks on vocal sounds and phrases, states updating their publicity statutes to explicitly mention artificial intelligence, and entertainment unions negotiating over who controls a performance and any AI-generated iterations of it. Tennessee’s Elvis Act is a concrete example of the legislative response: the state updated its right of publicity law to include voice and to reference AI directly. Similar efforts are underway elsewhere. The underlying challenge is calibrating protection so that it gives creators and performers meaningful control over their likeness and voice without foreclosing the development of generative AI systems that depend on broad rights to process and learn from content. Somewhere between those two interests, a workable legal framework needs to emerge. The brand deal context may be where the issue becomes most immediately practical. When a brand partners with an influencer and the campaign involves generative AI in any form, the contract needs to address control explicitly. Who has final approval over how the influencer’s likeness or voice is used in AI-generated deliverables? What happens to those assets after the campaign ends? These are not hypothetical questions. They are contract drafting problems that any brand counsel or creator attorney should be addressing today. What Comes Next Graves is cautious about predictions, but his sense of direction is clear. The regulatory environment will continue to fragment before it converges. The right of publicity will be updated, imperfectly, in more jurisdictions. Creators will continue to move toward owning more of their infrastructure. And the lawyers who do this work best will be the ones who understand the technology well enough to translate it into practical, defensible decisions for the people they advise. Full Transcript: Ken Suzan: Thank you, Rolf. Our returning guest today is Franklin Graves. Franklin is the founder and editor of Creator Economy Law, a website and newsletter that educates creator economy professionals on the intersection of law and policy with the world of creators, brands, and platforms. Franklin also published the first law review article focused on the creator economy, Upload Complete, an introduction to creator economy law. He regularly appears across news and media outlets as a commentator and contributor with a focus on educating creators and raising awareness of all legal aspects of the creator economy. Franklin is based in Nashville, Tennessee. Ken Suzan: Franklin was invited to participate as one of the creators and creator economy professionals in the first ever White House creator economy conference. Franklin works full time as a product counsel at LinkedIn Corporation. As a member of the product and data team, he focuses on emerging issues in AI and data. Franklin previously held roles on the technology law group at HCA Healthcare, the commercial legal team at Eventbrite, and the business and legal affairs team at Naxos Music Group. Welcome back Franklin to the IP Fridays podcast. Franklin Graves: Thank you so much for having me. It is exciting to be back and reflecting over the last decade since I last joined and also the paper that I wrote that dives into this in more detail. So I really appreciate it. And yes, full disclosure, I currently work for LinkedIn, which is a subsidiary of Microsoft. I’m here in my personal capacity to talk about this, the paper I wrote before joining LinkedIn and all of that. So thank you so much for having me back. Ken Suzan: Excellent. So Franklin, since your last appearance on IP Fridays in 2017, your career has evolved significantly. You are now senior product counsel at LinkedIn focusing on AI and data. How has working inside a major tech platform changed your perspective on the legal frameworks governing digital content compared to when you were viewing it purely from the creator side? Franklin Graves: I appreciate that question because when I wrote the article, I did not work for LinkedIn. And I had been coming from a history in my career where I, right out of law school, worked for a record label like we talked about almost 10 years ago. And I was on the content creation side. I’ve represented a major distributor of classical music digitally at the time. And that was my first exposure to understanding how content was taken from the initial inception stage from creators and routed through all the various digital platforms that were at the time still evolving and even arguably still today continue to evolve. The early days of YouTube Music launching and then Apple Music launching, and then going through all the phases of high-res audio and everything that came after that. So that was an interesting perspective to start my career with. And then I went to Eventbrite, which is a ticketing platform, but was also focused on elevating event creators. They kind of took on that moniker of “Hey, we are event creators that we support.” And that was arguably my first exposure to the platform side, the tech platform side of it, because Eventbrite is a platform. And so then I evolved from there in my personal capacity, in a pro bono capacity representing individual creators across the YouTube space. And that’s what we talked about a little bit back when I first came on the podcast. Franklin Graves: Over the last decade, it’s been a chance to grow my own understanding of the creator economy. The terminology “creator economy” came around. And then now on the other side of it, having written the article and all that, and now being fully in-house at LinkedIn, I truly am experiencing a social media platform. LinkedIn is of course arguably way more than just the platform itself. There are so many different avenues to it, but it is a chance for me to understand what it is like working for a company that is operating the platform that people are distributing content on. There’s a user journey to content and all of that. So it’s definitely enhanced and given me a different perspective from a major tech platform side. And part of my role at LinkedIn is really heavily focused on understanding regulation and how that from an AI and data perspective impacts the company. And so I’ve been really leveling up my game over the last year and a half that I’ve been here, understanding mostly EU regulations, but also US regulations that are still in their infancy when it comes to AI. But really when it comes to privacy and data, those are pretty well established across the board. It’s been kind of a combination of what I learned at Eventbrite, because I went to Eventbrite when GDPR was going into effect. And so that was an eyes-wide-open moment of getting in the weeds with negotiating data processing agreements, understanding data transfers and cross-border data transfers and the like. So it’s been kind of an evolution as the laws and regulations have evolved. So has my career, so has my own understanding, so have the platforms’ responses to those laws and regulations. And I’m sure that probably resonates with a lot of your listeners who have also been growing their practice and their understanding as the laws and regulations in this realm have been evolving too. Ken Suzan: Yes, indeed. Now let’s switch gears and talk about AI. You advise on AI and data daily. As platforms integrate generative AI tools into their tech stacks, what are the most critical best practices in-house counsel should be adopting right now to embed responsible AI principles into product development? Franklin Graves: So as an attorney, one of my key roles is to understand the technology. Even representing creators and working for creator platforms, that’s something I’m constantly trying to do: put myself in the shoes of being a creator. And I think I talked about this last time I was on, but I come from a background where I was working for a major label doing marketing, video editing, social media work. And I was creating content. I understood the whole life cycle from the inception point of an idea to execution and then to the final delivery and distribution of that content to an audience within a major music label. And so part of that is the same thing that I think attorneys, especially in-house, should be doing: using the tools that the product and engineering teams are either developing in-house or partnering with third parties to develop, or a combination of the two. Using them, understanding them, using them as a creator would, using them as an end user or a client or customer would. And making sure that if you understand the product and understand the nuances of how it operates, and being a part of the iterations of that internally before it fully ramps, that really gives you a chance to understand: okay, we have a lot of responsible AI principles and standards and protocols that are in existence right now, whether it’s NIST, whether it’s based on the EU AI Act or anything and everything in between. It’s understanding how to apply those and bring those into a product and an engineering environment in a way that is practical and actionable for the people that you’re supporting, the stakeholders you’re supporting. So I think one of the critical best practices is, number one, understand the product or features that you’re supporting. Franklin Graves: And then understand how you as an attorney can use your expertise and understanding of responsible AI practices, whether it’s a regulatory standard or an industry-adopted standard or a hybrid of the two, to leverage those and implement those, break those down and make them into actionable controls and processes and flows that work within your existing infrastructure. That’s a lot of high-level talk, but that’s the general idea. One concrete example we talk about frequently is with open source AI. If you’re working with a product team or an engineering team that is taking an off-the-shelf open source model and bringing that in-house, a lot of times companies have pre-existing open source processes that cover the use of open source software or code. Piggyback on that. That’s the easiest quick win for attorneys: leveraging your existing open source processes to just build on top of that the AI flavor and layering. It’s not very much that you have to do, but the underlying process of the key stakeholders that need to be involved in the review, whether it’s security, whether it’s executive sign-off if it gets to that point, even export control considerations should already be part of your existing open source software process. So layering in on those existing processes the specifics of generative AI or large language models that you’re trying to bring in is a great way to put this into practice. Ken Suzan: Now looking at the geopolitical landscape that we currently have, we have the EU AI Act setting strict standards and shifting US executive orders. How should platforms and brands prepare for this fragmented regulatory environment when deploying AI tools to a global user base? Franklin Graves: It’s a great question. It’s something that is still evolving, I think is fair to say. I would equate it, as I do in the paper that I wrote, to how creators and arguably brands don’t own the platforms that they’re building their communities on. That spawned this concept of de-platforming or going into building your own platform, a decentralized platform of sorts, and owning your community. That gives you that control and takes away the level of instability that can come for creators trying to build a business on a platform they don’t own, they don’t control when certain updates happen, when algorithms change, when tools and functionalities either become available or go away completely. So it’s very similar to what we’ve been experiencing in a regulatory environment where we have geopolitical complexities, for lack of a better term, that can overnight seemingly disrupt the way in which a platform or even a multinational brand is able to connect and reach an audience or continue to leverage the user base that they’ve built. I think TikTok is a great example of that, where it became a national security concern and suddenly it was facing an executive order that required it to be effectively disabled in the US or completely owned and operated by a US entity. All the mechanics and technicalities of whether it’s actually possible and still have a global platform with a global user base is a whole different discussion. But that’s an example of very similar considerations that are now not just a discussion point at the creator level or the individual brand level, but also in a much broader context at a platform level as well. Ken Suzan: Franklin, let’s now shift gears and talk about your article. In your recently published journal article, Upload Complete, which we will have linked in our show notes, you advocate for a shift in terminology from internet creator law, a term used during our first podcast almost a decade ago, to creator economy law. Why is this distinction important and how does it change the way legal practitioners should view the ecosystem of creators, brands, and platforms? Franklin Graves: Oh yes, this is part of the reason why I wanted to write the article: to lay this foundation of understanding. Because at the time I’d written the article, the term creator economy and creator had really not appeared but for maybe once in an actual court decision. And it was kind of focused on influencers and this concept, and it was just not getting it right. And so it was also, as you mentioned, when we first spoke I was even using the term internet creators. And I think that was something that was common at the time. The “internet” portion as a qualifier has since dropped off. And now for purposes of the creator economy, the term creators refers to individuals, it can be small businesses, which is what we’ve seen from a regulatory standpoint, how these small businesses are being impacted by regulations. But essentially creators in the article I pin in the context of intent. What is the intent behind the person or the small business that is posting content, trying to build a community and form a community in a virtual environment? And then that can even spill over into real physical world environments. And so the intent is kind of what I look at. Franklin Graves: And I have a chart in the article that has a diagram showcasing the overlap of what I refer to as “users generating content.” It’s a play on the concept of user-generated content, UGC. Users generating content is that large bucket of anyone posting on a platform of some kind. And within that large bucket, that large circle, are smaller subsets. You have creators, you have brands. Those are really the two buckets you can put people into. Otherwise it’s like your grandmother or your parents posting content on Facebook or Instagram, and those are everyday users of a platform. The distinction to get into that subcategory of being a creator more so has been analyzing the intent behind the posting. Are you posting content to build an audience, to build a community, to eventually have a chance to monetize the following that you’re bringing in or sell services or something like that? Brands are posting for that reason. Creators are maybe posting for that same reason. But even within the creator category, there’s a subcategory of influencers that are trying to sell something, that are trying to build more than just an awareness of who they are, their influence. They are trying to do brand deals, partnership deals, upsells and all that, and start an actual small business aside from just the content itself that they’re creating. So that’s kind of the distinctions that I make in the paper. And that’s why it’s important to understand and lay that foundation, that anyone can post content online, but the intent, the why behind their posting that content, really does ultimately matter, especially when you’re looking at it from a court case or from a regulatory standpoint. Ken Suzan: Now, Franklin, we’re seeing unprecedented geopolitical activity around platform ownership. For example, the US legislation targeting TikTok and Brazil’s recent temporary ban of X. How do these macro-level battles impact the day-to-day livelihood of creators? And how can they legally and operationally protect themselves? Franklin Graves: So the shift that we’re seeing, and I alluded to this earlier in our conversation, is this concept of Web 3. And that term may or may not be really popular anymore, but that’s essentially what we’re looking at: a shift into a federated, decentralized operation of a platform. So instead of one owner, one company, one entity owning and operating the platform, it’s decentralized. Anyone can start up a server, and it’s interoperable, meaning anyone can plug and play and connect to that larger network. And it creates this unified social network experience. Within each operating node of that network, there can be your own decisions around content moderation, your own decisions around the hosting providers you use, where you’re operating out of, the terms and conditions that apply to that. But the flip side is that instead of creators posting and sharing in a closed environment run and controlled by a singular entity, you’re now experiencing a peer-to-peer type operation where your experience can change based on which server, which node, which user you’re engaging with. You might have content that’s acceptable in one area but not acceptable in another, and maybe it just doesn’t even show up in that other area. Franklin Graves: But from a liability standpoint, as creators start to build their own networks and communities, even outside of a concept like the fediverse, it’s even down to creators building their own communities through online courses, subscription membership-based platforms that they run on their own website. There’s open source software out there, even something called Ghost, where you have memberships. And that is a creator or a small business in the creator economy that is now taking on the obligations that would typically fall upon a platform. They need to take into consideration terms and conditions, privacy policies, legal aspects, and regulatory considerations for running a platform, especially in a global world. So it’s a lot of liability that then shifts over to those small businesses and even brands sometimes that are doing the same thing. Whether it is something as simple or complex as content moderation or all the way up to monetizing an audience, this new world where creators can spin up and run a platform all dovetails back to the concept of creators not feeling like they have control in reaching the audience and the community that they’re building on an individual platform. And so this really became more mainstream conversation with TikTok and the issues around it potentially being shut down in the US. That was kind of the mindset shift and eyes opening for many creators, especially within the influencer subset, of realizing: we need to make sure that we have a way to reach the audience we’ve built if the individual platform that we’ve committed to over the last year or three years or so is no longer available. We need a way to continue that relationship outside of that one platform controlling it. Ken Suzan: Franklin, we have a few minutes left and a number of topics. So I’m going to switch gears and talk about a few issues. First, a major emerging topic in your paper is the evolution of protecting kids online. With state-level age-gating laws like the CAADCA and the recent FTC updates to COPPA, how should platforms navigate the significant tension between strict age verification mandates and the privacy and First Amendment rights of their users? Franklin Graves: Man, that is a whole discussion to unravel. It is a consideration that we’re seeing happen again, going back to the geopolitical nature of everything. Countries like Australia and certain countries in Europe and now even individual states in the US are trying to look at ways, and some of them have already put into place minimum age requirements before you can even sign up for an account with a social media platform. One of the things I’d just highlight quickly here is that one of the tensions is around how you verify someone’s age online and still maintain the ability to be at least pseudonymous. How do you still have a level of privacy, autonomy, and protection when it comes to having to provide something like a driver’s license or have parental consent tied and connected to an account managed by a parent in a situation where maybe it’s not appropriate or not beneficial to the child in that manner? But then maybe there are counterbalancing factors that outweigh that. All of that comes down to the technicalities of how it’s actually implemented and maintaining the sense of openness and freedom that we’ve had on the internet to date. And then the other element there is, since a lot of the internet that we think of today is more so through mobile applications, is it something that the mobile operating system providers and app store providers should be thinking about? So whether that’s the Google Play Store or the Apple App Store, where does that initial age verification need to fall? Is it at the platform level? Is it the app store or mobile device management level or something else? Yeah, there’s a lot to discuss there. And a lot of the issues we’re seeing with how the internet is changing in terms of being able to browse a website without disclosing personal information that might not have been required before is largely stemming from a focus on protecting children online. Ken Suzan: It sounds like, Franklin, we could have another episode covering lots of issues connected with that one topic alone. Franklin Graves: I would absolutely agree with that. There’s a lot going on there. And again, it’s different across the world. And so I know you all have a global listener base. And so there’s a lot of nuances to that whole discussion too, that are worth exploring. Ken Suzan: Last question for today’s episode is regarding the right of publicity. With the explosion of AI-generated synthetic media, digital replicas, and voice cloning, the right of publicity is taking center stage. What are the biggest legal risks for brands partnering with influencers right now? And how can creators protect their most valuable asset, their likeness? Franklin Graves: That’s a great question. I think we’re seeing kind of a throwing-spaghetti-against-the-wall-to-see-what-sticks approach right now by a lot of different parties, whether it’s trademark attorneys, whether it’s general entertainment attorneys or whoever. For example, we’ve seen Taylor Swift filing trademarks to protect certain sounds of her voice and phrasing that she uses. It’s a difficult area because in the realm of generative AI with deep fakes and virtual avatars, that is where it gets tricky, because traditional IP laws are just not able to fully cover that spectrum. It’s a piecemeal approach, but even then it doesn’t fully cover it. So for example, I’m based in Tennessee and a couple of years ago we had the Elvis Act that updated our right of publicity law to add voice and to explicitly reference artificial intelligence. And so that’s the kind of effort we’re probably going to continue to see: efforts to develop some framework around protecting what is essentially a privacy right, in a manner that doesn’t restrict generative AI systems from continuing to develop and operate the way they’re operating now, while layering in those protections so that in the US at least a First Amendment right doesn’t necessarily get squashed, and those traditional well-recognized efforts to not overregulate a technology in its early stages are respected. Franklin Graves: And so I think a lot of what we’re seeing is just a need to update laws. The SAG-AFTRA debate and the strikes that happened around maintaining control of your performance and any iterations of that, or building upon that by a media company that might come later, it’s all on the table right now and still being discussed, still being worked out. I think in the short run, a lot of times if it’s in a brand deal, the key question is: if you are using generative AI to enhance in some way the final deliverable for the campaign, who has control over that? Who has final say and sign-off on how that likeness or that digital replica or that person’s voice is represented? And even outside of the brand space, we’ve seen actors like James Earl Jones signing over certain aspects like their voice and allowing it to continue to be used in these manners powered by generative AI as Darth Vader. And I think I saw something that Boy George was even starting up an AI company that allows musicians, the original recording artist, to rerecord new versions of their masters so that they don’t miss out on that revenue. It’s powered by generative AI, by taking their voice now, which is significantly different than it was back in the 80s, and using generative AI to make it sound closer to the original, but all based on their current performance. So I think it’s still an evolving area. And what’s interesting too is on the platform side, we’re seeing the early stages of platforms like Google starting to acknowledge and rely on the license grant contained in their terms of service for YouTube, which grants them broad rights to use the content to run their platform. So all that to be said, it’s still early stages. I’m very interested to see where we go from here in the future, especially from a global perspective as well. Ken Suzan: Franklin, I could spend hours talking to you about this. You’re such a knowledgeable person on these topics. Maybe in a few years, will we connect again and talk further on AI and all the things that are yet to be developed? Franklin Graves: Thank you. Yeah, it doesn’t have to be another decade. Maybe we can cut it to half a decade, given the pace at which technology is going now. Ken Suzan: Sounds good, Franklin. Thanks again for being on the IP Fridays podcast.

The PIMCON Countdown Continues! Get a preview of the insights, strategies, and stories you'll see this year at the PIMCON stage. The personal injury industry is entering a new era. Outside capital is flowing into the market, consolidation is accelerating, and the firms that adapt fastest may have a significant advantage over the next decade. Chad Dudley is the founding partner of Dudley DeBosier Injury Lawyers and CEO of Orion Legal MSO. After helping build a firm that has recovered more than $1.8 billion for injured clients, Chad is now helping shape one of the biggest shifts the plaintiffs' bar has seen through the launch of Orion and its growing network of partner firms. In this episode, Chad returns to Personal Injury Mastermind to explain why MSOs are gaining momentum, how outside investment is changing the economics of personal injury law, and what firm owners should think about as consolidation reshapes the competitive landscape. On this episode, you'll learn: Why law firm consolidation is accelerating across the personal injury industry. How to scale with an MSO while preserving culture, leadership, and brand identity. What outside capital for law firms can unlock beyond traditional financing options. Why elite client service remains an advantage as competition and acquisition costs increase. Unlock the exact strategies to scale your firm by heading over to pimcon.org and securing your tickets for PIMCON 2026. Like what you hear? Hit Subscribe! We do this every week.  For more resources on how to dominate your market, visit us at Rankings.io. Subscribe to our newsletter and get the freshest news every Monday: newsletter.rankings.io Get Social! Personal Injury Mastermind w/ Chris Dreyer powered by Rankings.io is on Instagram | YouTube | TikTok

What happens when one man has seen the justice system from EVERY angle?In this powerful episode of Inside The Vault, Ash Cash sits down with The Fly Lawyer — a man who has lived multiple lives in one lifetime. From U.S. Army Paratrooper to Atlanta Police Officer, Criminal Defense Attorney, Prosecutor, Judge, Entrepreneur, Music Artist, and Millionaire, his story is unlike anything you've heard before.The Fly Lawyer shares how he transformed his life from growing up in Atlanta's projects to becoming one of the most recognized attorneys in Georgia. He breaks down the realities of the criminal justice system, the mindset that helped him build wealth, why positivity is his superpower, and how branding himself changed everything.This conversation isn't just about law — it's about reinvention, ownership, purpose, and refusing to put yourself in a box.If you've ever wondered how successful people continue evolving while others stay stuck, this episode is for you.

AI is not just changing how lawyers work. It is changing how lawyers learn. In episode 624 of the Lawyerist Podcast, Zack Glaser talks with April Dawson, Associate Dean of Technology and Innovation and Professor of Law at North Carolina Central University School of Law, about what AI means for legal education, new lawyer training, and the future of law practice.  April explains why law schools can no longer rely on written work alone to measure whether students truly understand the material. As AI becomes embedded in legal writing, research, and drafting tools, new lawyers will need to prove their value in different ways, including verbal explanation, critical thinking, judgment, and the ability to use technology responsibly.  Together, they explore how AI may shrink traditional mentorship opportunities, why new lawyers need to become more self-directed learners, and how legal employers may increasingly expect graduates to arrive with real AI fluency. April also shares why small firm owners should rethink their workflows from beginning to end instead of layering AI on top of inefficient systems.  If you are wondering what the next generation of lawyers needs to know, this episode offers a practical look at how AI is reshaping legal education, law firm training, and the skills lawyers will need to stay valuable.  Listen to our previous episodes on AI Skills New Lawyers Need Now.  #619: What Claude Means for Law Firms: AI Skills, Connectors, and Workflow Strategy, with Sam Harden Apple | Spotify | LTN  #590: Innovating Without Overwhelm: Practical AI Tips for Lawyers, with Graydon Trusler  Apple | Spotify | LTN   #577: Rethinking Law Firm Growth in the Age of AI, with Sam Harden Apple | Spotify | LTN  #553: AI Tools and Processes Every Lawyer Should Use, with Catherine Sanders Reach Apple | Spotify | LTN  Have thoughts about today's episode? Join the conversation on LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram, and X!   If today's podcast resonates with you and you haven't read The Small Firm Roadmap Revisited yet, get the first chapter right now for free! Looking for help beyond the book? See if our coaching community is right for you.   Access more resources from Lawyerist at lawyerist.com.   Chapters / Timestamps:  00:00 – Introduction01:20 – What Claude for Legal Shows Lawyers About AI05:20 – Using AI Without Starting from Scratch09:20 – Meet April Dawson10:40 – Why Law School Can't Teach the Same Way12:05 – Why Writing Alone No Longer Proves Understanding13:20 – The Skills Clients Will Actually Measure16:05 – Why “Strong Writer” Is Now Table Stakes18:15 – What New Lawyers Lose When AI Does the First Draft19:25 – How New Lawyers Can Learn Faster with AI22:55 – Building Judgment Without 20 Years of Experience27:10 – Why AI May Help New Lawyers Start Firms Sooner28:35 – What Small Firms Should Rethink Before Adding AI31:50 – Why AI-Savvy Lawyers Will Stand Out34:15 – The Risk of Automating Broken Processes36:15 – Closing Thoughts 

Today’s Phone Tap victim has been chatting with a woman named Juniper for about a week, but before their first date, he needs to talk to her representation, and unfortunately that means BROOKE!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today’s Phone Tap victim has been chatting with a woman named Juniper for about a week, but before their first date, he needs to talk to her representation, and unfortunately that means BROOKE!See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The six hundred thousand dollars is not the point. The defense says that's what Alex Murdaugh spent on his defense because of Becky Hill's interference. But they didn't file this suit to recover legal fees. They filed it in federal court because federal court gives them access to tools that the state murder case doesn't provide.In the murder case, the defense gets what the prosecution gives them in discovery. In the federal lawsuit, the defense controls the investigation. They can put people under oath. They can demand documents. They can subpoena courthouse staff, officials, and anyone else who might have been in a position to know what Hill was doing with the jury. If anyone knew and didn't report it, the defense finds out through this lawsuit — not through the prosecution's case file.Griffin's press conference question was simple: was she a lone wolf? That's not a rhetorical question. It's the framework for the entire suit. If the answer is no — if someone else was aware — the defense carries that into retrial. A juror who was dismissed the day of deliberations has also filed a separate motion to unseal the state's investigation into Hill. Bob Motta on what all of it means. Tony Brueski, Robin Dreeke, and Bob Motta.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #BeckyHill #MurdaughRetrial #FederalLawsuit #BobMotta #DefenseDiaries #ColletonCounty #JuryTampering #TrueCrime #HiddenKillers

Dick Harpootlian and Jim Griffin are doing something unusual for a defense team heading into a retrial — they're telling everyone what they plan to do. Harpootlian said on national television that his team has a strategy for the kennel video, the single most damaging piece of evidence from the first trial. That video placed Alex's voice at the Moselle kennels minutes before Maggie and Paul were killed. It forced Alex to admit he lied about his whereabouts. The first jury heard it and convicted in under three hours.Griffin went further. He pointed to unknown male DNA recovered from under Maggie's fingernails that was never run through CODIS. He confirmed the defense is bringing in new forensic cell phone experts to challenge the timeline. He laid out why a venue change might not work — Colleton County's demographics don't match the larger urban counties. And he described eight thousand pages of sworn testimony from the first trial as a roadmap for catching prosecution witnesses in inconsistencies.The defense also filed a federal lawsuit against Becky Hill that carries discovery tools the murder case doesn't provide. They're not just preparing for trial — they're running a parallel investigation. Criminal defense attorney Bob Motta on whether any of it actually shifts the outcome. Tony Brueski, Robin Dreeke, and Bob Motta.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #DickHarpootlian #MurdaughRetrial #KennelVideo #BobMotta #DefenseDiaries #MaggieMurdaugh #PaulMurdaugh #CODIS #TrueCrime

Watch the YouTube version of this episode HERETyson sits down with Darren Wurz to unpack what actually works when it comes to employee pay, bonuses, raises, and profitability inside a growing law firm. After appearing on Darren's Lawyer Millionaire podcast, Tyson knew this conversation needed to get in front of Maximum Lawyer listeners, especially the owners wrestling with labor costs as their biggest expense. He shares the stories, numbers, and mindset shifts that moved his firm from emotional, one‑off raises and complex bonus schemes to a simpler, more intentional compensation strategy that serves both people and profit.You will learn:How Tyson handled an 80% raise demand during COVID.Why automatic annual raises can backfire.How he replaced complex bonuses with higher salaries.How KPIs and job scorecards drive who earns more.How “non‑billable” roles are still tied to profit.The labor % Tyson targets to avoid bloat.Why he avoids full salary transparency in the firm.How AI is reshaping roles and headcount decisions.How an AI‑driven case management system boosted profit and morale.Tyson breaks down how his firm now uses job scorecards with a simple funnel of questions, starting with the purpose of the role, the top competencies, the key outcomes, and finally the numbers that prove success, to set clear KPIs for every seat. He explains why he prefers a lean team of A‑players, why labor savings from AI often get reinvested into higher salaries for remaining team members, and how he wrestles with the tension between not wanting to “replace people with AI” and making the right call for the business. He and Darren also get candid about raise requests that end in resignations, employees comparing salaries, and why your firm culture and compensation philosophy have to be aligned if you want to avoid long‑term resentment.If you are a law firm owner who wants to pay your people fairly, protect your margins, and make smart decisions about AI and staffing, Tyson's approach will help you move from guessing and reacting to using simple frameworks and numbers to drive compensation.Highlights0:23 – Tyson's background, PI firm, and “profit on purpose” theme for the year3:40 – The first raise request from an early employee and what he learned from it6:20 – The COVID‑era 80% raise demand and why he refused it12:10 – Scrapping a complex bonus system and moving to higher base salaries16:45 – Using job scorecards and KPIs to decide who actually earns more21:05 – Rethinking “billable vs. non‑billable” and tying every role to profit24:30 – Targeting ~38% labor costs and avoiding overstaffed, low‑profit firms29:15 – Why Tyson doesn't share everyone's salaries internally and the resentment risk34:20 – How AI is shrinking parts of multiple roles and the hard calls that follow47:10 – Increasing salaries when headcount drops and keeping A‑players happy52:30 – Why fewer KPIs are better and how to pick the ones that matter56:40 – What Tyson is reading now and how it shapes his leadership lensIf this episode helps you think differently about pay, raises, and AI in your firm, hit subscribe for more practical conversations on building a profitable, people‑first law practice, and share it with another lawyer who is tired of guessing on compensation.

The Joe Piscopo Show 6-23-26 Joe Piscopo is broadcasting live from the offices of Times Square Alliance overlooking Times Square in celebration of America's 250th Anniversary. 27:49- Dr. Carlos Campo, President and CEO of Museum of the Bible Topic: Museum of the Bible 40:40- Jeff Coltin, Editor-in-Chief of City & State New York Topic: Primary Day in New York 56:21- John Solomon, award-winning investigative journalist, founder of "Just The News," and the host of “Just the News, No Noise” on the Real America’s Voice network Topic: Primaries today; Three non-citizens admit to knowingly voting in federal elections despite ineligibility; Vandalism of reflecting pool; Other news of the day 1:05:27- Tom Harris, President of Times Square Alliance Topic: Broadcasting from Times Square Alliance; Upcoming events in Times Square 1:14:01- K.T. McFarland, Former Trump Deputy National Security Advisor and the author of "Revolution: Trump, Washington and 'We The People'” Topic: Iran peace talks in Switzerland 1:28:49- David Fischer, CEO of Landmark Capital Topic: Why now you should roll over a portion of your 401(k) and/or IRA into an IRA with physical gold and silver- PART 4 1:40:05- Arthur Aidala, former Brooklyn Prosecutor, star criminal defense attorney, and host of "The Arthur Aidala Power Hour" weeknights at 6 p.m. on AM 970 The Answer Topic: Broadcast from Times Square tonight 1:51:02- Mike Connors, Attorney at Law at Connors & Sullivan and host of "Ask the Lawyer," airing Saturdays at 6 p.m. and Sundays at 11 a.m. on AM 970 The Answer Topic: Broadcasting from Times Square; America's 250th Anniversary 2:06:03- Arthur Lih, Inventor & CEO of LifeVac and the author of "Sorry, Can't is a Lie" Topic: America's 250th; Portions of the proceeds of Patriots, Pasta, & Piscopo going to Equal First Aid 2:19:28- Chef Glenn Rolnick, Culinary Director of Carmine's Topic: What's on the menu for Patriots, Pasta, & Piscopo tomorrow nightSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Breaking up is hard to do. We'll make it a lil easier (and a lot funnier).Find a divorce pro who gets it at:⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠https://WTFdivorce.com⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠___Brought to you by⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠OurFamilyWizard⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ - Join more than 1 million parents & family law professionals who trust⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠ ⁠⁠OurFamilyWizard⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠⁠.***Featuring Guest, Jenny ShaneContact Divorce Coach: Jenny Shane

A federal agency wants to stop collecting certain employment demographic data. We'll hear from a former agency official who thinks that's a problem. And boiling up Palo Verde pods and grinding up mesquite beans with Cactus Kelly.

AI isn't coming for lawyers — but it is coming for the lawyers who don't adapt. Dr. Catherine McGregor joins Scott Love to break down exactly what technology transformation means for the legal profession and what lawyers can do right now to get ahead of it. Catherine is an executive coach, author, and management consultant who works with law firms and in-house legal teams on leadership and talent development in the age of AI. She and Lloyd Johnson co-authored Preparing Lawyers for Technology Transformation — a book Scott calls essential reading for every law firm leader, C-suite executive, and practicing attorney. In this episode you'll learn: What the "exponential age" means and why the pace of change is unlike anything before The 9 Exponential Age Mindset Attributes (EAMAs) every lawyer needs to develop Why clinging to the "just do the technical work" comfort zone is no longer enough How to shift from lawyer-as-technician to trusted strategic advisor The IRAC trap — and why leading with conclusions wins business How Bias Jiu-Jitsu helps lawyers recognize and leverage their own cognitive patterns Why fear of AI is really fear of identity loss — and how to work through it 3 actionable steps lawyers can take today to future-proof their practice If you're a law firm partner, in-house counsel, or legal professional navigating rapid change, this episode will give you a framework to not just survive the AI era — but lead through it. Visit: https://therainmakingpodcast.com/ YouTube: https://youtu.be/8WGkU9g6Ev0 ---------------------------------------- If you are a successful law firm partner or law firm founder and want to hear about other options, please book a time on Scott Love's calendar here: https://calendly.com/scott-736/half-hour-phone-meeting-with-scott Or email Scott to connect with him at: scott@attorneysearchgroup.com ----------------------------------------

“Someone in your office is stealing from you. They may not be stealing money and putting it into their own pocket, but they’re stealing time. They’re giving away work for free.” – RJon Robins, author of Profit First for Lawyers Many law firm owners focus on generating new business, increasing billable hours, and growing revenue. But bringing business into the firm is only part of what makes a law firm profitable. Have the Hard Conversations In this episode, Jose Luis Perdomo, Fractional CFO at How To Manage a Small Law Firm, discusses one of the most common threats to profitability: unpaid invoices and growing accounts receivable balances. Drawing from a Chapter 14 clip by RJon Robins from Profit First for Lawyers, Jose Luis explores why outstanding balances create more than a cash flow problem. They impact: Attorney and staff accountability Client expectations The long-term financial health of the firm And because collections conversations can feel uncomfortable, overdue balances are often allowed to linger while additional work continues to be performed. But every unpaid invoice that lingers as an accounts receivable balance represents labor, overhead, and resources that have already been invested. A best practice is to develop healthy collections practices long before an invoice becomes overdue. When collections become an afterthought, profitability suffers. Creating a Healthy Sustainable Business Every unpaid invoice tells a story. Often, that story begins long before work begins. Clear communication, well-defined expectations, replenishment policies, and accountability systems all play a role in the final outcome. The goal is not simply to collect money that is already owed. The goal is to build systems that make timely payment the natural outcome. That prevents “free work” from becoming a common practice in your firm and collection problems before they occur. This leads to stronger cash flow, healthier profit margins, and a more sustainable business that can help even more people. Mentioned Law Firm Diagnostic by How To Manage a Small Law Firm Business Plan worksheet G.A.S. Calls resource Chapter 14: For When You Really Take Profits Seriously Connect Subscribe to the Profit First for Lawyers podcast Watch episodes on YouTube And most importantly, order your copy of Profit First for Lawyers today!

Thom Francis welcomes poet, author, and educator Melody Davis to the Poets Speak Loud stage at McGeary's in downtown Albany, NY. She was the featured poet at the long-running open mic series on April 30, 2018. +++++ On April 30, 2018, Davis was the featured poet at the long-running series hosted by Mary Panza. She began her reading with work from her book One Ground Beetle: A Year in Haiku (Bad Cat Press, 2017), with prints by Harold Lohner. It was "Show & Tell" with Melody reading a haiku or two, then holding up the book to show the colorful print on the facing page. The haiku were on trees, clouds, birds, round stones, Albany, and work meetings. She then read from her collection of poems Holding the Curve (Broadstone Books), “Caillebotte's Laundry” and “Walter, the Lawyer.” Melody Davis, a writer and art historian, is the author of three poetry collections, including a special edition artists' book, One Ground Beetle, with Harold Lohner; and Holding the Curve. Her work in the history of photography has been published widely. In 2015, she published Women's Views: The Narrative Stereograph in Nineteenth-Century America with the University Press of New Hampshire. Davis has held fellowships from the National Endowment for the Arts, The Henry Luce Foundation, the Pennsylvania Council of the Arts, MetroArts (PA), and she was a finalist in the National Poetry Series. She holds a Ph.D. from the Graduate Center of the City University of New York and was an Associate Professor of Art History at the Sage College of Albany.

Headlines: – Welcome to Mo News + Toy Story 5 Box Office Success (02:00) – U.S.-Iran Talks Hit Challenges Immediately; Trump Threatens Hormuz Takeover (06:30) – President Trump Unveils New Air Force One (16:00) – Trump Admin. Tried To Block States From Regulating AI, But Some Are Forging Ahead (24:00) – The Memory-Chip Crisis Has Arrived (27:00) – Lincoln Memorial Reflecting Pool Woes: Algae, Peeling Paint & Vandalism (29:20) – AI Replacing Authors, Musicians, Lawyers (33:30) – U.S., Mexico, Germany Clinch Spots In World Cup Knockout Round (37:45) – Viral World Cup Fan Freddy: From Internet Sensation To White House Guest? (39:20) – On This Day In History (44:30) Thanks To Our Sponsors: – Monarch - 50% off your first year | Code: MONEWS – Factor - 50% off your first box | Code: monews50off –⁠ Industrious⁠ - Coworking office. 50% off day pass | Code: MONEWS50 – LMNT | Free Sample Pack with any LMNT drink mix or 12oz cans purchase – ⁠Boll & Branch⁠ – 15% off first order, plus free shipping | Code: MONEWS

What an attorney who reviews NIL deals sees in the contracts, and what college athletes may be signing away.Philip Sheng is an attorney at Venable LLP, a national firm of roughly 900 lawyers, where he works in the intellectual property group and the sports law practice. His focus is college NIL, the right of publicity, and college eligibility. Venable also advised Taylor Swift through her fight to control her music and re-record her catalog. Sheng notes that was the firm's matter rather than his own, but the throughline is the same question he now works on in college sports: who owns a person's name, image, and likeness, and what they give up when they sign.This is the on-the-ground legal view of NIL. For the full breakdown of how the system works, start with The NIL Hub, NIL Rules in 2026, and NIL Pros and Cons. This episode is narrower. It is what a practicing attorney sees inside the deals themselves.Eric Kasimov talks with Sheng about NIL as both a legal and an athlete-centered issue. They get into whether NIL is really athlete compensation, intellectual property, or both, and why the issue was known as the right of publicity long before college sports made it a household term. Sheng has lived the landscape from several sides. He played tennis at Stanford, competed as an ATP-ranked professional, and now has children navigating college athletics, including Division I basketball and tennis.TopicsNIL as intellectual property and the right of publicityThe College Sports Commission and how it reviews NIL dealsThe Nebraska and PlayFly case, and why the contracts were the problemWhy even a small NIL deal needs its rights language reviewedHow brands can work with role players, not only star athletesRoster cuts in non-revenue sports like tennis and swimmingHigh school NIL, state-by-state rules, and protecting minorsSports betting, college students, and the value of staying in schoolChapters in This Episode00:00 Philip Sheng's background in law, tennis, and college sports00:36 Venable LLP, intellectual property, NIL, and sports law02:11 NIL as right of publicity03:15 Stanford, conference realignment, and athlete travel04:13 The burden on student-athletes06:29 What college sports used to be for07:00 Money, transfers, and the changing athlete experience09:20 NIL checks, taxes, and athlete education09:36 Bad agents and why guidance matters12:25 Has NIL gone too far?13:00 Congress, courts, media, fans, and pressure to change16:11 Money, rosters, and the college experience19:05 What the College Sports Commission does20:00 Fair market value, valid business purpose, and NIL deal review20:55 Nebraska, PlayFly, and unclear NIL contracts22:39 Why the Nebraska case was not just bad paperwork23:40 Why other schools are watching25:00 Lawyers, arbitration costs, and legal representation26:18 Sheng's view of the CSC and NCAA enforcement28:46 College football playoff expansion and media money31:00 What happens if schools sell marquee games differently32:43 Why championships still matter34:50 Sheng's work with non-revenue sports and NIL contracts36:08 Why brands should look beyond star athletes38:47 Are NIL contracts becoming standardized?39:45 Why athletes need contract review40:38 Rights, music, Taylor Swift, and long-term ownership42:02 College tennis, roster cuts, and non-revenue sports44:29 International athletes and college tennis47:25 Similar issues in soccer and goalkeeper recruiting48:00 High school NIL and state-by-state rules49:37 Youth sports, money, and family pressure50:29 Sports betting, college students, and addiction risk52:00 Athlete data, betting markets, and protection54:00 The cost and value of college55:00 Why athletes should not discount the college experience57:25 Athletic fees, non-athletes, and campus tension58:57 Burnout, injuries, and changing paths59:28 Where to find Philip ShengAbout Philip ShengPhilip Sheng is an attorney at Venable LLP, where he works in the firm's intellectual property group and sports law practice. His work includes NIL, the right of publicity, college eligibility, NCAA eligibility, and athlete-related legal issues. He has practiced law for 15 years.He is also a former Stanford tennis player and a former ATP-ranked professional. That background gives him a view of college sports from both sides, as a former athlete and as an attorney working in NIL and intellectual property. He also brings a parent's perspective, with children competing in Division I basketball and tennis. The combination shapes how he thinks about NIL, athlete contracts, non-revenue sports, and the value of the college experience.Connect with Philip Sheng:X | LinkedIn | Venable LLPConnect with Eric and SportsEpreneur:LinkedIn | X | SportsEpreneur on LinkedIn | SportsEpreneur on XRelated SportsEpreneur NIL ContentThe NIL HubNIL Pros and Cons | The College Game Is Changed ForeverWhat the Protect College Sports Act Reveals About Athlete RepresentationDid You Know You're Paying for College Sports?

» Produced by Hack You Media: pioneering a new category of content at the intersection of health performance, entrepreneurship & cognitive optimisation.Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/hackyoumedia/Website: https://hackyou.media/James Sexton, a divorce lawyer, on why fear is good, why marriage needs a plan, and why heartbreak matters.As someone who sees relationships fail every day, James explains that scepticism about marriage is actually healthy, real bravery requires fear. Most people don't realise marriage is the most legally significant thing you'll do and enter it with zero plan, yet they plan everything in fitness. Passion and chemistry don't equal partnership compatibility, and complacency kills relationships when partners stop trying after "locking someone in." Relationships need intentionality, maintenance, and honest feedback like any other area of life.The hardest part isn't falling in love, it's believing you're worthy of it. Heartbreak is painful but beautiful because grief proves you had something worth losing, and those experiences create the depth most people never experience.00:00 Introduction06:21 Past Relationships and Compatibility10:19 Relationships as Career vs Side Hustle14:55 Designing a Perfect Life Without Marriage18:40 Complacency and Maintenance in Marriage27:10 Honesty and Difficult Conversations in Relationships30:21 Teaching Relationship Skills and Managing Disconnection35:12 Comparison Between Fitness and Relationships40:42 Age and Experience in Love and Marriage45:48 Intentionality in Relationships and Maintaining Love50:01 Appreciating and Valuing Relationships55:14 Overcoming Fear and Embracing Love1:02:59 The Importance of Having Children1:05:47 Financial Stability and Motivation with Children1:11:22 Fame, Wealth, and Relationship Challenges1:18:10 Performance Art in Relationships and Social Media1:25:33 Belief in Love and Life's Fundamental Questions» Escape the 9-5 & build your dream life - https://www.digitalplaybook.net/» Transform your physique - https://www.thrstapp.com/» My clothing brand, THRST - https://thrstofficial.com» Discover Bioniq Lab peptide products- https://bioniqlab.com/mike1010% off with code MIKE10» Join our newsletter for actionable insights from every episode: https://thrst-letter.beehiiv.com/» Join Whoop and get your first month for free - join.whoop.com/FirstThingsThrst» Follow JamesInstagram: https://www.instagram.com/nycdivorcelawyer/?hl=enWebsite: https://www.nycdivorces.com/

Steve Riley sits down with attorney Kent Berk this week, on Great Practice, Great Life, to unpack a case every lawyer needs to understand: United States v. Heppner. A former CEO who used a free Claude account to draft thirty-one documents before he was indicted, and prosecutors seized every one of them. The judge ruled none of it was privileged because no attorney directed the work. The bigger lesson extends far beyond one criminal case. Clients are already using ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and other AI tools to research legal issues, draft timelines, summarize facts, and develop strategies, often without telling their attorneys. Kent and Steve explain why that creates new risks for attorney-client privilege, confidentiality, discoverability, and even the quality of evidence in a case. Whether you run a solo practice or a growing firm, this episode offers a roadmap for addressing AI with clients before a preventable mistake becomes a costly problem. The message is clear: AI is here to stay, but legal judgment, privilege, and client trust still require a lawyer. ___________ In this episode, you will hear: How the United States v. Heppner decision stripped privilege from documents created in a free AI account Why attorney-client privilege does not automatically extend AI tools The hidden risk of clients using AI before, during, and after they hire counsel What attorneys should add to intake processes, engagement letters, and firm AI policies Why AI can assist legal work but can never replace attorney judgment ___________ Subscribe & Review Never miss an episode. Subscribe on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or YouTube. ⭐Like what you hear? A quick review helps more people find the show.⭐ If there's a topic you would like us to cover on an upcoming episode, please email us at steve.riley@atticusadvantage.com. ___________ Supporting Resources: Kent Berk https://berklawgroup.com/team/kent-berk/ Berk Law Group https://berklawgroup.com/ Berk Law Group AI Tip Sheet https://berklawgroup.com/tools/ai-client-tipsheet/ Kent's Previous Episode Ep 160 From Burnout to 200 Days Off https://atticusadvantage.com/podcast/from-burnout-to-200-days-off-kent-berk/ The Summit https://atticussummit.com/ Grow Your Law Practice with AI https://atticusadvantage.com/workshops/grow-your-law-practice-with-ai/ United States v. Heppner Case  https://harvardlawreview.org/blog/2026/03/united-states-v-heppner/ Atticus Newsletter https://atticusadvantage.com/newsletter-signup ___________ Curious about growing your own practice without burning out? Contact Atticus to see whether our law firm coaching can help you strengthen attorney success, refine your law firm business strategy, and build a practice that actually supports your life. This podcast for lawyers is part of our broader legal podcast library, offering practical insights on how to grow a law firm through stronger law firm leadership, law firm pricing and management, smarter marketing, intentional hiring, efficient operations, healthy law firm culture, and sustainable profitability, all while addressing law firm burnout and the realities of modern practice. You can also sign up for our newsletter to get practical insights on how to grow a law firm: from law firm leadership and management to marketing, hiring, operations, culture, and profitability, so you can build a Great Practice and a Great Life.

Tired of paying for “more clicks” and getting zero real cases? In this episode, you'll hear how strategic market research, real social proof, and case-study-driven content can turn a law firm website into a revenue engine instead of a digital brochure.   In this episode, Steve Fretzin and Cooper Saunders discuss: The real goal of digital marketing for law firms (revenue, not clicks) Market research and choosing markets you can dominate Building targeted content around real client cases and questions Personalization, video, and human connection on law firm websites Social proof, reviews, and the “Dream 100” referral strategy   Key Takeaways: Marketing success for law firms starts with showing up where people are already searching for the exact services you provide, instead of broadcasting to everyone and hoping for the best.  Smart lawyers look for markets they can dominate, choosing niches and geographies with solid demand but manageable competition rather than jumping into oversaturated metro battles by default. Case-based content that walks through “this client, this problem, this solution, this outcome” is far more powerful than generic articles that could apply to anyone and no one at the same time. Prospects convert at a higher rate when they can see and hear the attorney: simple, honest video on an About page often beats polished but faceless branding. Social proof, including reviews, testimonials, and concrete case studies, is no longer optional; it's the proof skeptical clients need before deciding you're the right firm to trust.   "I think the market research goes into identifying a pond you can dominate, rather than being a minnow in an ocean or fighting an 800-pound gorilla." —  Cooper Saunders   Check out my new show, Be That Lawyer Coaches Corner, and get the strategies I use with my clients to win more business and love your career again.   Join the Be That Lawyer Community and connect with ambitious lawyers who are serious about growing their book of business, strengthening their brand, and becoming confident, consistent rainmakers.   Ready to go from good to GOAT in your legal marketing game? Don't miss PIMCON—where the brightest minds in professional services gather to share what really works. Lock in your spot now: https://www.pimcon.org/   Thank you to our Sponsor! LEX Reception: https://www.lexreception.com/partners/bethatlawyer Rankings.io: https://rankings.io/ Lawyer.com: https://www.lawyer.com/   Ready to grow your law practice without selling or chasing? Book your free 30-minute strategy session now—let's make this your breakout year: https://fretzin.com/   About Cooper Saunders: Cooper Saunders is the owner and founder of WiseGuys Digital Marketing, a Kansas City, Missouri-based agency specializing in SEO and Google Ads. Recognized as a business growth expert, he has authored three national bestselling books—including Quit Competing Start Dominating and Marketing Secrets of the Ultra Wealthy—and hosts The Growth Secrets Podcast. Under his leadership, WiseGuys Digital Marketing operates without year-long contracts and was named a Kansas City Chamber of Commerce Small Business Superstar for three consecutive years from 2021 through 2023.   Connect with Cooper Saunders:   Website: https://wiseguysdm.com/ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/coopersaunders/   Connect with Steve Fretzin: LinkedIn: Steve Fretzin Twitter: @stevefretzin Instagram: @fretzinsteve Facebook: Fretzin, Inc. Website: Fretzin.com Email: Steve@Fretzin.com Book: Legal Business Development Isn't Rocket Science and more! YouTube: Steve Fretzin Call Steve directly at 847-602-6911   Audio production by Turnkey Podcast Productions. You're the expert. Your podcast will prove it. 

On the radio show this week, we start by highlighting impactful work engaging dads, especially around Father's Day. After that, we explore the rise of mom candidates who are stepping into leadership roles with fresh perspectives and the potential to drive change. Next, we delve into the power of mom activism, examining how mothers are organizing to make significant impacts in their communities and beyond. Finally, we close the show by discussing the critical issue of reproductive rights. Special Guests Ailen Arreaza, ParentsTogether; Sondra Goldschein, Campaign for a Family Friendly Economy (CFFE), @famfriendlyecon @sgoldschein, @cffe.bsky.social, @cffe_ontheground; Nathalie Demirdijan-Rivest, Civil Rights Lawyer, @natdemir; Alyssa Morrison, Lawyers for Good Government, @lawyers4goodgov.bsky.social

On today's Legally Speaking Podcast, I am delighted to be joined by Colleen Joyce. Colleen is the CEO of Lawyer.com. She has experience hosting marketing courses for lawyers and helping launch new products. Colleen started her entrepreneurial journey at Popstar.com, a trusted celebrity online resource. Colleen is also the Founder of the Lawyer Growth Summit.So why should you be listening in? You can hear Rob and Colleen discussing:- Community drives growth- Visibility matters more than perfection- Strong intake processes are essential- Personal branding is critical in the AI era- Adaptability and persistence fuel success.Connect with Colleen Joyce here - https://www.linkedin.com/in/colleenjoyce

During her path to the bench, Judge Debra McCaslin reportedly sat before state lawmakers and named the attorneys who shaped her legal career. One of three names she gave was Dick Harpootlian — Alex Murdaugh's lead defense lawyer. As a young attorney, she reportedly rented office space from him. Now she holds exclusive jurisdiction over every proceeding tied to the retrial on charges that Murdaugh killed his wife Maggie and son Paul.Defense attorney and former felony prosecutor Eric Faddis examines both faces of this appointment. McCaslin's record reportedly includes life sentences for killers and rulings that sided with law enforcement when defense attorneys cried foul. For a defendant whose path to a new trial ran through claims that the system broke, that record cuts in a specific direction. Faddis explains what a judge's warmth toward one lawyer actually looks like in rulings, in tone, and in the close calls — and whether judges with friendly history sometimes overcorrect against the lawyer they know. The critical pre-trial question: how much of Murdaugh's financial crimes evidence the next jury hears.Attorney Eric Bland adds the dimension nobody else is discussing. He built the financial fraud case prosecutors leaned on as their motive theory. He represented the Satterfield family. The Supreme Court called specific victim testimony “zero probative value” and said the retrial must restrict the financial evidence the first jury absorbed for hours. Bland answers whether the prosecution overplayed his work, what the ruling means for the families he represents, and what Harpootlian's six-hundred-thousand-dollar civil rights lawsuit against Becky Hill actually promises — and whether that promise means anything.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughRetrial #DebraMcCaslin #HiddenKillersLive #DickHarpootlian #EricBland #EricFaddis #BeckyHill #TrueCrime #SouthCarolina

Alan Jackson walked away from the Nick Reiner murder defense when the money collapsed. His firm has now filed a declaration in a Los Angeles probate case stating they are “ready, willing, and able” to return — the moment more than $1.5 million is released from the trust Rob and Michele Reiner built for their son as a baby. The loyalty of the most high-profile defense attorney this case has seen is, by his own filing, conditional on the check clearing.Eric Faddis has been a felony prosecutor and a criminal defense attorney. He understands exactly what Jackson's declaration means inside the legal fight and what it signals to the court about how this money will be spent. The 136-page probate petition argues the trust's language is unambiguous: half was due on Nick's thirtieth birthday, twenty-seven months before his parents were killed. The petition calls the distribution “mandatory and unconditional.” Nick has pleaded not guilty. Under the presumption of innocence, the petition argues, the money is lawfully his until a jury decides otherwise.Faddis takes both sides apart. The trustee who reportedly questioned Nick's judgment before stepping down. Jodi Montgomery — who managed Britney Spears' conservatorship — stepping in as the new fiduciary and reportedly requesting to visit Nick in jail. The slayer statute's real mechanics versus the version the public assumes. And the scenario that haunts the Reiner family: the money released, spent on defense, and then a conviction — with no path to claw it back. The conversation also covers the Murdaugh retrial's newly assigned judge and the questions her reported history with defense counsel raises.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#NickReiner #RobReiner #ReinerCase #AlanJackson #TrustFund #EricFaddis #JodiMontgomery #SlayerStatute #TrueCrime #HiddenKillers

Survivors of Jeffrey Epstein's abuse repeatedly voiced frustration that the administrators of his estate were dragging their feet when it came to compensating victims. Despite public promises that the estate would cooperate fully, survivors described a pattern of stonewalling—delays in processing claims, evasive responses to requests for documentation, and legal maneuvers that seemed designed to exhaust those seeking justice. Many said this obstruction only deepened their trauma, forcing them to relive the abuse while battling a system that appeared more interested in protecting Epstein's fortune than making amends.Lawyers representing survivors argued that the estate was hiding behind technicalities and secrecy to slow down or avoid payments altogether. Instead of transparency, the estate relied on a labyrinth of trust structures and offshore accounts that complicated efforts to track down Epstein's assets. Survivors viewed this as a continuation of the very culture of protection and cover-up that allowed Epstein to operate for so long. For them, the stonewalling wasn't just about money—it was about accountability, acknowledgment, and the recognition of the harm done, something they felt the estate was willfully denying them.to contact  me:bobbycapucci@protonmail.comSource:https://abcnews.go.com/US/victims-attorney-accuses-epstein-estate-attempts-stonewall-lawsuit/story?id=71830202Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-epstein-chronicles--5003294/support.

Do you have to bring in Shabbat when your shul davens!? Are You allowed to be a lawyer!? If you miss Mincha on Erev Shabbat can you say two Shemona Esrei in Arvit of Shabbat!?

Handel on the Law. Marginal Legal Advice.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Handel on the Law. Marginal Legal Advice.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Handel on the Law. Marginal Legal Advice.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

When the South Carolina Supreme Court assigned Judge Debra McCaslin exclusive jurisdiction over the Alex Murdaugh murder retrial, the appointment carried a history that neither the prosecution nor the defense has publicly addressed. McCaslin reportedly rented office space from Murdaugh's lead defense attorney, Dick Harpootlian, during her years in private practice. She reportedly named him among the lawyers who made a lasting impression on her professional life during proceedings before state legislators. The two worked together on a class-action. And McCaslin presided over pretrial matters in a separate murder case in which Harpootlian served as defense counsel.The Attorney General's office has not moved to recuse her. Harpootlian has not disclosed a conflict. Neither side has filed a single motion questioning her assignment. Defense attorney and former felony prosecutor Eric Faddis evaluates the legal standard for judicial recusal in South Carolina, what this documented history would require under the applicable rules, and why the silence from both legal teams may reveal more about their strategic calculations than any motion ever could.Faddis then turns to the decisions McCaslin will make before the retrial reaches a jury. The Supreme Court's reversal explicitly noted that the original trial included excessive financial crimes testimony and that any retrial must be sharply limited. McCaslin holds sole authority over where that boundary falls — a ruling that determines whether prosecutors retain the motive evidence that anchored the first conviction or enter the courtroom without the narrative that carried the guilty verdict.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughRetrial #DebraMcCaslin #DickHarpootlian #EricFaddis #TrueCrimeToday #TrueCrime #MaggieMurdaugh #PaulMurdaugh #SouthCarolina

Tyson sits down with Ryan Webber to unpack the custom “YouTube research skill” he built in Claude that has transformed his law firm's YouTube channel. Ryan shares how he took fifteen thousand dollars' worth of training from top YouTube strategists plus six years of experience, loaded it into Claude, and created a skill that now does the research those strategists used to do for him.You will learn:Why YouTube is a click‑first platform and why titles, topics, and thumbnails are eighty percent of successHow Ryan's skill scans niche and adjacent channels, pulls outlier videos, and turns them into ten prioritized title and thumbnail ideas with data to back them upThe shift from “YouTube for local clients only” to broader topics that took their channel to one hundred thousand subscribers and over one million views per monthHow Tiffany records just two hours a month, uses teleprompter scripts built in Claude, and still generates 1.5 million monthly viewsHow they turned seventy‑eight hundred dollars in monthly AdSense into roughly seventy thousand dollars in revenue by reinvesting into high‑ROI ads and funnelsRyan breaks down exactly how he uses cowork to trigger the skill, how it checks oneof10.com trackers and YouTube analytics, and why he now invests about eighty percent of his effort into research, titles, and thumbnails before ever worrying about video polish. He also shares what still requires a human touch, from injecting real client stories into scripts to tailoring the skill to each individual channel and its goals.If you are a law firm owner who wants YouTube to both bring in five to fifteen calls a week and build a much larger audience, Ryan's approach shows you how to stop guessing and start using AI to make smarter marketing decisions.Highlights0:00 – Why Tyson twisted Ryan's arm to share his YouTube skill0:26 – Turning $15K of strategist training into a Claude skill1:16 – How the skill researches channels, topics, and outlier videos4:10 – Hitting 100K subscribers and shifting the YouTube strategy6:02 – Why titles, topics, and thumbnails are 80% of success6:56 – Using AI to script videos that still sound like the lawyer8:20 – 1.5M views a month and $7,800 in AdSense9:48 – Turning YouTube into “free” local advertising10:28 – What it would take to offer this skill to other law firms11:22 – How much money Ryan is saving on strategists nowIf this episode helps you think differently about YouTube, hit subscribe for more practical conversations on building a business‑driving law firm channel, and share this with another lawyer who is tired of guessing on titles and thumbnails.

The woman now controlling every motion, every evidentiary fight, and the retrial itself in the Alex Murdaugh double murder case once shared an office with the man defending him. Judge Debra McCaslin reportedly rented space from Dick Harpootlian — Murdaugh's lead attorney — when both were in private practice. They worked a class-action together. And in a separate murder case where Harpootlian represented the defendant, McCaslin was the judge who reportedly denied the state's request to revoke bond.The South Carolina Supreme Court handed McCaslin exclusive jurisdiction after reversing Murdaugh's convictions for the killings of Maggie and Paul Murdaugh. The reversal came after findings that former court clerk Becky Hill's misconduct tainted the original jury. Now the question isn't just whether Murdaugh is guilty — it's whether the system running his retrial can survive its own history.Eric Faddis has been on both sides of courtrooms where a judge's connection to counsel shaped everything. He walks through what warmth toward one lawyer actually looks like in practice — in rulings, in tone, in the calls that could go either way. Then he digs into the ruling that may matter more than any witness: the first jury heard hours of financial crimes testimony. The Supreme Court said that was excessive. McCaslin now draws the line on what the next jury hears. That single decision could determine whether prosecutors can rebuild the motive that carried the first conviction — or whether they walk into round two without their strongest weapon.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughRetrial #DebraMcCaslin #DickHarpootlian #EricFaddis #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime #MaggieMurdaugh #PaulMurdaugh #SouthCarolina

Years before the South Carolina Supreme Court handed her the most closely watched murder retrial in the state's history, Judge Debra McCaslin stood before legislators and named the lawyers who left a mark on her career. One of them was Dick Harpootlian — the man who will stand at Alex Murdaugh's side when his double murder case goes back to trial for the killings of Maggie and Paul Murdaugh.The connection runs deeper than a compliment on the record. McCaslin reportedly rented office space from Harpootlian when she was building her practice. They collaborated on a class-action involving video poker litigation. She sat as judge in a separate murder case where Harpootlian defended the accused — and when prosecutors sought to hold his client before trial, she reportedly refused. Every layer of this history was available the moment her name was announced. And yet both sides looked at the same facts and said nothing.Eric Faddis has prosecuted felonies and defended against them. He breaks down what the Harpootlian connection means inside a courtroom — where a judge's warmth toward one attorney can show up in sustained objections, evidentiary rulings, or simply the tone that shapes how a jury reads the room. Then he gets to the decision that could rewrite this retrial before it starts: the Supreme Court ruled that twelve and a half hours of financial crimes testimony was excessive and that any retrial must sharply limit it. McCaslin alone decides where the line falls. If prosecutors lose their motive backbone, the evidence that remains may not carry the weight the first jury felt.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughRetrial #DebraMcCaslin #DickHarpootlian #EricFaddis #HiddenKillers #TrueCrime #MaggieMurdaugh #PaulMurdaugh #SouthCarolina

Everyone covering the Alex Murdaugh retrial jumped on one half of Judge Debra McCaslin's story — her reported connection to defense attorney Dick Harpootlian. She rented office space from him. She named him as one of three lawyers who shaped her career. She worked a case alongside him. She presided over another where he defended an accused killer and reportedly denied the state's motion to hold his client before trial.But the half that should keep Murdaugh up at night is the one almost nobody is talking about. McCaslin's bench record reportedly tells a different story than her early career connections. Life sentences in murder cases. Rulings that sided with law enforcement when defense attorneys alleged misconduct. A judge described by lawyers who have appeared before her as tough, fair, and impossible to rattle. If you're sitting in a cell hoping your judge gives the defense every benefit of the doubt, her record suggests the opposite.Defense attorney and former felony prosecutor Eric Faddis examines both halves with the eye of someone who has lived in courtrooms where a judge's history with counsel hangs over every proceeding. He explains how much raw power one judge holds over a case this size — from what evidence survives to where the trial takes place — and why the ruling on financial crimes testimony may be the single most consequential decision McCaslin makes before a jury is ever seated. The Supreme Court said the first trial went too far. McCaslin decides how far is far enough this time.Join Our SubStack For AD-FREE ADVANCE EPISODES & EXTRAS!: https://hiddenkillers.substack.com/Want to comment and watch this podcast as a video? Check out our YouTube Channel. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC8-vxmbhTxxG10sO1izODJg?sub_confirmation=1Instagram https://www.instagram.com/hiddenkillerspod/Facebook https://www.facebook.com/hiddenkillerspod/Tik-Tok https://www.tiktok.com/@hiddenkillerspodX Twitter https://x.com/TrueCrimePodThis publication contains commentary and opinion based on publicly available information. All individuals are presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. Nothing published here should be taken as a statement of fact, health or legal advice.#AlexMurdaugh #MurdaughRetrial #DebraMcCaslin #DickHarpootlian #EricFaddis #HiddenKillersLive #TrueCrime #MaggieMurdaugh #PaulMurdaugh #SouthCarolina

Mea Culpa welcomes back our old friend Harry Litman, the former US Attorney and Deputy Assistant Attorney General. Litman is currently the legal affairs columnist for the Los Angeles Times and a professor of Constitutional Law at UCLA and UCSD. Harry can be seen as a legal and political commentator on CBS, NPR MSNBC, and CNN. Litman is also the creator and host of the Talking Feds Podcast. Check out their latest show featuring a who's who of prosecutorial muscle and special guests like former Senator Al Franken. Also, make sure to check out their new YouTube channel. They may have a face for radio but its content you won't want to miss. New episodes are posted daily and he features the greatest legal minds and tough as nails former prosecutors breaking down the legal news and all things Trump indictment. But today Harry is here to give us the rundown on what's happening in Georgia and discuss just what was on Evan Corcoran's phone and how it will damage Donald Trump. So let's go now to that conversation.

Colombia's Presidential Election and Abel de la Espriella. Guest: Mary Anastasia O'Grady. Mary Anastasia O'Grady discusses the upcoming Colombian election and frontrunner Abel de la Espriella. As a lawyer with multiple passports, de la Espriella positions himself as a disruptor similar to Donald Trump or Javier Milei. He advocates for building mega-prisons to confront gangs and reviving the hydrocarbon industry. 1

Our Law Firm KKOS Lawyers is currently running an Estate Plan Special, Get your trust/Trifecta set up today - https://kkoslawyers.com/estate-planning-special-2026/Grab my eBook 30 Unique Strategies Every Business Owner Should Know! You don't want to miss this! Secure your tickets for the #1 Event For  Small Business Owners On Main Street America:  Main Street 360 Looking to connect with a rock star law firm? KKOS is only a click away! Are you ready to get certified in EVERY strategy I teach? Start your journey with a FREE 15-minute discovery call to explore the Main Street Tax Pro Certification. Check out our YOUTUBE Channel Here: https://www.youtube.com/markjkohlerCraving more content? Check out my Instagram! 

Think you're the only lawyer who struggles with your money? After coaching hundreds of lawyers, I can confidently say that's not the case. In this episode, I'm sharing some of the sticky scenarios my clients faced with setting goals and their money mindset over the years and how I coached them through. Head to rhothomas.com/317 for the full episode show notes.

We'll be back to our regularly scheduled programming next week, but here's a rebroadcast of one of the first episodes since Anna joined the show.Let's get straight to it. Sober sex for the first time is a big deal! Some of us had never even done it before. We talk about our experiences – from what we were told to what we expected, and what it was actually like. Lisa had an eventful trip to Utah and Anna, well, let's just say she ignored all that advice about not dating for the first year. 

In this re-aired episode of The Birth Lounge Podcast, HeHe sits down with attorney, human rights advocate, and birth justice champion Hermine Hayes-Klein for a conversation every pregnant person needs to hear.   If you've ever wondered whether you can say no during labor, change your mind after signing a consent form, refuse an induction or cesarean, or push back against a hospital policy that doesn't align with your wishes, this episode is for you.   Hermine breaks down what informed consent actually means, what your legal rights are during pregnancy and birth, and why so many families leave their birth experience feeling powerless, unheard, or violated. Together, she and HeHe unpack the difference between hospital policy and patient rights, discuss the reality of obstetric violence in the United States, and explore how coercion and fear-based counseling can impact birth outcomes and long-term mental health.   They also dive into why so many people are losing trust in the maternity care system, how providers can unintentionally override consent, and what happens when patients feel they have no real choice. Hermine shares powerful stories from her legal work advocating for birthing families and explains why being informed before labor begins is one of the most effective ways to protect your autonomy.   You'll learn:   What informed consent actually requires in pregnancy and birth   Why signing hospital paperwork does not mean you've given blanket consent   Whether you can change your mind or withdraw consent during labor   The difference between a recommendation and a requirement   What your rights are if you're being pressured into an induction or cesarean   Why hospital policies are not the same thing as medical necessity   How obstetric violence can occur, even in well-intentioned healthcare settings   The critical role doulas play in supporting informed decision-making   Practical ways to advocate for yourself before and during labor   How preparation can help reduce fear, coercion, and birth trauma   This episode is a powerful reminder that your body is not public property, your consent matters at every stage of labor, and you deserve to understand your options before making decisions about your care.   Guest Bio:   Hermine Hayes-Klein is an attorney, human rights advocate, and founder of the Know Your Rights campaign, which helps families understand and exercise their legal rights during pregnancy and childbirth. After experiencing the Dutch maternity care system firsthand, Hermine became passionate about addressing obstetric violence, protecting informed consent, and improving access to respectful maternity care. Through litigation, education, and advocacy, she works to advance accountability and reproductive justice for birthing families around the world. Connect with Hermine:  Birthrightslawproject.com hayeskleinlaw.com SOCIAL MEDIA: Connect with HeHe on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/tranquilitybyhehe/  Connect with Hermine on IG: https://www.instagram.com/herminehayesklein/   BIRTH EDUCATION: Learn how to stay in control of your birth and reduce the risk of unnecessary interventions in our Avoid a C-Section Webinar. HeHe breaks down the cascade of interventions, explains what's really happening in the hospital, and shares practical strategies to protect your birth plan, advocate for yourself, and navigate labor with confidence. Perfect for anyone who wants a positive, informed hospital birth experience: https://www.thebirthlounge.com/csection Feeling nervous about speaking up in labor? Our Scripts for Advocacy give you the exact words to handle the most common conversations that can make or break your birth experience. From declining unnecessary interventions to asking the right questions about procedures, these scripts empower you to stay in control, speak confidently, and protect your birth plan — even when the pressure is on. Think of it as your personal toolkit for advocating like a pro, so you can focus on your baby, not the stress: https://www.thebirthlounge.com/Scripts-for-Advocacy And if you haven't grabbed it yet… Snag my free Pitocin Guide to understand the risks, benefits, and red flags your provider may not be telling you about, so you can make informed, powerful decisions in labor: https://www.thebirthlounge.com/pitocin Join The Birth Lounge for judgment-free, evidence-based childbirth education from HeHe that shows you exactly how to navigate hospital policies, avoid unnecessary interventions, and have a trauma-free labor experience, all while feeling wildly supported every step of the way: https://www.thebirthlounge.com/ Want prep delivered straight to your phone? Download The Birth Lounge App for bite-sized birth and postpartum tools you can use anytime, anywhere: https://www.thebirthlounge.com/app   LINKS MENTIONED: Nursing article: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1751485123001587?via%3Dihub Examples of articles referencing how informed consent improves outcomes: https://www.envisionhealth.com/news/2024/shared-decision-making-in-healthcare#:~:text=How%20do%20informed%20consent%20and,the%20overall%20cost%20of%20care. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9486853/

At the end of June, early July of 2026, the Supreme Court will make a decision on President Donald Trump's executive order attempting to end birthright citizenship. On this Lawyer 2 Lawyer episode, Craig welcomes Paul Finkelman, legal historian and professor of law at Albany Law School, as they spotlight birthright citizenship. Craig & Paul discuss the Trump administration's efforts to end birthright citizenship, the legality of the executive order, the 14th amendment, amicus briefs, and the potential impact of the upcoming SCOTUS ruling on immigration policy.   Mentioned in this Episode: Brief for Professors Gabriel J. Chin, Paul Finkelman, and Erika Lee as Amici Curiae In Support of Respondents

[Part One of Two] Investigative journalists Mandy Matney and ⁠Liz Farrell⁠ dig into the Horry County Police Department's internal affairs investigation of the Scott Spivey case and the looming presence of former Deputy Chief Brandon Strickland throughout it.  Strickland insists he "stayed out of it" and "distanced" himself — yet there he is on recorded calls with Weldon Boyd admitting he was "working in the shadows," and — according to his own colleagues — sitting in on a meeting about Weldon Boyd's phone, and walking into the evidence room to say "just give Weldon and Bradley their guns back."  We break down the IA interviews and learn more about what went on in the investigation leading up to the decision not to charge Weldon and his co-shooter. The interviews shed light on why the guns weren't tested by SLED, how investigators determined the outcome before evidence was even collect and the odd emergence of the “steroid theory.”  Plus: why we'll see you inside the Spartanburg County Courthouse (Courtroom 6d) on Monday, June 22 @ 9am (The 5 Year Anniversary of MMP #1). Wear pink.  Let's Dive In…

Before Recovery Rocks, Anna hosted Recover Girl, where conversations about addiction often turned into surprisingly deep discussions about ego, identity, fear and why nobody actually feels like a real adult. This Thursday Throwback features John Taylor of Duran Duran—yes, that John Taylor in the flesh.John talks about becoming a global pop star almost overnight, still living in his childhood bedroom after Rio became a massive hit and slowly realizing that alcohol and cocaine had become stronger than he was. He opens up about addiction, shame, resentment, celebrity, Catholicism, recovery and the strange reality that even successful adults are often still wrestling with younger versions of themselves.The conversation covers everything from partying through Duran Duran's peak fame to why 12-step programs helped him stop blaming everyone else for his problems — and why most people have no idea how much work sobriety actually requires.If you've ever been hungry like the wolf to know John Taylor better, this is a can't miss.

Lawyers are trained to spot risk. But when it comes to AI, focusing only on risk may cause firms to miss the bigger opportunity. In episode 623 of the Lawyerist Podcast, Zack Glaser sits down with Bridget McCormack to talk about AI arbitration, legal innovation, and why the future of legal work may be less about replacement and more about reinvention.  Bridget reflects on her time as Chief Justice of the Michigan Supreme Court, including how the pandemic forced courts to adopt technology faster than anyone expected. She explains why that moment revealed both the limits of traditional legal systems and the potential for more accessible, user-friendly ways to resolve disputes.  Now leading the American Arbitration Association, Bridget shares how AAA is using AI to build tools for clause drafting, self-represented parties, resolution simulation, and even documents-only arbitration. The conversation explores what fairness looks like when AI is involved, why human oversight remains essential, and how legal professionals should think about accountability, bias, and trust.  If AI changes the routine parts of legal work, lawyers will need to rethink what clients actually need from them. This episode offers a practical and future-focused look at arbitration, legal technology, and the new kinds of judgment lawyers will need to bring to the table.  Listen to our previous episodes on Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Legal Practice.  #612 – AI for Lawyers: What You Need to Know Before Your Clients Do, with Cat Casey Apple | Spotify | LTN  #607 – The Future of Law Firm Business Models in the Age of AI, with Jordan Furlong Apple | Spotify | LTN  #619– What Claude Means for Law Firms: AI Skills, Connectors, and Workflow Strategy, with Sam Harden Apple | Spotify | LTN  #590 – Innovating Without Overwhelm: Practical AI Tips for Lawyers, with Graydon Trusler Apple | Spotify | LTN   #587 – Future-Proofing Your Firm in the Age of AI, with Jack Newton Apple | Spotify | LTN   #577 – Rethinking Law Firm Growth in the Age of AI, with Sam Harden Apple | Spotify | LTN  Links from the episode:  https://adr.org/  Have thoughts about today's episode? Join the conversation on LinkedIn, Facebook, Instagram, and X!   If today's podcast resonates with you and you haven't read The Small Firm Roadmap Revisited yet, get the first chapter right now for free! Looking for help beyond the book? See if our coaching community is right for you.   Access more resources from Lawyerist at lawyerist.com.   Chapters / Timestamps:  00:00 – Introduction  00:55 – Why Lawyers Should Test Their Own Intake Process03:35 – Meet Bridget McCormack04:25 – Leading Michigan Courts Through COVID05:20 – Why Remote Court Was Already on the Radar06:40 – Moving Trial Courts Online Fast08:45 – Why Legal Systems Are Slow to Change10:33 – From Chief Justice to CEO of AAA13:18 – How Alternative Dispute Resolution Is Evolving14:50 – AI Tools for Arbitration and Self-Represented Parties15:57 – Building AAA's AI Arbitrator17:36 – Resolution Simulation and Faster Settlements19:05 – What Is Left for Lawyers?21:19 – Fairness, Bias, and Human Oversight in AI Arbitration23:45 – Why Legal Disputes Need More Options24:41 – AI Agents and the Future of Legal Infrastructure26:26 – When AI Agents Negotiate Contracts28:30 – Closing Thoughts   

Vice President JD Vance, author of "Communion," joins to talk about what's really in the proposed new Iran deal, the economic benefits Iran could receive if it complies with the agreement, what happens if the regime refuses to cooperate, the backlash from neocons over the new Iran peace deal, what's being misrepresented about the agreement, the truth about what happens next in Lebanon and the broader Middle East, the divide on the right over the Iran war, why some non-interventionists are frustrated with the administration, why VP Vance believes critics should remain engaged in the Trump coalition, his journey back to God and faith, why the goal for success and money left him searching for something more meaningful, how marriage and family helped strengthen his beliefs, and more. Then Mario Williams, counsel for Brian Cole Jr., to talk about the facts of the case and the arrest of his client, whether the alleged January 5 "bombs" were even viable or if they were more like "props," the circumstances of the notable failed polygraph of another person of interest in the case, the government putting out video and other evidence publicly, Jeanine Pirro's noteworthy comments about the case, Cole Jr's autism and the circumstances of the arrest, the alleged "confession" while being interrogated, the evidence against Cole Jr., a possible plea deal, why it's notable the government started referring to him as the "January 5th bomber,"why Williams believes Cole Jr. qualifies for Trump's January 6 pardon, questions about race and double standards, the exact language of the pardon, and more.   VP JD Vance- https://www.amazon.com/Communion-Finding-Way-Back-Faith/dp/B0GTQMJ53N Williams- https://www.hdrattorneys.com/   Birch Gold: Text MK to 989898 and get a free America 250 silver round with qualifying purchase Brooklyn Bedding: Upgrade your sleep with Brooklyn Bedding—Visit https://brooklynbedding.com and use promo code MEGYN for 30% off sitewide! Herald Group: Learn more at https://GuardYourCard.com Relief Factor: Reclaim your mobility and celebrate your freedom from aches this year by grabbing your $17.76 3-week QuickStart at https://ReliefFactor.com or by calling 800-4-RELIEF.     Follow The Megyn Kelly Show on all social platforms: YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/MegynKelly Twitter: http://Twitter.com/MegynKellyShow Instagram: http://Instagram.com/MegynKellyShow Facebook: http://Facebook.com/MegynKellyShow Find out more information at:https://www.devilmaycaremedia.com/megynkellyshow Hosted by Simplecast, an AdsWizz company. See pcm.adswizz.com for information about our collection and use of personal data for advertising.

Sarah Isgur and David French break down the most recent cert grants out of the Supreme Court's order list and Trump's argument for suspending habeas corpus. The Agenda: —Paid petitions vs. In Forma Pauperis —Six-person juries in Florida —Can undocumented immigrants be held indefinitely? —New York Times reporting on Trump and habeas corpus —Leaked memo fallout —Lawyers using AI —Georgia campaign finance laws —On LSAT accommodations Show notes: —Ramos v. Louisiana —The White House staff secretary's habeas corpus memo Order Sarah's book here. Advisory Opinions is a production of SCOTUSblog and The Dispatch, a digital media company covering politics, policy, and culture from a nonpartisan perspective. Click here to sign up for our new Advisory Opinions newsletter, and click here to access all of The Dispatch's offerings, including audio versions of all our articles and newsletters. If you'd like to remove all ads from your podcast experience, consider becoming a premium Dispatch member by clicking here. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices