Dear list members, I think this is a wonderful idea.
I am a lawyer with my own small firm in Sydney, Australia. We share premises and a high degree of systems integration with another small firm. I love my computers and the internet as a hobby, but my programming skills are limited. I did a little bit of basic and some 6502 assembly programming probably about 20 years or more ago, and about 10-15 years ago developed some small private rbase and dbase applications. I am planning to teach myself Python when I get that elusive spare time that I never seem to find. I use Open Source software in my practice whenever it seems reasonable to do so. We run Linux on a couple of servers. SME Server provides a file sharing and mail server, as well as hylafax which delivers all faxes to us as pdf's via email. We also have a separate Centos server running a Kolab and Citadel server. I am currently the only person in the office running a Linux desktop (Gentoo on an AMD64). Both my secretary and myself use mainly OpenOffice, though we both have access to Word, in my case via Crossover Office. Unfortunately we also must run a Windows Server to host a proprietary package, LEAP, which provides client database, document generation and accounting which integrates further with MYOB. LEAP does not support Linux, OpenOffice or so far as I am aware any other open source software, and has no plans to do so. They don't even support the MAC. >From my point of view the most pressing need for Open Source software for lawyers in Australia is for Practice Management type software along the lines of a product like Leap or Amicus, supporting client database, document generation from precedents, integration with email, diary, accounting and time costing. There have been notable Open Source efforts in Europe, namely Italy, but they would need a lot of work to suit other jurisdictions. Another most interesting possibility is "Open Source" precedents for different jurisdictions. Unfortunately the hurdles of copyright and possible liability may ultimately prohibit this type of initiative, though it is of potentially great benefit to have such precedents available under, say, a creative commons type licence. Unfortunately, the law in Australia is, in my opinion, a long way down the road to becoming a business rather than a profession, and the demands of making a living leave little time for pursuing other things. This is perhaps why the list has remained effectively dormant for so long. I cannot promise that I will do much more than applaud the effort of others and perhaps do a little testing, but am happy to try to contribute in some small way. Darryl
