This Is Unreal

     Time for a reality check: Google "perception of reality."
     You may get a higher count by the time you try it, but I got 61,300,000 entries - and I'm guessing they rounded that off.
     Then I tried "reality."
     825,000,000 results. The first one on the list was Wikipedia. Apparently a lot of people try to find it there. Where else would you find reality?
     I ran this check because of an interesting bit of litigation occurring in Federal Court in Northern California over some real estate that isn't real.
     Or is it?
     For a summary, check out this ruling in a proposed class action over whether people playing Second Life (a massively multiplayer role-playing game) actually own their chunks of virtual (or is it real?) property in the game.
     After all, they paid money for it.
     Or did they?
     Apparently you use "lindens" to buy stuff in the game - it's an economy unto itself (so those national GDP figures you keep worrying about could be seriously underestimating the strength of the country's financial health, because they don't include the linden trade). If you're not familiar with this economy, click here and be amazed.
     Part of me wants to consult Immanuel Kant and part of me wants to talk to Ron Paul. If paper money is "fiat" currency that doesn't have real value - as opposed to gold, which is real, because you can eat it or build houses with it - what is virtual money?
     I'm picturing Ron Paul's head exploding.
     And, of course, the best part of this is that it's real enough for someone to file a federal class action in the real world if you believe in this reality.
     Stuff like this shakes my belief.
     
     More Reality. Stop the presses.
     No, wait, stop the Internet. We're not using presses any more. At least not us rich people.
     Anyway, I have found startling news courtesy of something called The Rainmaker Institute. (Really, there is such a thing. I think it has something to do with cloud storage. If it doesn't, it should.)
     Check out this fascinating, in-depth article that begins with this sentence: "A study out this week from SEI, Scorpio Partnership and Standard Chartered Private Bank says the wealthy are much more likely to use the Internet, mobile apps and other digital media communications tools."
     Perhaps because they can afford them.
     The article ends with this: "And attorneys who do not utilize digital communications in their law firm marketing are fast going the way of the dinosaur."
     Stuck in tar pits?
     Amazingly, this is followed by a copyright "all rights reserved" notice. Clearly they don't want anyone else taking credit for this notion.
     So take heed, all you law firms out there using typewriters and hefty objects filled with writing printed on paper - you'll only be representing poor people.
     
     Crisis Response. Two recent headlines in a legal publication:
     Law School Enrollment Continues its Decline
     And
     UCLA Launches LL.M. in the Law and Sexuality
     I thought the second headline was a terrific response to the first. Imagine my disappointment when I found out that the UCLA course was about sexual orientation law.
     They might want to rethink this.
     Consider how many more students would be attracted to legal careers if there were a double major in, say, tort law and acupressure.
     Consider how many more clients would be attracted by one-stop-shopping law firms offering both legal solutions and stress-reduction.
     It's a better way to serve the public.