Legal Tech Companies Shouldn't Rely on Rebranding After a Cyberattack
Crisis managers and marketers say legal tech companies can't downplay a cyberattack by rebranding. Instead, being transparent and open is essential to gaining and maintaining clients.
March 18, 2020 at 11:30 AM
4 minute read
Announcing a cyberattack isn't a milestone celebrated by any legal tech company. But cyber incidents occur in legal tech, like any other industry.
Still, instead of rebranding and distancing itself from the incident, legal tech marketers and crisis management professionals recommended legal tech companies who suffered an attack take a different approach.
"In general, I think the most important thing that any company can do under these circumstances is to be transparent," said Cathy Kenton, co-founder of marketing provider Legal Tech Media Group.
Kenton and other communication professionals stressed legal tech companies should first take steps to fully understand what and how data was impacted. As tech experts confirm aspects of the incident during a forensic investigation and applicable legally required notifications are made, the company should provide details to clients.
Leah Presser, a content and copy writer for legal tech companies, said the status updates should be crafted to foster trust and reshape public perception, including not "hiding behind the company logo," she said. Instead, external communication should come from a higher-up in the organization.
For companies that can't stomach bad press and upset clients after a cyberattack, rebranding is the last solution any company should consider, sources said.
Kenton noted legal tech companies' clientele is less receptive to rebranding. "We are populated with cynics; lawyers and legal professionals are taught to be cynical and question and look for chinks in the armor. Trying to overcome that with rebranding is like putting lipstick on a pig. Someone is going to find out about it and the press is going to go after it," she said.
Indeed, sometimes a company can only improve existing problems and develop new solutions without ignoring previous mishaps. When Assembly Software released its legal case management platform Needles Neos last week, it stressed the new browser-based platform wasn't a reiteration of its case management platform TrialWorks, which went offline last October after a ransomware incident. Though Needles Neos combines TrialWorks' litigation features and Needles' workflow management capabilities, Neos was in development for two years, said Assembly Software CEO Ryan Pakter.
However, Assembly Software did address and adjust TrialWorks' infrastructure after the cyberattack last year, the company noted. Notably, it shifted TrialWorks' infrastructure and customer files, databases and desktops to Microsoft Azure Cloud Services. The migration was one of various initiatives the company took to "improve the security and disaster recovery of our hosting environment, to protect us from cybercrime attacks, such as the ransomware incident which took place this past October," wrote Assembly Software chief technology officer Jim Garrett in an email.
To be sure, rebranding also loses valuable "online branding equity," noted Gina Rubel, founder of legal marketing and law firm public relations firm Furia Rubel Communications Inc, which may prove futile when a law firm vets a product during procurement and discovers the company's cybersecurity history anyway.
It's best, sources said, to remain transparent and issue consistent and timely messages during and post-incident. A legal tech company can also shift the narrative to highlight the insights and experience it gained, Kenton noted.
"Once a company has gone through an incident and comes through the other side they're probably a better company to do business with. They're actually learning where to look for weaknesses and have their systems evaluated."
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1Paul Hastings, Recruiting From Davis Polk, Continues Finance Practice Build
- 2Chancery: Common Stock Worthless in 'Jacobson v. Akademos' and Transaction Was Entirely Fair
- 3'We Neither Like Nor Dislike the Fifth Circuit'
- 4Local Boutique Expands Significantly, Hiring Litigator Who Won $63M Verdict Against City of Miami Commissioner
- 5Senior Associates' Billing Rates See The Biggest Jump
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250