We were inspired by this post
on Business Insider, which used the non-profit
Internet Archive's «Wayback Machine» cache tool to see what the
websites of some
prominent corporations used to look like during the early days of the World Wide Web.
It does work you know if you pay a service to help you with SEO, that's one other tactics, it's to get you linked at other
websites and actually other
prominent websites so it's not just a link, but if it's a signed law or somewhere else that's really a strong presence
on the
internet and you're linked
on there, you sort of rise with them.
Prof. Conduct 123 (2001)(subject to the operational structure and content described in the opinion, a lawyer may affiliate with an online legal services
website); Nebraska Op. 07 - 05 (lawyer may participate in
internet lawyer directory which identifies itself as a directory, disclaims being a referral service and only lists basic information about lawyers without recommending specific lawyers and charges a reasonable, flat annual advertising fee); New Jersey Committee
on Attorney Advertising Op. 36 (2006)(lawyer may pay flat fee to
internet marketing company for exclusive
website listing for particular county in specific practice area if listing includes
prominent, unmistakable disclaimer stating the listings are paid advertisements and not endorsements or authorized referrals); North Carolina Op. 2004 - 1 (lawyer may participate in for - profit online service that is a hybrid referral service - legal directory, provided there is no fee - sharing with the service and communications are truthful); Oregon Op. 2007 - 180 (2007)(lawyer may pay nationwide
internet referral service for listing if listing is not false or misleading and does not imply that the lawyer can represent clients outside jurisdictions of the lawyer's license, fee is not based
on number of referrals, retained clients or revenue generated by listing and the service does not exercise discretion in matching clients with lawyers); Rhode Island 2005 - 01 (permitting
website that enables lawyers to post information about their services and respond to anonymous requests for legal services in exchange for flat annual membership fee if
website exercises no discretion over which requests lawyers may access); South Carolina 01 - 03 (lawyer may pay
internet advertising service fee determined by the number of «hits» that the service produces for the lawyer provided that the service does not steer business to any particular lawyer and the payments are not based
on whether user ultimately becomes a client); Texas Op. 573 (2006)(lawyer may participate in for - profit
internet service that matches potential clients and lawyers if selection process is fully automated and performed by computers without the exercise of human discretion); Virginia Advertising Op.