Promoting alternatives to the illegal downloading of music, films and e-books will be the only way to defeat internet piracy, researchers claimed yesterday.

A team of academics at the University of East Anglia claim that to compete with unlawful file-sharing, consumers should be given easy access to information on the benefits of legal purchases or services.

According to the researchers, those benefits include rapid access to a wide catalogue of content, and the capacity to consume selectively created content – in other words, when downloading legally, consumers would not need to buy entire albums if they only wish to access individual songs.

The researchers analysed the responses of about 1,400 consumers to assess the extent to which the unlawful sharing of music and e-books was motivated by the perceived benefits as opposed to the legal risks. Respondents’ ability to remain anonymous online, their trust in the industries and UK legal regulators such as Ofcom, and downloading behaviour were studied.

The findings published in the journal Risk Analysis show that consumers who trust regulators think file-sharing is riskier. Those who think file-sharing is risky do not think it is beneficial and vice versa.

“Our findings suggest that it may be possible to diminish the perceived benefit of unlawful file-sharing (UFS) by increasing risk perception,” said Piers Fleming, from UEA’s School of Psychology, “but only to the extent that UFS is considered emotionally, and users trust industry and regulators.

“Increasing trust in industry and regulators may be one route toward encouraging UFS to be considered in emotional rather than rational terms. However, given the limited impact of risk perception upon behaviour, a better strategy would be to provide a desirable legal alternative.”

Amorphous as the term may be, the majority of London partners moving between law firms do so for “culture” reasons and not to boost their annual pay packets, researchers have claimed.

Nonetheless, further research shows that most young adults anticipate that the legal profession will not offer an acceptable work-life balance.

A study just published found that more than 60 per cent of lateral-hire partners made the move because they were attracted by the recruiting firm’s culture. Only 15 per cent told the researchers that they had moved for financial reasons.

Of those citing culture as the strongest reason for their move, two-thirds said that diversity and inclusion played an important role in their decision. Women feel strongest about diversity, with more than 60 per cent pointing to it as a motivating factor in their move; only slightly more than 20 per cent of men agreed.

But regardless of gender, migrating partners were often disappointed after making their moves. Only 28 per cent reported that their cultural expectations were met.

“The legal market in London is still very much a male-dominated world,” said Melinda Wallman of Major, Lindsey & Africa, a legal sector recruitment agency that commissioned the survey.

“Recruiting female partners is much harder than attracting men – for a host of reasons – but our survey shows that female lateral partners have an easier time integrating into new firms. Many of the UK firms that set diversity targets over the last few years have done a good job of prioritising diversity and have begun to experience the benefits of a more inclusive culture.”

However, another survey revealed that only 18 per cent of 18 to 24-year-olds anticipated that the legal profession would provide an acceptable work-life balance. And the picture did not improve significantly slightly higher up the age scale, with only 20 per cent of 25 to 34-year-olds saying legal careers offered a good balance.

The study – conducted by ComRes for Keurig, a business that supplies coffee machines to UK legal firms – found a stark disparity of views with the older generation. More than half of those over 65 said a career in the legal profession would offer a good work-life balance.

A City of London law firm has launched an outsourcing centre on the other side of the world in a move that will reheat the debate over the future structure of law firms.

Herbert Smith Freehills, the Anglo-Australian practice, announced yesterday that it would cut the ribbon on a centre in Melbourne this November. It will initially have a staff of 65, including 50 fee earners.

The move comes five years after HSF became the first international law firm based in the Square Mile to open in Belfast. The practice also experimented about a year ago with what it described as a “pop up” office in Perth, Australia. In addition to opening in Melbourne, the firm said it would make the Perth office a permanent fixture.

Patrick St John, HSF’s partner in charge of strategic implementation, said the firm’s “alternative legal services offering” had been “very popular with clients in Australia and around the world. We now have over 350 staff in seven strategic locations; we intend to keep investing in innovative solutions.”

Campaigners and lawyers welcomed proposals from the Ministry of Justice and senior judges to allow vulnerable witnesses to record evidence and avoid appearing in open court.

The plans – which would see evidence pre-recorded in sensitive trials such as those involving rape allegations – were unveiled formally yesterday in a paper from the lord chancellor, the lord chief justice and the senior president of tribunals.

Citizens Advice said it was “right that vulnerable witnesses of crime should be allowed to give their evidence before a trial where possible”. Gillian Guy, the organisation’s chief executive, said: “The government’s proposals that the most vulnerable witnesses, including children, are allowed to give evidence before the trial could relieve much of the stress and difficulty of attending court and thereby help them to give their best evidence.”

Bar leaders also responded positively. “Efforts to make our justice system a more suitable environment for victims and vulnerable witnesses is a step in the right direction,” said Chantal-Aimée Doerries, QC, chairwoman of the Bar Council of England and Wales.

She claimed the council had been “at the forefront of producing special training for considering the needs of vulnerable witnesses in the criminal justice system”. She pointed to a forthcoming training programme for barristers.

Lawyer whose mansion was ransacked by sword-wielding thugs flees capital – London Evening Standard

Melania Trump releases letter from immigration lawyer after accusations she entered country illegally – The Independent

High Court judge uses emojis to help children understand family law judgment – Legal Cheek