For law firms
There when it goes wrong.
Signed before it goes out.
The person who will need your firm next month is typing their situation into a search box tonight, and the answer they find decides who they call.
One full article free. No card required, no time limit.
What actually works
Nobody searches for a lawyer. They search for what happened to them.
A dismissal, a contract that turned out to mean something else, a landlord, a business partner, a letter. The search is the situation in the person's own words, weeks before they think of it as a legal matter. The firm that explained it plainly, without a pitch, is the firm they ring when it becomes one.
That changes what is worth writing. Not the firm's view of a landmark ruling. The questions a new client asks in the first ten minutes, answered the way you would answer them across the desk: what this usually means, what the options tend to be, what it tends to cost and how long it tends to take, and what to do this week.
And it changes what the writing must not do. An article about a situation is one sentence from advice about a situation, and one word from a claim the firm may not make. That constraint is what the rest of this page is about.
Earns the call
- What usually happens next in a situation like theirs
- Whether this is worth a lawyer at all, answered honestly
- What the work tends to cost, and what changes the number
- The mistake people make in the first week, before they call anyone
Reaches nobody
- The firm's take on a judgment reported everywhere else that day
- The new partner, the new office, the ranking
- Ten things to know about an area of law, aimed at nobody in particular
- Anything that reads as an advertisement for the firm
Which situations people are actually typing is measured before anything is written, so an article is only made where a search for it already exists.
Why it never happens
The people who could write it are the ones with the caseload
Every firm has the plan, and it loses to the matter that is on this week. That is the right call each time and a poor outcome over years. The associate who was going to write it billed the hours instead, and the partner who knows the answer has explained it by phone a hundred times and written it down never.
Then there is the second reason, which firms say less often. Writing in public feels like exposure. Every sentence could be read as advice, every adjective as a claim, so the safe thing is to publish nothing, and the safe thing is what happens.
An agency can write it, but a writer who does not know the firm does not know which words the firm never uses, and the review that makes a piece safe lands back on a partner, which is where the time went in the first place.
cpywrk keeps the rules in your account: how the firm describes its work, the words it does not use, the claims it never makes, the corrections you gave last time. Set once, applied to everything after, and still yours when you stop paying for it.
What it needs from a partner
The question and what the firm knows about it, a yes to the outline before anything is written, and a read of the draft before it goes live. Those are the moments the article needs somebody who would be answerable for it. Everything between them happens without the firm, and if a draft misses, it goes back for as many revisions as it takes at no cost to your plan.
Before it reaches you
The words your firm never uses, caught before you read the draft
Firms are held to rules about how they may describe themselves: what may be called a specialism, whether a result may be promised, which comparisons are off limits, whether a client may be named. You know your rules. cpywrk does not, and does not need to, because you write them down once as standing rules, and every draft is checked against them before it reaches you.
The superlative you may not use, the guarantee you may not give, the title you are not entitled to, the client who may not be named: whatever is on your list. When a draft crosses it, the check shows you the passage and the fix. When you correct something the check missed, the correction is applied to every article after it, so the note is given once.
This is a first read, not a compliance review, and it is not legal advice to anyone. It gets the draft to the point where a partner's review is quick, and the review is still a partner's. Nothing publishes without it.
Before any of that, the gate. You approve the outline before a word is written, so the angle and the argument of every section are signed off by somebody who knows the law before a draft exists to worry about.
Every article is graded on six dimensions before it reaches you
Brand voice
It sounds like the firm and stays inside the firm's rules, with the passage shown when it does not. The check that matters most here.
Learnings
A word you struck out in one draft stays struck out in every draft after it.
Brief compliance
It explains what the outline said it would explain, and stops where the outline stopped.
Search
It targets the situation in the words a person types, not the name of the practice area.
AI answers
People now describe their situation to an assistant first. The article is structured so those systems can quote it, and quote the part that says when to get advice.
Machine tells
Hedging and filler are stripped out. A worried reader stops at the first paragraph that says nothing.
Each failing check shows you the passage and the fix. See every step up close.
Where it ends up
Live without a partner touching the website
The draft is approved, and then it sits, because the site login left with the marketing assistant, or the last change to the website took a month and three emails. So the article is finished in every sense except the one that counts.
WordPress, direct
Connect the site once. After that it is one button: press Publish and the approved article is live, formatted, with the image and the internal links in place.
Anything else, by webhook
On a site a developer built for the firm, the webhook hands the finished article to whatever you do run. Somebody wires it up once.
Articles come out in English, Dutch or Czech.
The LinkedIn version comes out of the same brief, written for how LinkedIn reads, which is where the accountants, brokers and business owners who refer you spend their time. It is yours to post when you choose. We write it; we do not post it for you.
Proof
Read something it made and judge for yourself
We are not going to show you another firm's enquiries and ask you to trust them. What we can show you is our own work. Every article on this blog came out of the same system this page is describing: researched, written, checked, published, and read and approved by a person before it went out.
They are about content and search rather than about law, so read one the way you would read a junior's draft: does it claim anything it cannot support, and does it say anything you would not sign?
Read the blogQuestions worth asking first
- What should a law firm actually publish?
- The question a person types before they know they need a lawyer: what usually happens next in a situation like theirs, whether it is worth speaking to anyone at all, what the work tends to cost and what changes the number, and the mistake people make in the first week. Those reach somebody with a live problem. A note on a judgment reported everywhere else, or a page about the firm, reaches people who already know you.
- Can an article about a situation avoid being legal advice?
- It is written to explain, not to advise: what usually happens, what the options tend to be, and when to speak to a lawyer. Standing rules you set once hold every draft to that framing, you approve the outline before anything is written, and a partner reads the draft before it publishes. Where the line sits in your jurisdiction is your judgement. The approval step exists so that judgement is made before publishing, not after.
- We cannot name clients or promise outcomes. Can it hold to that?
- Yes, because you write the rules down once. The words the firm never uses, the claims it never makes, whether a client may be named: every draft is checked against that list before it reaches you, and when a draft crosses it the check shows you the passage and the fix. A correction you give is applied to every article after it. It is a first read, not a compliance review, and the review is still a partner's.
- Can it publish straight into our WordPress site?
- Yes. Connect the site once, and after that publishing is one button: press Publish and the finished article is live, formatted, with nobody at the firm touching the CMS. A site built for the firm by a developer receives the article through a webhook instead.
Take the question every new client asks in the first ten minutes
Approve one outline, watch it move through all four steps, and read the draft the way you would read a junior's before it left the building.
Start free trialOne full article free. No card required, no time limit.
Would rather not run it yourself? We can run it for you.