At the very least, it appears that the statute exempts only such books and software which "clearly and conspicuously state that the products are not a substitute for the advice of an attorney." Thus, under certain facts and circumstances, it appears that such software and/or books "could" still constitute the unauthorized practice of law absent a disclaimer as "required" by the statute. For a discussion of the specific facts that led a federal court to conclude that the developer, publisher, and marketer of Quicken Family Lawyer had engaged in the unauthorized practice of law in Texas (prior to enactment of section C, above), the reader is referred to "Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee v. Parsons", 1999 WL 47235 (N.D. Tex. 1999)