This argument basically builds a strawman: Geeks have a bad image which causes them to be undervalued. Then it kills it with a non-sequiter: Lawyers, who are valued for their knowledge, charge out the nose. Geeks aren’t valued for their knowledge, they’re valued for their skill. Lawyers memorize books of law, law theory, and court precedent in order to inform their clients about the context of their case. Geeks can typically Google the knowledge they need and forget it in the next moment. Geeks don’t need a re-branding, they need a re-tooling: being an economic player is a problem to be solved, and solving it has rewards that extend beyond the joy of problem-solving.
As an addendum, lawyers who don’t market furiously, and don’t win cases don’t stay lawyers because they can’t pay the bills. Programmers who can’t negotiate wages and suck at programming become middle managers at enterprise-level corporations.