>Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1993 17:19:11
>From: pgeorge@Law.USC.EDU (Paul George x06482)
>
>Wetlaw has hired several student reps whose major responsibility at
>this time is to distribute several different promotional booklets.
>We have no objection to this but we are being asked to store many
>large boxes of materials that we don't have a place to store for even
>a few days, much less the several weeks we believe the promotional
>activities will be going on. If Westlaw really cared about distributing
>the books, why not just put them in the student mail boxes? But since
>they are part of the promotional scheme, are we being caught up in
>it by storing the materials in our offices and storage room? I was
>wondering if other libraries have experience this new push to
>promote Westlaw.
While we're talking about promotional materials, has anybody else
seen a glossy brochure from MDC entitled "LEXIS/NEXIS Advantage:
Why You Should Choose the LEXIS/NEXIS Services"? I found one
copy on our circulation desk, and I can't find out where they
came from--included with LEXIS/NEXIS passwords or what.
The typical WESTLAW and MDC newsletters are one thing, but I'm
really bugged by this latest piece of literature from MDC,
particularly if they're handing this out to 1Ls. It's filled
with inaccuracies and misleading statements about the differences
between MDC LEXIS/NEXIS and WESTLAW.
There are a number of minor inaccuracies, or at least
questionable statements: for instance, under "LEXIS/NEXIS
Exclusives and Advantages," it lists "More 'Law-Related'
Information" (I suspect that DIALOG on WESTLAW provides at least
as much "law-related" information as NEXIS and MEDIS do); "Cover
to Cover Law Review/Journals" (although WESTLAW now includes many
law journals in full, not just selected articles); "MODIFY and
FOCUS features" (although WESTLAW's LOCATE feature corresponds to
MDC's FOCUS).
The worst misstatements are in the section about West headnotes.
The brochure cites several court opinions criticizing litigants
for _relying on headnotes as statements of positive law_. For
instance: "Sloppily relying on a headnote (which has been
misprinted), without bothering to read the actual text of the
opinion, they misstated the holding of this court." Buchanan v.
Blase, N.D. Ill., slip opinion, July 30, 1984. (No indication of
the problems with relying on unpublished slip opinions, by the
way.)
I have never seen any indication from West to lead users to
believe that's what headnotes are for; West seems to make every
effort to teach users that headnotes are for case-finding
purposes, and should not be relied upon as statements of the law.
MDC, on the other hand, would have us believe this is the only
function of headnotes.
I'll admit that the line is sometimes fuzzy, but nonetheless,
there is a difference between generally accurate promotional
material and dishonest comparisons based on intentional
misstatements of fact.
Jim Milles
Head of Computer Services
Saint Louis University Law Library
millesjg@sluvca.slu.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 03/09/00 PST