Perhaps, Mr. Gruben, you can explain how West "persuaded" National Public
Radio to make its retraction which included a wholly inaccurate and
gratuitious attack on Mr. Oakley.
West feels free to demonize its opponents -- indeed, it is standard
operating procedure. Look at the advertisements in last October
Washington Post, found on the West gopher. "It is almost Halloween and
look who is knocking on the door", complete with hobgoblins.
And, their brief to the Wis. Supreme Court demonized Jamie Love and John
Lederer.
Personal attack is part and parcel of the modern political campaign and
the modern corporate propoganda campaign.
What was the West response to the Minneapolis Star Tribune story -- that
the Star Tribune wrote the story because they planned to go into
competition with Westlaw. In the words of Marcia Clark "Your honor, that
is completely ridiculous."
Alan Sugarman
sugarman@panix.com
HyperLaw
On Mon, 27 Mar 1995, Karl Gruben wrote:
> Jamie, I agree, I would like to see more industry representation on panels.
> What I was pointing out was Sugarman demonizing West
> and insinuating, no - baldly stating, that West was using its size to
> intimidate other publishers and keeping them from the panel. Probably
> nothing could be farther from the truth. The people I know at West know
> and, generally, respect the other legal publishers and would welcome them
> on the panels. It's not West, it's the people putting together the panels.
>
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> Karl T. Gruben * Internet kgruben@starbase.neosoft.com *
> Vinson & Elkins * Telephone 713-758-2679 *
> 1001 Fannin * Fax 713-758-2346 *
> Houston, TX 77002-6760 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
>
> On Sun, 26 Mar 1995, James Love wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 24 Mar 1995, Karl Gruben wrote:
> > > Maybe it's something else but I was also struck by the contents of these
> > > panels referred to in A. Sugarman's email. I reaached a different end.
> > > I noted that Jamie Love has a seat on each and every one of the same
> > > panels on which a West representative sits. Perhaps it is Jamie Love who
> > > has so terrorized the publishers that they don't want to participate?
> >
> > I think that the numbers of a bit misleading. I was just
> > letting people know about three debates on this topic (all using the name
> > title), that West and TAP were both participating in. Of course there
> > are many others, that TAP isn't participating in, or that West isn't
> > involved in. But it is true, as Alan Sugarman has pointed out, that far
> > too often conference organizers ignore the smaller publishers. Thus, for
> > example, the AALL citation task force includes LEXIS and West, but none
> > of the independent publishers represented by the American Association of
> > Legal Publishers (AALP), of which there are several with interesting
> > stories to tell.
> >
> > > Perhaps, however, it is simply that West is the most oppressed and
> > > interesting of those under attack, right now.
> >
> > Maybe so, but it quite unfortunate, in our opinion, that West
> > receives is treated as THE INDUSTRY on many of these panels. If a
> > company wants to argue that its not a monopoly, then it would be nice if
> > we would see more of its "many" competitors, to learn their views,
> > which, as Sugarman points out, are often quite different from those of TAP.
> > jamie
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > James Love, TAP; internet: love@tap.org
> > P.O. Box 19367, Washington, DC 20036; v. 202/387-8030; f. 202/234-5176
> > 12 Church Road, Ardmore, PA 19003; v. 610/658-0880; f. 610/649-4066
> >
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 03/09/00 PST