I'll take that as a yes.
Cindy Chick
cchick@netcom.com
(213) 689-6502
--------------------------------------------------------
On Thu, 3 Nov 1994, James Love wrote:
> On Thu, 3 Nov 1994, Cindy Chick wrote:
> > Jamie -
> >
> > Could we clarify something? Are you saying that you are NOT
> > advocating that the courts assume responsibility for the
> > collection, compilation, editing and quality control of all
> > federal court cases?
>
> Things the courts should assume responsibity for:
>
> Collection: Courts should "collect" their own opinions. They have
> records of their opinions now, don't they (at least in paper formats). If
> the courts disseminate opinions in electronic formats, like many federal
> and state courts do, they shouldn't destroy the records, but they should
> keep archives. This isn't very expensive.
>
> Compliation: It seems reasonable to have the courts number their
> opinions. This isn't beyond their own competence.
>
> Editing: Ever look at the differences between federal slip opinions
> and the "edited" versions that West publishes? Not much of a difference,
> and most people believe that the corrections mostly come from the
> parties, who notify the courts. Yes, I think that courts should assume
> responsibility for spell checking (doing a better job than I do) and
> fixing mistakes in grammer.
>
> Quality Control: What does this mean? Several firms now offer cite
> checking software. Editing (see above)?
>
> jamie
>
> >
> > *************************************************************
> > Cindy Chick cchick@netcom.com
> > (213) 689-6502
> > *************************************************************
> >
> > On Wed, 2 Nov 1994, James Love wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, 1 Nov 1994, Cindy Chick wrote:
> > > > I don't think this will ever top crime as the major concern of the
> > > > average American. There is, however, no doubt that there are publishers
> > > > that would like the government to collect this information for them and
> > > > present it to them in a marketable format.
> > >
> > > The other publishers just want an opportunity to publish court
> > > opinions with a legal cite without having to pay a royalty to West.
> > > And, of course, as far as we know, the only firms that have licenses to
> > > use the West cite are Mead, for LEXIS, but not for Michie, because of a
> > > settlement of an antitrust suit, Matthew Bender, because of a settlement
> > > of a lawsuit in NY, and apparently a firm that sells legal information in
> > > the Virgin Islands. (Please, if there are more, let us know). This
> > > isn't a question of handouts, it's a matter getting the right to
> > > redisseminate a usable version of government information without
> > > the permission of a private party (West). If West would abandon all
> > > claims that it "owns" the official text of judicial opinions and that it
> > > "owns" the official (and required citations) then this debate would end,
> > > immediately, and life would go on, with competition. LEXIS can live with
> > > that, why can't West?
> > >
> > > 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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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