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