This is forwarded from the LAWPROF group, with an OK by its author.
Very interesting data on the subject of "true texts"
- Wendy Gordon
<wgordon[_at_]bu.edu>
- Forwarded message ----------
Date: Mon, 6 Feb 1995 10:27:25 -0600
From: Bruce Markell <BRUCEMARKELL[_at_]law.indiana.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <lawprof[_at_]chicagokent.Kentlaw.EDU>
Subject: Authenticity & West (long)
This thread is interesting, not only because we
are repeating historical mistakes (ever try to
reconcile conflicting case reports of old English
cases?), but because of current trends.
Let me relate some recent experience. We are in
the process of putting all Indiana case decisions
on the Internet. We have met with the Indiana
Supreme Court and have their (non-exclusive)
blessing for this project. A couple of comments:
- The Court has agreed to give us the electronic
version of the opinions they give to West. They
are in WordPerfect 6.0 format. We plan to place
these on an ftp site "as is" with an appropriate
index. We also plan to put a hypertext version on
our Web site.
- Problem 1: the members of the court each
use different formats, down to fierce independence
over fonts; the majority opinion will be in Arrus,
the dissent in Ariel. Margins, spacing, headers,
etc., are all uneven. When we put this into a
hypertext format, we will have to standardize the
text. Will this make it any less authentic? I
think not; even West will change this stuff. As
long as we maintain the ftp site in the original
format, users can check our stuff.
- Problem 2: the court isn't always
careful. A recent opinion had a WordPerfect
comment to the effect that a clerk should check
for a more recent edition of a citation. Is that
part of the opinion? We will probably take it out
of the hypertext version (as would West, I
suppose), but leave it in the ftp site.
- Citation. This, in many parts, boils down to
audience. If the purpose of publications is to
aid lawyers, West has control of its page numbers.
But recent proposals such as the one in Wisconsin
will ultimately create alternative ways to cite to
electronic materials, hopefully satisfying lawyers
and judges. But not all users are lawyers; a name
for these users is often as good as an
alphanumerical string.
- Noise. In our dealings with the Indiana
Supreme Court and the Indiana Legislature (we also
publish the Indiana Code on line), we were often
met with the attitude that "they" would not give
us the material because "they" could make money on
it. Indeed, the legislature here maintains a
separate database on all pending legislation that
they will not release to the public unless they
are paid for it ("they" will say that they are
just controlling the time, place and manner of
access so that "they" do not get swamped with
requests).
West doesn't help. In talks with the Indiana
Supreme Court, I suggested that the court check
with West to make sure that there were no
contractual impediments to giving us the
electronic version of the opinions. They checked.
They came back and told us the following: i. West
gave the court computers with CD-Roms to run
West's CD-Rom products; ii. West's position was
that a condition of using the computers was that
they could not use them to deliver anything to us
(we are using alternative access that under any
analysis is cobbled together, but seems to work).
By the way, given the source of this comment, I
both believe its accuracy and cannot disclose who
said it.
4. Conclusion. Everything old is new again;
there is no substitute for caution in checking how
the publisher of your material verifies the
accuracy and authenticity of what they publish.
The legal community has long been the beneficiary
of West's (and other publishers) care and effort,
but the cost of that care and effort may now call
into question who owns the law (sort of like the
Bonner Mall decision this term at the Court).
Although alternative means of publication may
present attractive options, the critical issue
will be the care of the publisher. But then it
always did. (In this regard, I commend and take
as an example the care taken by Cornell's Legal
Information Institute in explaining the how and
why of everything they distribute).
Sorry for the bandwidth on this one.
*Bruce A. Markell *
*Professor of Law *
*Indiana University School of Law--Bloomington *
*Telephone: (812) 855-2253 *
*Fax: (812) 855-2253 or 855-0555 *
*Internet: brucemarkell[_at_]law.indiana.edu *
- "Credit is but suspicion delayed." *
- Thomas Paine *
Private replies: BRUCEMARKELL[_at_]law.indiana.edu
Public replies: LAWPROF[_at_]chicagokent.Kentlaw.EDU
To subscribe, signoff, or digest: LISTSERV[_at_]chicagokent.Kentlaw.EDU
Technical questions: SYSADMIN[_at_]chicagokent.Kentlaw.EDU
Other inquires about the list: OWNER-LAWPROF[_at_]chicagokent.Kentlaw.EDU
Received on Mon Feb 06 1995 - 20:41:40 GMT