Worthless Updates Produced by "Editorial Staff" and the Implied Contract Between Legal Researchers and Publishers

"[W]e are living in dangerous times right now. The ideas of “print is dead” and “algorithms are meaning” seem to be pushing us to accept secondary material as bits of networked content that are influenced by tags, not people. The value of an author—a learned person—cannot be replaced by Wikipedia, Google, Shepards, or KeyCite" writes Jason Wilson in his commentary on the upcoming trial in Rudovsky v. West Publishing Corporation, Give me your money! (A comment on relationships.) More ...

The outcome of the dispute, while largely inconsequential to most practicing attorneys, raises some important issues about the implied contract between legal researchers and the publishers from whom they purchase content. Perhaps even more so with legal publishers who use their own editorial staff to update an existing product.

For more on the lawsuit, see LLB's 2009 post, Cold Comfort for West in "Sham" Treatise Pocket Part Ruling. [JH]