Law Librarian Blog

Math Prof Learns Lesson in Tax Math for Expensing Research and Writing Costs

TaxProf Blog reports that the Tax Court recently denied a math prof's deduction for expenses related to his research and writing activities. "[I]t is particularly important that petitioner distinguish his research and writing activity from his activity as college professor as well as from his personal activities," wrote the Court. ... "[H]e has failed to provide the Court with any adequate records or sufficient evidence to corroborate his own testimony."

How much of a deduction? $15,397 including $2,108 for a laptop. Guess this math prof learned a lesson in calculating and documenting "computer, home office, etc." business expenses. Wonder when the Tax Court deals with its first Kindle or iPad case. [JH]

Can You Reconstruct the Bill of Rights This Constitution Day?

Intended for elementary-aged students, the interactive Bill of Rights Game is designed to reconstruct the Bill of Rights.

Yes, I know the first 10 amendments to the US Constitution became effective December 15, 1791 and today is supposed to celebrate the Constitution being adopted on September 17, 1787 by the Constitutional Convention. But since the Constitution wasn't formally ratified until June 21, 1788 when, by a 57-47 vote, New Hampshire because the ninth state to do so, the federal government couldn't even get down to business and, in fact, the birth of the federal government was March 4, 1789. In order words, pick a date to celebrate or a document such as the Bill of Rights which protected civil liberties. An agreement to create the Bill of Rights, after all, helped to secure ratification of the Constitution. [JH]

AALL's Special Interest Section Dues

I do not plan to sign the petition. As a former SIS chair, I have an appreciation for the support from AALL Headquarters. I can't speak for other SISs but I know that ALL-SIS got a lot of value for the dues contributed to the annual fund last year.

Joyce Janto provided an FAQ in response to the AALL Petition for By-Law Amendments Regarding SIS Fees. Hopefully it will allow the membership to make an informed decision regarding the petition. The text of the FAQ is below. [BA]

AALL's Special Interest Section Dues: an FAQ

There is a petition in circulation requesting a change to AALL Bylaws regarding our SIS dues structure. The petition was originally sent to the law library directors at large law firms, who were asked to circulate it to their library staff. This week the petition was posted to some listservs and blogs.

As a result, we have received calls and emails from members with questions about the proposal. Therefore, I thought it would be helpful to provide members with information about SIS membership and dues. I also thought it would be beneficial for all of our members to be aware of the petition and its potential ramifications. In order to put this proposed bylaws change to a vote of the membership, at least 5 percent of AALL members must sign the petition.

How many AALL members are also members of an SIS?

As of August 31, 3,704 members were members of one or more SISs. SIS membership totals range from as many as 1,350 to as few as 70. But, no matter the number, each SIS provides members with the ability to share expertise and knowledge with colleagues who share similar interests.

When we talk about AALL and SISs, aren't we all part of the same professional organization?

Yes, we are. SISs were created to allow members to network and share knowledge and expertise in areas of interest in law librarianship. In order to fund SISs activities, a dues structure was developed. The dues pay for the additional administrative support necessary to support our SISs and their many programs and activities. SISs are not separate entities, they are part of AALL.

Did AALL increase SIS dues rates?

At its July 2010 meeting, the AALL Executive Board approved an increase in special interest section dues. Currently, members who belong to an SIS pay an annual $15 fee per SIS. The Executive Board approved an increase in that fee to $20 per year per SIS for the dues year beginning June 1, 2011.

Why did AALL increase SIS dues rates?

The purpose of the fee increase is to provide adequate support for section activities and programs. The last increase in section dues was in 2004.

How are SIS dues allocated?

Of the total SIS dues collected, 50 percent is credited to AALL's general operating fund; the other 50 percent is credited to each SIS treasury. Currently, about $53,000 from SIS dues income is credited to AALL's operating fund on an annual basis.

How often are collected SIS dues allocated?

All SIS dues are credited to each SIS and the AALL operating fund twice a year. Dues are credited on May 31, the end of the membership year, to ensure SISs receive all dues collected for that membership year. Dues are again credited on September 30, at the end of the fiscal year, to ensure SISs receive any dues collected from new members and members who were late in paying their dues. This is the most efficient way to properly account for and credit dues payments.

Does the dues allocation for AALL administrative support fully cover costs?

No, the $53,000 allocation does not fully cover the costs for the administrative support provided to our SISs. For example, our contracts with the headquarters hotel and the convention facility for the Annual Meeting include rooms to support all of the meetings and educational programs hosted by SISs. Based on usage for the past three years, the average annual cost for the rooms used by SISs is $51,575. In addition, the direct cost for supporting the SIS representatives and the SIS Council Chair, on an annual basis, is about $20,500. This does not even include the costs for routine administrative services outlined below.

How would the circulating petition for a Bylaws amendment change this?

If the current proposal were to be adopted, 20 percent of the SIS dues collected would be allocated to the AALL operating fund, the remaining 80 percent would be credited to each SIS treasury. The AALL operating fund would be credited about $28,000 annually.

How would this affect services currently provided to SISs?

AALL would no longer be able to provide the same level of support to our SISs. This would be an additional burden for SISs, especially the smaller SISs, which represent the greatest number of SISs

What is the current balance in each SIS treasury?

Balances range from $5,000 to $50,000. A complete accounting is provided here.

What services do SISs currently receive from AALL?

Each of AALL's 13 SISs receive the following services, which are supported by AALL's administrative offices and AALL's general operating fund:

GENERAL ADMINISTRATION

• SIS Council Chair is fully supported financially to attend the AALL Executive Board meetings, two per year, as the representative for SISs.
• AALL Representatives are fully supported financially by AALL, 11 of which represent the interests of and liaise with SISs. Representatives travel to meetings, throughout the U.S., one to two times each year.
• Creation, review and management of legal documents and contracts required by SISs for their publication royalty, work for hire, and other such agreements.

FINANCIAL ADMINISTRATION

• Manage and provide accounting services for SIS treasuries, including account reconciliation and processing of account receivables and payables.
• Oversight and management of annual audit.
• Issuance of quarterly financial reports to SIS treasurers.
• Management of SIS endowments, including investments and processing of donations.
• Training and ongoing support of SIS treasurers.
• Liability insurance coverage for SISs.

ANNUAL MEETING SUPPORT

• Reserve space and manage logistics required for all SIS activities, including education programs, business meetings, committee meetings, receptions, and other events. The average number of SIS events held and managed at each annual meeting is 160.
• SIS education program coordination and scheduling.
• Education program descriptions and editing for the online and final programs.
• Online registration and ticketing for SIS events.
• Event coordination and management of all food and beverage orders.
• Management of audio/visual orders and room setup details.
• Ordering, proofing, and management of all event signage, including maintenance of the SIS sign inventory.
• Solicitation of sponsorships for SIS events.
• Production of SIS awards, including plaques and award announcements.
• Reconciliation of all SIS invoices related to annual meeting services.

INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY

• Hosting and support services for SIS websites.
• Discussion list hosting and management for SISs, including SIS committees.
• Online election system use and management.
• Survey software use and management.
• SIS webmaster training and ongoing support.

MEMBERSHIP

• Billing and collection of all SIS dues.
• Maintenance of SIS membership lists.
• SIS recruitment marketing, to current and potential members.
• Project management assistance, editorial support, and production coordination for SIS brochures and special publications.
• Order fulfillment and shipping of SIS special publication and materials orders.
• Maintain inventory and archives for SIS materials.
• Promotion of SIS programs and activities.

CONTINUING EDUCATION PROGRAMS

• Webinar program development and production support.
• AALL Grants program to provide financial support to educational program

Friday Fun: Research Devil vs. Research Angel

Is it time for the information literacy lecture for law school legal research instruction classes? Click play, go grab a quick cup of coffee and return to the classroom... [JH]

Legal Skills Includes Law Practice Tech: Are law students being introduced to these real world services?

Here's the first annual New York Law Journal's best vendor rankings because, well, rankings sell issues and subscriptions. Just look at US News! This one was produced by "more than 2,000 votes" in a survey of NLJY subscribers. While I disagree with some of the results, that isn't important. What is important is that I wonder how many legal skills profs

1. actually know these vendors' services exist;
2. have used them sufficently to evaluate them; and
3. provide instruct in their use to law students.

Legal skills extends well beyond research, writing and clinical experience. A hands-on introduction to one service is each product category listed below is sufficient to provide law students with enough experience to translate what they learned to what they find available after they graduate.

A sample of the New York Law Journal 2010 Best Vendors rankings by product category follows:

Best Case Management Software

1. SAGA Systems
2. TrialWorks
3. AbacusLaw

Best Docketing & Calendaring Software

1. AbacusLaw
2. PracticeMaster
3. Deadlines On Demand

Best Docket Management Software

1. Legal Files
2. Interwoven
3. DocsCorp

Best Time & Billing Software

1. Sage Timeslips
2. Amicus Accounting
3. PCLaw

Best eDiscovery Provider

1. Xerox
2. Catalyst Repository Systems
3. Complete Discovery Source

Best Tables of Authority Software

1. WestCiteLink
2. Shepard’s Full Authority
3. Best Authority

Best Online Research Vendor

1. WestLawNext WestSearch
2. LexisNexis Total Litigator
3. FindLaw

Best Small Firm/Solo Research Vendor

1. Westlaw Litigator
2. LexisNexis Research Value
3. VersusLaw

Best Legal Research Vendor

1. CP Legal Research Group
2. National Legal Research Group
3. Research Associates

[JH]

Emerging Technologies in Librarianship: A Note on an Upcoming Continuing Education Program

When was the last time you heard of a US News #1 ranked school close its doors? While my school did in the 1990s. The Graduate Library School at the University of Chicago was always ranked #1 or tied for first place with the University of Illinois Graduate School of Library and Information Science. Got accepted to both back in 1977. U of I requiring that you had to prove yourself for scholarship $$$ during the summer semester back then while U of C's GLS offered cold hard $$$ up front. Being a Chicagoan helped make the decision easy (read visions of living in corn fields in Urbana-Champaign, which really isn't the case.) At decision time, I certainly didn't comprehend that many of the courses I would take at GLS would be taught by physicists-turned-information scientists who assumed we all knew how to do complex math and whose instruction in higher order programming languages was, "here the manual." And it was a two-year grind instead of U of I's 12 month program.

I haven't checked U of I's LIS School US News rankings in a very long time because I am way beyond learning anything new; I doubt anything would stick in my no-short-term memory brain anymore. The older you get the more learning is about making associations to embedded memories. But my hunch is the school is still at or near the head of the pack. I bring this up because it is offering a continuing education program entitled "Emerging Technologies in Librarianship" for those who are not neural network challenged. Participants "will explore select emerging technologies while building those imperative and complementary skills of discovery and evaluation. The focus will be on web-based and open-source software that have potential to create value for library users. Assignments will expose participants to journals and other media that illuminate trends in technology, and will encourage participants to develop a personalized rubric for evaluating the merit of new tools." Details below:

Emerging Technologies in Librarianship
Dates: September 20 – October 29, 2010
Times: Online asynchronous format accessible at any time
Cost: $300
Instructor: Jason Kovac, Ph.D.

Intended audience: Librarians and information professionals interested in using emerging technologies in their libraries.

What will be covered:

Week One: Web 2.0 Basics: The Democratic Web
Week Two: Online Productivity
Week Three: Building Community
Week Four: Mobile Technology
Week Five: The Fun Stuff: Virtual Worlds and Gaming
Week Six: The Library as Web 2.0 Entrepreneur

Delivery format: The course will be conducted via the same course management system (Moodle) used by the Graduate School of Library and Information Science online education program (LEEP). Students will be expected to participate asynchronously during the 6 weeks via discussion boards and to view podcasts and webinars.

For more, including how to register, here's the link. [JH]

Are You Feeling Like the Pretty Boy in a Maximum Security Prison? On the mythos of "list price," sale price, and library continuation spend for TR Legal print

AALL 2009 Price Index for Legal Publications

In the "From the Desk of" August 2010 message about the publication of the 2009 Price Index, our association's president glossed over the fiasco that was data compilation for this latest "effort."

Quoting from the members-only page: The Price Index for Legal Publications Committee works with AALL headquarters staff to gather and measure the annual subscription pricing data that gets recorded in the Price Index for Legal Publications. A price index measures the changes in average prices of specific sets of goods against a base price. ... Thomson Reuters agreed to supply prices for the 2009 Price Index. They supplied list prices for new sets for the years 2005 -2009. Historically, prices within the Price Index have been for supplementation. After Thomson Reuters submitted new set prices, the Chair looked more closely at other publishers' prices within the Price Index. It appears that other publishers have also supplied new set pricing between the years 2005 and 2008. To clarify what is the proper pricing for publishers to supply, the 2010-11 Committee is drafting a set of written pricing standards. These standards will be sent to publishers in advance of their agreement to participate in the Price Index. The written standards will articulate the specific type of price that must be provided for each material type in the index. The 2009 index now shows the percentage of change from 2005 to 2009. In calculating this overall percentage of increase, the Thomson Reuters prices were excluded. There are several reasons why: 1) the Thomson Reuters data has been identified as new set data and the majority of past data in the index has been for supplementation; 2) the addition of the Thomson Reuters titles would necessitate that the base be reset this year; and 3) as new standards are developed by the 2010-11 Committee, the base will have to be reset for the 2010 index. Weighing these factors, it was decided to forgo resetting the base in 2009 and to keep the Thomson Reuters data separate for the 2009 index. The base will be reset in 2010 after the new standards are adopted and all publishers who participate have been required to submit the same type of data for each material type. Users will be able to refer to the 2005-2009 Thomson Reuters data on the Price Index Query page. On the query page, users can also access data from all publishers for the time period 1998-2004.

Clarification Needed? Some members of the Price Index Committee responsible for producing the 2009 Price Index did not even know what AALL asked vendors to supply in terms of pricing information! OMG, I'm about to defend TR Legal ... wait for it ... according to a very reputable company source, AALL did not ask for print continuation pricing for this year's Price Index! And we are letting our association's leadership control and define the vendor-buyer relationship! What the... . Oh yes, the August message from "the desk of" AALL President Joyce Manna Janto also included the following announcement: A search committee has been formed to select AALL's next vendor liaison. The vendor liaison will serve as AALL's liaison for fostering knowledge and information sharing between the law library community and legal information vendors. This individual will also work to develop programs or initiatives for sharing expertise and creating a dialogue about library-vendor issues and to communicate about legal information policy issues from the law librarian perspective.

Time for a Conference Table in AALL Leadership. Is it just me or is it time to replace "the desk" with a conference table where the elected heads of the academic, private and public sectors' SIS groups sit, each serving as AALL vice-presidents, jointly deciding what our so-called association of law library institutional buyers do? We are well beyond "enough is enough" in our institutionalized AALL "mythos." NB: This notion is actually something our vendors who just happen to be  our association's advertisers can relate to and I think our vendors may actually welcome such structural changes as a step in the right direction because that's exactly how they view the market. How long will it be before an association that is by definition based on instiutional membership, not individual law librarian membership, will realize we are all conducting business in market sectors that are uniquely different and are in no small part defined by purchasing power and user populations? Tweaking the current structure of AALL will not be enough. As for the status quo, AALL is being gamed because our major vendors see the opportunity to do so. Can't blame them -- ya think TR Legal didn't know that historically the Price Index measured supplementation costs? But if not asked to provide, why do so. And the membership is allowing this to happen... . Perhaps the maximum security prison is actually located in Chicago. Say a prayer tonight that Ken Svengalis is still going strong when he reaches the ripe old age of 100.

Anyone who is monitoring annual upkeep spend for print (and who isn't in the Shed West Era) knows that both TR Legal and MB's annual costs for major (and even sometimes not so major) secondary source titles is running in the 70-75% range of buying new at list price. Has been for years if you have been paying attention to Ken Svengalis. However, both companies have been mounting regular as in monthly, weekly, even just 3-day long marketing campaigns for over a year now by offering 20-25-30-40-50% off list price for cumulatively speaking a not insignificant portion of their print catalogs of major (and sometimes not so major) works. 

List price, Does That Matter? What's our new benchmark, the lowest sale price offered during the past 12 months? Note to self, don't waste paper printing out the AALL 2009 Price Index for Legal Publications. See sidebar, right.

Oftentimes TR Legal Marketing's sale pricing for buying new for titles we have on standing kowtow order makes me think our little county law library is the pretty boy in a maximum security prison located in Minnesota. Displayed below is a random sample of TR Legal Marketing's sale pricing for titles on Sept. 10, 2010 that we have on standing order, along with our 2010 proforma pricing for them. Of course, everyone knows, TR Legal's proforma pricing is not what institutional buyers actually pay. It's just an "estimate." I, for one, can't remember the last time the Company's proforma pricing was higher than actual costs. But what the heck, "shipping is free."

If curious, you know how to look up today's pricing for each title. Can you say, spin the wheel of fortune? I'm alluding to the original meaning of the Greek goddess, Nemesis.

Who knows what today's TR Legal sale pricing is but do note the upkeep schedule for each advertised title before you make a buy-not buy decision because the buy decision may trigger nightmarish print continuation charges. Yes, I am now alluding to Epiales, the daimon in Greek mythology who assaults sleepers, because TR Legal Marketing's for print has reached mythical proportions in the Company's attempt to return to Mount Olympus. Professionally, I think TR Legal's tactics indicate that the Company already knows it is residing in Tartarus.

Note to Self: Quit with the allusions already! Just because you studied the association between Classical Greek mythos and its intellectual backdrop for pre-Socratic philosphers like Heraclitus and remember that Aristotle's Poetics defined mythos as the first element of tragedy, doesn't mean LLB readers give a damn.

"The path up and down are one and the same." -- Heraclitus

Of course everyone know what happened to Sisyphus who promoted commerce, but was avaricious and deceitful, and also what his punishment was for violating the laws of hospitality by killing travelers and guests, right? Our major legal vendors, particularly TR Legal by its arrogance, have violated the economic laws of law library hospitality. Our user population have a short-term memory. They will not remember nor care about what once was, once we have introduced them to what now is. Damn it! Now an allusion to Heidegger! Sorry, I can recall things from 40 years ago but have no clue what I did four hours ago. Time to move on... .

The New World of WEXIS Print Acquisitions for Secondary Print Titles. Of course these marketing campaigns are an attempt to prop up print revenue in response to the Shed West Era. If interested in acquiring a new MB print title on sale, you can oftentimes obtain free upkeep. For example, during this summer's MB treatise promo you could order any new title that normally costs $800 or more for a 50% discount. I was a buyer of MB's 12-volume loose-leaf set, Environmental Law Practice Guide: State and Federal Law Guidance. Instead of paying list price of $1,991, we paid $995.50 (plus shipping and handling) for the set plus got 12 months of upkeep.

Free upkeep from TR Legal? Well, I don't know about real large sets because our library is more likely to cancel them, than acquire major new titles from the Company. But for the sales titles I have been looking at, free upkeep is not usually the case. Anyone want to map when TR Legal puts a title on sale and when that title's next upkeep will be sent and billed to the new subscriber?

TR Legal Marketing's Sales Pricing Merry-Go-Round. While I have shed West print in our little county law library to the tune of of 50% of last year's spend with another 25% to be cut from our library's adjusted spend basis this year, I am not opposed to buying new West titles in principle. Two cases in point from TR Legal Marketing's sales pricing merry-go-round.

We shed all West bankruptcy subs we could last year including all the practice-oriented titles West gobbled up over the years because they weren't being used (editorial quality?), and all the titles we dumped were more costly to maintain than the "other guy." $7,000-plus savings. But, by we could, I mean except for two comprehensive, not needed, not used, but expensive even at 50% off SUB pricing major treatise sets that will be eliminated once they are off our WestPrint lock-in with Westlaw at the end of this year. Hey, I tried this time last year but got the pro forma "no, but we can renegotiate your Westlaw contract" response. Thanks, but no thanks. But I digress... .

I did acquire the two volume "loose-leaf" Bankruptcy Practice Handbook 2d at 20% off (if memory serves, it certainly wasn't bought at list and might have been at 25% or 30% off list) a couple of months ago but only after the June upkeep date. Hey, you have to pay attention to these things! List price is $527, current sale price, by which I mean, last week is $447.95. That would be 15% off list. I am worried that this title might get a TR Legal format switcheroo because it is the kind of publication the Company may want to pitch for purpose of storing on an attorney credenza.

I purchased Immigration Pleading and Practice Manual on Sept. 9th. At that moment in TR Legal Marketing time the title had a sales price of $114.60. List price was $191. After doing the math, this acquisition with upkeep costs due in a couple of months (most likely November or December) factored in will equal the list price. Such a deal for 40% off list price! But in the course of the next year, I'll know if our little county law library's patrons will use it. If not, it will be history. Due note that on the next day, that would be Sept 10th, the sale price for this title was $162.35, or 15% off list but then there's that little pesky update cost thing. Wouldn't have been a buyer at that price.

In almost all cases I just take a pass on TR Legal Marketing's sales pricing merry-go-round but this is the new world of print acquisitions work. So after I cancel some more West SUBs at the end of this year (can you guess which ones listed below?), I wonder what their sales pricing will be a year or two from now. My hunch is if you asked the Company, the response would be, "no, no, this is temporary." And perhaps it is. However, our little county law library's Shed West cancellations are not based on a gamble that this new regime of sales is permanent; it's based on library economics. TR Legal is pricing itself out of the print continuation market. For multi-volume treatises, MB titles are the better value and that Company's historical annual price increases for subs are substantially less. [JH]

Sale Price on September 10, 2010	TR Legal's 2010 Proforma Upkeep Estimate Costs for SUBs
	$903
	$1,997.50
	$7,086.50
	CJS  at $6,570 and that doesn't include the CJS TOC at $654.50

End Note. So what do you do with all the print you have cancelled in this epic Shed West era? Why not turn some of the volumes into a public services desk! Hat tip to LLB co-editor Mark Giangrande for this one. More images here.

An Introduction to Trade Law: Selected International Agreements and U.S. Laws

From the summary of the CRS report Trade Law: An Introduction to Selected International Agreements and U.S. Laws (R41306, dated June 29, 2010):

U.S. trade obligations derive from international trade agreements, including the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), the other World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements, and additional bilateral and regional trade agreements, as well as domestic laws intended to implement those agreements or effectuate U.S. trade policy goals. This report provides an overview of both sources of U.S. trade obligations, focusing on a select group of agreements, provisions, and statutes that are most commonly implicated by U.S. trade interests and policy.

Among the federal agencies and entities discussed are the United States Trade Representative (USTR), the International Trade Administration (ITA), the International Trade Commission (ITC), the United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and the United States Court of International Trade (CIT). This report is not intended as a comprehensive review of trade law. It is an introductory overview of the legal framework governing trade-related measures. The agreements and laws selected for discussion are those most commonly implicated by U.S. trade interests, but there are U.S. trade obligations beyond those reviewed in this report.

[JH]

U.S. News Ranks Law Firms

U.S. News is out with its Best Lawyers "Best Law Firms" survey.  Before I get to the substance, my prediction is that those on top will push the results as confirmation of their excellence while those, uh, farther down on the lists will complain that the results are inaccurate.  In other words, it's the law school ranking reaction model all over again.  I don't remember any law schools promoting their fourth tier status, and I don't think there will be law firms celebrating 900th tier status either.  Fortunately for the 9,000 or so ranked firms, the methodology doesn't put them into one single list.  The rankings are geared to areas of practice and metropolitan areas, thus avoiding some direct comparisons.

U.S. News sent out reputation surveys to clients, lawyers, marketing officers, recruiting officers, firms without marketing or recruiting officers, and firm and summer associates.  Some of these surveys had a total of 724 questions.  The responses, in some cases, provided hundreds of thousands of evaluations.  Firms that are ranked nationally had to have an office in one of 40 major metropolitan areas, otherwise local rankings were listed for 171 metropolitan areas and 7 states.  Those of you practicing law in, say, Casper, WY, or Bismark, ND (Bismark is in North Dakota, isn't it?) will not escape the unblinking eye of the Sauron that is U.S. News.  National firms are ranked against 39 practice areas and local firms are ranked against 81 practice areas.  The full methodology details are here.  Odd that law school placement directors aren't included.  A comment about chopped liver comes to mind.

The rankings are presented as a browsable list (national firms only) and through search (all).  The list (by area of practice) will show tiered ranking for that practice area.  There is no "top 100" as far as I can tell.  Clicking on a law firm name will show all tier rankings for that firm and client comments.  Search is by firm name, location, city, and practice area.

These rankings, unlike those for law schools, are not based on metrics that get reported to an accrediting agency.  Take them for what they are worth.  Prospective clients should find this useful, as should any law student considering a prospective employer.  The ABA weighed in on this last February and was not amused.  The organization probably hasn't changed its point of view.  Lawyers will now know how the law schools have felt all these years. [MG]

"We techies stand ready, willing and able to make this happen:" What LAW.GOV means to Sean McGrath, IT architect and builder of legislative systems

Sean McGrath works for Proplyon, a world leader in legislative and regulatory content management. With his permission, the following is republished from his Sept. 1, 2010 blog post in response to LLB's open invitation to answer the question "What Does LAW.GOV Mean to You?" Please note well, the opinions expressed below are his own and neither Propylon nor any other party necessarily agrees with them.

If anyone doubts that the technology for LAW.GOV is not already available, please note what McGrath has to say. [JH]

Herein is my response to the question what does law.gov mean to you?

I am an IT architect and a builder of legislative systems more so than a direct legal publisher. Having said that, I have worked with most of the worlds legal publishing entities at some time or other over the last twenty years. My current focus is creating legislative systems for legislatures - mostly in the U.S.A. - the content our systems produce is then published by legislatures themselves and also by third party publishers.

I am a technologist first and foremost. I recently started blogging about the KLISS eDemocracy system here in Kansas in the hope that the technical details I am blogging will help other technologists to understand the legislative domain better and thus help create a more informed tech community around one of the most important aspects of any democracy.

I agree with pretty much everything Ed Walters said about the AOL Moment that is currently happening in the legal publishing industry. I also also agree with pretty much everything Carl Malamud says about the desirability of free, unfettered access to authenticated, machine readable primary legal materials in the context of the law.gov initiative.

For me however, the most interesting vista that law.gov opens up is the potential for the most significant event in the evolution of democracy since the funeral oration of Pericles 2400 years ago. For the first time in human history, we now have all the technological pieces we need to bring participation in the democratic process to levels not seen since ancient Greece when everyone could literally congregate in the same place. To quote Don Heiman, CITO for the Kansas State Legislature:

"Anything, including law making, you do in the presence of government you can do electronically without regards to wall or clocks provided it is easy to use and free to citizens."

There are no longer any technical reasons why we cannot publish the public activities of a legislature in real-time, or have statute databases codified on the fly, or provide direct visibility of what the impact of a proposed modification to the law would look like before it gets voted on. No technical reason why we cannot allow citizens to not only observe, but also participate in the making of law *as it is being made* - not just see the results ex post facto.

It is a lot of work for sure but it is only work at this point. No new technology breakthroughs are required. What needs to happen next (and there are signs it is happening) is for the world of law and the world of software development to both come to the realization that they are both in the same business from content management and publishing perspectives. I really believe that law is source code in the sense that the disciplines and techniques that have been perfected in the software development world have a tremendous amount to offer those who manage corpora of legal texts.

I look forward to the day when we speak of, for example "release 7.8a (Rev 456422) of the consolidated statutes of Tumbolia (MD5: checksum d03730288a7f0278e36afc82f220ddab)."

I look forward to the day when we can jump into a time machine and look at Rev 674245 of the 2011 Legislative Biennium Corpus for Tumbolia in order to better understand the legislative intent of an amendatory bill.

I look forward to the day when we can look at the laws of Tumbolia, as they were at noon Wed, 20 Jan 2010 in order to present attorneys and the courts with a complete view of what the law said at the time some contested action took place.

I look forward to the day when we can detail edit-by-edit how the consolidated statutes of Tumbolia came to be what they are by starting with the Constitution of Tumbolia from 1899 and rolling forward changes to its statute from its session laws, step-by-step with all the rigor of an accounting audit trail of transaction ledgers.

I hope that the law.gov initiative heads in that direction. The http://legislation.gov.uk website clearly points the way for what is possible. Speaking as a technologist, we techies stand ready willing and able to make this happen. Is the political will there to make it happen? Is the disruption of the status quo too much too soon for such a staid and contemplative field as law and law-making? I can answer neither of these questions but I sincerely hope the answers are "yes" and "no" respectively.

The biggest threat to any democracy is a disinterested electorate. In years to come, I hope law.gov will be seen as the catalyst that re-invigorated an entire generation to engage with the democratic process. A process that too many currently feel is beyond their realm of influence. We can change that now. For our sakes and the sakes of future generations, I hope we do.

-- Sean McGrath

Right About Now 1Ls Are Asking Some of the 25 Questions These Recent Law Grads Wish They Had Had Answers Before Attending Law School

Kelsey May, Samantha Roberts, and Elizabeth Shelton, all recent Tulsa Law grads, have written What the L?: 25 Things We Wish We'd Known Before Going to Law School (Carolina Academic Press, July 15, 2010). Here's the blurb:

Law school can be a terrifying experience if you don't know what you're getting yourself into. For students who don't have their career paths or pedagogic goals mapped out, law school is even more terrifying. There are so many questions that accompany the decision to apply to law school: Is it worth the money? Is it worth the time? Is this the right time to go? Will I do well? How can I do well? How do I find a job? What kind of job is right for me? Is law school like college? And if you decide to go to law school, there are even more questions: What is an outline? How is an exam structured? How do I get a job at a big firm? What is a legal fraternity? What is the bar exam and when do I take it? This book is a firsthand account of trudging through law school without the answers to any of these questions. Three students offer a completely candid student perspective on every aspect of law school, from classmates to bar review, and outlines to studying abroad. While other law school preparation books are helpful, this account is a true story of how things really work, from the ground up. We are not law school experts, we are law school students: just like you. If you've ever wanted to know the real story on law school, this is it.

Buy a couple of copies for the reserve collection? What the heck, help the authors pay their law school debts. [JH]

Opening: Reference Librarian, New York County District Attorney’s Office

The New York County District Attorney’s Office seeks a Reference Librarian for it Library Unit.  Responsibilities include but are not limited to:

• Conduct legal, medical, psychological, business and general research using diverse sources including books, Westlaw, PsycInfo, Lexis, and web resources.
• Create and maintain RSS feeds.
• Provide classroom and one-on-one training for legal research, in-house and web 2.0 resources.
• Evaluate information resources and troubleshoot computer problems.
• Facilitate Interlibrary Loan.
• Research expert witnesses; compile legislative histories.
• Process library invoices. 
• Maintain in-house knowledge management systems; perform related duties.

The ideal candidate should possess the following qualifications:

• Bachelor’s degree required; MLS preferred
• Experience in legal research or library work preferred.
• Excellent writing and training skills preferred.
• Excellent Microsoft Office and computer skills required.
• Excellent organizational, communication and interpersonal skills required.
• Ability to relate with different users.

Salary $41,619. Excellent vacation and benefits package.  EOE. Resumes should be forwarded to: libraryresumes@dany.nyc.gov

If you do not have access to e-mail, please mail application to:

Recruitment Coordinator
New York County District Attorney’s Office
One Hogan Place – Room 749
New York, NY  10013

eBooks and Library Borrowing

There's an odd little item from the Salt Lake Tribune with the headline "Oops.  Kindle cannot support library books."  The author, Vince Horiuchi, is correcting an assumption that he published last week that because the Kindle can read PDFs it can handle eBooks loaned in that format.  Yes, the Kindle can read PDFs but not those with DRM attached.  That, in the wallet of the provider, would be bad.  As the story notes, quoting Greg Near of the Salt Lake County Library:

“At this point, they want customers of the Kindle and iPad to purchase the files — hence, not making them available from their local library. With the explosion in popularity of e-books, it could take a while for the manufacturers to catch up with the public’s demands and work out a plan to include public libraries in their service.”

That's Apple and Amazon.  Other libraries do lend eBooks in an Adobe Epub format and the commercial readers out there that can read them are the Barnes & Noble Nook and the Sony Reader.  

I suppose that it is the trade off between coolness and functionality.  Sony has never been known to open with their products.  They once created a portable music player that used a proprietary format  (Atrac) that wasn't compatible with anything.  The company also invented a new form of DVD (UMD) that only worked with its PSP player.  Both products and formats were market losers, and gone the way all bad market products should go.

 It's refreshing to see Sony lighten up a little with eBooks and not attempting to reinvent the wheel in its own image.  In fact, it's even more refreshing to see them host a page that acts as a Library Finder, searchable by state/province or zip code for electronic lending compatible with its reader.  I assume that the Barnes & Noble device will take advantage of the same borrowing opportunities.  It seems, though, that setting up for loaned eBooks on the Nook is not easy for some, if the comments on this page are accurate.

While I acknowledge the popularity of eBook readers and tablets, I still have concerns about the devices in that they lock in consumers to one store, more or less.  It's just that devices tend to go obsolete, and it really is a trust that the manufacturers will carry forward the content they sold (leased?) on successive devices.  It's not that I expect Amazon or Apple will go away in the near future.  Companies, though, can be bought or change sales philosophy.  For this reason I appreciate that there are devices out there that can borrow from a library.  There is a source for content that doesn't require a store.  For the record, the Salt Lake County Library system can loan out eBooks, just not to an iPad or a Kindle.  [MG]

AALL Petition for By-Law Amendments Regarding SIS Fees

Here is a petition asking AALL for a vote by distributed ballot (simple majority of those voting) to:
 
1.  Increase the percentage of SIS fees given to each SIS to 80% (this allows AALL 20% as an administrative fee) and provides that it be paid quarterly instead of once a year.

2.  Requires any changes to SIS fees be voted on by the members of AALL.
 
Why make this proposal? See my LLB post, Results of Law Librarian Blog SIS Fees Poll.
 
AALL requires original petition signatures.  Only members in good standing may sign the petition. 
 
Please feel free to pass this petition along. All signed petitions should be returned to me by snail mail at the below address.   
 
Caren J. Biberman
Director of Library and Information Services
Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP
80 Pine Street, Room 1829
New York, NY  10005

Who Owns Computer-Generated Works That Require No "Human Intervention"

The "usual suspects are: a) the author of program; b) the user of the program; c) the program; and d) none" according to Mark Perry and Thomas Margoni, (University of Western Ontario, Faculty of Law) in From Music Tracks to Google Maps: Who Owns Computer Generated Works? [SSRN] Let's add, maybe it's a joint work when we are talking about output that has been computer-generated without direct “human intervention" beyond a mouse click.

From the authors abstract:

Increasingly the digital content used in everyday life has little or no human intervention in its creation. Typically, when such content is delivered to consumers it comes with attached claims of copyright. However, depending on the jurisdiction, approaches to ownership of computer-generated works vary from legislated to uncertain. In this paper we look at the various approaches taken by the common law, and the legislative approach take in the United Kingdom.

Hat tip to Media Law Prof Blog. {JH]

Internet Privacy Ctd.

Friday saw the release of two opinions from Judge Rosemary M. Collyer of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.  These concerned whether subpoenas seeking the real names of ISP subscribers who allegedly downloaded the movie Far Cry (in one case) or The Steam Experiment (in the other) should be quashed.  The suits are controversial in that there are 4,577 Does in the first case and 1,653 Does in the second, and that these Does are scattered across the United States.  As to whether these individuals enjoy a level of privacy that overcomes the subpoenas, the judge answered with a resounding "no." 

Several wrote the Judge on the record with their names and addresses, essentially mooting the privacy issue.  As she said, their notes present defenses, which interesting, are not appropriate at this stage of the proceedings.  For the one individual who filed his motion under seal and actually responded to subpoena, well...why not let the Judge say it:

With regard to the claim that identifying information is private, courts have found to the contrary. Courts have held that Internet subscribers do not have an expectation of privacy in their subscriber information as they already have conveyed such information to their Internet Service Providers. See, e.g., Guest v. Leis, 255 F.3d 325, 335–36 (6th Cir. 2001) (“Individuals generally lose a reasonable expectation of privacy in their information once they reveal it to third parties.”); U.S. v. Hambrick, Civ. No. 99-4793, 2000 WL 1062039, at *4 (4th Cir. Aug. 3, 2000) (a person does not have a privacy interest in the account information given to the ISP in order to establish an email account); U.S. v. Kennedy, 81 F. Supp. 2d 1103, 1110 (D. Kan. 2000) (defendant’s Fourth Amendment rights were not violated when an ISP turned over his subscriber information, as there is no expectation of privacy in information provided to third parties).[FN3]

Accordingly, the motions to quash will be denied. [FN4]

[FN3] Mr. Doe #1 also erroneously argues that his Internet Service Provider, Verizon, is not required to divulge its customers’ identifying information, relying on cases that dealt with subpoenas governed by the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. § 512. See Recording Indus. Ass’n of Am. v. Verizon Internet Servs., Inc., 351 F.3d 1229 (D.C. Cir. 2003); In re Charter Commc’n, Inc., 393 F.3d 771 (8th Cir. 2005). The subpoenas issued in the case are Rule 45 subpoenas, governed by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

[FN4] While some courts have held that the anonymous downloading and distribution of music over the Internet constitutes protected First Amendment speech, the protection afforded such speech is limited and gives way in the face of a prima facie showing of copyright infringement.  “Defendants’ First Amendment right to remain anonymous must give way to the plaintiffs’ right to use the judicial process to pursue what appear to be meritorious copyright infringement claims.”  Sony Music Entm’t, Inc. v. Does 1-40, 326 F. Supp. 2d 556, 567 (S.D.N.Y. 2004); Arista Records LLC v. Does 1-19, 551 F. Supp. 2d 1, 8–9 (D.D.C. 2008) (“Not surprisingly, courts have routinely held that a defendant’s First Amendment privacy interests are exceedingly small where the ‘speech’ is the alleged infringement of copyrights.”) (collecting cases). Plaintiff has made a prima facie case
of copyright infringement in this case, and Plaintiff’s need for disclosure outweighs the First Amendment privacy interests here.

The text of the nearly identical opinions are here and here.  [MG]

Kagan Applies for a Part-time Job

As reported in the Wall Street Journal last Friday , our newest Supreme Court justice has recently recused herself from an additional ten cases slated to be heard in the coming Supreme Court term, her first term on the venerated bench.  This will bring the total number of cases (so far) up to 21, or slightly more than 50% of the 40 cases currently granted writ for this term.  The docket will fill up with many more, but at this rate, I wonder how much free time Justice Kagan will have on her hands.  Imagine loosing 50% or your workload?  Wow.  Almost like a sabbatical.

I have listed the cases at the end of this post for convenience.  I had a difficult time identifying them all in one place and want to give credit to JDJournal: Nothing But the Truth  for taking the time to list them for us.

Justice Kagan excused herself from the first eleven cases because she was the counsel of record.  These ten new cases are those where, in her role as Solicitor General, either authorized or did not authorize government involvemend in lower court litigation.

This is not really a surprise.  Bloggers like Ed Whelan at the National Review warned readers back in April about a potentially large number of cases that a Solicitor General might recuse herself if appointed to the bench. 

In fact, in her successful bid for the bench, Justice Kagen herself said:

“I would recuse myself from any case in which I’ve been counsel of record at any stage of the proceedings, in which I’ve signed any kind . . . 

If I personally reviewed a draft pleading or participated in discussions to
formulate the government’s litigating position, then I would recuse myself
from a case.In my view, this level of participation in a case would
warrant recusal.

and

If I gave advice about the government’s litigating position or the content of a
filing, then I would recuse myself from the case.In my view, this level of
participation in a case would warrant recusal. 

Analysts compare Justice Kagan to the last Soliciter General who was elevated to the Supreme Court: Thurgood Marshall.  According to Lawrence Wrightsman in his book The Psychology of the Supreme Court, Justice Marshall recused himself from 57% of the cases heard by the Court during his first year. Well, if people were comparing me to Justice Marshall, I'd feel like I'm off to a pretty good start.

It is hard to say what is the right standard of appropriateness for acknowledging a conflict of interest.  There have been many a law review article written about it, and the justices themselves have written extensively about recusal - often in defense of themselves for NOT stepping aside (see for example, Scalia's defense of himself for not stepping down in the case of then VP Cheney's duck hunting fiasco).  

In additional to the Judicial Code of Conduct, 28 USC 455, and to a lesser extent  28 USC 144  offers guidance on when a justice might just step aside.  But they are not detailed and are certainly open to interpretation by the greatest interpreters that the country has to offer!  My cynical take on it is that if there is enough media pressure, a justice will excuse themselves to maintain the dignity of the court if nothing else.  The problem is that most of the justices hate to miss a case (which is good I guess), but none of them told Elena.

For my purposes, I am more interested in how this information gets conveyed to the researcher.  How do you know if someone did recuse themselves and why - or was asked to and did not. You cannot search Supreme Court cases in which a justice excused themselves from a case due to a potential conflict or appearance of bias. I looked up a few cases where I knew a justice recused themself.  The opinions just seem to say: Justice so and so took no part in this decision. 

Likewise, we aren't told in an opinion if a motion was made by a party requesting 
that a justice recuse themselves. Even if you used a citator, it is likely going to 
miss any memo written before the Supreme Case was heard.  Maybe you would pick it up in the history.  Maybe.  This later situation seems much more interesting and relevant than the former, but they both indicate a hole in the reporting process.  

The most informative source on recusal that I found is a blog at the National Law Journal called the Recusal Report.  I found the entries facinating and intend on using it as a new source for note topic selection!  Think about how spicy some of these recusals could be!  Recusals could be a new field search on our wexis databases.  Maybe Bloomberg can add this as another fab unique feature in its spiffy interface.  Or, in addition to the circuit court splits in U.S. Law Week, BNA can add recusal information. I know it would be a hit.

Kagan’s first eleven cases from which she recused herself are:

• Abbott v. United States 
• Michigan v. Bryant 
• NASA v. Nelson 
• Flores-Villar v. Unitred States 
• United States v. Tohono O’odham Nation 
• Costco v. Omega 
• Staub v. Proctor Hospital
• Williamson v. Mazda Motor Company of America 
• Sossamon v. TexasMayo 
• Foundation v. United States
• Pepper v. United States

The most recent ten cases are:

• Premo v. Moore 
• County of Los Angeles v. Humphries
• Henderson v. Shinseki 
• Thompson v. North American Stainless 
• Gould v. United States 
• Harrington v. Richter 
• Chamber of Commerce v. Whiting 
• Virginia Office for Protection 
• Advocacy v. Stewart Bruesewitz v. Wyeth Kasten v. Saint-Gobain Performance Plastics

(VS)

 

Curse you, West Baron! (Or don't call the NUMBER if you are trying to reach the Wizard of Eagan)

Well, here I go again, the Charlie Brown of the Law Library world, still trying to kick the football that West so obligingly holds before me....
 
So I receive a refund check from Thomson Reuters. It describes itself as "Refund- Paid and Cancelled 6064973933". Being a well-trained little West customer, I sign onto My Account, enter the magic invoice number and, what to my wondering eyes should appear but an actual invoice. For the new Rutter Group title California Discovery Citations. Which I purchased back in  May. Which I can actually see on the shelf from my office. Which, needless to say, I never cancelled.
 
Now here's where I made my first mistake. (I mean, aside from becoming a law librarian.) Also printed on the check ( I should have stuck with commercial grunion fishing, like my mother wanted.) is the statement: For questions regarding this payment, please call Thomson Reuters AP Customer Service at 877-835-7103." (Not that there's anything wrong with being a Law Librarian. As long as you never have to deal with vendors. To quote the Bard, "A reshelving cart, a reshelving cart, my kingdom for a reshelving cart.")
 
I knew better. I'm smarter than that. (It takes brains to catch the wily grunion.) I've been tricked before. And yet, in spite of every instinct, past experience, better judgment, I CALLED THE NUMBER!!!!
 
We didn't discuss it, but I'm sure the weather is lovely in India this time of year. At least, I don't think we discussed it, the gentleman who answered had such a thick accent I'm not entirely sure what all we chatted about. Eventually he was able to communicate to me that he had no information about nor access to information regarding the refund check and that the telephone number on it was a mistake that he had been assured it would be removed from the refund checks. I was able to understand this part of the conversation because it was identical to the one I had the last time I called the Customer Service number printed on a refund check. Six months ago. And on the one before that....and the one before that....and the....
 
So the polite Indian gentleman gave me the regular West Customer Service number, an unnecessary gesture as it is seared into my cerebral cortex from years of use, a number I wake babbling in the midst of nightmares....I digress...
 
I call regular old Customer Service. After only a seven minute wait, while music originally composed for use in North Korean POW camp brainwashing experiments played loudly in the background, a nice lady named Linda came on the line.
 
I explained the situation, that we had received a refund check allegedly for cancelling our subscription to the Rutter Group title California Discovery Citations, which we hadn't. (I also mentioned the still incorrect help number on the check. And the Korean Torture Music.) She placed me on hold to research the problem. (Cue Korean Torture Music.) She came back on some little time later  and explained to me that the refund was because we had cancelled our subscription to the Rutter Group title California Discovery Citations. I explained again that, no, sorry, didn't happen, please check again, also check that the Rutter title is still active, and about the hold recording...(Cue Korean Torture Music.)...She returned several choruses later, having discovered that the refund was in fact because we had a credit of approximately $300 for cancelling one subscription to the California Real Estate NewsAlert and one subscription to the California Real Estate Newsletter, and that was why we received a check for $137.19 which said it was because we cancelled the Rutter Group title....
 
I pointed out a number of issues I had with this explanation  - why hadn't I received any notice of this credit*, why was it applied to an invoice without my permission, despite the fact that I have repeatedly instructed West not to do that, why did the refund indicate the subscription to Rutter was cancelled and, oh, by the way, we have never, ever subscribed to a publication called the California Real Estate Newletter because NO SUCH TITLE EXISTS....(CKTM)....several concerti later...
 
[* Side rant: Linda informed me that I could sign onto My Account and set up an E-Alert to notify me when West was holding onto money belonging to me and not telling me they had it, and then fill out and submit paperwork asking them nicely to please return it. Which is fine by me. I enjoy being an unpaid member of the West accounting staff and doing their job for them. Lord knows they need the rest.]
 
...Linda comes back. Sorry. The California Real Estate Newsletter actually another appellation for the California Real Estate NewsAlert, they just like to give the same publication a number of different pet names to avoid confusion. And the refund was for cancelling two of our three subscriptions. Except, I interjected, we only cancelled one of the three subscriptions...(CKTM)....
 
Linda tried her best. It took only 43 minutes altogether to get her to agree to void the refund check we received, reinstate our subscription to California Discovery Citations, have a new refund check issued for the correct amount and for the correct cancellation, correct our number of subscriptions to the NewAlert, rotate the tires, check the oil...She actually tried very hard to be helpful and I didn't yell at her at all. Honest. I made it very clear none of this was her fault, it was just that she was working for minions of Satan determined to destroy the last spark of human feeling in an aging grunion fisherman...
 
At least now I understand why West's prices keeping going up so much each year. It's expensive screwing up a system that thoroughly.
 
I'm leaving now. The grunion are running. (CKTM)

-- Bob Ryan, Librarian, Hill, Farrer & Burrill, LLP

The above is reprinted from Bob's law-lib post with his permission. I'll add that Bob's opinions do not necessarily represent Hill, Farrer & Burrill. I don't think he cares. In one of our email exchanges, he wrote "They already know where I live." "They" being TR Legal, of course.

Some Tips on Dealing with West Moments! Bob's experience reminds me of a West Moment! I recounted about a year ago. Nowadays I just call my West account rep and let him deal it and he does it very, very well. Thank you, Fraz. He's my library's Wizard of Eagan and proof of the concept that TR Legal can provide damn good personalized customer service. Fraz is so customer service focused that once when I forgot the difference in time zones and hung up instead of leaving a voice mail message because it was his lunch break and I could shoot him an email, he still called me back! Because I'm 30 years older then Fraz (read old, slow, driven by distractions) he called back before I had sent him the email! Just last week, I read the drafted email to him on the phone and said, I'll click "send" soon so you don't have to write any of this down. Imagine that, a direct dial phone number and email address to someone on board for the long term to help me with the 10 or so West accounts I manage. My only worry is that Fraz will get a promotion (much deserved), then what?

Once even my Wizard of Eagan didn't know where the "you owe us money" fax I sent him came from but he sorted the damn thing out. What does all this mean? I never call the NUMBER to conduct business. It's just takes too damn long. Hell, just writing down the voice mail message takes too long. Ever get one of these messages from god knows where in Munchkin Country? (No slight to Indians intended; they speak the Queen's English, are very polite, have a job to do and try to do it, but their task at hand is essentially that of a collection agency.)

I'm calling about invoice number blob, blob, blob, blob (where blob is not a binary large object but does sound like the spitting out of amorphous chunks of data) for account number, a whole lot of blobs. Please call, more blobs (read the NUMBER).

No name, just all those blobs from someone in Munchkin Country. I used to have to repeat the voice mail message three or four times to write down the data chunks but that just may be me because of my rapidly deteriorating short term memory. Now I just take down the NUMBER, call Munchkin Country, blob, blob, blob my fax number to the first person who answers and hang up the phone. Any more follow-ups gets a request from me to put it in writing and a response from me that once I have received it I will promptly resolve the matter with my account rep and with no one else. If money is due TR Legal, the Company deserves to be paid; if I've screwed up, it will get my undivided attention. But in our little county law library, the Company will only be paid by addressing the matter in the most efficient and effective manner possible. That's 1-800-REAL-PERSON.

Getting from Munchkin Country to the Emerald City. If you are not one of TR Legal's "preferred customers" (read really big spenders who get personalized attention by way of a 1-800-REAL-PERSON), here's what I suggest you do. If you have a Westlaw K, email the matter to your Westlaw rep with the following note:

Please deal with this before payment of next month's Westlaw invoice is due because I'm not going to waste 45-plus minutes explaining and reiterating the facts up and down the yellow brick road that is your Company's telephone tree while listening to Korean Torture Music to reach the Wiz.

Send your West rep whatever info you received initially and move on with your day.

No Westlaw? If you don't have a Westlaw K but still have some West print titles in this Shed West Era, get the absolutely cheapest Westlaw license (think one user for the cheapest database) just so you can avoid the NUMBER. Now, there's a selling point for a very expensive online search service that Johnny and Jenny Westlaw have not pitched (yet)!

No doubt, your time is more valuable to your employer than the time Bob spent as he described above. And what Bob has documented is the rule, not an exception to it. Nothing has changed since LLB's Rate Your Legal Resources Vendors Survey: Customer Services Findings for BNA, LexisNexis, West and Wolters Kluwer.

Should West sales reps have to deal with this crap nonsense "business practice"? Nope! But CRIV-lite can't do anything about it so maybe if enough West sales reps complain that they are spending so much time on these sorts of matters that they don't have time to sell, TR Legal may listen. While personalized customer service to all institutional buyers may be pretty unimportant to the Company, sales is, well, OMG SALES! The Company knows that sales is what generates checks it can deposit in the bank.

If MB can print the name and contact info for a dedicated account rep on invoices who is actually reachable and responsive, so can TR Legal. Those of us who have been in this business for some time remember just how bad MB was once. If that corporate culture can change, so can TR Legal's. Of course, changing the corporate culture in the well-insulated from the work-a-day world of conducting vendor-buyer business sixth floor in Eagan will be no small task. At this point it is up to their sales force to make it happen.

Until then, perhaps CRIV-Lite can develop a standardized opt-out postcard addressed to Bob Azman, Senior Vice President of Customer Experience & Education, that reads

Do nothing by [insert date] if you do not want us to pay you because of an unresolved issue we have.

That's it. Nothing more. No need to fill in any blanks to reference the matter at hand. Just add your name, institution's name, email and/or phone number. TR Legal defined this level of specificity in its vendor-buyer postcarding communications. Just keep a ready supply of postcards on hand. And buy an ink stamper with your contact info.

Pay Us! Let's not even discuss how TR Legal applied a credit to an outstanding invoice without Bob's permission. Been there too, even after explicitly instructing the Company not to, just like Bob had. See my West Moment! No doubt, we are not the only two institutional buyers who have "benefited" from this business practice. Apparently in TR Legal's grab for the cash it doesn't give a damn what havoc unilaterally applying a credit can create to an institutional buyer's accounting or the cascading effect it can have in attempting to reconcile a TR Legal account. "Oh look, we 'paid' that invoice!"

Every other vendor I work with will ask what I want to do with a credit first, send a refund check or apply it to an outstanding balance per my explicit authorization. So too does our library's Wizard of Eagan. Note how Bob learned about the MyAccount email alert system he can use to do TR Legal's accounting work for the Company. Hum, wonder if there is an email alert system function in TR Legal's MyAccount that will eliminate blob, blob, blob, blob phone messages from Munchkin Country?

A Digression of Sorts. Is it just me or do you think the folks in the land of 10,000 invoices has taken a chapter from GMAC lending? "So the car is a lemon and it's warranty has run out but you signed a 60-month 'loan' that hasn't run out, so pay us!" That's exactly what older and newer "order forms" like assured pricing plans, West Complete contracts and other multi-year commitments, included LMAs, Classic Westlaw and WLN licenses, are all about --  "pay us!" It's all about the revenue stream. It doesn't matter one iota if format switcheroos have been made etc., etc. Here's a thought, toss in the following clause:

The [insert your institution's name] may terminate this Contract for its convenience after issuing written notice to Thomson Reuters. If the termination is for the convenvience of [insert your institution's name] Thomson Reuters will be entitled to compensation for any Deliverable [insert your institution's name] has received before the termination. Such compensation will be Thomson Reuters' exclusive remedy in the case of termination for convenience and will be available to Thomson Reuters only after Thomson Reuters has submitted a proper invoice for such, with the invoice reflecting the amount determined by [insert your institution's name] to be owing to Thomson Reuters.

Good luck with that! Try applying the above subscriber convenience termination clause on a title by title, product by product basis. Again, good luck with that! The only other option, depending on the terms of the varieties of TR Legal boilerplate experiences (I'm alluding to psychologist and philosopher William James' The Varieties of Religious Experience: A Study in Human Nature) is repeatedly shipping back print updates until your agreement ends for, you guessed it, credit to your account! Loop back to Munchkin Country.

Endnote. Some law-lib-ers were wondering what Bob's reference to grunions were. So here's Wikipedia's entry and an image below Was it used in a TR Legal marketing meeting powerpoint? Not that I know of, at least not yet, but what the heck do I know... . [JH]

Call for Volunteers for AALL Committees

Darcy Kirk, Vice President of AALL, has issued the annual call for members to volunteer for AALL Committees.  I urge all AALL members (and especially the under-represented private law librarians) to heed that call and volunteer. 

Despite my less then stellar experience with the CRIV Committee, I still think it is vitally important for members to try to participate in AALL which represents us as a profession.  There are 25 committees.  But instead of choosing one and applying for only that one, choose several or volunteer to serve on any committee.  If you choose just one and that's the "popular" committee that everyone chooses, everyone loses.  You, if you are not picked and AALL which could have benefited from your experience, vitality and strength. 

So please apply. I have. Caren Biberman

Round-Up of Practitioner Blogs

BP Oil Spill Lawyers Blog
http://www.bpoilspilllawyersblog.com
http://www.bpoilspilllawyersblog.com/index.xml
Analyzes BP oil spill news, opinions and reports in Louisiana. Published by the Berniard Law Firm.
 
Michigan Consumer Credit Law Blog
http://www.micreditlawyerblog.com
http://www.micreditlawyerblog.com/index.xml
Covers consumer credit cases, reports and opinions in Michigan. Published by Gary Nitzkin & Associates.

Orange County Bankruptcy Lawyer Blog
http://www.orangecountybankruptcylawyerblog.com
http://www.orangecountybankruptcylawyerblog.com/index.xml
Reports on bankruptcy law opinions, news and cases in California. Published by OC Bankruptcy.
 
Social Security Disability Lawyer Blog
http://www.social-security-disability-lawyer-blog.com
http://www.social-security-disability-lawyer-blog.com/index.xml
Provides insight on social security disability opinions, news and reports in Georgia. Published by the Law Offices of Louis B. Lusk.

Chicago DUI Lawyer Blog
http://www.chicagoduilawyerblog.net
http://www.chicagoduilawyerblog.net/index.xml
Provides opinion on DUI news, cases and reports in Illinois. Published by Davis & LaScola, Ltd.