Law Librarian Blog

Yikes! "Utterly verboten workplace activities" in the courtroom

"Then there are things you cannot do. Period. Things that any competent employee should simply know are unacceptable. Included in this category of utterly verboten workplace activities are watching porn during a rape trial when you’re the on-duty court clerk," writes ATL's Christopher Danzig. See his How to Destroy Your Career As a Court Employee: Watch Porn During a Rape Trial and/or Fall Asleep on the Bench post for details. {JH]

IRS Warns On Tax Avoidance Schemes

Tax season is starting up in full gear.  The IRS is getting the word out be releasing a top ten list of tax scams and frauds to avoid.  These are:

• Identity Theft
• Phishing
• Return Preparer Fraud
• Hiding Income Offshore
• “Free Money” From the IRS & Tax Scams Involving Social Security
• False/Inflated Income and Expenses
• False Form 1099 Refund Claims
• Frivolous Arguments
• Falsely Claiming Zero Wages
• Abuse of Charitable Organizations and Deductions
• Disguised Corporate Ownership
• Misuse of Trusts

The section on Frivolous Arguments has its own detailed page of these issues and how courts have stomped them out.  The Service lays out a highly detailed research guide (albeit favoring its position) to each of these topics.  I have a friend who fell for the “income tax is voluntary” scam.  All I’ll say is the pain that followed was not voluntary.  The Service is supplementing the list with videos posted to YouTube on the various topics.  It’s just about two months to go before the filing deadline.  Happy tax to all.  [MG]

Advantage Bloomberg? Part 4: BLaw will be competitive with WEXIS as a primary provider in a solutions-driven market before the end of this decade

Does anyone really believe Bloomberg isn't hell bent on acquiring primary provider status in this decade? My hunch is that the Company has a couple of years before WEXIS integration of Solutions (including Search as a Solution) appears in the market by way of the Dashboard model and about five years after that for the Dashboard to be widely accepted as an expected user experience, at least in the private sector. Let's peg the user acceptance milestone as arriving around 2020.

By that time there will probably be only three major professional legal services vendors -- BLaw, Lexis L & P and TR Legal. I serious doubt Wolters Kluwer's US Legal has a snowball's chance in hell of surviving the flames of this three-way competition. It will be sold by then, if not sooner. But to whom?

• Unlike BNA, will WK just not give a damn about the commondization of its content by selling to TR Legal if TR Legal makes the highest bid?
• Will Lexis L & P fill in its Tax & Accounting gap by buying WK's high quality editorial content to be more competitive with BLaw online and to enhance its competitiveness by filling in some speciality area gaps by way of CCH tax and accounting and WK's "Aspen" law and business practitioner treatise catalogs to bring to market high analytical, practitioner-focused specialist content in enhanced eBooks vis a vis TR Legal's enhanced eBooks (now that TR Legal has realized those smaller treatises it acquired many years ago but neglected actually have some value)?
• BLaw doesn't really need WK US Law & Business but if the Company wants to dominate the market by reducing the competitiveness of TR Legal and Lexis L & P for speciality practice area content, then you bet BLaw may be a very interested buyer of WK US Legal for its online sources, p- and e-titles, continuing eduation programs and, more generally, its user population and human capital (meaning in-house editors and only meaning in-house editors).

Actually, I'm hoping Fastcase will buy WK US Legal if (when) it comes up the auction. Let's start that unsubstantiated rumor [wink]. Four-way competition is better than three-way competition over the long haul.   

From a shorter term perspective, BLaw is not a player in the nascent enhanced Law eBook market yet. That will change. No doubt BLaw will be enhancing BNA treatises, portfolios, etc., into eBooks with link-thru to BLaw online. BLaw may very well be the first enhanced Law eBook publisher to provide multi-media content from its growing content inventory -- not just video from Bloomberg financial and law news but also from its topical webinar inventory which can be dovetailed into eBook formats for existing and new titles. The Bloomberg BNA brand has been aggressively rolling out more timely topical webinars featuring experts in the field. This sort of content certainly can be incorporated into eBooks in addition to BLaw online.

BLaw will be competitive as a primary provider in a solutions-driven market. WEXIS better take notice in now terms of all of its eContent-related offerings - databased and eBooks. Responding to the Google generation, for example, by way of "next-gen" federated Search coupled with filtering is not going to be good enough. The targeted user population is also the YouTube generation. Here, WEXIS is behind the curve. BLaw is not. [JH]

Friday Fun: AmJur 2d v. Google

Some of Brittany Persson's (Reference/Acquisitions Librarian, Seton Hall Law School) ALR students created the below Xtranormal video. While few will ever see AmJur 2d in print once they leave law school, that's not really the point of the portrayed exchange of a 1L student and a law librarian. [JH}

Advantage Bloomberg? Part 3: BLaw will not become a viable primary provider until it offers “solutions”

On 3 Geeks, Greg Lambert posed several questions at Bloomberg Law Snags DLA Piper's US Business (some answered by Jean O'Grady's post, some not.)

“Who lost DLA Piper's US business?? (I'd find it very hard to believe that a firm, even of DLA Piper's size, would want to carry Westlaw, Lexis AND Bloomberg on their annual budgets.)”

According to comments to Greg's post, the consensus is that Lexis probably lost or will be getting much less of DLA Piper's business. While O'Grady gave WLN a less than stellar endorsement during an AALL panel at Philly 2011 -- "it is what it is" if my faulty memory isn't play tricks on me -- I very seriously doubt DLA Piper dumped its “preferred” customer status with TR Legal.

What about any WEXIS solution "upsells" DLA Piper may have? Take that into consideration when thinking about another question Greg poses.

"If DLA Piper did dump one of the other vendors, what resources does DLA Piper lose in the change? ..."

I would add two related questions assuming DLA Piper and any other BigLaw firm did/has/will dump one of its major vendors when adopting BLaw:

1. Did BigLaw also dump vendor “solutions” in addition to dumping a vendor search service?; and
2. What forthcoming WEXIS resources and services has BigLaw lost at this time by doing so?

BLaw is not yet a serious contender to be the primary or even sole provider for BigLaw.  Except for a small set of BNA solutions (e.g.  BNA Auditor and Global Auditor, web-based  environment, health and safety compliance auditing tools) BLaw frankly is not really a player in the integrated professional legal services "solutions" market that is dominated by WEXIS. For this reason, it is premature to talk about BLaw really being competitive with WEXIS. It's just not about Search and the databased resources provided anymore.

User Experience: Search+Solution (or Search as one among many solutions being offered). Today, online legal search really needs to be viewed as one among many offered Solutions. Some WEXIS solutions integrate Search from within their applications, some do not. However, all WEXIS solutions are upsell opportunities because WEXIS has boots on the ground to sell them.

There is no doubt in my mind that our major professional legal services vendors will “dashboard” all of their sold solutions (including search) at the institutional level by way of user account management  for an integrated user interface. When that happens, it will be the most transformative change in the legal profession since the acceptance of very expensive online legal search. My hunch is the Dashboard user experience will garner wide acceptance in the private sector -- large, small, even solo law plus corporate law departments -- within 10 years. After that, the government and academic legal markets will follow.

But for now, the options remain (1) WEXIS in the generalist market for professional grade "search plus solutions" and (2) BLaw BNA and Wolters Kluwer in the specialist market for higher editorial quality analytical content with "search sans solutions".

BLaw BNA is becoming a high quality secondary source content rich environment. BLaw already licenses, for example, PLI business and law treatises for its online service. The Company will eventually integrate BNA secondary sources into BLaw online. Do note, the recent launch of BNA's Bankruptcy Law Resource Center is, I believe, unprecedented in BNA's resource centers content mix since it includes licensed secondary treatises to compensate for BNA not having any bankrupty treatises of note. This indicates to me that BLaw is quite willing to reach into the Company's deep pockets to provide high quality secondary sources published by industry specific and legal practice area specific professional associations to fill out its online secondary source literature offerings.

Deep Pockets Means BLaw Solutions Are Coming. I seriously doubt Bloomberg will rest on just Search, which of course also includes primary and secondary legal content. It's just a matter of time before BLaw offers Solutions that are created in-house or licensed or both to compete in the market with WEXIS.

More about BLaw competing in the current WEXIS market for primary provider status in tomorrow's post. [JH]

Rankings Gamesmanship Be Damned: Class-action fraud lawsuits can damage schools' credit ratings

In Fraud suits against law schools 'credit negative': Moody's, Moira Herbst (Reuters) reports that the recent lawsuits filed against law schools alleging fraud because their job placement stats reporting practices could result in credit rating downgrades accounding to Moody's. Moddy's, which maintains ratings for eight of the schools being sued, including Southwestern Law School; California Western School of Law; Brooklyn Law School; New York Law School; Golden Gate University; DePaul University; Hofstra University; and the University of San Francisco, noted that standalone schools are more likely to suffer "credit negative" effects than law schools that are part of a larger universities. However, reputational damage and tuition revenue declines could impact them all.

Now, who would have thought that "innocently" gaming stats for ego-stroking rankings purposes could be "credit negative"? I seriously doubt many law school administrators did. Until now, that is. Welcome to the real world. The legal academy can't point the finger at anyone else for this one. [JH]

Opening: Deputy Director, Univ. of Maryland Thurgood Marshall Law Library

The University of Maryland Thurgood Marshall Law Library seeks to fill the position of Deputy Director of the Law Library

The University of Maryland campus is located in downtown Baltimore, blocks from Orioles Park at Camden Yards, Ravens Stadium, and the Inner Harbor with many of the city's top attractions. The Thurgood Marshall Law Library has a full-time staff of twenty-six including twelve professional librarians and occupies attractive space in a relatively new law school building. In addition to a strong core of basic services, the library has taken innovative approaches in several areas. These include implementing one of the first institutional repositories in law schools, developing an extensive library fellows program to assist faculty in all stages of the scholarship process, assigning librarians to courses, assuming a leadership role in advising student journals, digitizing collections, and other forward-thinking activities.

Job Summary: Reporting to the Assistant Dean for Library and Technology, this position will assist with administrative responsibilities, including budget preparation, long- and short-term planning, personnel supervision, facilities management and technology initiatives; oversee all library services including research services, technical services, access services, collection development, reference, academic technology and the library's instructional program, and coordinate interdepartmental activities within the law library; teach legal research and participate in reference, research and the library's faculty liaison program. The Deputy Director assumes responsibility for policy, service and operations matters specific to the library in the absence of the Assistant Dean. 

Essential Responsibilities include:

• In a collaborative environment, provide vision, oversight and leadership for the next generation of library services. 
• Coordinate and participate in delivery of faculty and student services across all library departments.
• Teach in the library's instructional program.
• Lead or participate in substantial library procurements such as large vendor contracts or significant equipment purchases.
• Assist with identification of library funding needs and work with the school's institutional advancement staff to identify potential funding sources.
• Work closely with the law school's technology staff to implement new and emerging library applications and knowledge systems.  
• Represent the library at faculty programs, on law school committees, at student events and in other appropriate campus-wide and system-wide activities. 

Minimum Qualifications include:

• An M.L.S. and J.D. from accredited programs
• Minimum five years of progressively responsible law library experience, including at least three years of managing and developing staff
• Minimum three years of experience providing user services or managing user service operations in an academic or research library 

Preferred Qualifications include:

• experience in library technical and bibliographic services
• teaching experience, especially teaching legal research
• at least three years of experience supervising professional librarians
• experience with information technology or library systems beyond knowledge of LEXIS, WESTLAW, OCLC and office software
• record of working across departments (i.e., information technology, technical services, collection development, scholarly communication) to create effective service models
• record of innovation as evidenced in scholarship, teaching methods and library services

Knowledge, Skills and Abilities:

• Ability to communicate effectively, both in written and verbal form
• Ability to develop and maintain positive working relationships with members and affiliates of the law school community
• Strong managerial skills, including project management and performance evaluation
• Strategic and analytical thinking skills with an ability to solve problems and make decisions
• Ability to prioritize ongoing and new projects

Salary and Benefits:

• Salary is competitive and commensurate with qualifications and experience. Comprehensive benefits package.
• The position is a 12-month library faculty appointment. The successful candidate will be expected to meet library and university requirements for permanent status and promotion within established timeframes.

Availability: The position will be available April 2, 2012.

To Apply: Interested applicants should submit electronically a cover letter, resume, and the names and phone numbers of three references to: LAW-HR(at)law.umaryland.edu, with subject line Deputy Library Director, or mail to:

Mary Alice Hohing
Director, Administration & Operations
University of Maryland  Francis King Carey School of Law
500 West Baltimore Street
Baltimore, MD 21201-1786

Deadline: Preference will be given to candidates who apply by March 2, 2012.

The University of Maryland is an affirmative action, equal opportunity employer.

FY 2013 Federal Budget: There's an app for that

The GPO has released an app for President Obama's Budget for the U.S. Government, FY 2013. Quoting from the Feb. 13, 2012 press release:

GPO's mobile Budget app will provide users with access to the text and images of the FY 2013 Budget, including the Budget Message of the President, information on the President's priorities, and budget overviews organized by agency. The app provides links to GPO's Federal Digital System (FDsys) where summary tables and additional books of the Budget, including the Analytical Perspectives, Appendix, and Historical Tables are available. The public can take advantage of this free mobile Web app on major mobile device platforms, including iOS 4.3 and above, Android 2.2 and above, and Blackberry OS version 6.0 and above.

Here's the link for the GPO's FY 2013 Budget app: http://m.gpo.gov/budget Useful, I think, for congressional staffers, lobbyists and the Capital Hill press corp. [JH]

Student Sues Law School Over Grading Curve

Law students have found another reason to sue a law school according to this article in the Houston Chronicle.  Two students are suing Texas Southern University’s Thurgood Marshall School of Law because they received Ds in Contracts II, placing them below the 2.0 cumulative average necessary to stay in school.  They claim the grading decision by a visiting faculty member was arbitrary and capricious and complain that the school will not let them see the evidence of how the grading took place. 

I have mixed sympathies, from the both the receiving and giving end of grades.  Curves unfortunately result in students getting lesser grades in relation to their peers in a particular class despite the quality of work.  Schools use curves as a way of minimizing grade inflation though it [does not feel good] to be near the bottom of the curve.  Law schools have been accused of using curves as a way to cutting off merit scholarships when a student falls below a particular average.  That is not the case here.  The implication of a single D causing someone to fall below a 2.0 average questions the quality of other grades awarded.  That information is not discussed in any of the news reports, so I will speculate no further on it.

Curves are in some sense arbitrary by their very nature, but I'm not sure if capricious is an apt description.  I don’t know what the likelihood of success in this cause will be as it depends on what information can be brought out in this particular incident.  It is, nonetheless, another cautionary tale for those still willing to apply to law school.  The lesson:  law school is a highly competitive environment, much more so than in undergraduate work.  The learning is highly technical, even if the curriculum is mostly theoretical.  Law school costs lots of money, and flunking out doesn’t erase that debt from the first few semesters.  Be absolutely sure about being up for that challenge.  Ask prospective schools about their grading policies and be realistic about your chances under them.  [MG] 

Advantage Bloomberg? Part 2: Yes, once BNA resources are fully integrated into or current BNA costs are offset for BLaw to compete with Wolters Kluwer

The integration of BNA's resources into BLaw will take about a year. In this context, note what Jean O'Grady says (heading in bold as published) in her Dewey B Strategic post about subscribing to BLaw at DLA Piper:

Yes BNA Is Included at No Additional Cost

Bloomberg appears to be staying true to the business model and is including acquisitions both big and small in Bloomberg Law at no additional cost. When they bought Business Week, it was fully integrated Now Bloomberg is telling subscribers that as soon as all of the BNA material including all newsletters, e.g. the pricey "Daily Report for Executives" and all BNA research platforms such as the Intellectual Property Library are converted, all BNA content -- including content not previously subscribed to will be available at no additional cost to the Bloomberg Law subscribers.

(Emphasis added.)

That’s a damn "good thing." Even at BLaw's single seat flat rate of $450 per month that cost starts to sound reasonable once all of BNA is loaded into BLaw -- better still for a multiuser license -- for several reasons.

First BLaw will be offering a fairly complete set of practice area offerings by way of BNA's premium editorial quality resources. Eventually, this will include, for example,

• Labor & Employment Law Resource Center
• Intellectual Property Law Resource Center
• Telecommunications Law Resource Center
• Internet Law Resource Center
• Health Law Resource Center
• Benefits Practice Resource Center
• Bankruptcy Law Resource Center

Outside of BNA's Law and Business publishing division, let’s not forget BNA’s Tax & Accounting, Environment, Health & Safety, and Human Resources publishing divisions. I think content from at least the first two, if not all three, will eventually be offered by way of BLaw online.

Second, the cost for a single seat or multiuser license for BLaw will be at least partially offset because institutional buyers will no longer have to subscribe to standalone BNA Resource Centers and other BNA services and may further be offset by cancelling at least some Wolters Kluwer IntelliConnect services.

Hopefully, institutional buyers will still be able to license some BNA Resource Centers as standalones if they do not need or want all of BLaw but clearly BLaw is not worried about cannibalizing BNA revenue for increasing its adoption rate, which so far has been less than spectacular. Hell, BLaw needed BNA content to justify its not inexpensive but getting worth the price of BLaw's single or multiuser flat rate licenses. Now it's time to give BNA's sale force the green light to sell BLaw.

Two questions to consider about the recent BLaw-DLA Piper announcement. First, did DLA Piper kill or keep some Wolters Kluwer IntelliConnect resources? Of course, I'm assuming DLA Piper has some WK resources but it is hard to imagine the firm's tax specialists practicing law without IntelliConnect's "Standard Federal Tax Reporter," opps, I mean online (or at least print) tax materials.

I also find it hard to imagine DLA Piper’s tax attorneys not having BNA's Daily Tax Report delivered to the desktop and just as hard to imagine that any DLA Piper labor and employment attorney is practicing without BNA Labor & Employment Law Resource Center for research and BNA's Daily Labor Report delivered to the desktop for current awareness purposes. 

Hence the second question. Is DLA Piper still paying for BNA resources not yet available on BLaw if the firm has online licenses from them? Hell if I know. Perhaps DLA Piper only subscribes to BNA publications in print.

However, in the world of BigLaw deep pockets, taking DLA Piper out of the equation, I would insist on a waiver of all licensing fees for BNA Resource Centers and eNewsletters I currently have that are not yet online via BLaw in exchange for signing up for BLaw. In the world of smaller pockets, BLaw’s flat rate fees for some seats, not necessarily all of an institutional buyer’s user population, becomes reasonable at this time if a BNA licensing cost offset is part of the deal.

It is also hard for me to imagine that any BigLaw firm isn't subscribing to or interested in subscribing to BGov for some seats. BNA's reporters are some of the most, if not the most, trusted and experienced press corps on Capital Hill. Their content will enhance BGov when integrated (if that has not already been done). So toss that into the mix, too.

Wolters Kluwer should be worried. But is BLaw ready now to be the primary or sole provider for BigLaw institutional buyers? That’s the topic of tomorrow’s post. [JH]

Opening: Director of Library Services, Venable LLP

Venable LLP, one of the top 100 law firms in the U.S., is seeking an experienced Director of Library Services to manage the firm’s library and research functions.  Responsibilities include management of the following areas:  acquisitions, budget, online resources, inter-library loans, reference desk operations, Integrated Library System, library collection maintenance, development/implementation of best practices, and comprehensive library training programs.

Requirements include a Master of Library Science degree, a minimum of eight years law library management experience and three years supervisory experience.  The Director of Library Services will report to the Chief Operating Officer.

Venable provides a comprehensive benefits package, a competitive salary, and excellent working conditions in a professional environment.  Visit our website at www.venable.com.

Please respond to:  Venable LLP, Attn:  HR Dept., 750 E. Pratt Street, Suite 900, Baltimore, MD  21202; or e-mail careeropp(@)venable.com. 

EOE M/F/D/V

Book Review: How To Fix Copyright by William Patry

William Patry’s latest book on copyright is titled How To Fix Copyright.  It’s a well written book that expresses a view of copyright policy drawn from its historical purpose—to promote the useful arts and sciences and encourage creativity.  What we have instead are laws that protect mass marketers who seek stricter controls on their copyrights through term extensions and legally enforceable controls on how intellectual property can be used, specifically with digital goods.   He demonstrates through multiple examples how current law does not in fact encourage creativity at all.  Rather, the economic value of most copyrighted works diminishes significantly after the first few years of availability.  Locking them up for well over 100 years or more does nothing to encourage new creative works based on these earlier, protected works.

None of this, however, stops governments or multinational distributors from using arguments based on artists’ rights, protecting creativity, and other emotional appeals to pass favorable laws.  The legislative environment that Patry identifies is one where government aligns its interests with intellectual property businesses, happily accepting industry statements on levels of job creation and how piracy is depriving the industry of billions of dollars.  The claims, however, are greatly exaggerated.  Government researchers accept unverified figures from industry provided sources and integrate them into their own reports.  This lends a veneer of truth to the “dire” need to help the media distributors with new laws.  The reality is that this has more to do with protecting old ways of doing business than innovating in a digital market.  Patry documents this quite effectively throughout the book via copious notes at the end of each chapter. 

How To Fix Copyright was written in 2011 and though it does not mention PIPA or SOPA, it very much predicts the process under which this legislation is considered.  Trade associations and media companies want to protect their markets by asking for tougher laws on piracy.  Bills are written heavily favoring industry.  Congress sets up hearings that are presented by proponents as a balanced look at the problem but are in reality one-sided affairs that give the companies’ what they want.  The House Judiciary Committee considering SOPA held a hearing that gave voice to only one opponent of the Act as written.  The Act would have passed if everything had gone according to script.  But it did not.  The mass statement of displeasure emanating from the Internet managed to make passage a political football no one wanted to touch.  That didn’t stop RIAA head Cary Sherman from calling the various protests against the bills by Internet sites a “gimmick” or “an abuse of power.”  The irony is palpable given the diminished due process rights SOPA gives to targeted sites for contesting seizure and shut down.     

Patry does not promote a world where piracy would be the norm.  The intellectual property market today is defined by artificial scarcity that is supposed to drive up demand.  That demand, however, competes with unauthorized sources that are either less expensive and/or more convenient for the consumer.  Pressing for more laws to further criminalizing these outlets will not necessarily stop the underlying problem.  Rather, Patry calls for a market that actually respond to demand by supplying what consumers want at reasonable prices and laws that incentivize that market.  This would conceivably make everyone happy by giving people what they want and in turn make boatloads of money for the distributors.  Patry cites study after study supporting that view.  Some of these are conducted by independent entities who actually try to quantify the level of damage to industry caused by piracy.  It is a problem, but not necessarily one that requires ham-fisted legislation such as SOPA. 

So, how would Patry fix copyright?  He suggests that Congress, or any national legislative body should consider the real purpose of copyright and pass laws that align with it.  An industry wish list does not always coincide with promoting the useful arts and sciences.  Extended terms for copyright should be brought back to a balance where an individual (or corporation) mines the work for value but doesn’t prevent the public from exploiting it at some point.  This type of balance would address the problem of orphan works, still under copyright but unavailable of exploitation.  Longer copyright terms only exacerbate the problem. 

Another suggestion is to stop vilifying fair use.  There has to be situations where some uses do not involve licensing or handing over cash.  He uses examples where artists are prevented from creating new art by sampling older works.  Record labels will not distribute tracks that incorporate short samples of older works unless cleared by the original artists.  One of his examples is telling.  Danger Mouse created an album (The Grey Album) that used vocal tracks by Jay-Z and mixed samples of the Beatles as the backing music.  The record companies involved sought court orders preventing its distribution.  Jay-Z and Paul McCartney had no problems with the record.  It became an underground hit through free distribution.  The Grey Album could have made plenty of money for everyone, but for the reaction of the source material distributors.  The Grey Album was creative, something copyright law is supposed to advance.  It floats around the Internet still.  Wouldn’t it have been better if the law supported a mechanism for everyone to get paid without having to ask for permission in advance?

How To Fix Copyright (ISBN 9780199760091) is an Oxford University Press publication.  I suspect the industry will hate it for reasons clear in this review.  I found it a refreshing examination of how copyright law as it currently exists has turned from a cultural tool that supports business to a purely business tool, culture be damned.  Members of Congress should read it.  Sadly, I know, they won’t.

Oxford supplied a copy of the book for review.  [MG]

Advantage Bloomberg Law? Part 1: Not until BLaw unleashes BNA’s sales force to get boots on the ground

So BLaw has added DLA Piper as a subscriber and not just a handful of seats at a BigLaw firm as has been the past adoption rate for BLaw at BigLaw. All US-based DLA Piper attorneys now have a BLaw account, that’s something like 1,400 attorneys. Quoting from BLaw's press release:

“We are deeply gratified that a firm of DLA Piper’s caliber has chosen Bloomberg Law for its lawyers throughout the United States,” said Bloomberg Law Chairman Lou Andreozzi. “We look forward to working closely with DLA Piper as we continue to develop the resources to help law firms better manage their research and costs so they can concentrate on adding value to their clients.”

Hum, "work closely with DLA Piper as we continue to develop the resources"... .

Initially, I thought BLaw's Lou Andreozzi was stealing a page from Lexis' advertising playbook. Remember back in the 1980s: "all Skadden Arps attorneys have a UBIQ in their offices”  (read sure as hell Skadden did not pay the equipment leasing fees the rest of us did back then). But no, DLA Piper Jean O'Grady's Dewey B Strategic blog post title makes it clear that nothing similar happened. See Welcome to Bloomberg Law: No Deals No Discounts No Apology. I sure as hell don't think this transaction requires any apology whatsoever. Again, quoting from the press release, (which IMHO should have been released the day before, not the day of TRI’s 2011 financial reporting):

Don Jaycox, DLA Piper’s Chief Information Officer, said, “Law firms need to cost effectively deliver great client service in a highly competitive environment. In addition to being experts in law, our clients have made it clear that they also want us to understand the business challenges they face on a daily basis. Bloomberg Law’s unique combination of legal research, company information, and news helps our lawyers stay abreast of a wide array of information affecting our clients.  Plus, Bloomberg’s inclusive pricing model helps us manage costs in a predictable way.”

So, let's do the math. Now if the transaction was based on a single user flat rate fee: 1,400 seats times $450 per seat per month flat rate equals $630,000 per month or $7,560,000 per year. Of course, the BLaw-DLA Piper transaction was based on a multiuser license so the pricing was substantially less. How much less? Who knows, but still it certainly was not a bad day in the world of professional legal services sales in the specialist market!

Can Bloomberg Law capitalize on this transaction? Well, there are plenty of BigLaw firms (and academic law libraries) that have been waiting for BLaw's sales force to travel beyond Manhattan to hear from the Company as one law firm librarian characterized the situation in a LawLibCon podcast episode recently. And there are plenty of Bloomberg BNA field reps biting the bit to sell BLaw, like now, Lou!

BLaw needs to seize the post-DLA Piper moment by unleashing BNA's sale force. That’s the best damn way for BLaw to get boots on the ground beyond Manhattan. When you pay over $900 million, isn't it about time to grab some ROI by way of an experienced sales force? Perhaps the DLA Piper announcement means BNA sales reps have been or soon will be pitching BLaw. If not, the DLA Piper adoption doesn't mean all that much.

BLaw ought not wait until BNA content is fully integrated into BLaw before giving the Bloomberg BNA field reps the green light because … well, that’s the topic of tomorrow’s post. [JH]

Leveraging the Collective Buying Power of Libraries: Report on ALA Talks with Publishers Regarding eBook Issues

In a not too subtle reminder that "libraries represent a significant amount of direct buying power," Molly Raphael, ALA President recently reported on meetings conducted by an ALA delegation consisting of elected ALA officers plus an association official and a task force chair and eBook publishers. She characterized the meetings as:

frank discussions related to library ebook lending and [the ALA delegation is] appreciative of the serious engagement by [representative of Penguin, Macmillan, Random House, Simon & Schuster, and Perseus].

By way of a reminder, the ALA delegation met with each publisher separately in NYC, Jan. 30 - Feb. 1, 2012. See LLB's earlier post, Consumer Advocacy by a Library Association: ALA asserts at Midwinter and in meetings with publishers "you need to deal with libraries and you need to do it as soon as possible." Senior executives attending the separate meetings included CEOs, division presidents, and other executives.

At issue with publishers who produce eBooks was their policies and practices with respect to library acquisitions and lending of eBooks. Quoting from Raphael's report of the meeting in Ebook Talks: The Details, published Feb. 8, 2012 on E-content blog, an official ALA web publications:

Our discussions with publishers who already sell ebooks to libraries focused on how to maintain and strengthen our relationships. Of course, libraries represent a significant amount of direct buying power.

Now wait just a minute. An association of institution buyers brings to the table the AALL unheard of concept of "direct buying power" as a backdrop for meeting with individual publishers. No doubt no threats were made during the "frank discussions." But the fact remains that collectively libraries do have a huge amount of buying power (particularly in this age of content commoditization with respect to legal resources).

And an elected official of a library association, in this case, the president, can use "direct buying power" language in an official blog post, one that is published in a timely manner no less. What planet do these people live on? What planet does AALL live on? (Pluto? My bad, not even a planet anymore.)

Also note that In meetings with publishers who currently do not sell eBooks to libraries, Raphael reported

[W]e shared our profession’s concerns regarding the impact of these practices on library users, many of whom rely solely on the public library for their reading choices. In some instances, we found that there were misconceptions about how libraries operate that, once clarified, mitigated some of these publishers’ concerns.

Raphael reported that "[m]any of the meetings extended for a longer time than scheduled, and all ended with the expectation of a continuing dialogue between each publisher and ALA." She ends her report on the eBook meetings by adding:

The biggest lesson is that there is nothing like direct communication. We didn’t leave New York with complete and perfect solutions; that wouldn’t have been a realistic expectation. But I am happy with the progress that we made on multiple fronts—establishing ongoing direct lines of communication and correcting misconceptions about libraries, to mention only two. Much work remains to fully grasp the rapidly changing context of digital content and libraries and to converge on solutions that all key stakeholders can live with. We must find these solutions so that libraries can continue to provide the best possible service to their communities.

In the coming days, we will be following up with these five publishers, initiating contact with other publishers and intermediaries, and pursuing additional activities within the framework of ALA’s Digital Content and Libraries Working Group.

(Emphasis added.)

Forum non conveniens, for whom? Let's end this blog post by saying "get off your official collective butt. If your official collective head is buried in the sand, then get out of the way because the membership knows what the hell is going on and can both act and report of actions in a very timely manner." I think you know who I am referring to. Only the utterly clueless need a clue: Time and duty to one's employer is "of the essence" in vendor relations; much less so for AALL and AALL's Biggest Blunder of 2011.

Let's "quote" 7th Circuit Court of Appeals Judge Richard Posner because there really is no difference between litigators' habit of ignoring court precedent and AALL's habit of ignoring established ways and means of advocating for its institutional members and their users as an association of consumers.

[JH]

TR Legal Responds to Latest Add-Ons/Ancillary Materials Rant Published on Law-Lib

The law-lib list went viral last week in response to a West Key Rules rant. By "rant" and the law-lib message trail, I mean "to scold West vehemently" because no one spoke up in TR Legal's defense of its business practice in this matter. As a PSA, you can listen to TR Legal's unofficial response in the below video clip. Wait for it at 1:59. My hunch is that current occupants of executive suites in the Land of 10,000 Invoices do

love the smell of desperate librarian(s) in the morning.

No word from AALL on law-lib about this. Perhaps I missed it, perhaps not. At this point in the AALL-vendor "partnership," I think the only way our association of institutional buyers will truly understand what the hell is going on and can be prepared to respond in a timely institutional buyer manner is if AALL buys print and online from TR Legal and our other major vendors for an in-house collection of p- and e-resources at HQ. Nothing trumps first-hand experience in "customer education and experience." Do I digress?

Grassroots advice from invoice-paying law librarians to invoice-paying law librarians. What the heck, do we really need another pushback "Dear Colleagues" response to an AALL inquiry? The law-lib message trail offers sound advice from law librarians, including the following:

The best way to combat dishonest sales practices is to buy the rules from other publishers.  Take your business elsewhere.

We switched our Federal Rules and IP rules over to O'Conners [published by Jones McClure] and saved money plus they are a pleasure to do business with.

Do note that Jones McClure offers federal rules that are well-edited, reliably annotated and priced one hellva lot lower than West but only offers state rules for Texas and California; if your state rules market is not monopolized by West, Lexis state rules, at least for Ohio, are just as good, if not better than West, and cost substantially less than the titles offered by the Land of 10,000 Invoices.

If your user population insists on West state rules, even after showing them the costs of and explaining the practices of TR Legal, one law-lib-er offers the following advice:

Call HQ and ask to speak to the Subscriptions Department.  They can remove add-on subscriptions while you talk and give you a confirmation number to use if/when another copy shows up.  You can also ask to have your account flagged No-Add-Ons/No Ancillary Materials.  Regular Customer Service reps can sympathize and send return labels only.  Vigilance may still be needed, but the number of unsolicited items will drop to practically zero.

I don not know if institutional buyers BDSM-ed by way of West's LMA can kill Add-Ons/No Ancillary Materials during the term of their multi-year contracts but their libraries can certainly take action at the end of their LMAs. Ditto regarding WestPack-ed titles tied to Westlaw contracts.

One law-lib-er commented:

[T]o me the more important point is they can't MAKE you buy them. If they are bundled and there is no additional cost that's one thing.  But West Publishing does NOT make collection development decisions for my firm. That is my job.

My response is:

• There is always a cost because we are talking about TR Legal;
• West's entire add-ons and ancillary materials scheme clearly indicates that West thinks it is their job to make our collection development decisions because in past "Dear Colleagues," the message, in a nutshell, was "we think those materials are useful to our customers."; and
• By way of TR's OnePass-Your Ass scheme [here and here], TR intends not only to make our collection development decisions but also to sell its court rules, etc. directly to our institutional users and toss the cost into our institutional West accounts. See ad, right.

BTW, if the medium is truly the message, law-lib-ers offer a number of arts and crafts activities for using the Key Rules print volumes.

I haven't linked to or identified the law librarians who posted on law-lib following the initial West KeyRules Rant. The vast majority were law firm librarians. All major vendors monitor law-lib -- well, perhaps TR Legal has stopped doing so because the folks in the Land of 10,000 Invoices just might not give a damn about what their institutional buyers think anymore. Oh, my bad. Anyone remember the last time TR Legal did give a damn by taking corrective action?

AALL Consumer Advocacy Caucus calls for information from the rank-and-file. The above opinions are mine and mine along. That being stated explicitly, do note that Michael Ginsborg posted the following message in the Key Rules Rank law-lib trail:

[The AALL] Consumer Advocacy Caucus would welcome your complaints about these kinds of problems with legal publishers. We aim to track as many complaints as we can. Doing so will help us reflect your concern as we collect evidence of unfair and anticompetitive business practices. We expect to use this evidence when we prepare our recommendations to the AALL Executive Board for government intervention.

To communicate consumer complaints about the kinds of problems law librarians are experiencing because of vendor business practices for the above-stated evidence collection objective, the Consumer Advocacy Caucus has established an information clearinghouse by way of this Google docs-driven Library Consumer Complaint Form.  [JH]

Reminder: Registration for AALL Webinar on Educational Storytelling as an Instructional Technique Due by Feb. 16

Back in the day, I would use one of my own legal research stories for a research class lecture or while working alongside an anxious young firm associate performing research when appropriate. In my case, storytelling was oftentimes a parable that sounded in the research log and writing process to serve as a warning -- "you may think you have finished research and can now just write but the odds are high that during the analytical process that goes into writing, you will be returning to perform more research until the work product is ultimately finalized."

Quoting from the description for AALL's Feb. 22, 2012 Developing and Using Stories to Teach Legal Research webinar:

[S]torytelling ... serves as an effective communication technique in trial practice, business administration, and library science.  While little used in law librarianship, storytelling has the potential to transform the way law librarians convey legal research techniques and legal information to law library patrons.  This comprehensive webinar will introduce educational storytelling, and include a demonstration of a legal education story as well as methods for collecting, developing, and evaluating potential stories.

If storytelling is or has become a technique little used by law librarians, it can be a valuable technique that IMHO should be used in the classroom and in patron assistance. It certainly isn't always appropriate but the technique ought be in the law librarian instructional toolbox. Again quoting from the webinar description:

This comprehensive webinar will introduce educational storytelling, and include a demonstration of a legal education story as well as methods for collecting, developing, and evaluating potential stories.

(Emphasis added.)

This isn't a matter of telling "war stories." The key here is developing stories which are instructional for the patron in the library and other stories for group audiences. In the context of legal research instruction in law schools, storytelling needs to dovetail into the intent of the course. Is the course designed to teach reseach skills to students so they can conduct legal research during their academic career? Is the course designed to teach practice-oriented legal research to students?  

Moderated by Mark Estes, the webinar's speakers are Vanessa Christman (formerly Uribe), El Dorado County Law Library Director, and Beth Wrenn-Estes who is a full-time lecturer in the School of Library and Information Science at San Jose State University. Should be interesting.

Developing and Using Stories to Teach Legal Research
February 22 at 11 a.m CST
Cost: $30 for AALL members; $60 for nonmembers; $150 for site registration (per physical site)
Registration and payment due by February 16 at 5:00 p.m. (CST)

For additional information and to register, go here. Do note, space is limited. [JH]

Opening: Law Librarian III Position, Maryland State Law Library

The Maryland State Law Library is seeking applicants for a Law Librarian III position. For the complete job announcement with application instructions, please visit the Maryland Judiciary website at: http://mdcourts.gov/jobs/077544.pdf. Do note that the deadline for applications is March 1, 2012.

Excerpts from the job posting:

Essential Functions: The Maryland State Law Library is seeking a professional librarian to perform a variety of reference, collection management and cataloging functions. Provides advanced legal and general research, reference and referral services via telephone, e-mail, live online chat, and in-person, to the Maryland Judiciary, other State agencies, the legal community and the general public. Assistance is provided in an accurate and timely manner using sources in various formats, such as digital, print and microfilm. Manages various aspects of the Library’s physical collections, which may include the following: conservation and preservation of fragile historical materials; collection assessment; space planning; inventory control; and other similar projects on an as-needed basis. Catalogs and classifies newly acquired legal, historical, academic and general information resources published in any format, using customary tools, such as OCLC and integrated library system (ILS) software by Innovative Interfaces. Maintains accurate cataloging records by updating bibliographic and holdings information as necessary. Performs other duties as assigned.

Skills/Abilities: Knowledge of the profession of librarianship, the legal system, and current information technology systems and trends. Knowledge of the Anglo-American Cataloging Rules (2nd ed.), RDA (Resource Description and Access) rules, MARC format, and Library of Congress subject heading and classification schemes and local or alternate cataloging rules. Knowledge of legal database retrieval and document delivery technologies, such as LexisNexis. Knowledge of legal, historical and general information resources in multiple formats, including digital, print, and microfilm. Knowledge of library collection practices for physical resources, especially including the conservation and preservation of fragile historical materials. Ability to perform both original and copy cataloging, including authority control, using OCLC cataloging software and local automated library and cataloging systems. Ability to prioritize and organize multiple tasks and duties. Ability to analyze and solve complex legal research/reference queries using both print and electronic sources. Ability to communicate effectively both orally and in writing. Ability to work well with a diverse group of customers using a variety of communication methods, including telephone, e-mail, live online chat, and in-person dialogue. Ability to sit for extended periods of time at a computer or reference desk. Ability to lift up to 20 lbs. Ability to perform all essential functions of the position.

The Maryland Judiciary is a drug free workplace and an equal opportunity employer, committed to diversity in the workplace. We do not discriminate on the basis of race, religion, color, sex, age, sexual orientation, national origin or disability. Applicants who need accommodation for an interview should request this in advance. The candidate selected for this position will be subject to a background check. Employees must be United States citizens or eligible to work in the United States.

Round-Up of Law Practitioner Blogs

Orange County Patent Attorney Blog
http://www.orangecountypatentattorney.pro/
http://www.orangecountypatentattorney.pro/index.xml
Examines patent cases, news, and related topics in California. Published by Mandour & Associates
APC

Fort Worth Injury Lawyers Blog
http://www.fortworthinjurylawyersblog.com/
http://www.fortworthinjurylawyersblog.com/index.xml
Examines personal injury cases, news, and related matters in Texas. Published by McGartland &
Borchardt LLP
 
Brain Injury Lawyer Blog
http://www.braininjurylawyer24-7blog.com/
http://www.braininjurylawyer24-7blog.com/index.xml
Examines brain injury cases, news, and related personal injury matters in New York. Published by
Stephen Bilkis & Associates

Missouri Injury Lawyers Blog
http://www.missouriinjurylawyers-blog.com/
http://www.missouriinjurylawyers-blog.com/index.xml
Examines injury cases, news, and related topics in Missouri. Published by Michael J. Sudekum