Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Google Scholar that is. We reported earlier on a glitch with Google Scholar caught by eagle-eyed and rapier-witted Chris Wren that created an inconsistency between the footnote numbers in the GS version of a case and the official version. Google quickly responded and the problem has now been fixed.
But this afternoon, FourthAmendment.com via legalblogwatch reported that "the citations that should link to the Supreme Court's decision in Virginia v. Moore all linked to the order denying the ABA's request to participate as amicus, rather than the decision on the merits." By itself, not a major problem but the bigger issue is whether GS can gain the confidence of hardcore legal researchers as a consistently reliable research tool. At present it seems unlikely GS will supplant Westlaw as the go-to search engine for critical projects because of the latter's copyrighted key numbered indexing system. Given that Google is free, it's brand new and thus still working out the bugs, and that it works super-fast, I think they've still got a big winner on their hands despite the occasional glitch.
Hat tip to law.com and the legalblogwatch.
I am the scholarship dude.