Trying to Save the Web’s Shortcuts

From the “Technology Journal” of today’s Wall Street Journal (Wednesday, November 25, 2009, p. B5):

Trying to Save the Web’s Shortcuts

Project Seeks to Preserve Links Behind Fledgling Services That Shrink Internet Addresses

By Andrew LaVallee

The Internet Archive and more than 20 start-ups are banding together to preserve the historical records of the abbreviated Web addresses that are passed around on services such as Twitter.

. . .

Volunteers Log Off As Wikipedia Ages

“As rules for editing the online encyclopedia proliferate, volunteers have been departing Wikipedia faster than new ones have been joining,” according to a front-page story in today’s Wall Street Journal, “Volunteers Log Off As Wikipedia Ages,” by Julia Angwin and Geoffrey A. Fowler.

PACER Survey for Everyone

Recently, the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts  launched a PACER Online Satisfaction Survey. [PACER=Public Access to Court Electronic Records]

As the A.O. is trying to get feedback from PACER users, only individuals with a PACER account may take this survey.  (Question #2 on the survey asks for your PACER account information.  You are not able to skip past Question #2)

This made me wonder: 

  • Are there folks that might want to take this survey that aren’t holders of a PACER account?
    For example, our students in Advanced Legal Research get to see what PACER looks like, but don’t have an account.  Many folks who used PACER during the pilot program might also have comments but may not have an account.  Etc. 
  • Are there individuals with PACER accounts that would prefer not to provide their account information in the survey? 
    [You are unable to skip past Question 2 which asks for the account information.]  Although the survey claims to be completely confidential, there might be folks who would prefer to answer the survey anonymously.
  • What about organizations that share a single PACER account? 
    The survey is geared to a single response from each account holder.  There might be others, such as librarians in a firm or at a school, that want to each provide unique feedback.
  • There is another category of people who might want to take the survey — students who we log on.  Sometimes they are very heavy users (e.g., $ 500) and might have some very valuable feedback.

So, after thinking about those questions, we decided to copy the core questions from the PACER survey on the A.O. site and create a second, more-open survey.

This “PACER Survey for Everyone” does not ask you to provide a PACER account number (and it doesn’t ask you for your name, as is the case in optional Question #3 on the A.O. survey).    However, all of the other questions remain the same.

This survey allows anyone, users and non-users alike, to provide the simple feedback on PACER that the A.O. wants right now.

We plan to share the results of this survey with the A.O. so they can compare and analyze this other layer of feedback.  We hope that it is useful for all.  We also plan to post the results online here, too.

New Resource: Tiny URLs for Links from the Library of Congress’ THOMAS System…

A valuable web tool — tinyThom.as — that makes the links on the Library of Congress’ legislative website, THOMAS, permanent, has been introduced recently; see:

Mighty Tiny Thomas

Cross-posted on LawLibraryBlog.

Report on New Legal Service Market in the UK

Byfield Consultancy has released a report, based on interviews with practitioners, on the future of  law firm regulation in the UK.  The report discusses legal and busniess changes that impact firms in Britain. 

The Big Bang Report: Opportunities and Threats in the New Legal Services Market. November 2009

Jon Robbins

http://www.byfieldconsultancy.com/docs/Big_Bang_Report.pdf

Excerpt from the Executive Summary:

Chapter 3: Revolution in Legal Services

Alternative business structures, the most revolutionary aspect of the Legal Services Act 2007, will allow lawyers to form multidisciplinary practices offering legal services together with non-legal services. They will also allow non-lawyers, including external investors as well as the likes of Tesco, AA, banks and insurers to have a stake in firms.

Times (London) also has an article on the report:

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article6921906.ece?&EMC-Bltn=WAN381F

Sanremo Handbook on Rules of Engagement

The U.S. Naval War College has posted the November 2009 edition of the Sanremo Handbook on Rules of Engagement, published by the International Institute of Humanitarian Law. The document includes discussion of  land, maritime, air, outer space, and cyberspace military operations. Hat tip to Kelly Vinopal.

Sanremo Handbook on Rules of Engagement

http://www.usnwc.edu/getattachment/7b0d0f70-bb07-48f2-af0a-7474e92d0bb0/San-Remo-ROE-Handbook

From the Foreward:

The text has been prepared by Commander Alan Cole RN, Major Phillip Drew, Canadian Forces, Captain Rob McLaughlin, RAN and Professor Dennis Mandsager, Captain, JAGC, US Navy (Ret.). The final draft has been reviewed by a team of Council members of the Institute, composed of Brigadier General Erwin Dahinden, Dr. Baldwin de Vidts, Professor Wolff Heintschel von Heinegg, Professor Marie Jacobsson, Dr. Michael Meyer and Professor Michel Veuthey, with the cooperation of Colonel Darren Stewart, Director of the Military Department of the Institute.

There are no other Handbooks of its type in existence; it has been designed so that it can be used by any nation or group of nations without reference to security caveats or restrictions. Of course this was always the intent, to provide a tool that could be used to facilitate and enhance multinational cooperation and mutual understanding while ensuring that military forces are in compliance with national security and policy concerns.

As the political control on the use of force and with that the use of rules of engagement to regulate the conduct of armed forces by individual nations, alliances and coalitions around the world continues to grow, so too the need to be able to train on and understand rules of engagement similarly gains importance. It is essential that a clear understanding exists that whilst rules of engagement are often a mix of military and political policy requirements, these must be bounded by extant international and domestic legal parameters. Such legal constraints may never be exceeded, but are quite often restricted further by the effect of rules of engagement. Too often national or multinational security classifications mean that the publication and sharing of rules of engagement experience and best practice is problematic. The ability for militaries to share their experiences as well as for academics, students and the public to consider the subject is critical in order to promote awareness of the practical implementation of International Humanitarian Law through rules of engagement.

The Law of Access to Government

“The Law of Access to Government”

RICHARD J. PELTZ, University of Georgia School of Law

This is the only casebook geared entirely to the study of the law of access to government, or freedom of information law, in the United States. The book takes a multistate approach, familiarizing students with norms of state and federal open records and open meetings laws, and exposing students to statutes, regulations, and cases at both state and federal levels. Though the book is designed principally to employ the law-school case method of study, it is suitable as well for graduate and advanced undergraduate students in journalism schools. Extensive notes follow primary-source materials raising legal and policy questions, and providing ample fodder for class discussion. Graphic elements drawn from public-domain sources enhance the flow of the text. Coverage is organized in three parts – Access to the Judiciary, Access to the Executive, and Principal Issues in Access Law – and in ten chapters: (1) Criminal Proceedings, (2) Juries, (3) Court Records, (4) The FOIAs, (5) Law Enforcement and Corrections, (6) Homeland Security and the War on Terror, (7) Open Records, (8) Open Meetings, (9) Electronic Access, and (10) Scope of Laws. Table of Contents available for download.

Source:  LSN Information Privacy Law Vol. 2 No. 44,  11/18/2009

Another big day for Free Law – ABA launches site summarizing federal court opinions and upcoming cases

Here’s a new site is designed mainly for the press but access is free to all. Cases are summarized by professors with support from law students.  For the Ninth Circuit, for example, the content contributors are:

University of San Diego School of Law  and
University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law

 Here’s the site: http://new.abanet.org/SCFJI/Pages/MediaAlertsOnFederalCircuitCourts.aspx

 

Here’s the press release:

 

Release: Immediate

Contact: Dave Jaffe

Phone: 312-988-6139

E-Mail: jaffed@staff.abanet.org)

Online: http://www.abanews.org

or

Contact: Tina Vagenas

Phone: 312-988-5105

E-Mail: vagenask@staff.abanet.org

 

NEW ABA WEB SITE TO HIGHLIGHT RULINGS BY FEDERAL APPELLATE COURTS

 

CHICAGO, Nov. 18, 2009 – The American Bar Association today launched a new Web site intended to inform the media and public of important cases in the nation’s federal appellate courts. The site was officially unveiled at the Newseum in Washington, D.C., where judges and journalists were gathered for a conference hosted by the First Amendment Center. 

Media Alerts on Federal Courts of Appeals, as the site will be known, is sponsored by the ABA’s Standing Committee on Federal Judicial Improvements. It represents a collaborative effort to broadly disseminate timely, accurate and unbiased information about noteworthy and legally significant cases in the federal courts of appeals. The site will be updated daily with postings on key decisions and alerts on upcoming cases.

Circuit Judge M. Margaret McKeown of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, a founder of the project and immediate past chair of the Standing Committee on Federal Judicial Improvements, said the site targets the media, but also will serve as a resource for lawyers, educators and the public.

“The case information not only serves a practical need, it also promotes transparency and public access, which go hand in hand with judicial accountability and judicial independence,” McKeown said. “Greater access to and understanding of the judicial process fosters public confidence in our judicial system.”

“There is nothing more important to our democracy and freedom than a well informed press and public,” said U.S. District Judge Nancy Atlas of the Southern District of Texas, chair of the standing committee. “The Media Alerts on Federal Courts of Appeals site should enhance the media’s ability to help us achieve this goal.” 

Federal courts of appeals, which are at the level just below the United States Supreme Court, hear direct appeals from both federal trial courts and federal administrative agencies. Of the 11 geographically drawn circuits, the new Web site initially will highlight decisions from the Third, Fifth, and Ninth Circuits, then eventually expand to include the rest of the circuits. 

In conjunction with the ABA, cases are selected and summarized by a panel of distinguished law professors, supported by their students. The ABA is working in conjunction with professors at the law schools of Temple University (Craig Green and David Sonenshein), the University of Texas (Stephanie Lindquist and Dean Leslie Oster), the University of San Diego (Shaun Martin), and the University of Arizona (David Marcus). The academic teams will be choosing from the more than 25,000 cases filed annually in the three courts of appeals. The project aims to select a manageable number of cases so that the site will be of practical use to reporters. 

The project grew out of a shared concern between journalists and the judiciary that reporting about federal courts has been declining. The concern is due in part to new trends in media coverage, including the steadily shrinking pool of news staff in traditional media and the rise of Internet-based news sites, blogs, and other media outlets. 

“For the past decade federal judges and journalists around the country have shared their perspectives and concerns through a series of meetings sponsored by the First Amendment Center,” said U.S. District Judge D. Brock Hornby of the District of Maine, chair of the Judicial Branch Committee of the Judicial Conference of the United States, which has cosponsored the programs. “This Web site is a real and tangible outgrowth of our meetings, and one that I think will bring greater public access and understanding to the work of the U.S. Courts of Appeals.” 

Following launch of the Web site, the standing committee will continue to explore opportunities for the exchange of views among judges and journalists. In 2010, the committee plans to sponsor a forum on media and the courts in conjunction with the William H. Rehnquist Center at the University of Arizona James E. Rogers College of Law. 

 The Media Alerts Web site is at http://new.abanet.org/SCFJI/Pages/MediaAlertsOnFederalCircuitCourts.aspx

With nearly 400,000 members, the American Bar Association is the largest voluntary professional membership organization in the world. As the national voice of the legal profession, the ABA works to improve the administration of justice, promotes programs that assist lawyers and judges in their work, accredits law schools, provides continuing legal education, and works to build public understanding around the world of the importance of the rule of law.

A big day for Free Law

See Google post below.  And stay tuned for another announcement tomorrow, which will be yet another big day for Free Law.   And we here at Stanford have something cooking too.  Stay tuned.

Take a look at this posting and its comments too, from the Supreme Court of Texas Blog.

 

 

http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2009/11/finding-laws-that-govern-us.html

 

Finding the laws that govern us
 
11/17/2009 09:05:00 AM

As many of us recall from our civics lessons in school, the United States is a common law country. That means when judges issue opinions in legal cases, they often establish precedents that will guide the rulings of other judges in similar cases and jurisdictions. Over time, these legal opinions build, refine and clarify the laws that govern our land. For average citizens, however, it can be difficult to find or even read these landmark opinions. We think that’s a problem: Laws that you don’t know about, you can’t follow � or make effective arguments to change.

Starting today, we’re enabling people everywhere to find and read full text legal opinions from U.S. federal and state district, appellate and supreme courts using Google Scholar. You can find these opinions by searching for cases (like Planned Parenthood v. Casey), or by topics (like desegregation) or other queries that you are interested in. For example, go to Google Scholar, click on the “Legal opinions and journals” radio button, and try the query separate but equal. Your search results will include links to cases familiar to many of us in the U.S. such as Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education, which explore the acceptablity of “separate but equal” facilities for citizens at two different points in the history of the U.S. But your results will also include opinions from cases that you might be less familiar with, but which have played an important role.

We think this addition to Google Scholar will empower the average citizen by helping everyone learn more about the laws that govern us all. To understand how an opinion has influenced other decisions, you can explore citing and related cases using the Cited by and Related articles links on search result pages. As you read an opinion, you can follow citations to the opinions to which it refers. You can also see how individual cases have been quoted or discussed in other opinions and in articles from law journals. Browse these by clicking on the “How Cited” link next to the case title. See, for example, the frequent citations for Roe v. Wade, for Miranda v. Arizona (the source of the famous Miranda warning) or for Terry v. Ohio (a case which helped to establish acceptable grounds for an investigative stop by a police officer).

As we worked to build this feature, we were struck by how readable and accessible these opinions are. Court opinions don’t just describe a decision but also present the reasons that support the decision. In doing so, they explain the intricacies of law in the context of real-life situations. And they often do it in language that is surprisingly straightforward, even for those of us outside the legal profession. In many cases, judges have gone quite a bit out of their way to make complex legal issues easy to follow. For example, in Korematsu v. United States, the Supreme Court justices present a fascinating and easy-to-follow debate on the legality of internment of natural born citizens based on their ancestry. And in United States v. Ramirez-Lopez, Justice Kozinski, in his dissent, illustrates the key issue of the case using an imagined good-news/bad-news dialogue between the defendant and his attorney.

We would like to take this opportunity to acknowledge the work of several pioneers, who have worked on making it possible for an average citizen to educate herself about the laws of the land: Tom Bruce (Cornell LII), Jerry Dupont (LLMC), Graham Greenleaf and Andrew Mowbray (AustLII), Carl Malamud (Public.Resource.Org), Daniel Poulin (LexUM), Tim Stanley (Justia), Joe Ury (BAILII), Tim Wu (AltLaw) and many others. It is an honor to follow in their footsteps. We would also like to acknowledge the judges who have built this cathedral of justice brick by brick and have tried to make it accessible to the rest of us. We hope Google Scholar will help all of us stand on the shoulders of these giants.

Posted by Anurag Acharya, Distinguished Engineer