As the Washington, DC-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has started accepting electronic filings, now every U.S. federal appellate, district and bankruptcy court is doing so.
Please see:
All Federal Courts Now Accepting Electronic Filing
Cross-posted at Law Library Blog.
Call for Submissions
The Goettingen Journal of International Law (GoJIL), founded in 2007, is currently seeking submissions for its 5th International Law Essay Competition. GoJIL is an e-journal of legal scholarship focusing on International Law. It is the first student-run German International Law journal published exclusively in English. The journal is available online and free of charge. If you win, your article will be published online and accessible.
To participate in the GoJIL International Student Essay Competition 2012, follow the following guidelines:
The deadline is 15 August 2012.
For further details see the GoJIL website: www.gojil.eu
The Chesapeake Digital Preservation Group — with participating libraries including the Georgetown University Law Center Library, the Harvard Law School Library, the Maryland State Law Library and the Virginia State Law Library — has recently posted its 5th Annual investigative report
Some highlights:
Data Show Link Rot in 38 Percent of Online Publications within Five Years
Cross-posted on Law Library Blog.
The Congressional Research Service (CRS) late last month issued a report on the U.S. Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP):
Federal Depository Library Program: Issues for Congress
Here is the (March 29, 2012) report’s summary:
Summary
Congress established the Federal Depository Library Program (FDLP) to provide free public access to federal government information. The program’s origins date to 1813; the current structure of the program was established in 1962 and is overseen by the Government Printing Office (GPO). Access to government information is provided through a network of depository libraries across the United States. In the past half-century, information creation, distribution, retention, and preservation has expanded from a tangible, paper-based process to include digital processes managed largely through computerized information technologies.
The transition to digital information raises a number of issues of possible interest to Congress. This report discusses those possible concerns as they affect FDLP. These issues, which are in some cases interrelated, may not only affect FDLP, but also extend beyond the program to a variety of contexts related to the management of government information in tangible and digital forms. Issues include the following: maintenance and availability of the FDLP tangible collection; retention and preservation of digital information; access to FDLP resources; authenticity and accuracy of digital material; robustness of the FDLP Electronic Collection; and the costs of FDLP and other government information distribution initiatives.
The emergence of a predominantly digital FDLP may call the capacity of the statutory authorities GPO exercises into question. Whereas GPO is the central point of distribution for tangible, printed FDLP materials, its responsibilities are more diverse, and may be less explicitly specified, regarding its distribution of digital information. In some instances, GPO carries out activities to distribute digital information that are similar to its actions regarding printed materials. In other instances, GPO provides access to digital content that it does not produce or control. The agency has archiving and permanent retention authorities for tangible materials, but those authorities do not envision digital creation and distribution of government publications. Digital distribution authorities provide for online access to publications, but are silent on GPO’s retention and preservation responsibilities for digital information. These concerns may be addressed in their own right, or in the context of user demand for FDLP information, for which there is no uniform metric.
A number of efforts related to FDLP have been initiated by GPO and groups representing a number of libraries that participate in FDLP. These have included certain regional library activities; studies of the program by a private organization; proposals by a consortium of FDLP libraries to advance the consolidation, digitization, and cataloging of tangible collections; and a study of FDLP coordinated by GPO.
Cross-posted at Law Library Blog.
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) has just issued:
Global Parliamentary Report: The Changing Nature of Parliamentary Representation
This is the first such report by the UNDP.
Highlights from the executive summary of the report include:
Summary Conclusions (also from the executive summary):
(Also from the executive summary) Three specific challenges stand out:
Hat tip to DocuTicker.com.
Bloomberg L.P. has added Bureau of National Affairs (BNA) content to the Bloomberg BLAW system.
Please see the Bloomberg BNA press release here.
And additional coverage is here.
Cross-posted on Law Library Blog.
Boing Boing, a group blog that started out as a zine, has recently posted an interesting and provocative piece by Carl Malamud of Public.Resource.Org:
Liberating America’s Secret, For-Pay Laws
Cross-posted on Law Library Blog.
Bloomberg Law (BLAW) has won the American Association of Law Libraries (AALL) 2012 new product award, recognizing BLAW’s innovation in providing access to legal information.
Please see:
BLOOMBERG LAW NAMED 2012 NEW PRODUCT OF THE YEAR BY THE AALL
&
Hat tip to Law Librarian Blog here.
Following up earlier LegalResearchPlus posts on recently-filed legal actions as to the copying/sale of court filings/lawyers’ briefs and related matters — here, here, and here, West Hartford, Connecticut attorney and lead plaintiff David J. Heinlein on Wednesday 14 March 2012 brought a class action (docket no. 12-00386) against West Publishing Corporation in the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut — please see:
Article: Attorney Class Claims West Violates Copyright
&
Class Action Complaint (U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut
Civil Action No. 2:12-cv-00386, March 14, 2012)
To better illustrate some of the points made by Paul in his posting Selling others’ Briefs, Bryan L. Jarrett (our former student and now an associate at Jones Day) has given us permission to post two of the charts he created for his paper “Vending Appellate Briefs.” (To recap, Bryan’s paper surveyed the practices of sixteen state jurisdictions and DC — the ten largest ABA jurisdictions (by membership size) and seven jurisdictions that did not supply copies of appellate briefs to commercial vendors. The data was gathered in 2010.)
The first table (“Table I: The Ten Largest Jurisdictions”) displays five questions (for the jurisdictions of NY, CA, TX, FL, IL, DC, MA, OH, PA and NJ): do these jurisdictions provide appellate briefs online; do they have an arrangement with a vendor (Westlaw, Lexis) for the distribution of briefs; do these jurisdictions send appellate briefs directly to vendors; is the exchange of briefs quid pro quo; and have any attorneys objected.
The second table (“Table II: Jurisdictions that Do Not Supply Their Briefs to Vendors”) focuses on seven jurisdictions (NV, NH, NM, OK, VT, UT, and WY) and addresses the same questions as in Table I.
