Subject: West Publishing (Re: the value chain)
From: <>
Date: Fri, 10 Dec 1999 18:47:30 -0800

This issue has been discussed on CNI-Copyright
( in recent memory.  The
citations issue has been mentioned.  I don't recall the disposition of
the case.

On Fri, Dec 10, 1999 at 09:31:23PM -0500, Scott Goehring wrote:
> On 10 Dec 1999 11:32:13 -0500, Ian Lance Taylor <> said:
> >Based on your description, they're selling a service, not control
> >over the data.  The service is better access to the data.
> Quite true.  You can walk into virtually any law library (there are
> hundreds of public law libraries in this country) and see the exact
> same data that is replicated on Westlaw.  (In volumes published by
> West, no less.)  Westlaw is merely much faster and more convenient
> than the paper editions.
> Lawyer's Co-op sued because West tried to keep them from putting
> markers into their publication of Supreme Court opinions indicating
> where page breaks are found in West's publication of Supreme Court
> opinions.  They would want to do this because, until recently, when
> citing a Supreme Court case, one was required to cite "in parallel"
> all three publishers: the United States Reports (published by the
> GPO), the Supreme Court Reports (published by West), and the Lawyer's
> Edition (published by Lawyer's Co-op).  Without these page break
> markers, one would have to have subscriptions to both West's and
> Lawyer's Co-op's reporters to effectively cite any Supreme Court
> case.
> The citation rules have recently been changed to eliminate the need
> for parallel citation of those cases which have been reported in the
> United States Reports.  I cannot imagine that this is not in response
> to West's suit.

Karsten M. Self (
    What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?

SAS for Linux:
Mailing list:  "subscribe sas-linux" to