Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gatekeepers of Law: Inside the Westlaw and LexisNexis Duopoly

thebignewsletter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 76 posts

Re: Gatekeepers of Law: Inside the Westlaw and LexisNexis Duopoly

#61

Post by rockskon »

singleshot_ wrote: post #49
rockskon wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't Nevada update its own laws on its own website?

The answer is probaly embedded within the concept of codification of acts. Legislatures pass acts, which are kind of like diffs for statutory law. But there is no base document, just a series of diffs from the beginning. Somewhere along the way, someone did a lot of work to “codify” the law, and when you go look up 18 USC 1001, and then click “next,” you are taking advantage of the codification process. But the perso…

So are Nevada lawmakers using Westlaw as there reference for the base document to build "edits" off of?

Re: Gatekeepers of Law: Inside the Westlaw and LexisNexis Duopoly

#62

Post by singleshot_ »

gmueckl wrote: post #59
singleshot_ wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer is probaly embedded within the concept of codification of acts. Legislatures pass acts, which are kind of like diffs for statutory law. But there is no base document, just a series of diffs from the beginning. Somewhere along the way, someone did a lot of work to “codify” the law, and when you go look up 18 USC 1001, and then click “next,” you are taking advantage of the codification process. But the perso…

The codification needs to become part of the process of passing acts. The government should be required to publish the updated code themselves along with any act that changed it. The whole concept that a commercial entity can have rights to the fully assembled text is terribly broken. If anybody is worried about the jobs those businesses created, then tell them to pivot into publishing commented editions of the codes…

The codification happened hundreds of years ago, though.

But you could do it too! The Congressional Record is a thing, and it publishes all the acts of Congress, all the way back to the beginning.

The problem is that after you were done, the first thing someone would ask you is to cross-cite everything into the West Annotated code because no one else has your code and no one cares about it, because we all have Westlaw.

(Which publishes commented editions of the codes, with cross references, references to relevant court decisions, etc.)

It's all a little bit antiquated but it works fine. Someday it will change. I too thought it should work the way people are describing upthread when I was a computer guy but it is what it is.

Re: Gatekeepers of Law: Inside the Westlaw and LexisNexis Duopoly

#63

Post by singleshot_ »

rockskon wrote: post #61
singleshot_ wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer is probaly embedded within the concept of codification of acts. Legislatures pass acts, which are kind of like diffs for statutory law. But there is no base document, just a series of diffs from the beginning. Somewhere along the way, someone did a lot of work to “codify” the law, and when you go look up 18 USC 1001, and then click “next,” you are taking advantage of the codification process. But the perso…

So are Nevada lawmakers using Westlaw as there reference for the base document to build "edits" off of?

I would imagine you either start with the first acts of your legislature and codify it from the beginning, or you start with some version of the code you figure you have rights to and go from there. It seems like it would be insane to do that job halfway, but that's not my area of expertise.

I have no idea whatsoever what is going on in Nevada.

Re: Gatekeepers of Law: Inside the Westlaw and LexisNexis Duopoly

#64

Post by chaps »

Terr_ wrote: post #60
chaps wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Friend, I highly highly recommend you do some court watching. The courts.. really, really, really do not work that way.

Pal, I think the immediate disclaimer at the very beginning is enough to show that I'm being wistful.

My point is that -- the criminal case exists. Please try out court watching!

Re: Gatekeepers of Law: Inside the Westlaw and LexisNexis Duopoly

#65

Post by Digory »

crazygringo wrote: post #25
atlanta90210 wrote: post #15

The state of Georgia tried to copyright its public written laws. They lost. https://www.bfvlaw.com/supreme-court-rules-georgia-cannot-cl...

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make? First, laws cannot be copyrighted. They're in the public domain. Second, the case you link to was not about laws, but annotated law. The annotated version (OCGA) was written by LexisNexis, and all that work paid for by LexisNexis. Obviously, normally that would mean LexisNexis has the copyright on the annotations. This is unproblematic. Another organization (Public.Resou…

I’d guess Lexis did that to itself. Usually the “deal” is that West or Lexis provides codification and reporting services for zero dollars, if they are named the official printer.

So the Legislature doesn’t have to maintain and oversee their own nest of troublesome legal pedants, and picks up a few contributions from legal publishing “entrepreneurs.”

By making the Annotated code official, it meant that anyone looking to prove what a particular law says in court would have to get it from the expensive, $412 hardback book, not the free version. I’d guess Lexis asked for that provision as part of its deal with Georgia.

Re: Gatekeepers of Law: Inside the Westlaw and LexisNexis Duopoly

#66

Post by [deleted] »

gmueckl wrote: post #59
singleshot_ wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer is probaly embedded within the concept of codification of acts. Legislatures pass acts, which are kind of like diffs for statutory law. But there is no base document, just a series of diffs from the beginning. Somewhere along the way, someone did a lot of work to “codify” the law, and when you go look up 18 USC 1001, and then click “next,” you are taking advantage of the codification process. But the perso…

The codification needs to become part of the process of passing acts. The government should be required to publish the updated code themselves along with any act that changed it. The whole concept that a commercial entity can have rights to the fully assembled text is terribly broken. If anybody is worried about the jobs those businesses created, then tell them to pivot into publishing commented editions of the codes…

[deleted]

Re: Gatekeepers of Law: Inside the Westlaw and LexisNexis Duopoly

#67

Post by lanyard-textile »

TZubiri wrote: post #31
chaps wrote: post #8

I do a lot of IL criminal courts research and it's really, really fucking bad out there. Transcripts: Multiple dollars per pages. Want that expedited? Multiply that amount by four. Don't know the court date? Can't get your transcript. Clerks put in the wrong date? Tough luck. Payment for those transcripts? Over Zelle because the court reporters themselves are contractors and get paid independently. FOIA: IL Judicial…

>"Tough luck. Payment for those transcripts? Over Zelle because the court reporters themselves are contractors and get paid independently." That doesn't sound right, are you sure that wasn't a bribe?

It sounds unbelievable but it's true! We do it in California too, at least in my county's court.

Re: Gatekeepers of Law: Inside the Westlaw and LexisNexis Duopoly

#68

Post by [deleted] »

showerst wrote: post #2

Lexis especially makes even scraping public state laws and admin codes difficult, which is extra frustrating because they are the legal publisher of record in a number of states. I've been considering trying to launch an OpenStates style scraper project for US laws and admin codes, but haven't had the time to attack 100 more scrapers. Even with AI help, the volume is significant.

[deleted]

Re: Gatekeepers of Law: Inside the Westlaw and LexisNexis Duopoly

#69

Post by squigz »

pyuser583 wrote: post #36

And this doesn't include the messiness in the decisions themselves. Judges often edit the decisions for some time after they are published. For example, Souter was editing his published opinion in Lee v. Weisman nine years after the case was decided. https://balkin.blogspot.com/2025/05/a-justice-souter-anecdot...

> Having received my letter, Justice Souter notified the Reporter of the error, and at 535 U.S. i appears an erratum, directing that “Homer nodded” be inserted—eight or nine years after the opinion was delivered.

I would guess corrections so long after publishing are relatively rare - but if they're also marked as such, it seems a slight stretch to say it's still being "edited" 9 years later

Re: Gatekeepers of Law: Inside the Westlaw and LexisNexis Duopoly

#70

Post by squigz »

pstuart wrote: post #43

On a tangential note, this seems ripe for LLM analysis/summarization to digest the legal code down so mere mortals could better understand it. It would also be great for pointing out all the loopholes that have been built in by our owners.

I'd be interested to see some information on LLMs being used for legal research. I expect it would not go well. I don't imagine it's just a simple matter of summarizing the text that's there - one has to interpret it with legalese, put it in context of the jurisdiction, look up related cases, etc.
Post reply on HN