Comments on: Google Law http://law.marquette.edu/facultyblog/2009/11/20/google-law/ Sat, 11 Feb 2012 21:08:33 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Daniel Lutz http://law.marquette.edu/facultyblog/2009/11/20/google-law/comment-page-1/#comment-27164 Daniel Lutz Tue, 01 Dec 2009 19:55:43 +0000 http://law.marquette.edu/facultyblog/?p=8073#comment-27164 Hrm this is all pretty new to me, I've never looked into these aspects of google before, however I'm very interested in learning more. Thanks for this article, very good indeed :). Hrm this is all pretty new to me, I’ve never looked into these aspects of google before, however I’m very interested in learning more. Thanks for this article, very good indeed :) .

]]> By: Bonnie Shucha http://law.marquette.edu/facultyblog/2009/11/20/google-law/comment-page-1/#comment-27118 Bonnie Shucha Tue, 24 Nov 2009 15:23:08 +0000 http://law.marquette.edu/facultyblog/?p=8073#comment-27118 While I agree that the freely available legal coverage on Google Scholar is a wonderful thing, I don't think that it is quite as rosy as you portray it. There are some major drawbacks of which legal professional should be aware. - false hits as mentioned by Volokh - lack of source info (where is the info coming from?) - lack of advanced search options (boolean, field limiters, etc) - citators are not comprehensive (this is a big one!) In time, Google may and likely will overcome some of these issues. But it will never match subscription databases for content, authority and editorial enhancements. Is this a big deal? It depends. If all that you need is the text of a case, you're fine with Google Scholar. But if you want to cite the case in a brief, you probably should be using the official source. And when you need to determine whether that case is still good law, I would be very hesitant to rely on Google or any other free resource. On the plus side, Google has always done a wonderful job of designing a clean and easy user interface, and the legal content on Google Scholar is no exception - as you point out. Hopefully Lexis, Westlaw and others will follow their example - it wouldn't surprise me at all. While I agree that the freely available legal coverage on Google Scholar is a wonderful thing, I don’t think that it is quite as rosy as you portray it. There are some major drawbacks of which legal professional should be aware.

- false hits as mentioned by Volokh
- lack of source info (where is the info coming from?)
- lack of advanced search options (boolean, field limiters, etc)
- citators are not comprehensive (this is a big one!)

In time, Google may and likely will overcome some of these issues. But it will never match subscription databases for content, authority and editorial enhancements.

Is this a big deal? It depends. If all that you need is the text of a case, you’re fine with Google Scholar. But if you want to cite the case in a brief, you probably should be using the official source. And when you need to determine whether that case is still good law, I would be very hesitant to rely on Google or any other free resource.

On the plus side, Google has always done a wonderful job of designing a clean and easy user interface, and the legal content on Google Scholar is no exception – as you point out. Hopefully Lexis, Westlaw and others will follow their example – it wouldn’t surprise me at all.

]]> By: Tom Kamenick http://law.marquette.edu/facultyblog/2009/11/20/google-law/comment-page-1/#comment-27112 Tom Kamenick Sun, 22 Nov 2009 19:56:33 +0000 http://law.marquette.edu/facultyblog/?p=8073#comment-27112 Volokh had a blog on this last week, pointing out some strange results, like searching "Volokh" turning up several cases that never mention the term, and a 1761 case about computer file sharing. http://volokh.com/2009/11/18/google-case-law-and-law-review-article-search/ Volokh had a blog on this last week, pointing out some strange results, like searching “Volokh” turning up several cases that never mention the term, and a 1761 case about computer file sharing.

http://volokh.com/2009/11/18/google-case-law-and-law-review-article-search/

]]> By: Matthew Fernholz http://law.marquette.edu/facultyblog/2009/11/20/google-law/comment-page-1/#comment-27103 Matthew Fernholz Sat, 21 Nov 2009 16:27:27 +0000 http://law.marquette.edu/facultyblog/?p=8073#comment-27103 Another area of interest in the field of “Google law” is the lawsuit filed this week by Habush, Habush & Rottier against its competitor, Cannon & Dunphy. It seems Cannon & Dunphy purchased the words “Habush” and “Rottier” for Google searches, so when users type in the name of the Habush firm on a Google search they automatically get a link to Cannon & Dunphy’s website. The rest of the article can be read <a href="http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/70430797.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>. Another area of interest in the field of “Google law” is the lawsuit filed this week by Habush, Habush & Rottier against its competitor, Cannon & Dunphy. It seems Cannon & Dunphy purchased the words “Habush” and “Rottier” for Google searches, so when users type in the name of the Habush firm on a Google search they automatically get a link to Cannon & Dunphy’s website. The rest of the article can be read here.

]]>