September 23

Regulations Data Collection

Last, but certainly not least, I’m ready to survey regulations.   I think this one may be the most heartbreaking of the Big Three, since (a) regulations exert a lot of control on people’s day to day life and (b) I’m suspecting that the government publication of these may end up being the official version more often than not and yet done in a way that will not lend itself to research or preservation.  Like, with the case law I finally accepted the fact that it was done for press inquiries and I could let it go (LET IT GOOOO…) about how inadequate it was.  But these regs are going to be for keeps.

I think my data points are going to be very similar to the stuff I collected about codes.  To wit:

  • Name of official version of code
  • Publisher of Official Code
  • Online version URL
  • Is online version official?
  • Statement of officialness?
  • Format of Online Version
  • Publisher of Online Version
  • Use restrictions on Online version
  • Statement of Copyright
  • Current year only or archival versions available online?
  • Code archive or regulation
  • URL of Archival versions
  • If archival versions available, how far back?
  • Bulk download available?
  • Search capabilities – none, basic, advanced/filtered
  • Update schedule?

Am I missing anything?

 

September 23

Blockchain in the Legal News

Looks like there’s a legal-themed blockchain based company in the news.  Meet Stampery.

They are presenting at Tech Crunch’s Disrupt.  The great quote?

When I asked Stampery’s legal value, Levi’s answer was straightforward. “It’s so new that for now nobody uses the blockchain in court. As soon as they use it, the judge will have to accept it. It’s not an opinion, it’s mathematic.”

HAHAHAHAHA.   Aw.  Bless his heart.

I still think blockchain is the future, or could be the future, if one could get the legal world on board.   I may jump ahead and start doing a little blockchain research and crank out a explainer blog post on this.  Blockchain is a hot topic among my Berkman colleagues, so I will also hopefully learn a lot in our working group on it.

Oh, btw, other companies doing legal-ish block chain:

Eris Industries

Smart Contract

Ethereum

 

September 21

State Case Law Data

I made it through the survey of case law published by courts/government on the web.  You can check out the public version here. As of this writing, South Carolina is missing because their website is down.  I’ll add that into this public worksheet as well as my private official copy later.

I really started to question the validity or usefulness of collecting this data about a third of the way through this.  So this was emotionally hard to get through.  Can I admit that?  Although now that I’m done I guess I’m happy I did it because it becomes obvious how uniformly bad case law publication is. So yay?

As with the codes, more in depth analysis is to come later after I tear through all of this, but you can play with the explore button on the bottom right hand side of the spreadsheet to get some graphs.  They require some data clean up to be more accurate, but you can see that PDFs and West publishing pretty much rule the day when it comes to case law.  I don’t know why I was surprised so many states use the regional reporters as their official publication, but here we are.

Now onto regulations!

September 21

Information Poverty

There’s a joke that goes “librarians like to search, everyone else like to find.”

Listen, I didn’t say it was a funny joke.

Anyway, I do love searching.  But I love it even more when I find the right term to search by, which happened this weekend.  It turns out that there is term for the “justice desert” concept that I’ve been kicking around.

Information poverty.

I thought it up on Sunday morning while watching Melissa Harris-Perry on MSNBC.  (A show which I highly recommend, btw.)  I did a quick and dirty google search and lo and behold..it’s an actual term of art for the concept I’ve been kicking around.  So boo for not being able to be the “originator” but yeah for more literature to review.  And double yea for more confirmation that this topic hasn’t been beaten to death and written about.

As an aside, I do find myself in the weird position of wanting to share everything I learn as I learn it but having a fear that I’m going to get scooped if I reveal too much?  I know I’m just being paranoid, because who else wants to research and write about this topic?  I dunno.    Just suffice it to say that working in the open can be hard sometimes, mentally and emotionally.

September 18

Activity Summary – Week Four

Week Four.  A month.  A month!  How have I been here a month already????

This week I have hit the state case law survey hard.  And it hit me back.  The situation is pretty grim there. It was pointed out to me this week that I seem to take this research personally, and I do, perhaps to a fault.  I’m only to the O’s on the case law survey and I can tell now that any hopes I had for it to be possible to even do a modicum of free research on government websites are gone. Long long gone.  It’s depressing.

I realized that any publication of case law done on state websites has to be for press inquiries and other related reasons.  Legal research and self help is just not on the radar of reporters of decisions.  It can’t be.   But as long as I remember that the publication isn’t done for legal research purposes, I feel better?

Some other issues I’ve seen/thoughts I’ve had:

– The few states that are making their online publication the “official” and authentic version….well, they aren’t putting the rest up.  So a person is gong to have to go to several spots to get the “real deal” law.  As I said on twitter, we won the authentication debate at the price of a useable legal information ecosystem.

– I wonder if a state would ever retroactively go back and adopt an online ecosystem, assuming that you could prove provenance of the data.

– Lots of usability issues.  PDFs galore, no or limited searching (NO SEARCHING!), limited scope, unofficial copies (although I swear I could care less about “official” or “authentic” status right now.  Does that make me a bad librarian?)   Mainly courts are putting up slip opinions, which may or may not be correct.  I’d like the correct law over the official version.   It could be argued that how do you know it’s correct without it being official?  I dunno.  How do I know the sun is going to come up tomorrow?

Sorry, I’m being snarky.

Here’s the nice thing about digital information – traditionally, there’s been the official copy of the law.  Usually print.  And if there’s a discrepancy, the “official” version wins.  BUT.  With digital information it is possible to have LOTS OF COPIES that can be certified as being the same and they can be more easily (and cheaply) distributed and they are more usable.

In other news, I got my office computer set up and signed up for the big three legal research databases.    This has been excellent for two reasons.  (1) I can leave my laptop at my apartment, which means I can work from home more easily. (As I am now.  In my jammies.  FTW.)  (2) I started doing the preemption checking on the paper(s) that I see coming out of this research that I am doing.   So far, no one seems to have written the article(s) that I see writing.  So that’s good.

I know some people scoff at academic writing and the value of it vs. just blogging and/or “making something”, but I think in order to convince some of the people that I’ll need to convince to make the legal information ecosystem better, I’ll need to have an article or two as “proof.”

See, I’m not just a crazy woman ranting on the Internet.  I’m a crazy woman ranting in print with the blessing of half a dozen law students that selected my article for publication!

It’s a weird game, I know.

I do plan, as the year progresses, to design out a publication system for maybe libraries or other interested parties to use to start publishing law.   I think that’s where I’m heading.   I want to make solutions, not just point out the problems.   Speaking of which, I really need to get back on the stick of codeacademy.

I’m feeling a little burnout, so I think the plan for today is to read law journal articles, wander over to the Berkman Center and maybe stay away from spreadsheets until Monday.   This year is a marathon, not a sprint!

September 14

Activity Summary – Week Three

Last week was both very very busy, and yet I don’t feel like I got a lot done.

Started in on the case law review.  Holy cats, it’s so much worse than I thought it would be! I was expecting the unofficial, unauthenticated PDFs, but I was not expecting the really limited scope of the posted cases, the INABILITY TO EVEN SEARCH, or the fact that some states decided that once it was published by a print commercial journal, there was no need to make it available online anymore.

Last week was also when the Berkman Center kicked off activities and I got to meet all the other people connected to it.  Words can’t quite express how neat it all was.  Everyone is very smart, and dedicated and sincere.  I have a feeling I’m going to learn a lot from all of them.

Finally, on Friday I went down to DC for Transparency Camp. It was very interesting and I’m glad I made the somewhat spontaneous decision to go.  There’s not a lot of overlap between the “open law” and “open government” people, at least it doesn’t feel like it to me.  But, if law is data, and I believe it is, I think there’s a lot to be learned from each other.    Probably the biggest thing for me to come out of this unconference was the idea that I should take a look at state’s open data laws and portals.  Maybe they are the future of distribution of legal information since the creating bodies are seemingly having such a terrible time of it.

It also has occurred to me that in looking at law as data, there may be some more sticks (instead of just carrots) that can be used to encourage/force government bodies to open up their legal information.  Because that’s a big hurdle – convincing people in the government to do it and trying to get other people to join the open law movement. Unfortunately saying “it’s the right thing to do” or “access to justice” isn’t enough, sadly.  I’d like to be able to say “oh, actually you’re supposed to because of x,y,z requirements.”

I’ve sort of rededicated myself to/decided that looking into the law and policy behind open legal information is going to be an important piece of this year’s work.   I came up with a rough outline last night, but of course I have forgotten it right now as I write this.

September 4

Case law data collection

Next up on data collection list…case law.  This is going to be ugly.  Here are the data points I think I’m going to be collecting for the state supreme and appellate level cases.

  • Court Name
  • Official print publication for cases
  • URL of online cases
  • Official or Unofficial
  • Statement of Officialness
  • Format cases published in
  • Vendor neutral citation?
  • Current Year or Archival Versions Available?
  • URL of Archive
  • If Archival versions available, how far back?
  • Bulk Download available?
  • Copyright Claims
  • Use Restrictions

Am I missing anything?

September 4

Activity Summary – Week Two

Made it to Friday of my first full week of work!  Yay me!   So what have I done this week?

I made it through the first pass of reviewing all 50 states (and DC) online codes. My goal was to have all of the state code data collection project done this week, so I’m pretty much on schedule. Yay me.*  About halfway through I decided I needed to have separate entries for the actual name of the code and the name of the official/certified version of the code.  (Because they’re not the same thing. Of course they’re not.)  I hope to fill that in, as well as a few unknowns in my datasheet by the end of business today.  That means I get to spend today in the Harvard Law Library Reading Room using the AALL State Bibliographies, which will hopefully help solve some mysteries for me.

After I get everything sorted I’ll make it all public.  I really want to jump into the data collection on case law, so any in depth analysis of the code information will probably wait.   I can say now that one way my thinking has changed is that – for some reason –  I used to think that only state websites could/should be the publisher of official digital copies of law.  However, something about seeing the number of privately published print official/certified codes has caused me to change my mind.  Why can’t a State Decoded website be certified too?

(I have vague ideas about how blockchain technology could be implemented ensure absolute accuracy and chain of custody with regards to code data without relying upon PDFs. But that’s another post for another day.  And I’m sure they’re are other ways of doing this. Hey hey, who’s got a research project and a couple of months to spare doing research?  This gal right here.  But I digress.)

Speaking of AALL, I was reminded this week of the Digital Access to Legal Information Committee.  They are the ones in charge of the 50 state surveys, which I am modelling my data collection on.  Yay for more people being interested in this type of information and future possible collaborators.

*It’s interesting being in charge of my own schedule and deadlines.  I like it.  Surprisingly, no guilt thus far about not working hard enough or fear about setting the bar too low.  I think maybe because it wasn’t that long ago that getting out of bed and getting dressed consisted of a victory for me that I’m in no rush to set myself up for failure.

Speaking of success, the Berkman stuff will finally start to ramp up next week.  There was an email chain of all the new/returning fellows/affiliates/associates etc introducing themselves.  Holy Impressive Lineup, Batman.  I was hit with a mixture of impostor syndrome and “I don’t think we’re in Kansas anymore, Toto.”  My parents like to kid me about being a librarian rockstar, but there are like, actual rockstars on this list.   And, oh, by the way, US Supreme Court justice coming to talk to us.   It’s intimidating and exciting and I can’t wait to learn more from the community.  I’m still not entirely sure how I am lucky enough to be doing this.

On the skills enhancement side of things, I started to work my way through the Code Academy web stuff.  All refresher thus far and pretty easy.    I was told by several people, quite understandably, that instead of asking what programming language I should learn, I should have a project in mind and build it and that will teach me what language to learn.  But that doesn’t quite answer the question about which language will do what I want – I don’t want to start building something in, say, Ruby, only to find that actually Python would have been better.  Does taht make sense?    At any rate, I think I’m going to start with the python modules on code academy.

I also want to highlight this blog post I read this week:  Libraries’ Tech Pipeline Problem.  Definitely reinforced my thinking that I have a great opportunity here to teach myself some new technical skills.

On a personal note, settling into Cambridge nicely.  My apartment – a small fully furnished one – is finally starting to feel a little like home/my space, even though I’m surrounded by other people’s stuff.  I’m also starting to get some routines in place, which are always comforting.   I’m definitely learning to embrace simplicity, just due to the size of my apartment and the fact that I couldn’t bring much stuff with me.  It’s nice.  I guess I could insert a reference to local boy Thoreau here, but I’ll pass on the temptation.    My plan for the weekend is to get the heck out of Boston one day – probably Salem because I know I definitely want to see that and soon it’ll be too close to Halloween to deal with – and maybe one day go down town and ride a double decker bus tour just to get the lay of the land.  I’ve been to Boston quite a few times in the past few years, but it seems like all I saw was either the convention center or Harvard Law School.