Monday, May 20, 2019

Article: Accused of ‘Terrorism’ for Putting Legal Materials Online

While judicial decisions, recorded by U.S. courts, have been held a being in the public domain, states have turned to legal publishers to make the materials available, and copyright has become an issue.  In 1888, the Supreme Court ruled that:
The whole work done by the judges consitutes [sic] the authentic exposition and interpretation of the law, which, binding every citizen, is free for publication to all, whether it is a declaration of unwritten law, or an interpretation of a constitution or a statute. Nash v. Lathrop, 142 Mass. 29, 35, 6 N. E. Rep. 559. In Wheaton v. Peters, at page 668, it was said by this court, that it was 'unanimously of opinion that no reporter has or can have any copyright in the written opinions delivered by this court; and that the judges thereof cannot confer on any reporter any such right.' What a court or a judge thereof cannot confer on a reporter as the basis of a copyright in him, they cannot confer on any other person or on the state.
In Georgia, the state believes it can stop someone from publishing court decisions, because of the annotations, which are not part of a judge's ruling.  A federal appeals court has rules against the state, and now the state has asked the Supreme Court to step in, even though it ruled on this in 1888. 

The New York Times has a good article on this and it is a fascinating read. Can a state limit who publishes court rules? Can it limit how much is published?  And if a state can control the dissemination of rulings, what affect will this have on its residents?

Monday, May 06, 2019

Can the search committee see you working in their environment?

Glass wall in Hotel Andaluz
Below is a post I wrote in the Facebook group Library Think Tank (#ALATT) on April 1 and it is now joke.  It is a post that I don't want to lose, so I'm placing it here.  (Please note that it has been updated to fix wording in a couple of places.)


Can the search committee see you working in their environment?


I'm currently on three search committees (and have been on many before this) and I know that we ask versions of this question when we are reviewing candidates. Does this person have the right skills, or can the person (quickly) develop the needed skills? Does the person's attitude mesh with ours? Is the person on the same trajectory as us? Is the person demonstrating that they want to fit in with us?
Yes, we review the person's resume/CV, interview the person, check references, etc., all with an eye towards whether the person is the correct person for this opportunity at this time. The person might not be ready.

Questions (for you to ponder) for those of you on the job hunt, how do you demonstrate to the search committee that you see yourself working in that environment? What is in your cover letter, which connects you to that environment and its needs? Do they see on your resume that you have the skills they are looking for? Through your interview (Skype, telephone, or on-site), can they see that you will fit in? Have you taken the time to learn something about that organization and do you use that information in your interview? If you have to give a presentation, have you inserted what you know about the organization?

When you ask about your piercings or hair color, what you are asking is whether the search committee and organization will see you as fitting in. When they look at everything about you (resume, etc.), will they see someone who belongs in their organization? Or do your materials, presentation, interview, etc. paint a picture of you such that the fact you have piercings or colored hair become the dominate piece of information about you?