Archive for the ‘Westlaw’Category
Network Part 2: Not Going to Take It Anymore
In Part 1 of this series I discussed the current legal research market (lame) and how Wexis was without challengers until a little company called Google smacked them upside the head last year. But the question remains: what are you going to do about it?
Change. At Last?
Even if Google Scholar does begin the long climb into the consciousness of lawyers, goes the thinking, Wexis could certainly deal with a direct attack as it dealt with Loislaw and Fastcase before. After all the real power of the network is that it resists by tightening its grip and digging in its heels until removing it would kill the host. But direct action is not Google’s style. On the contrary, Google is king of feature creep. It excels at constant development of bells and whistles joined to a simple, irresistible feature like … search. So it’s a good bet that Google Scholar will not directly threaten Westlaw or Lexis any more than Adwords threatened Findlaw or Lawyers.com. Of course Google has relentlessly siphoned off legal marketing dollars from Wexis for the past decade regardless of its indirect approach. And like Adwords, Google Scholar is part of an even bigger network than either Westlaw or Lexis. So maybe change is possible.
At the end of the day, I believe that Google Scholar will do for legal research what Avvo did for lawyer selection: bring transparency where there was none before. If that happens then consumers of legal information including lawyers, scholars, students, and lay people, will be able to bypass the thicket of jargon and questionable practices that kept them in thrall to Wexis for a century. The result would be a body of legal research enhanced by user input (think Wikipedia) instead of a narrowly controlled, opaque system like the ones that lawyers use now. Change, at last.
Running Scared
This month the ABA Journal features a comprehensive look at the new crop of threats facing Westlaw and Lexis, including Google Scholar and Bloomberg Law. According to the article Westlaw intends to roll out it’s next-gen research platform, WestlawNext, in time for the ABA Technology Show in March; while LexisNexis will announce the new Lexis, dubbed creatively ‘New Lexis,’ later this year. But while the article makes it sound as if both companies are about to make a real technological leap, I’d advise you not to hold your breath. Westlaw and Lexis have never responded to threats with anything but cosmetic changes, falling back instead on enticement or intimidation to keep users loyal. And it has always worked, so why fix what ain’t broken? Besides, how likely is it that after generations of taking their market for granted either company will invest the time, money, or business discipline needed to break with the past? Then again, if Wexis loses its iron grip on legal the spigot of legal information then it is nothing but a search engine, and not a good one at that. Reason enough to be afraid.
I’m Mad As Hell And Not
Going to Take It Anymore
So are Westlaw and Lexis simply keeping up appearances as they did when the Internet threatened their proprietary networks in the 90’s? Or do they really think they can change everything from their business model to their corporate culture to cope with the likes of Google and Bloomberg? My guess is that, as usual, Westlaw and Lexis will talk a good game but continue to rely on contracts and intimidation over innovation. Hey, it worked for AIG, GM, and Lehman Brothers, right? And look where they are today.
07
02 2010
Network Part 1: Mad As Hell
Everybody knows things are bad. Everybody’s out of work or scared of losing their job. Banks are going bust. Nobody knows what to do. So I want you to get up, go to your windows, and yell – ‘I’m as mad as hell and I’m not going to take this anymore!’ – Network
Last month the blawgosphere erupted with discussions about the future of law: what to change, what to preserve, where did we go wrong? One of the most fundamental debates was about closed networks like Westlaw and Lexis (let’s call them “Wexis”) versus nominally open ones such as Avvo or Google. Wexis monopolizes legal research and – thanks to properties like Findlaw and Lawyers.com - legal marketing as well. These are the ultimate closed networks. They draw their strength from contracts, a steep learning curve, talented salespeople, and ubiquity. Avvo, Google, and others offer a more transparent experience with no sales force, few barriers to entry, no commitment, and no direct price tag for the use of their services. Which type of network is most likely to help lawyers meet their obligations in the future? The answer depends on whether lawyers get mad as hell and decide not to take it anymore, or shrug off the question and go back to business as usual.
The New 800-lbs. Gorilla
By putting an army of salespeople in the field and convincing lawyers that they could not function without them, Westlaw and Lexis have survived countless recessions and outlasted every threat. But last year, forces that had been building for decades such as unbundling, outsourcing, information availability, non-lawyer alternatives, and weak attorney-client bonding, created an opportunity for a different network provider to fill the void. And that is exactly what happened. But here’s the real question: if lawyers had not been jobless in record numbers last year, if businesses had been able to spend, if Big Law had not started laying off instead of hiring, and if the economy had not cratered, would Wexis still be doing business as usual? Probably: and that most likely means that lawyers are resigned to living under a 2-vendor cartel with little real competition and almost no incentive to innovate.
So in November 2009 when Google Scholar announced that it would be offering State and Federal cases including Supreme Court opinions back to 1791, it took a while for the news to sink in. Soon however, you could hear Westlaw and Lexis brass drop their collective loads as they realized that Google would not be content to give away for free the information that they had been charging for. Instead, they realized, Google Scholar intended to update its databases in real time and add services to enhance its growing legal library. In short, it looked like Wexis might face serious competition and the suits were scared.
… too be continued in Part 2
05
02 2010
Ahh … that New Lexis Smell
Today LexisNexis unveiled a partnership with Microsoft at LegalTech NY – the result is meant to foreshadow the complete revamp of the Lexis research system due out later this year, and dubbed New Lexis. In short, the company’s answer to WestlawNext, which was unveiled at LT NY yesterday. As a result of the partnership, a LexisNexis tab can now be integrated into the ribbon that Microsoft began using in Office 2007 and continues to use in Office 2010 beta as a substitute for the profusion of button bars in Office 2003. Users can conduct legal research, Internet searches on Bing and Google, even Sheppardize, all from within their Word, Outlook, or SharePoint document.
According to Clemens Ceipek, vice president of New Lexis, our customers spend their time … in e-mails or in Word creating or reviewing documents. That is exactly what we are doing. As a lawyer you no longer need to go to a separate, dedicated site to get the information.” Ideally this means that a user reviewing a brief in Word can click on the Shepard’s tab and confirm the status of all cases in the document at once. If the user wants to read the cases, clicking on another tab splits the screen and pulls up the cases. This same integration of information could extend to items within a firm’s own network or document management system in addition to items from Lexis databases or the Internet.
via abajournal.com
02
02 2010
WestlawNext. Where’s the Beef?
Reuters has been claiming that it’s “next gen” product WestlawNext will practically do your research for you, and as you know monopolies like Westlaw are famous for truthfulness so I don’t see why we shouldn’t trust them. Do you?
For instance, check out the above video. I couldn’t help noticing that there is nothing substantive in it, or in any of the company’s other marketing pieces for this product. Not the slightest attempt to tell me why this bill of goods is any better than the last one. Come on Westlaw. How do you look yourself in the eyes every morning? Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice … and I won’t buy your bullshit anymore. How about asking lawyers what they really need for a change instead of selling high-priced hot air? In short, I say #fail.
Posted via web from practice (redux)
31
01 2010
Quick Review: Collaboration Tools and Technologies
“The practice of law is, has been, and will continue to be a collaborative process” according to Dennis Kennedy and Tom Mighell, authors of The Lawyer’s Guide to Collaboration Tools and Technologies: Smart Ways to Work Together. True enough. And collaboration in the Internet Age is not what it used to be. In their book, Dennis and Tom have compiled a guide for lawyers who want to keep up with current tools and methods of collaboration that take advantage of the technology. For example the book discusses
- Document collaboration in a lawsuit
- Internet meetings and file-sharing
- E-mail productivity including GTD
- An overview of the Web 2.0 phenomenon
- Strategic planning using technology
With an-easy-to read-format, short chapters, and full glossary and index, in addition to a complete list of tools and resources, The Lawyer’s Guide to Collaboration Tools and Technologies is exactly what it claims to be.
15
12 2009
You know you have a following when …
… websites that aggregate 3rd-party applications compete for your favor. Case in point, the following 5 iPhone app aggregators are featured in this post on RWW
Chorus
AppsFire
Yappler
Appolicious
App Genius
This is where survival of the fittest takes on a whole new meaning. Even the folks at Read/Write/Web aren’t sure which one is the best of the best. Now, if only our industry inspired such creative aggregation, maybe someone would have a shot at unseating the Legal Research Duopoly that rules our lives.
Hey, a guy can dream …
17
11 2009
WhichDraft – putting it all together (online!)
Lawyers Jason and Geoff Anderman want to make online document automation simple. Easier said than done. Many have tried. None have succeeded.
Hotdocs is one option; as are Richard Granat’s DirectLaw and similar “virtual practice” applications such as VLO Tech. Over the years Ixio and other desktop software solutions have tried to deploy their systems to the Web with mixed results too. But just being online isn’t the point. The question is whether an application can add value in this (over)crowded field. Large firms have been doing this for 2 decades and can afford to make mistakes or even do things the hard way using a virtual private network (VPN). Smaller firms have done this for a good 5 years. And with the advent of DirectLaw, Advologix – which adapts Salesforce.com for lawyers – and the prevalence of SaaS, sole practitioners can now get in on the act.
So can WhichDraft get it right? Based on my interview with the founders … maybe. At least they have a better starting point than their predecessors who literally had to cover the cost of expensive legacy systems and weren’t native web-based solutions. My advice is to try WhichDraft and voice your suggestions loudly. These guys seem smart enough to listen and give us what we want instead of making us take what they’re giving. Are you listening, Thomson West?
