4 ms·

No kidding. After looking at this project for a bit longer, I'm much less optimistic about this project. Frankly, it really depresses me that they require resea

No kidding. After looking at this project for a bit longer, I'm much less optimistic about this project. Frankly, it really depresses me that they require research agreements to download all information. Developers of this project: Please make the information freely available in a way that doesn't require agreements with a giant for-profit company. For now, I'm convinced that this project is nothing more than a veiled advertisement for lexis nexis.

wheaties 8y ago
Unless you can provide them with the information, it's not the developers who are making the rules. There's a reason Lexus is as profitable as they are.
paulgb 8y ago
My reading of this is that it's something they're contractually bound to for the near term but not forever: > Access limitations on full text and bulk data are a component of Harvard’s collaboration agreement with Ravel Law, Inc. (now part of Lexis-Nexis). These limitations will end, at the latest, in March of 2024. Hopefully this means no logins, also, but that's less clear. The blame on this should really fall on the courts that allow private companies to paywall access to the rule of law. At least some states have started to do it right: > Once a jurisdiction transitions from print-first publishing to digital-first publishing, these limitations cease. Thus far, Illinois and Arkansas have made this important and positive shift and, as a result, all historical cases from these jurisdictions are freely available to the public without restriction. We hope many other jurisdictions will follow their example soon.
- JackC 8y ago
  > Hopefully this means no logins, also, but that's less clear. The only things we have behind logins are what we are contractually required to, yes. This gets pretty fine-grained -- if you do a logged-out search across jurisdictions, requesting full text, the json contains error fields for the specific fields we aren't allowed to share without a login yet.
  - paulgb 8y ago
    Awesome, thanks for the clarification!

wheaties 8y ago

Unless you can provide them with the information, it's not the developers who are making the rules. There's a reason Lexus is as profitable as they are.

paulgb 8y ago

My reading of this is that it's something they're contractually bound to for the near term but not forever: > Access limitations on full text and bulk data are a component of Harvard’s collaboration agreement with Ravel Law, Inc. (now part of Lexis-Nexis). These limitations will end, at the latest, in March of 2024. Hopefully this means no logins, also, but that's less clear. The blame on this should really fall on the courts that allow private companies to paywall access to the rule of law. At least some states have started to do it right: > Once a jurisdiction transitions from print-first publishing to digital-first publishing, these limitations cease. Thus far, Illinois and Arkansas have made this important and positive shift and, as a result, all historical cases from these jurisdictions are freely available to the public without restriction. We hope many other jurisdictions will follow their example soon.

JackC 8y ago
> Hopefully this means no logins, also, but that's less clear. The only things we have behind logins are what we are contractually required to, yes. This gets pretty fine-grained -- if you do a logged-out search across jurisdictions, requesting full text, the json contains error fields for the specific fields we aren't allowed to share without a login yet.
- paulgb 8y ago
  Awesome, thanks for the clarification!