Well, since Nimmer is published by Bender (which is owned/distributed by
Lexis), and since McCarthy is published by West, I'd venture to say that
your lawyer's request is quite lawyerly in that it is simultaneously
accurate and useless: the distinction between the print and electronic
is one of format. In fact, given the rapidity of updates to the
electronic versions when compared with the paper-based updating process,
I'd have to say that your lawyer is flat out wrong in his perception of
one being 'official' (presuming, of course, that we consider accuracy to
be an element of 'official-ness'). (Of course, YLCRMV: your local
court rules may vary!)
Now, if your lawyer simply prefers to read the print rather than the
electronic, well, that's a horse of a different color, as we used to say
back in Arizona. But if your guy is looking for the most official and
up-to-date, then he's got to look at the electronic versions direct from
the vendor, I'm sorry to say.
And this is, of course, only my $0.02 USD.
dkp
Dennis Kim-Prieto, J.D., M.S.L.I.S., M.F.A.
Reference Librarian
Rutgers School of Law -- Newark
123 Washington Street
Newark, NJ 07102
(v)++973.353.3037
(f)++973.353.1574
*****************************************************
Member, Copyright Committee
American Association of Law Libraries
>>> <natalie.davis@verizon.com> 4/9/2008 11:40 AM >>>
I have had a lawyer request the print subscriptions for Nimmer on
Copyright and McCarthy on Trademarks. He states that the print version
is "official" while the electronic version has errors.
I am wondering what other librarians think of this statement. Have
people run into this in regards to content being official vs.
unofficial- for print, online via Lexis, and online via Matthew Bender
Online?
Thanks,
Natalie Davis
Law Librarian
Verizon Legal Dept.
703/351-3173
703/351-3656 (fax)
natalie.davis@verizon.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Apr 09 2008 - 10:01:55 PDT