I loved The Ferschnizzilator, but Ferschnizzilator 3 was even better! ;)

I am a solo practitioner, and I don't need Westlaw or Lexis to access all the law I need. However, I still look forward to the day that I can subscribe to Westlaw, not because it will mean access to the case law, but because it will mean access to West's advanced search capabilities (which, as far as I have discovered, are not available anywhere else -- please correct me if I'm wrong), its "Shepardizing" tools (for determining if cases are still good law), its gloss or anotations on the case law, and its other databases (like magazines, law reviews, legal encyclopedias).

I really don't see why it is big news that the government is not (yet) interested in what you have to offer.

Nevertheless, I agree with you that it is a travesty that the government still relies on West and Lexis to get its official case law online.

Cory, that headline is WAY sensationalist -- or were you trying for controversy? :)

Don't forget that every federal judicial office has all its own caselaw in book form. They really just need a good reliable search engine. West and Lexis provide that and SO much more (as other posters have noted).

Carl: once you have a complete database and a search engine that is as advanced as those of West or Lexis, then you can start arguing that we should all switch to neutral citations. Once we switch to neutral citations (which will happen one day) then you will be on better footing. Until then, you really have nothing to offer the government.

Tragic. We can berate him for his stupidity and (sort of) laugh about it. The guy who did it will be berating himself for the rest of his life, and will likely never be able to smile about it. I just hope I never have a lapse of judgment that leads to someone else's injury or death.

I agree, its pretty rotten to call the cops on him . . . but was that really what happened? Can you imagine a better guy with a better set of facts to take the stand? So I wonder, was it a tipster, or a test-case-r? Regardless, I'm glad he won!!

@112 Ornith
Sounds like you've got a chip on your shoulder. You're reading my statement backwards. I said it forwards, essentially: only the female bears children. I did not say it backwards, as you suggest: only those who bear children are female. My statement does not logically require the second statement, and I reject it. You are twisting my words (thus, the chip). Speaking more precisely, however, I believe that an inherent part of being female is the biological potential to bear children, even if it is medically not possible (for any of the myriad reasons this happens).

@100 Takuan
Please don’t jump to conclusions. I'm aware of the possibility that souls may not match bodies, and it is a mystery I am glad I do not need to solve. Just because I have strongly held beliefs, doesn't mean I would force them on others, let alone BURN another for not agreeing.

I believe that there is a spiritual side to life, and that souls are inherently either male or female. I believe an inherent element of the female is the bearing of children. Thus, this creeps me out.
I could be wrong, but there you have it.

Whatever. Some lawyers are evil, and some are good.

Takuan: the number of lawyers in the country is irrelevant to this fact, and until heaven comes again to our physical plane, to there will always be injustice in the world. Blaming one profession for this is blind.

Noen: I'm aware of how this works, but I think is is specious to say that I should not get offended by something because it was posted online. Airing disagreement is airing disagreement. My sense of the truth is offended by people who condemn all lawyers just as it would be by those who condemn all hippies (or whatever). It's stereotyping, it disserves the speaker and the listener, and it distorts the truth.

I'm glad I get offended.

I'm an attorney too, and wanted to add some background.

As someone already noted, the status quo is that ANYONE who wants to direct an adjudicator to some binding point of law (whether a "self-serving" attorney, a "public interest" attorney, or someone who is representing him or herself) must do so using the page numbers of the official reporter (the published version of the case). These reporters cost money. The most prevalent publisher of these reporters is Thompson West, and Westlaw, the dominant electronic database, is run by the same company. Access to Westlaw is very, very expensive. The most powerful way to remove this cost barrier is to shift from citing by page number, to citing by paragraph number (sometimes called "neutral citation"). A court could then issue the decision with the paragraphs numbered, and boom, an attorney or anyone else has everything he or she needs to authoritatively cite to the point of law desired. But right now, courts are hesitant to shift to this system, probably in large part because all of the old case law hasn't been published that way. Therefore, the most significant thing about the Open Case Law project is that it is a strong start at creating a comprehensive source for cases that have numbered paragraphs.

I also don't understand the hostility towards the attorneys who posted here. Most attorneys are in small firms or work alone. These attorneys will be able to provide better and cheaper services if the cases are freed from the "proprietary" citation system. Furthermore, once all the cases are scanned and in the database, how long do you think it will take the open community to work out a search tool that rivals (and then surpasses) that provided by West/Lexis???? I say it happens very quickly. Once that search tool can search a true database of all the case law needed, with authoritative citations possible (only West and Lexis offer this right now) then there will be much less reason to use the proprietary providers (only their proprietary content, like headnotes, etc., will be unique).

I for one am very excited for the future.

I was waiting for Harry Potter.

But are people really creeped out by the video? Way too short for me . . .

Oh, so the internet really IS all porn!

Oh, I'm definitely a flying monkey, right out of Wayne's butt!

http://www.moviewavs.com/php/sounds/?id=bst&media=MP3S&type=Movies&movie=Waynes_World"e=monkeys.txt&file=monkeys.mp3

teehee

But when do we get a team poster that ACTUALLY includes Joel?

Never attribute to malice that which can be explained by stupidity.

Similarly, trial in the press is never fair. He'll have his day in court, and either find vindication or conviction.

Either way, I feel bad for the guy. It must have been horrific to see the beautiful bird fall, and I believe him when he says he regretted his actions as soon as he hit it.

Is it just me, or is Cory totally not looking at the camera (unlike the other three)? Is it the glasses? Anyone else see that?

FWIW: http://biz.yahoo.com/special/allbiz101106_article3.html

Something kike this would be great to keeps kids off the power bar. We have ours jammed behind desks, etc. Not very convenient.

I'm no drug law expert, but was simple possession illegal when he pulled his stunt? When DID he pull that stunt, anyway? And did he intend it the way it is being spun, or did he simply go for a cruise for a little privacy before tok'n?

Of course if all the thing did was surveillance, noise, lights, and no water or other touching, I'd be all for it! Especially if he could control it from inside his bar.

So the guy is a genius of either super hero or villain category? How about crazy!?!?

Even vagrants and ne'er-do-wells should be able to figure this scheme out pretty quick, and they'll be after him pretty quick -- and he has no armor plating. Plain stupid, if you ask me, and as it can't possibly have any lasting effect, hardly worth the effort.

Plus, its true, he is assaulting AND battering his victims, and he could be prosecuted.

For all these reasons, I'm betting this article effectively puts an end to the operation.

Woo hoo! Lang's a family friend, and a really cool guy. Check out this "interview" (admittedly, some kind of an ad or endorsement for/of Apple):
http://www.apple.com/science/profiles/origami/?sr=hotnews

Nicely articulated, Teapunk.
And in reply to Zuzu and Antinous, if I knew that Tesanovic's position was outside the pigeonholes and in limbo, I'd be happy. I don't care what she says her position is, I would just like to know what she says. So far, it seems no one knows.

@ Antinous

It's not possible to debate in different languages, so I have no reply.

@ Antinous
One can't help but push ones agenda. So why hide your hand?
If your primary goal is to convey what is actually happening, then tell people what your tertiary agendas are so that they can judge your reporting fully.
You can't help but take a position (including one in the middle). Just because it is hard to change doesn't mean it shouldn't be taken--just the opposite, in fact.
"Because questions are more valuable than answers when the answers involve the military." I don't understand this.
"Because the whole crisis is essentially psychological in nature (You're stealing our national identity! No, you're stealing our national identity!)" Maybe it starts here, but those riot police weren't worrying about the psychology . . .
"Because reporting it subjectively is less likely to lead to war." I don't agree. I don't think the subjectivity/objectivity of reporting has much corellation to whether or not it contributes to the start of a war.

@ #7 Antinous: How is the lack of a political statement helpful?

I very much appreciate the fact that Tesanovic seems to be focusing on the emotions of the situation, which surely deserve much attention. But I would still like to know what she thinks. Her last post included something about a grandmother (mother?) charging her with protecting Kosovo (I think). I'm interested to know if she meant to protect it by helping it secede or by keeping it united with Serbia. Also, if she is recognizing the right of Serbs to mourn the loss, a very empathetic thing to recognize, I'd like to know whether she was able to see this despite wanting to see Kosovo free, or whether it is just a part of the opposite position.

I'm not reading her post as art, but as a conversation, and in that conversation I would be saying, "Wait, do you think it is right for Kosovo to be free, or not?" Maybe it doesn't matter as a piece of art, but I read it as more than that.

Could someone fill me in here: is Tesanovic for or against Kosovo's independence?

@ #10 mechfish
But given that the film is essentially stop motion, I assume made by cutting out everything but the peak of each jump, the camera would have to be perfectly still not to feel jumpy. Seems unavoidable to me.

Yeah, I don't get the deleting posts thing either, but I have to agree with SUS #30 above.

I also agree with Joel -- I'm stuck with Vista at the moment, and as a basic word processing, internet browsing, user, its serving me just fine!

That's really clever and must have taken a lot of work. The Kounen film is even better!

@ #38 that's sick and not even funny. An 8 month old would be in far more danger than the cat, and even if it was staged, how is that comparable to sacrificing a child a wild animal???

I wonder if this was filmed in Florida. Growing up in the north I was always told a racoon was nocturnal and was obviously sick if out during the day. I was in Florida one time, however, and saw a skinny racoon during the day, and a park ranger told me that because it is warm and food plentiful all year in Florida the racoons never bulk up or hibernate and don't adhere to the nocturnal thing as much. Who knew!

@ 7 AND 8
Ex post facto also only applies to criminal punishments, not civil ones.
Many states have prohibitions on laws that target specific people or companies. This is different from the ex post facto prohibition, and there is no such limitation on Congress (although the Constitution prevents them from interfering in private contracts).

@ #22 BDGBILL
As a husband of a Mommy-bot, while in some women the phenomenon might be bot-ish, I know that my wife's change is solely the result of the demands of her desire to care for our son to the best of her ability. Socializing with other moms is the best way to gain advice and perspective. Its the thing she talks about most because she spends the most time and energy at it -- but she can talk about other things. There's really nothing strange going on for most women. Its just the effect of a very intense job -- childrearing.

Hear, hear, err, wait -- LOL :)

But seriously, the sellout crowd is taking this way, way too far. If this is selling out, then I would have to go back to Joel's point -- only those in Yurts, or tipis, or igloos, for that matter, are not sellouts in this world. Somewhere in the supply chain of most of the things you depend on in your cushy modern life has something that is bad for the environment, safety as an ideal form, and communal living (what did I leave out . . . poetry?)

My dearest hope is the Cory and Mark and Xeni et al are able to get as many good laughs out of these baseless rants as they deserve -- along with the Honda money.

Hear, hear, Joel.

@ #34
We're all consumers when we read the site. Might not be the best argument, but I don't think it is spurious to celebrate the fact that my favorite Boing Boing editors can make a living doing what i like seeing them do.

I see what you're saying, but I don't think any company, or any person, can say anything about "supporting the environment" without it being hypocritcal -- at least not with the super-broad definition of "the environment" that is en vogue. As far as self-censorship, I guess I see no problem with the concern, but in my judgment it is not a significant risk in this context.

About safety: why do we have to read the sponsorship to mean that Honda creates "safety" in its ideal form? I'm sure all Honda is worried about is making each car safer than the last. In this context, its an admirable aspiration and one that Honda, unlike some car companies, is entitled to.

@ #14 -- your loss.

@ #16 -- Huh? Anyway, as all dreams are aspirational, what's wrong with Honda aspiring to be better than it is?

@ #17 -- yep, a straw man from the devil's advocate.

As others have noted, there are much worse companies out there than Honda, for heaven's sake. Further, the only content change this could possibly have created is use of three specific tags -- which are general enough they (or some synonym) surely would have already been a part of Boing Boing. Do you honestly think that any of these editors would be persuaded to change their content solely for the benefit of an advertiser? Furthermore, the ads mean more living for the editors, and therefore, more Boing Boing! This is such a ridiculous thing to get upset about.