<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Google Scholar &#8211; Free Case Law For Everyone!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.stlr.org/2009/11/google-scholar-free-case-law-for-everyone/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.stlr.org/2009/11/google-scholar-free-case-law-for-everyone/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 23:59:22 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: U.S. legal information from Google &#171; Library Notes for Political Science</title>
		<link>http://www.stlr.org/2009/11/google-scholar-free-case-law-for-everyone/comment-page-1/#comment-13740</link>
		<dc:creator>U.S. legal information from Google &#171; Library Notes for Political Science</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 14 Dec 2009 01:44:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stlr.org/?p=654#comment-13740</guid>
		<description>[...] However, unsurprisingly, Google does not offer the same level of search precision as legal giants like Lexis-Nexis, Westlaw, and Hein Online. In the case of Hein, at least, Google&#8217;s indexing is not complete (see details on the Hein Online blog). The tool is new, but legal librarians and researchers have offered some preliminary assessments, for example on Slaw and the Columbia Science and Technology Review. [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] However, unsurprisingly, Google does not offer the same level of search precision as legal giants like Lexis-Nexis, Westlaw, and Hein Online. In the case of Hein, at least, Google&#8217;s indexing is not complete (see details on the Hein Online blog). The tool is new, but legal librarians and researchers have offered some preliminary assessments, for example on Slaw and the Columbia Science and Technology Review. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andrew Gradman</title>
		<link>http://www.stlr.org/2009/11/google-scholar-free-case-law-for-everyone/comment-page-1/#comment-13650</link>
		<dc:creator>Andrew Gradman</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:38:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.stlr.org/?p=654#comment-13650</guid>
		<description>There is one awesome functionality that may currently be little known.  At the risk of sounding ungrateful, though, it could use some improvement.

Google Scholar is currently the only source of caselaw that permits you to embed search terms in a URL.  Thus, if you cite State v. Pittman, 943 P. 2d 713 for the proposition that, &quot;If you are dying from starving to death, the munchies can be critical&quot;, there is no resource other than google that permits you to &lt;a title=&quot;cite to the document AND highlight the cited text&quot; href=&quot;http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2268089450655213937&amp;q=%22If+you+are+dying+from+starving+to+death,+the+munchies+can+be+critical.%22&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2002&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;cite to the document AND highlight the cited text&lt;/a&gt;.  You can even &lt;a title=&quot;highlight multiple quotes within one document&quot; href=&quot;http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9738309099999149495&amp;q=%22The+original+seven+words+were,+shit,+piss,+fuck,+cunt,+cocksucker,+mother-fucker,+and+tits.%22+%22It%27s+in+the+Bible,+cock+in+the+Bible.%22+&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2002&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;highlight multiple quotes within one document&lt;/a&gt;.

Unfortunately, if you are citing a lengthier claim -- e.g. that &quot;I think almost everyone over the age of 15 in this society knows that marijuana makes you hungry. It causes the munchies. If you are dying from starving to death, the munchies can be critical&quot; -- &lt;a title=&quot;the character limit gets exceeded&quot; href=&quot;http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2268089450655213937&amp;q=%22I+think+almost+everyone+over+the+age+of+15+in+this+society+knows+that+marijuana+makes+you+hungry.+It+causes+the+munchies.+If+you+are+dying+from+starving+to+death,+the+munchies+can+be+critical.%22&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2002&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;the character limit gets exceeded&lt;/a&gt;.  This will prevent us from using this functionality to cite lengthy claims in documents.  That is a shame, because it would have brought legal citation closer into the way in which people actually use citations. (i.e. authors quote things, and readers want to verify those quotes or view them in context.)

As long as we&#039;re at it, it would be nice if you could put something into that URL so that the viewer jumps down to the search term (or to a pincite / paragraph of your choosing).

STLR, could you use your special connections with Sergey Brin and Barack Obama to make this happen?????</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is one awesome functionality that may currently be little known.  At the risk of sounding ungrateful, though, it could use some improvement.</p>
<p>Google Scholar is currently the only source of caselaw that permits you to embed search terms in a URL.  Thus, if you cite State v. Pittman, 943 P. 2d 713 for the proposition that, &#8220;If you are dying from starving to death, the munchies can be critical&#8221;, there is no resource other than google that permits you to <a title="cite to the document AND highlight the cited text" href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2268089450655213937&amp;q=%22If+you+are+dying+from+starving+to+death,+the+munchies+can+be+critical.%22&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2002" rel="nofollow">cite to the document AND highlight the cited text</a>.  You can even <a title="highlight multiple quotes within one document" href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=9738309099999149495&amp;q=%22The+original+seven+words+were,+shit,+piss,+fuck,+cunt,+cocksucker,+mother-fucker,+and+tits.%22+%22It%27s+in+the+Bible,+cock+in+the+Bible.%22+&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2002" rel="nofollow">highlight multiple quotes within one document</a>.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, if you are citing a lengthier claim &#8212; e.g. that &#8220;I think almost everyone over the age of 15 in this society knows that marijuana makes you hungry. It causes the munchies. If you are dying from starving to death, the munchies can be critical&#8221; &#8212; <a title="the character limit gets exceeded" href="http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=2268089450655213937&amp;q=%22I+think+almost+everyone+over+the+age+of+15+in+this+society+knows+that+marijuana+makes+you+hungry.+It+causes+the+munchies.+If+you+are+dying+from+starving+to+death,+the+munchies+can+be+critical.%22&amp;hl=en&amp;as_sdt=2002" rel="nofollow">the character limit gets exceeded</a>.  This will prevent us from using this functionality to cite lengthy claims in documents.  That is a shame, because it would have brought legal citation closer into the way in which people actually use citations. (i.e. authors quote things, and readers want to verify those quotes or view them in context.)</p>
<p>As long as we&#8217;re at it, it would be nice if you could put something into that URL so that the viewer jumps down to the search term (or to a pincite / paragraph of your choosing).</p>
<p>STLR, could you use your special connections with Sergey Brin and Barack Obama to make this happen?????</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
