Author: David Euchner/Nigel Maywood <maywood@world2u.com> at
          -Internet
    Date: 3/12/97  10:39 AM
Priority: Normal
     BCC: CITATION at AO-OCPPO
      TO: citation@ao.uscourts.gov at -Internet
 Subject: Put court decisions on Internet

     I am writing in order to show my support for an electronic 
database on the Internet containing all court decisions in the United 
States.

     West's intent to stifle the conversion of these documents from 
print to the Internet is quite understandable, considering how much 
they have to lose if such an event occurs. But what is not 
understandable nor acceptable is their gifts (shall we call them 
bribes?) to judges who at that very moment have cases involving 
copyright protection to West's materials. West granted these bribes 
with the sole intent of influencing the judges' decisions in these 
cases, a felony crime. If West's allegations that "everyone else is 
doing it" are indeed true, that still does not excuse them or anyone 
else from the laws, which are supposed to be objective.

     West held a de facto monopoly in this market for most of the 
century because no competitors could rise to their level of success. 
This does not mean that West has a right to maintain that monopoly at 
any cost; only that as long as no other worthwhile competitors exist, 
they should maintain it.

     The Internet is the single greatest social discovery of this 
century. It allows people anywhere in the world to communicate with 
each other at no cost other than the monthly cost of their service. 
It allows people to find any document in the world in a matter of 
seconds and at no additional cost. That is, any document in the 
world except for decisions by courts in the United States, which cost 
$4 per minute on Lexis/Nexis or Westlaw.

     West's allegations that their representation of the facts 
warrant copyright protection is totally absurd. The judges (and 
their clerks) write the entire opinion, with the exception of a 
paragraph at the beginning and the West Key references. It should be 
obvious to all that West itself does even believe its own arguments; 
otherwise, why would they find the need to bribe the judges hearing 
these cases?

     These are public documents owned by the people and owed to the 
people. Unfortunately this has become just another sad example of 
how special interests can easily buy political power and how 
politicians and judges totally forget about objectivity and rights of 
American citizens when there is a wad of money in front of them. 

     I left law school after completing two years because I was 
taught that these practices were acceptable in our legal system, a 
premise I continue to fight. The right thing to do in this case is 
to let West battle the Internet with no interference at all from the 
government. That is the only way to see who can provide the 
best service at the lowest cost to the consumer. I know that the 
Internet would win such a battle, but I do not wish for the rules of 
battle to be drawn in a way that favors either competitor. Please 
remove the constraints on the Internet which were put there by West 
and the public officials they bribed.

                                   David Euchner 
                                   Rutgers 
                                   University School of Law 1994-1996