<?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: Radical Trust and Legal Information</title>
	<atom:link href="http://sarahglassmeyer.com/?feed=rss2&#038;p=329" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://sarahglassmeyer.com/?p=329</link>
	<description>in perpetual beta</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2010 19:20:04 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Mikhail Koulikov</title>
		<link>http://sarahglassmeyer.com/?p=329&#038;cpage=1#comment-652</link>
		<dc:creator>Mikhail Koulikov</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 07 Feb 2010 20:39:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sarahglassmeyer.com/?p=329#comment-652</guid>
		<description>&lt;i&gt;Can someone please explain to me what steps that free information providers like Justia, the Legal Information Institute and Public Resource – or even Google Scholar – need to be taking so that they are given the same respect as Lexis and Westlaw?&lt;/i&gt;

At least in my mind, mostly, they just need to be able to stick around for another dozen years. Right now, good as they are, they are still at the &#039;good idea&#039; stage, but the response they get is generally along the lines of &#039;why should I trust a good idea with five years of track record over a good idea with thirty years of track record.&#039;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><i>Can someone please explain to me what steps that free information providers like Justia, the Legal Information Institute and Public Resource – or even Google Scholar – need to be taking so that they are given the same respect as Lexis and Westlaw?</i></p>
<p>At least in my mind, mostly, they just need to be able to stick around for another dozen years. Right now, good as they are, they are still at the &#8216;good idea&#8217; stage, but the response they get is generally along the lines of &#8216;why should I trust a good idea with five years of track record over a good idea with thirty years of track record.&#8217;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Glassmeyer on Radical Trust &#38; Legal Information &#171; Legal Informatics Blog</title>
		<link>http://sarahglassmeyer.com/?p=329&#038;cpage=1#comment-569</link>
		<dc:creator>Glassmeyer on Radical Trust &#38; Legal Information &#171; Legal Informatics Blog</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Jan 2010 20:13:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://sarahglassmeyer.com/?p=329#comment-569</guid>
		<description>[...] Glassmeyer on Radical Trust &amp; Legal&#160;Information By legalinformatics  Sarah Glassmeyer, Reference and Access Services Librarian at the University of Kentucky College of Law, has written an interesting post about the authentication of digital legal information, entitled Radical Trust an.... [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Glassmeyer on Radical Trust &amp; Legal&nbsp;Information By legalinformatics  Sarah Glassmeyer, Reference and Access Services Librarian at the University of Kentucky College of Law, has written an interesting post about the authentication of digital legal information, entitled Radical Trust an&#8230;. [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
