Thomson Reuters (used to be Thomson West) has, in typical form, announced a new product and won’t tell us what they’re charging for it. It’s touted as the biggest update for Westlaw since its debut on the web, and it’s supposed to revolutionize legal research. You don’t search in databases, and you don’t focus on keywords. West’s query system is designed to figure out the area of law you are researching and produce relevant results. It’s apparently much more simple and intuitive and is being presented as more-Google-like, which I don’t necessarily take as good news (but can’t tell whether that’s just a marketing slogan).
So. My question, as a practitioner in a small firm: What’s it going to cost. I read through their website rolling out the product and got no clue. Like siding companies, they want to send out a salesman to close the deal rather than give me any advance information about this product.
I read through blog post after blog post looking for information. The first hint I saw was this post from the SLAW blog, which has a good preview of the product:
I’m not sure that the price which this service will cost is entirely justifiable for most clients and cases. For the Supreme Court, or a large piece of litigation which might justify the disbursement – obviously. Westlaw staff coyly talked about a modest premium on current costs but ducked questions on what sort of percentage that might be. This is consistent with the firm-by-firm contract negotiations that are conducted by the two dominant market players.
One blog post headed Westlaw Next: Product and Pricing didn’t provide a clue beyond this:
When we asked, point blank, what that price would be, the West representatives didn’t have a simple answer. Instead, they explained that the company’s sales reps will try to convince customers to add additional content to their subscriptions at the time of upgrade. When pressed as to whether the upgrade would be pegged at a certain percentage of the cost of a subscriber’s plan, West denied taking that approach.
That tells me nothing, except that they aren’t going to base the price on the plan currently in use. But there are a couple of clues out there. Several places say that there will be a “modest” price increase but don’t explain how. There’s this answer from a pricing question in an interview with Mike Dahn, Vice President of WestlawNext Product Development, on the Social Media Law Student blog:
We have simplified our pricing structure significantly and have tried to better align price with value. In WestlawNext, there is a single, low cost price for a search, and all searches are considered “in contract.” Viewing a document generates a charge that is either “in contract” or “out of contract” depending on your subscription.
Hmm. A “price for a search” but all searches are “in contract.” What does that mean? In Westlaw as it stands now, “in contract” means I don’t get “charges for a search.” Then this: “Viewing a document generates a charge” either “in” or “out” of contract. Are they saying here that we will be charged for searches and results, with the charges lower for results “in contract” than “out”? Doesn’t this sound suspiciously how Westlaw pricing began– charging for searches and results, a model that made it entirely unpredictable what you were spending, and made Westlaw far to expensive for small firms?!?
Here’s a couple of long preview posts (along with those linked above, particularly the SLAW post) for those wanting information about what we’re likely to get: AdamsDrafting blog (a transactional lawyer’s perspective), an ABA Journal article about Westlaw Next and what Lexis is doing to compete (which implies early that increased competition may eventually cause a price decrease but then says: “As of late December, West had not priced its new platform, but the company said when the platform is launched it will only be available as an upgrade.”), Robert Ambrogi’s blog.
h/t iPhone JD for the news of the launch and the Slaw, ABA Journal, and Ambrogi links.
“Area of law” rather than “database” seems to suggest finding lots of potentially interesting law from jurisdictions that are of no help whatsoever.
If I had to guess, I’d suspect that all they’re doing is refining their Key Number system so that it governs search results more often.
being presented as more-Google-like
Btw, I can’t tell you how many times I’ve wished I could search Google like Westlaw, with proximity connectors.
I share your frustration with West’s refusal to discuss any details about pricing for WestlawNext. In my post on the subject (which you’ve linked to), I suggest that solos crowdsource information on WestlawNext pricing, just as travelers share tips on how to get the best deals on sites like Priceline and Hotwire. While greater transparency from West would be ideal, I don’t think we’ll be seeing it any time soon.
As one of the bloggers who received a fairly in-depth briefing about WestlawNext, I can help clarify your confusion about in-plan and out-of-plan searches and document views. I’ll do that by providing an example.
Let’s assume that your WestlawNext subscription includes access to all Mississippi state and federal cases (including SCTOTUS), Mississippi statutes and some Mississippi secondary sources. When you do a search on WestlawNext, you can search in any jurisdiction you want, and there will be no charge for the search. This might be helpful if, for some reason, you need to research the law of a different state or federal circuit. You will not be charged to run this broad search or to view the result list; you’re charged only when you have a “meaningful interaction” with a particular document (e.g., printing).
Let’s assume now that you limit your search to Mississippi state and federal cases. As you can see from this screen shot http://lh4.ggpht.com/_iHYDAo93tQY/S2NlrCvorzI/AAAAAAAAGWU/5AbRSen075Q/s1600/result_list_1280.png , you’ll be able to view the search results in the main portion of the search results screen. If you have a “meaningful interaction” with any Mississippi state or federal cases in your search results, you will not be charged, since those materials are in-plan for you.
However, as you can see from the left and right columns in the screenshot, you will also be offered many other types of documents in your search results. Some of the documents may be in-plan. For example, under “Secondary Sources,” you may find sections from Mississippi secondary sources that are within your plan. You can access those documents at no charge. However, both Secondary Sources (on the left) and Related Documents (on the right) will likely also include many other sources (such as federal sources or national ones) that are outside your plan. You will incur a charge when you access those documents (after seeing a warning screen, just as you see a warning screen in the current version of Westlaw if you are about to go outside of plan). Entire categories of documents that are listed in the left sidebar (such as briefs) might be outside your plan (just as they are now).
The materials in the left- and right-hand sidebars in WestlawNext are somewhat analogous to what you currently see under the Results Plus column to the left of your search results in the current version of Westlaw. However, ResultsPlus is limited to about 300 sources, while the materials on WestlawNext cover more than 6,000 sources. Under both systems, you will be charged to access a document that is outside your plan (unless, of course, your current Westlaw subscription includes the Results Plus add-on, which brings any document accessed directly from the Results Plus list into plan: mine does, and I have found it to be worth the price). I still don’t know whether WestlawNext will offer a similar plan (I’ve asked my rep, but he won;t be prepared to talk to me about WestlawNext pricing at all until next week).
Finally, in her post about WestlawNext, Carolyn Elefant, who’s been the web’s most vocal voice on behalf of solos for more than seven years, said: “I want to pay for what I eat, not for all I can eat.” (http://www.myshingle.com/2010/01/articles/legal-research-and-writing/my-trip-out-to-west-a-preview-of-westlawnext/). I think a lot of solos feel the same way.
Sounds like they are imitating a competing product, about 11 years old now, called TheLaw.Net. It costs $575 per year, flat, for one lawyer and one assistant over all jurisdictions. I used it in its early years and looked at it again recently. It was good enough that I just cancelled my Westlaw subscription.
Thomson Reuters can dry up and die for the screwing they’ve been giving me. If I can get something elsewhere, I do now.
As the legal industry changes, especially the delivery of legal knowledge, so will the models of business whether it be in pricing, delivery, etc. Understanding your frustration with affordable legal resources that an attorney finds valuable in their practice, I would like to bring to your attention the MS Bar FormsPass program. Similar in nature to Fastcase and Casemaker, we are partnered with the Bar to provide a valuable service in support of attorneys in their daily work.
On a personal note, I spent a good many years up north going to school and McSorely’s is a personal favorite.
My westlaw rep is full of himself. He looked at my usage and said that if I paid for it without a plan it would be around $63,000 a year. I explained to him that for $30,000 I could find some half-wit with a cell phone to sit at the law library and be on call at all times to pull cases. Of course, this is their sales line to attempt to make me think I am getting value for $950 a month (or better).
Results Plus is somewhat helpful, but it was $200 a month with a two year contract. I found myself tailoring searches attempt to get law journal and treatises on the right side so I could click on them at no charge.
To make matters worse, West continually sends books – updates, new releases, random selections – that we send back. It is more of a hassle than a service. Billing is a nightmare.
Yes, I am jaded with West.
Lexis’s prices are not that much better. However, Lexis does offer Shepard’s with an option to retrieve the sources by clicking through the case links. This is around $150 – 200 a month. With Casemaker and Shepards, I believe I am getting a thorough search result. I can buy the specialty West publications (Griffith’s, etc…) in print. It makes for a more inexpensive personal law library than maintaining a West subscription. Besides, in the Jackson area there is always the state law library, MC or my county law library which has Lexis and provides printers with no additional charge for printing.
I was wondering if anyone had actually looked at or used theLaw.net. I have been getting their ads, and looked into the service somewhat. It looks like a pretty comprehensive site, but I worry about citations to things like rulings on summary judgment that are not published but that WL has.
Anyone out there, like somslawyer, have any experience they’d care to share with me re: theLaw.net?
Thank God Westlaw finally has some serious competition!
I recently wrote an article titled, “Does WestlawNext Really Change Everything: The Implications of WestlawNext on Legal Reserch.” In it I discuss its searching, pricing and other aspects. You can find the article at http://ssrn.com/abstract=1773767
I haven’t tried WestlawNext because I’m already hooked on regular Westlaw and it costs too damn much (everytime they send me a postcard threatening to raise the price even higher if I don’t sign another long-term contract I just think “make my day assholes; all I need is one more price increase before I tell you to go to hell”; and why are they threatening price increases in this economy?). Lexis is offering a comparable service for much less money and I’m really tempted to change.
Thanks for pointing out your article. I will definitely read it before I decide what to do.
Thanks for the article, Ron, I’ve just made it the subject of a post.
Give us a call Jane!!
A Lexis employee…