I understand from various sources that preparations are well advanced for the annual meeting of the Canadian Association of Law Libraries. Among other things, the meeting offers an invaluable platform for legal publishers and law librarians to share information with each other.
A key element of the preparation for the meeting is the annual request for information on the anticipated price increases that the library community can expect in the coming year. The issue of price increases is a critical element in planning and budgeting and gives the library purchaser a useful guideline for use in budget presentations and in making the decisions made to acquire, cancel or update subscription product.
At one time, the decision to discuss pricing trends at the CALL annual meeting was an innovative way of obtaining information from legal publishers. Over time it has become almost a ritual as gracious questions presented by law librarians in a respectful and unthreatening manner are responded to with vague generic answers by legal publishers. Perhaps the time has come to have a meaningful dialogue on the subject of pricing.
Price Trends 2010
Steven Mathews and Shaunna Mireau in an earlier post provided the following report based on information gathered from legal publishers on proposed 2010 price increases which every company except Irwin Law, SOQUIJ and Wilson Lafleur proposed to implement:
It is an established tradition for the Vendors Liaison Committee to share pricing trends at this time of year. Here are the various publisher price trend predictions that the Committeee has assembled:
Canada Law Book is advising a 3% to 6% price increase for print and electronic products.
Carswell price increases will be in the 5-7% range for print products.
CCH Legal/Business/Tax subscription products will increase approximately 3-9%. The price increase for Legal/Business books available in print should be in the 2-5% range and for our Tax books in a 5-10% range for 2010.
Éditions Yvons Blais price increase for books should be in the 3-5% range. The increase for online products is in the range of 3-7%.
Emond Montgomery Publications price increases will be selective and will not exceed 2-5%.
Irwin Law has no major increase planned. They continue to produce quality books at a fair value so that their authors get a decent royalty and the company gets a fair return. Books are shipped by Canada Post and therefore this cost will be affected by increases by Canada Post.
LexisNexis products will increase on average in the range of 4-5% next year.
SOQUIJ has confirmed they do not expect any increase for 2010.
Wilson Lafleur does not plan any price increases in 2010
Pricing realities
The information provided by the legal publishers raises a number of questions. First and foremost is whether the publishers in fact did increase their prices in the manner projected in 2009. Economic and market conditions have changed since those projections were made and prices in particular have been affected. The question generally assumed that there would be price increases, but was that the case? Throughout 2009 and continuing into 2010, the market for legal information has been characterized by intense competition as the major online publishers challenge each other for market share. It is arguable that price competition for online information is now a permanent feature of the market. In such circumstances, prices likely declined or remained unchanged.
Historically, increases in usage drove the annual price increases of online services. Usage figures are still something that publishers bring to the attention of customers when renewing a subscription but it no longer has the punch it once did. In today’s market, increased usage is more likely to be an argument for simply maintaining a subscription that might otherwise be cancelled.
What constitutes a price increase? In the online environment, that is a valid question. If a publisher provides significantly more content and improved functionality for the same price, or at a slightly higher price, the reality is that the price of the component parts is effectively reduced. In the current market, price increases for online products are usually accompanied by a significant increase in the content made available to the customer. Is a price change of this character really an increase in the price?
Prices vary by publisher expectations and by product type
The publishers objective with respect to pricing varies by product. Is the publisher seeking to grow revenue by selling more copies? If so, the price will have to be attractive to the customer. Think of the three main English language annotated criminal codes that offer more and more content at the same price year after year. Statute consolidations are also constant in price.
Alternatively, the publisher may view a product as a mature product that has a limited life expectancy. Pricing theory suggests that such products be harvested for all they are worth in the short term because there will be no long term. Many print law reports fall into this category. Simply calculate the amount that is charged per case in every bound volume and compare the cost of accessing that same case in any other format. The difference is staggering.
The publisher may be seeking to “inspire” the customer to migrate from one format to another. In such a case, the price may vary dramatically according to the format. The major legal encyclopedias cost more in print than they do online. CD ROMs on the other hand are generally included as give aways with the print.
New publications and new editions of existing publications
The question that needs to be asked regarding new print treatises, or new editions of established treatises, is not whether there is a price increase of some kind, but rather how the publisher establishes its base price for treatises and monographs. In general, the price is based upon a combination of a price per page with an estimate of the number of copies certain to be sold. The per page price of a new editions of established treatises by major authors are generally at the higher end of the scale. It is a legitimate question to ask what is the per page price being charged for a publication. With a baseline established, it is then possible to determine if there has in fact been a significant increase in the price of secondary content year over year.
When I was active in legal publishing, I always wondered why law societies and bar associations were exempted from the survey on prices. In general, they have the highest per page prices with the lowest level of editorial value added. These publications are used as a source of revenue for the organizations that publish them and represent a significant part of the budget of many law firm libraries. Consideration should be given to including them in this year’s survey. CANLII/LexUM might also be a candidate if in fact there is any plan to add a complementary fee for service component to their product line, as is rumoured in publishing circles.
New ideas on pricing?
Do publishers or librarians have any new ideas on pricing? Given the current economic conditions and the pressures faced by both law libraries and legal publishers, it might be desirable to consider new approaches to pricing. Some ideas that I previously have suggested include the following:
On the publishers side, why not introduce once a year annual updating of the entire contents of a loose leaf service for a fixed price? Why not offer to update all of an institutional library’s looseleaf holdings on an annual or biannual basis for a fixed price? Why not do the same on an annual basis for new hard bound titles?
On the libraries side, why not assess your information needs and approach publishers for new deals for updating entire collections of loose leaf services in print?
At the end of the day…
In my experience, the answer to any questions about price increases is always a political one. Publishing executives meet, consider the matter with care and make a careful decision to say what any price increase will be, or whether there will be any price increase at all. An announcement is then made of a figure that the publisher believes will be acceptable to the research community. More often than not, the figure is forgotten until the following year at CALL when the question is asked again.
Actual prices are set for most products on an ongoing basis throughout the year and reflect the revenue needs of the executives and the businesses more than anything else. Overall, I believe that average pricing including both print and online in 2009 fell short of the publishers projections and will do so again in 2010. When everything is taken into account, prices were likely flat year over year and revenue growth for legal information publishers was marginal at best. However, that is not information that most legal publishers would be prepared to share.
In any event, the reality is that pricing is ultimately determined by what the publisher believes to be what the market will bear. These days, that is not very much.
Pharmacy Benefits Managers (PBMs), pharmaceutical companies and government payors have all expressed a shared goal: getting “the right treatment, to the right patient, the first time.” Doing so would improve care (personalized medicine) and decrease costs (c0mparative effectiveness). However, as industry players try to connect their employees, patients and customers with personalized treatments, they will sometimes be intercepted by the Genetic Information Nondiscrimation Act, other privacy legislation, or plain old public mistrust.
Teva is a winner even with health reform stalled, since it filed a full biologics license application (BLA) for Neupoval last year. The BLA asks the FDA to ignore the fact that Neupoval is a copy of Amgen’s already-approved drug Neupogen and treat Neupoval as if it was an entirely new drug. This week, the FDA accepted Teva’s filing for review, allowing the company to proceed without needing new legislation (though Teva is still a long way from the plane of the goal line).
The moral of this week’s story is: “politically fragile biosimilars pathways are best ignored”… or “education is the key to personalized effectiveness”… or maybe “every cloud has a silver lining.” Yep, that’s it. So, stay tuned to the Cross-Border Biotech Blog for regular packets of optimism (even though they still mosey along at 54Mbps).
I’d like to share a new website we soft-launched today for our client Jonathan Rosenfeld. As you can probably guess from the URL, the site is US-based and provides State-by-State collections of Nursing Home injury laws.
Our approach to this website was a bit different than we normally take. Right from the outset, we considered it a collection rather than simply another lawyer website. On the design side, the interface is very browse-centric, with a map graphic driving the homepage navigation. Once you drill down into the State pages (See Illinois as an example), the site identifies negligence and wrongful death laws, and whether there is an applicable Statue of Limitations or Damages Cap for each State. These pages also include links to State laws, general resource links, and any related posts from Jonathan’s blog.
This is project we’ve been working on for a few months now, and stemmed from Jonathan’s wanting to do “something different”. He already had a blog, along with one of our FAQ collections, and wanted to carry forward with a similar approach. As many Slaw readers can guess, personal injury law can be a very difficult practise to market. Especially when the goal is to avoid digital ‘ambulance chasing’, and to promote oneself in a professional manner.
Like most websites, this offering will continue to be a work in progress. If you have feedback on features or content that might be added, I’m happy to hear suggestions.
Nada Khirdaji has an interesting piece on her transition from legal research skills in law school to research skills in practice in CCH’s law student monthly,
Law school helped me to think like a lawyer, but it was only in practice that I began to appreciate the essential role of legal research. In fact, much to my chagrin, I remember derisively dismissing an optional course in advanced legal research on the assumption that it would be of little use to me.
I am now a research lawyer. Everything that I know about legal research I learned in practice. I am a generalist (with a growing specialization in class actions) and I provide legal advice in all areas of my firm’s practice. I write opinions, memoranda and facta, among other things. I am constantly asked to provide answers in areas of law that I know virtually nothing about.
Her tips are pretty useful, considering how quickly students and recent grads turn to databases and resources that are not always the most cost-effective or efficient. The implications of a more streamlined research work process is better service for the client, and less stress on the young associate.
You’ll find the relevant documents from the United Nations, as well as those from the various and lesser-known (here) regional organizations, such as the Economic Community of West African States and the South Asian Association for Regional Co-Operation.
The Center also offers student research assistance to judges confronting issues of gender-based violence, though whether the offer would extend to judges outside the United States is unclear.
If one has a weak password for one’s web-based personal information, is it reasonable to conclude that one has a reduced expectation of privacy with respect to that information?
(Here’s an English list (from 2006) of the 10 most common password and a list of the 500 worst ones, from the point of view of security.)
If someone uses “password” as his or her password, should he or she really be able to claim some privacy interest in the information behind it?
What about file sharing? If one has files or folders or most of one’s computer accessible to peer-to-peer sharing, does one still have some expectation of privacy in the contents somewhere?
Does it matter that unauthorized use of computer resources is illegal? In a prosecution for that offence, one cannot claim authority because of a weak password. After all, it is illegal to trespass on property if there’s a plain, non-threatening sign saying ‘do not trespass’ or ‘keep off’, even without a fence. (For that matter, many trespass laws bar trespass if the trespasser ought to have known the property was private, even without a sign or fence.) Is trespass a good analogy for privacy infringement?
Presumably one does not sacrifice one’s privacy by using P2P just because some uses of P2P may violate copyright (and some don’t).
Enough speculation: do you know of any case law or privacy officer decisions based on such reasoning? I don’t, but maybe I haven’t looked hard enough.
I know that the various governors of the legal profession (law societies, bar associations etc) tend to say that use of email generally or even unencrypted email does not waive any expectation of privacy, and, more important (perhaps), does not negate any privilege in the documents communicated by this method. Lawyers are advised to discuss communications security with their clients (and the subtle advisors warn that the clients may not be very knowledgeable about that topic, and one can’t hide behind that ignorance to establish a permission); but the general rule is that ordinary, unencrypted email is OK. VPNs and Extranets are generally considered OK too — which takes us back to the first question: does it matter how secure the password protection is for such networks?
Any relevant case law on the legal profession’s share of the question?
A shocking school slaying rendered sterile in court
Christie Blatchford, who should know better, complained that the Crown’s opening statement “managed to render murder dull.” She wrote:
This is modern Canadian justice, where even such a shocking killing is rendered sterile, the poor victim barely given a nod, all in the name, presumably, of a prosecution so measured that no one will ever again be wrongfully convicted – or at least not because a Crown attorney thundered inappropriately and inflamed a jury.
and
Against all odds, the real-life principals of Law & Order Canada, undoubtedly following all the correct legal principles to the letter, have managed to render murder dull.
“Presumably” to avoid wrongful conviction? “Sterile”? Sterile for whom? The judge? The jury? Certainly not for the judge. Ms. Blatchford might have had a point if her purpose was to suggest that that the opening was so dull that it might have resulted in the jury not paying attention. However, there’s no reason to believe that was her point. If it was, she didn’t say that. As such, I think it correct to conclude that she didn’t mean “so dull that the judge and jury missed the point”.
Would Ms. Blatchford have complained in the manner she did if the victim of the killing was an admitted serial killer?
With all due respect to Ms. Blatchford, trials should be dull (in the entertainment sense) and even more so trials for murder. The purpose the “Law & Order” TV franchise is entertainment not truth. The purpose of the real criminal law & order franchise – the justice system – is truth.
It seems to me that, rather than complaining, the Globe & Mail and Ms. Blatchford ought to have commended the Crown for avoiding sensationalism, for honoring the standards of proper prosecutorial conduct in the pursuit of justice even if the result was that the Crown’s opening statement was, for her “dull”.
The comments about the article, on the Globe website, make the same points, albeit more pointedly and in fewer words. There are 5 shown under the “latest comments” heading.
Jurriaan de Reu recently mentioned the implications of Google Social Search for SEO. The new Google feature will provide higher results based on the reviews and commentary of your friends on various social media platforms.
Essentially this is the same concept as the traditional word-of-mouth marketing, but conducted online instead. When someone mentions their experience with a specific product, brand or service (including lawyers) on a social media platform, their contacts will get those informal reviews at the top of their searches when looking for similar topics.
The feature will only work if you are logged into your Google Profile account, but as the company increasingly becomes the one-stop shop for everything, including e-mail, calendar, video, maps and more, that will almost become standard practice.
De Reu concludes,
The new Google feature will therefore not only have a great impact on SEO itself, but also on a company’s online reputation. Connections on social media platforms will be even more influential in the information we use to make decisions as whether to book a flight with airline A or B, or to trust our savings with bank C or D. Yet another reason to start listening what these contacts are saying online and built relationships that help to give them the best online customer experience you can offer.
Updates
The Wall Street Journal reports that Google might be getting into the social media game directly:
Google Inc. is taking a swipe at Facebook Inc. with a new feature that makes it easier and faster for users of Gmail to view media and status updates shared by their friends.
Google could announce the new Gmail feature as soon as this week, said people familiar with the matter. A Google spokeswoman declined to comment.
Two weeks ago, while watching the NFL playoffs, I upgraded the OS on my home laptop (a Lenovo T60p) to Windows 7 Professional from Vista Business.
The upgrade went quickly, smoothly, and without a hitch. I haven’t had a problem since. The screen image from the instructional video – which I have yet to need – was captured with the Windows 7 native screen capture tool, called the “Snipping Tool”. It’s very easy to use.
When will I recommend that move at the office, where all of our machines run on Windows XP? Where the common core of all of our Microsfot software does not yet include any flavour of Office 2007 software? Not tomorrow, anyway, but that’s nothing more than a current “don’t fix what ain’t broke” premise when there’s, as yet, no need to begin.
In that vein, the two new laptops I ordered both have Win XP installed and the word processing software will be the Office 2003 suite. Bear in mind that we do not have internal IT support – other than yours truly who’d prefer not to.
Even assuming one’s (computer) hardware is sufficient to run the Win 7 OS effectively, one of the current “inconveniences” in moving from Win XP to Win 7 is that it requires what is called a “clean install”. You can’t just install Win 7 over Win XP, with the installation process saving all of your existing settings. The installation process essentially wipes out what you had so that you will have to reinstall everything: applications and data.
That issue may well be the killer for many firms (law and otherwise) who do not have to upgrade, immediately, on a firm wide basis. This link is to an ABA Journal article that discusses some of the issues involved in the decision to upgrade. The article’s conclusion is:
With Windows 7 there are many positives, but I suspect the compelling reasons for a move (and they are important) will be the end of life of an aging XP and transition away from or avoidance of Vista.
If you plan to stay in the world of Windows, Windows 7 will likely be in your future sooner than later. You will want to do your homework, make a realistic plan and create an environment where success is likely.
When will you do so if technology is part of your mandate, your office runs on a Microsoft platform and the time comes to update?
Now for the relevance of the “truth in blogging (not)” part of the title to this post. Consider this recent review of the ABA article on a ”law marketing” blog whose proprietor asserts the sort of claims about successful advice that one would expect from a “law marketing” blog, successful or not. The caption for the post is “Why Windows 7 Will Bomb In Law Firms”. The second reason the blogger provides, including a quotation from the ABA Journal article is:
There is no compelling reason to get Windows 7. “As I researched this article, I actually found it difficult to put together a list of compelling features that might motivate someone to pay money and move,” Kennedy wrote
(emphasis in original)
Now let’s see what Mr. Kennedy wrote, which puts that quotation in context.
However, for most people, Windows XP just worked. There was simply no compelling reason to move, and to this day it is difficult to point to specific features in Vista that would motivate the average user to move from XP.
This “lack of compelling feature” issue might also prove to be a problem for Windows 7. As I researched this article, I actually found it difficult to put together a list of compelling features that might motivate someone to pay money and move.
On the other hand, Windows XP, released in 2001, is nearing its end of life. It’s quite old in operating system years, and it has its own set of issues. For example, instead of getting a cup of coffee the next time you start up XP, take a stopwatch and see how long it takes to fully boot up.
I suggest you read the ABA article for yourself. As to the “law marketing” blogger, well, maybe he is as successful as he claims to be. I have no idea. And less interest in finding out.
Those who aren’t Apple iPad“icolytes” will enjoy this YouTube video and probably agree with this article. Those who are the former should, too, even if they don’t agree.
Ahem, Steve: the idea is to go smaller, not bigger. You can call me when you develop a folding iPad, like this or better, like this.
My view, for now? The iPad is too big to play “closies” with, even if I could find another adult who remembers how to play the game. And a paper matches book is a cheaper and better solution for a wobbly restaurant table leg.
Addendum: On the third hand, is the iPad proof that Moties exist? Is Apple hiding a caste of Motie “Engineers” or “Watchmakers”?
I guess it was just a matter of time. IT World posted an article today by Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols (sjvn@vna1.com) entitled: “Can you trust Chinese computer equipment?”
While this may seem like the musings of a hyper-active Homeland Security Department, it is based on MI5’s report in The Times Online “China bugs and burgles Britain” that the Chinese Government has given British executives equipment with security holes.
The Times Online article contains a chilling paragraph in discussing a report on these incidents:
Written by MI5’s Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure, the 14-page “restricted” report describes how China has attacked UK defence, energy, communications and manufacturing companies in a concerted hacking campaign.
It claims China has also gone much further, targeting the computer networks and email accounts of public relations companies and international law firms. “Any UK company might be at risk if it holds information which would benefit the Chinese,” the report says.
It would seem that there is no reason to suspect that if this behaviour is going on, that it would be restricted to UK companies and executives.
The Times further states:
In 2007 Jonathan Evans, the director-general of MI5, had written privately to 300 chief executives of banks and other businesses warning them that their IT systems were under attack from “Chinese state organisations”.
There have been unconfirmed reports that China has tried to hack into computers belonging to the Foreign Office, nine other Whitehall departments and parliament.
Well – instead of trying to hack your way in, what better way to get into sensitive data than by placing the trojans directly into the computer equipment being manufactured in China? That is the thrust of the IT World article.
For anyone who handles confidential data, and here I am speaking of lawyers in particular, (such as those who handle proposed mergers and acquisitions, sensitive patents and other commercially-valuable transactions) the thought that we may be using equipment that allows a foreign government to read the secrets of our clients is a real threat to client confidentiality and commercial activity. Our clients may have first-class computer security surrounding their sensitive commercial information, but can they rely on their lawyers to have equally robust security systems?
Most people would scoff at this, stating that international companies would not build such trojans and back-doors into their hardware.
But that’s not the most serious misuse of a telecommunications surveillance infrastructure. In Greece, between June 2004 and March 2005, someone wiretapped more than 100 cell phones belonging to members of the Greek government — the prime minister and the ministers of defense, foreign affairs and justice.
Ericsson built this wiretapping capability into Vodafone’s products, and enabled it only for governments that requested it. Greece wasn’t one of those governments, but someone still unknown — a rival political party? organized crime? — figured out how to surreptitiously turn the feature on.
I don’t know about you – but something don’t feel right..I just might be paranoid.
One of the great funny men of all time, in my opinion, was George Carlin — he’s famous for his Seven Words You Can Never Say on Television, the “hippie-dippie weatherman,” and many trenchant routines satirizing the powers that be.
Towards the end of his life he had a routine about being “a modern man, a man for the millennium.” It consisted of a lengthy string of clichés delivered at a machine-gun pace from memory without a slip, a true tour de force.
Here’s the video, followed by a transcript so that you, too, can practice telling the world who/what/how you are.
I’m a modern man, a man for the millennium. Digital and smoke free. A diversified multi-cultural, post-modern deconstruction that is anatomically and ecologically incorrect. I’ve been up linked and downloaded, I’ve been inputted and outsourced, I know the upside of downsizing, I know the downside of upgrading. I’m a high-tech low-life. A cutting edge, state-of-the-art bi-coastal multi-tasker and I can give you a gigabyte in a nanosecond!
I’m new wave, but I’m old school and my inner child is outward bound. I’m a hot-wired, heat seeking, warm-hearted cool customer, voice activated and bio-degradable. I interface with my database, my database is in cyberspace, so I’m interactive, I’m hyperactive and from time to time I’m radioactive.
Behind the eight ball, ahead of the curve, ridin the wave, dodgin the bullet and pushin the envelope. I’m on-point, on-task, on-message and off drugs. I’ve got no need for coke and speed. I’ve got no urge to binge and purge. I’m in-the-moment, on-the-edge, over-the-top and under-the-radar. A high-concept, low-profile, medium-range ballistic missionary. A street-wise smart bomb. A top-gun bottom feeder. I wear power ties, I tell power lies, I take power naps and run victory laps. I’m a totally ongoing big-foot, slam-dunk, rainmaker with a pro-active outreach. A raging workaholic. A working rageaholic. Out of rehab and in denial!
I’ve got a personal trainer, a personal shopper, a personal assistant and a personal agenda. You can’t shut me up. You can’t dumb me down because I’m tireless and I’m wireless, I’m an alpha male on beta-blockers.
I’m a non-believer and an over-achiever, laid-back but fashion-forward. Up-front, down-home, low-rent, high-maintenance. Super-sized, long-lasting, high-definition, fast-acting, oven-ready and built-to-last! I’m a hands-on, foot-loose, knee-jerk head case pretty maturely post-traumatic and I’ve got a love-child that sends me hate mail.
But, I’m feeling, I’m caring, I’m healing, I’m sharing– a supportive, bonding, nurturing primary care-giver. My output is down, but my income is up. I took a short position on the long bond and my revenue stream has its own cash-flow. I read junk mail, I eat junk food, I buy junk bonds and I watch trash sports! I’m gender specific, capital intensive, user-friendly and lactose intolerant.
I like rough sex. I like tough love. I use the “F” word in my emails and the software on my hard-drive is hardcore–no soft porn.
I bought a microwave at a mini-mall; I bought a mini-van at a mega-store. I eat fast-food in the slow lane. I’m toll-free, bite-sized, ready-to-wear and I come in all sizes. A fully-equipped, factory-authorized, hospital-tested, clinically-proven, scientifically- formulated medical miracle. I’ve been pre-wash, pre-cooked, pre-heated, pre-screened, pre-approved, pre-packaged, post-dated, freeze-dried, double-wrapped, vacuum-packed and, I have an unlimited broadband capacity.
I’m a rude dude, but I’m the real deal. Lean and mean! Cocked, locked and ready-to-rock. Rough, tough and hard to bluff. I take it slow, I go with the flow, I ride with the tide. I’ve got glide in my stride. Drivin and movin, sailin and spinin, jiving and groovin, wailin and winnin. I don’t snooze, so I don’t lose. I keep the pedal to the metal and the rubber on the road. I party hearty and lunch time is crunch time. I’m hangin in, there ain’t no doubt and I’m hangin tough, over and out!
An English court has refused an injunction against the publication of the story of an alleged affair between a well-known football player and a teammate’s girlfriend: Terry v. Persons Unknown[2010] EWHC 119 (QB).
English law has recently given a good deal of protection to the privacy of celebrities, so some people have wondered if that protection is being reduced by this decision. Out-law.com says No.
One of the reasons (among several) for refusing the injunction in this case was that the application appeared to aim at protecting the player’s commercial sponsorships, rather than in protecting his feelings (which are described as ‘robust’). The court distinguished between protecting privacy, which is OK because mentioned in the European Convention on Human Rights, and protecting reputation, which was not entitled to the same deference.
Given PIPEDA’s focus on commercial use of personal information, is this a distinction that would prevail in Canada? Does it make sense anyway?
And should the court have cared about the privacy or reputation of the other party to the alleged affair, though she was not a party to the application for an injunction?
A Times-Colonist report reveals the outdated, inconsistently applied, and sometimes mis-applied access to court records policy in a number of BC courts. It seems BC is way behind the curve on this, as compared to the rest of Canada. Today’s article is only the first of a four-part series. The article includes a link to an interactive Googlemap.
For the record, I don’t intend to buy one. At least, not for a few more years and not until the inevitable upgrades, improvements, fixes, and content distribution changes have run their course. But well before the iPad 3.o arrives, the original version will have had a serious impact on the computer industry, on the [...]
