Slaw news — for those who read Slaw only via RSS or email.

On the website now:

This week’s Maritime Law Book case summaries are up, precis on Slaw and full at cases.slaw.ca.

• Tucows.Com Co. v. Lojas Renner S.A. 2011 ONCA 548
• Martinez-Caro v. Canada (Minister of Citizenship and Immigration) 2011 FC 640
• Martin v. Interbooks Ltd. et al. SKQB 251
• Charter Building Co. v. 1540957 Ontario Inc. et al. 2011 ONCA 487

Thus far, seventy summaries in total are available on cases.slaw.ca. . . . [more]

Those of you who get your Slaw via email or RSS may not visit the website often enough to know that a little dot has caused a big fuss here at Slaw. Lexum’s post, “Are We to Live with Useless Periods Forever?,” has elicited 18 comments as of Friday noon. It’s always a puzzle to me what prompts a reader to comment, and I must say that I’m a little surprised that a proposal about a period has generated debate. At any rate, go and have a look at the discussion, and add your 2¢ if you feel . . . [more]

For those of you who read Slaw via RSS or email (and who don’t subscribe to the comments feed), let me point you to a discussion that you might like to visit. There are now fifteen considered and well-written comments on Yosie Saint-Cyr’s post on April 1: “Quebec Government Bill Upholds Gender Equality and Secularism.” Have a look; join the discussion. . . . [more]

Here’s the week’s update on what’s been happening in the comments and on the website, for those who follow us by RSS.

The winner in the comments sweepstakes was Connie Crosby’s LinkedIn Becoming More Powerful for Legal Industry Use, with 8 comments.

Ted Tjaden was a close runner up with the unlikely Jactitation of Marriage – The Unnecessary Legal Phrase of the Day, which garnered 6 comments, if you can believe it.

On the website itself we’ve put The Cromwell Pages back in the box: the links are gone from the front page but you can still read . . . [more]

Here’s an update about what’s happening on the website for those of you who read Slaw via RSS.

There are some discussion threads you might want to visit, if, like most of our readers you don’t subscribe to comments:

• Steve Matthews’ ABA Blawg Contest Rigged? has garnered 8 comments and is still counting.
• Ted Tjaden’s Legal Citation Question on Indicating Jurisdiction in Case Law Citations has just under a dozen comments, which, as Slawyer Alex Manevich said, may say something about us.
• Seven readers have contributed to the discussion of John Gregory’s Destroying Data

And as always there’s a bunch . . . [more]

If you follow us by RSS or email and don’t visit the website, you’ll likely be missing a couple of interesting conversations in the comments to recent posts. (You can, of course, subscribe to the comments either by email or RSS, though many readers haven’t yet done that.)

Alex Manevich’s post on arbitral awards and limitations periods has generated an interesting series of exchanges between him and John Gregory. Well worth taking a look.

And Dave Bilinsky’s post, Shouldn’t It Just Work?, sparked a bunch of comments on tablet PC’s.

So drop by the website for a good read. . . . [more]

Those who read us by RSS and don’t get the RSS comments feed might not know that an important aspect of the ABA Blawg100 feature is the chance to vote for your favourite blog in each category. Naturally, we’d be overjoyed if you’d vote for Slaw in the Technology category. It’s easy to do: either go to http://www.abajournal.com/blawgs/blawg100_2008/technology/ and scroll down to Slaw, or go to Slaw’s home page and click on the ruddy great VOTE FOR SLAW button at the top right. . . . [more]