Evan Brown at InternetCases.com had some interesting comments on the use of Wikipedia by courts. Wikipedia is a sort of open source online encyclopedia. Despite the uncertain parentage of some of its postings, it could be an appropriate persuasive authority in some cases, and some courts have recognized this. One factor: Is the post in question ‘self-authenticating’ (i.e., is the information persuasive, independent of its source?). Another example: Is the point of the citation to demonstrate a common understanding of something? Thanks to Health Care Blog for the link.
Wikipedia itself lists many examples of courts citing it as an authority.
(Via Netlawblog.)
I can tell you this, if I asked one of my local judges to use Wikipedias as persuasive authority, all but one would look at me like I was an idiot. I can honestly say that maybe only one of my judges would know what they even are. But this is an interesting idea.
Technorati Tags:
Wikipedia
