 Thank you, Carl, for inviting me here. I thought for a while why I'm here. And I think part of the reason is that there's a big elephant in the room in these discussions, and that's the commercial legal information industry. And I think I'm here to tell you how big the elephant is, and maybe a little bit about where it's moving. And some of the directions it might take in light of all of the open access stuff that we're talking about. Carl mentioned that Outtel, the company where he is, the gardener of the legal industry, legal information industry. But actually, we're the gardener of the whole information industry, not just legal. And that's a big part of what we do in it, and a big part of what we can bring to this discussion is the understanding that we've learned from studying other segments of the information industry, such as scientific and medical and technical publishing, or the news industry, or market research industry, or all of the several sectors of the industry that we track. We're a research and analysis company that serves that industry. We collect data about publishers and their markets. We serve people in those companies, but we also serve clients among big content buyers, such as libraries, corporate libraries, and also academic and public libraries as well. We collect a lot of data about the different players, so in other words, all the companies that are in one way or another, a publisher or an information provider. And we serve our clients through a variety of services, including reports and data and analysis and sort of consulting type services. The way we do the industry is helping information companies grow their revenues, understand what's going on in the world, know where to move in the future. And so our focus is quite a bit on the established companies, the big name publishers that you all recognize. And we do a lot of research on their markets. So what's going on with end users? What trends do we see among end users? How much time do they spend using information? How much money do they spend using things like that? We also track the technologies that are going into the publishing industry and try to keep our clients up to date on that stuff. And one of the reasons this whole lot of initiatives interested to me is that we also keep track of destructive forces out there in the marketplace. Who are the destructive end users? What are the new business models that are coming along as a result of new technologies that are either threats or opportunities to a lot of the established players? So I thought I'd start by just taking, sort of, painting a picture of the legal information industry as we do it. And what are some of the dynamics in recent years? What are some of the things I see going on in the future? And just in terms of numbers, I want to do first paint a little context of the entire industry. So as I said, we track a lot of segments of the information industry. And the whole shebang is $365 billion worth. Of that, about $14.5 billion is legal. So legal is actually a fairly small segment of the overall information industry. And our $365 billion doesn't include some things like entertainment and entertainment-type content. It's mostly business-to-business publishers and sources. So in that context, legal is fairly small. The blue lines show the global revenues over the past few years and projected up to 2012. The sad-looking line in the middle is 2009, where the industry lost 8.5% of its value during the current recession. So there's a lot going on in the industry because of the global recession. It has definitely affected the publishing industry. But also, a lot of that effect is the result of technology and its constant push and pressures on the industry. So if we zoom in a little more on just legal, here's what it looks like. It's a little more flat. It's a little more stable than the overall industry. And if you ran this 2007 back to, say, 2002 or so, it's pretty flat. It's a pretty boring industry in terms of fluctuations in revenues. It's pretty stable. A lot of the revenues in the industry are subscription-based. And that helps even out fluctuations in the economy. But even so, 2009 was a tough year for the legal information industry. For the first year since we've been tracking it, it went negative. And we're expecting it to slowly recover. Actually, I think this might be a little optimistic for 2010 at 2% growth. But it'll eventually, I think, get back up to somewhere at a 5% range. If you extend this back, the growth rates were typically in the 5% to 7% every year. So that's what we're talking about. The legal tax and regulatory publishers of the world generate $14.5 billion in revenue. How is that split up among the various providers? Well, as you all know, there's three really big legal publishers in the world, Thompson Reuters, Walters Cluer, and Reed Elsevier, which owns Lexus Nexus. And together, they account for 75% of those $14.5 billion in revenue. And I think what's fascinating about this is that aside from the B&A here, and a couple of associations, probably not a lot of those players are familiar to a lot of us. And that says a lot that there's sort of nobody left out there for them, for the big three to acquire that you might recognize. If you look at that, if you take away this chunk, it kind of looks like a pac-man going after everybody else. And that's pretty much what happened over the past several decades, those three players have acquired quite a bit of the legal information market through acquisitions, but also through organic growth. It's not just that. So that's a picture of the market share with the three big players. Here's a little more specifics on how much revenue each of them has and how much the growth rates was like in 2009. It's a little bit tricky with growth rates because the big three players report their revenues in three different currencies. And currency fluctuations just make comparisons very difficult. And it's not just that they earn all their money in Europe, for example. You have less as nexus, which earns a lot of money over here reporting its revenues in pounds. And then we're converting it back into dollars. So there's a lot of stuff going on that makes it a little bit hard to compare growth rates, company to company. The reason we convert everything to dollars is just to have one currency that we can say, OK, here's how big the whole industry is. But if you wanted to compare company to company, it's a little more useful to go back to their native currencies and see what the growth in their native currency was. But anyway, having said that, and then also you see that there are some places that were more affected by currency growth than others. The actual growth rates of the rest of the top 10 were fairly flat across the board. But if you're in Japan, that means your revenues went up in dollars. But if you're in Europe, it means the currency exchange rates means your revenues went down in dollars. So that's a little tricky. And then the long tail of the industry is about $1.6 billion of all the companies, the revenues of all the companies that are smaller than this top 10. So that's the big picture. So of that $14 and 1 half billion in revenue, I think one of the questions that's relevant to this discussion is, if we're focused on, for the purposes of today, the US, and it's all about surfacing and making available primary legal documents, then one interesting question is, OK, how much of that $14 and 1 half billion is private companies selling access to public documents? But what's the share of that money that we as a society are spending with private companies, with commercial publishers, to get access to our own data? And that's a really hard question. And I think you'll see why. I mean, if you take the whole pie at $14 and 1 half billion, first thing you do, and that's pretty easy, you take out everything that's not US. So about a third of the market is non-US, primarily Europe and Japan, and a few other Asian countries. That cuts it down a little bit. You can also take out non-research products. As I'll get to in a minute, one of the things that the major publishers, like Topson, and that's this Nexus, and most of all, have done is move to other areas other than research and information. They sell software. They sell software to help you run your law firm. They sell all kinds of non-research products. So that means about half of the $14 and 1 half billion that's kind of research products. But yet to make another distinction, and that is what share of that half is primary research, primary legal sources versus secondary research. So as you know, publishers publish treatises, they publish articles, they publish journals, they publish all kinds of stuff that's editorial content. That's not primary legal sources provided by public age, public bodies. There are lots of products that mix pure data from government sources with analytical tools or a layer of finding tools or a layer of metadata that's editorial provided. So I don't know where to draw the line, right? But if you took it at about 50-50, if you said, let's say half of what the major providers provide is primary, what they're selling is access to primary sources. It would be about $3 and 1 half billion. But I'm willing to have an argument about where that percentage and where that line should be. Because I don't really know. I find it very hard to pick apart what exactly, when you do a search on West Tower, like this, or search some of them, while there's bluers out by tax products, what share, the money you're spending, is going to the documents versus going to the service you're getting, the metadata, the decent use, et cetera, the aggregation. So that's kind of a picture that's kind of intended as a spoof or thought, because I don't think it's a definitive answer. There's a couple more things that I wanted to just take a step back and talk about in terms of the question of where the industry is going. In terms of the recent past, let's take a look at. And now, from here on out, I'm kind of focusing on the big three, Thompson and Dustin and the next is the Malmö Steward. The recession has really hit the legal industry hard. For the first time, I think you really see a major redrenchment and real difficulties in that industry. And even the largest law firms, and I've undergone a lot of wrongs and layoffs, maybe things are stabilizing a little bit now. But that major law firm market is the biggest market for the big three players. And that accounts for the dip, by and large. Those best customers are under intense pressure to cut costs. And corporate counsel, who are the people who hire those law firms, are starting to turn the screws, are starting to become innovative themselves in how they're calling the shots a little more on how they do business with major law firms. And that's affecting the revenues that go into law firms and the money that's then available to publishers. So that's one thing that's going on. Another thing that's going on in the buyer marketplace, if you look at law libraries, particularly law firm libraries, they are still functioning like libraries used to do. For all the innovation that's gone on, I think the incredible growth in the big law in the sector of the law firm industry has meant that law libraries in law firms have kind of shielded from some of the same pressures that have affected corporate law libraries. And so I think law firm libraries are maybe five or 10 years behind corporate libraries in their sort of transition to new ways of doing things. And those new ways include a lot of a different approach to purchasing, a different approach to the library being a separate entity versus having skillful information professionals out in the organization as part of the multi-functional teams of researchers. So that law library market sector for these publishers is under a lot of pressure, too. There are two areas that have been pretty good for the major law firms, or at least the areas where they tend to be looking for growth, since the core legal market here in the States is pretty well saturated. A lot of them are looking to international markets, and a lot of them are looking to practice related software services. So I'll take the international piece. Compton just bought a Brazilian publisher this week. There's a lot of activity going on in China and India, our major areas for development for all three of these publishers. So that's one part of the world where they're seeing better growth than they're getting out of the domestic market. And then, as I mentioned, they're also producing more and more software service-type offerings. So in addition to buying your research from the West, you could buy workflow software. You could buy case management systems. You could buy practice management. You can even buy consultancy services from Hildegrands. You can use fine law to market your firm. And then they also serve, of course, the educational sector, not just law schools, but also continuing education. So it's not your father's West Law or Lexus-Nexus anymore. They've infiltrated their way into market sectors that are different from just research or product sectors, I should say. So they're offering a wider range of services, but still primarily focused on that law firm. If you think about it, I mean, if you talk to people from, I worked at Compton at West in the 1980s. And I've talked to people who work there now. And it's a completely different mindset. They were a publisher in 1985. Today, they have a professional services and software mindset. So that's kind of the recent past. Now let's look forward. What's going on? I think there's a couple themes swirling around the commercial publishers that are interrelated. And I think there's going to be a lot of change for the legal services industry. And that's going to be changed for the information industry as well. The first is what we're talking about today, open access. Expectations among users and buyers are changing very fast. They expect everything to be open, timely, free. The issue of cost, which has been alluded to several times here, is that making access to primary legal documents cheaper will not only benefit the newbies, the past cases of the world, but also the little benefits of it. And that's just if they want to use that new, newly available product for new products. The big distinction here is I think we're moving to a conception of open access from that it's about data, not documents. It's not about courts or legislatures publishing documents, and that's called open access. It's about them making that data available freely for other people to use, to build upon, to add, to manipulate, to go buy with other sources. So I think that's one big front of activity that's affecting the commercial industry as well. The next big trend is I think the availability of technology in general is leveling the playing field between the big law firms and the small ones and the solo players. If you're a small, if you're a two-man law firm, you have lots of tools today that you didn't have 10 years ago. You can do your research on fast kits or case maker. You can use RocketMatter to set up your whole firm's infrastructure. You can blog, you can use social media to market yourself. If you want to make cheap routine services available to clients, you can use a service like DirectLog, which kind of helps you build a virtual law firm. So there's lots of things in motion that are making it easier for the small firms to do business. And it's kind of an open question of will the big players be interested in that market or not. And so far, to me, it looks like not that much. I think there's lots of small competitors that are coming into that space that are grabbing a lot of the share of that sector of the legal services industry. The other of the four big things that's sort of swirling around out there is, I guess you can call it in general, peer-to-peer collaboration or socialization of legal commentary or just plain social media. There are ways in which lawyers are sharing information with each other that in many ways bypass the need for published information. They're helping each other find information they need. They're helping each other interpret the information they need. And it's all being done in a social way and in a free way. And so some of the things that publishers used to do are, I won't say unnecessary, but are diminishing in performance. One interesting thing I think in terms of what's hot in terms of content is that more and more legal information products focusing on the practical aspects of the practice of law, not just the what, what did the court decide, what does the statute say. But the how of it, I need to do this filing next week. What do I need to do to do the filing? What are the steps? And companies like the Practical Law Company is a good example of somebody who's coming into a commodity place and constructing kind of a whole new kind of information product that's not just about finding the primary law, but actually helping lawyers walk through the process, the how of practicing law. And of course, the idea of open access to legal content really plays well into that increased use of social media in collaboration among lawyers. So there again, these trends are kind of interrelated. And then finally, the piece of this that I think is really most interesting in the law term is whether there will be a sustainable and growing market for consumer level legal information. And I think a lot of what we talk about here is giving the average citizen in touch with the content, the legal content that they need from their government. But it can go a lot of directions because a lot of the space and a lot of legal content isn't all that useful to an ordinary consumer. So sure, you can search cases on Google Scholar. But what does that do for me as a consumer? It requires levels of interpretation. It doesn't answer any direct questions. But stuff like building permits, liquor licenses, other more practical things that we don't fall into more broader definition of what's legal information are going to be a really hot area for innovation once they're set free. If companies can come in and start using some of that kind of data, mashing it up with other data, building applications on top of that, there you've got something. And then I see sort of a spectrum also from consumers to there's a lot of non-lawyers in the corporate markets that need access to legal information. So law for non-lawyers, I think that's going to be another area that's sort of a little bit over from the consumer market, where they need quite technical information. Maybe they need the building permits or they need the violence from various regulations or agencies, that kind of thing. So I think this sort of non-lawyer market is the big unknown, but it's also the big opportunity for this whole movement. And I think that's what's being their movement. So just to go back and sum things up, I've heard Carl, I've heard you talk about three big values, justice, democracy, and innovation, all of which this open access movement is serving. And I think the really interesting one is the innovation because without the innovation, the justice and the democracy is not going to happen. I mean, as we've been hearing these horror stories of the current state of where public information is, we really need to work on the technical side of things before the democracy and the justice can start to happen. But I don't think people tend to have this paradigm of set legal information free. That means, oh, we're going to have a Westlaw Alexis, but it's going to be free. I don't think that's really where things are going. I think the real end game is finding new markets for the information, as I said, with consumers, with small business people, with solo practitioner lawyers and people like that. Those are new markets that are very poorly served by the legal services industry today. And that could really benefit from some of the innovation that we're talking about here. So I think that the big publishers are going to continue to focus on their core market, which is big law firms, corporate tonsil, they're going to do fine. They're going to have to adjust, but they're going to do fine. The open access movement is going to create or help create a lot of new latent markets. And then what happens with this is that as all this stuff gets infiltrated into these consumer markets and lawyers at big law firms start seeing people using services and tools that are cheap and free and fun, they're going to start to ask, why can't I have that? And some of the big products and services and price points of the big publishers are going to be under continued pressure through this whole period because of the way that the innovative new products are going to make life easier for a lot of people and everyone is going to want to have it. So that's about what I had to say and what was useful. Any questions? John Mayer from Cali. So it seemed to me that the strategy of the big three would be to let the market place innovate, the small firm, and then buy some of these small guys up. Is that a pattern from them buying all the, or are you buying all the small publishers in the consolidation? Why wouldn't consolidation just happen in that innovation market as well? I wouldn't bet against that happening. But on the other hand, I mean, the big three have, they always face strategic choices about different markets. That if the consumer market really is something where they see a lot of this coming to fruit and some small companies start making a lot of money there, sure, that's a possible choice. But it's also an entail the choice to go into consumer markets in a bigger way than they already are. Is the open source movement from your perspective, you mentioned that you also try to spot disruptive forces in the market. Is the open source movement of getting information available and creating applications for it, seen as the major disruptive force or not, and whether yes, positive or negative kind of pooms? I think it is very much the disruptive force. Again, if you look across the whole information industry, just by analogy, I mean, it's caused a lot of disruption for the scientific publishing industry, for example. Open access to scientific publishing has caused a lot of change there. So yeah, certainly it's going to bring price pressures and all kinds of trouble. There's some sectors that are more troubled by other policy forces than others. The news industry is the fascinating case of the industry. But it's not so much open access as much as it's the flavor of open access and the openness and the freedom of the news about that so far in the industry. Yeah, I had a question. So the $7 billion in the primary, secondary access to US materials, right? Not trying to split it up, but what the primary is. How much do federal and state governments spend? And how much do our law schools spend? Do you have any idea? I don't have a good number off my head, but it's the vast majority of it is still private. We're in the market. Time for one more question, and we're ready for lunch. Well, we have librarians here that can tell you how much they spend. We have the ADA takeoff, you're right. I think it varies from $7 million down to $1 million a month. So $1 million times $200 a week? What? $1 million times $200 law schools? Yeah, except for the big ones who spend more. But some spend a lot less, too. I don't know, ballpark? Is that right? $200 million, that's not a lot a month. OK, let's say it's $500 million. I mean, that's $500 million. Most of that's for print. Yeah, and a lot of it's for print, too. Well, there's academic discount, too, if you have any difference. Carol, we have a couple more questions. Lunch is on its way. OK. Or we can simply break through the bathroom. But the first question is, what's the damage of David being there? This is actually a rare opportunity. Normally, this costs a lot of money. The question about government, as a contender in most of your publications, it looks like sometimes average articles where business, it could seem to be saying, just give us the raw data, like data.gov. Don't try to put up any websites or regulations. Don't do any value-added sites, like the department that you wanted to do. Just put that data out. We'll take care of it. And I'm very suspicious of that kind of approach. Well, I think it's one area where maybe the interests of a lot of people in this room and the interests of the big group of publishers are together, actually. I mean, everybody wants low costs. And if commercial or non-governmental entities are able to get this stuff for free, and they're able to do better, as an example, we just heard, if you put up a better website than the Washington Supreme Court can do by itself, let's have at it. But the whole pattern that ALA has stuck with is where publications that were publicly available for decades even, valuable ones, suddenly became private. The National Cancer, the whole bunch of full list of them, that the government used to provide for free, and peer-reviewed, not the whole chat. All sudden, pressure comes from somewhere, and they get turned into private publications that are very expensive. So that's the other side where you don't get kind of interest. Well, it is the other side, except that if this movement plays out the way everybody would want it to, I think you'd have the access to the bulk data that would be free. Would be free, or very inexpensive, and so then if you try to take that data and turn it into an expensive journal, somebody else could maybe take the same data and do something for free, or cheap. Yeah, hopefully, yeah, that counts now. Yeah. In your talk, are you suggesting that some of the JV Supra and legal honors might be a more logical partner for this kind of activity or for the lack of access to a lot of that kind of thing? I think they're part of the whole spectrum of activity. I think JV Supra, for example, is another flavor in the way of open access. It's not opening up government information, it's opening up the private practitioners' information for different purposes. But it's feeding the whole sense of openness and access. It also ties into the consumer market because a lot of those products are designed to help the lawyers market. Their motive is not just to enlighten the world, they're trying to get people to see their product and attract customers. So there's a lot of this stuff that's openness and it crosses between what's non-governmental and what's private sector. It's not just about not opening up government. Thanks. Out this door.