Link Rot at the Supreme Court

There's something rotten at the U.S. Supreme Court....

There's something rotten at the U.S. Supreme Court.

<p>Specifically, it's the hyperlinks.</p> <p>According to <a href="">new research by Jonathan Zittrain, Kendra Albert, and Lawrence Lessig</a>, "50% of the URLs found within U.S. Supreme Court opinions do not link to the originally cited information."</p> <p>It seems we're facing the same issue here in Canada. Several Supreme Court of Canada decisions posted online include hyperlinks that no longer work.</p> <p>For example, <a href="">Breeden v. Black</a> links to <a href="">a PDF document that now results in an error page</a>. <a href="">R. v. National Post</a> links to a 2004 document from the Canadian Association of Journalists that no longer appears online at the <a href="">stated address</a>. Trying to access a <a href="">PDF</a> linked from <a href="">R. v. Cunningham</a> also results in an error.</p> <p>To find out more about link rot and why's it's particularly problematic in the legal world, Nora interviewed Kendra Albert. They also talked about a proposed solution from the <a href="">Harvard Library Innovation Lab</a> called <a href=""></a></p> <!--START Link Rot at the U.S. Supreme Court AUDIO HERE --> <div class="clear"></div> <!--END Link Rot at the U.S. Supreme Court AUDIO -->


To encourage thoughtful and respectful conversations, first and last names will appear with each submission to CBC/Radio-Canada's online communities (except in children and youth-oriented communities). Pseudonyms will no longer be permitted.

By submitting a comment, you accept that CBC has the right to reproduce and publish that comment in whole or in part, in any manner CBC chooses. Please note that CBC does not endorse the opinions expressed in comments. Comments on this story are moderated according to our Submission Guidelines. Comments are welcome while open. We reserve the right to close comments at any time.