Equally to the point is the economics of doing business with L-N. Over the years they have bought up some of the good, entrepreneurial legal software suppliers such as PCLaw, TimeMatters, and CaseSoft (all of which I use). Just one man's opinion, but as best I can tell, not much has changed under the ownership of L-N except that prices have increased. So it's no wonder that they're now trying to turn a profit directly on the rating service, too.

So now everyone rated on Martindale-Hubbell will be AV rated. Which, to the outside observer, will look sort of silly. People will think that EVERYONE gets an AV rating. When, in fact, only people with a high rating will pay for inclusion.

Seems like a great way to destroy their credibility, doesn't it?

Recently though, I've started seeing a little hope. A little. See, web 2.0, SaaS, and SOA may catch on with enough lawyers or service providers to give us a real choice for the first time in ... well, ever. The movement towards control of our own research is young and the tools are in their infancy (Loislaw, Fastlaw, etc.) but it's gaining momentum and stands to get a lot faster as more of us catch on.

But yeah, Martindale has never shown itself to be anything but an expensive waste. Prove me wrong and I'll gladly concede. I could always be wrong - but I'm not.