« Attention: Your Words May Fly Elsewhere | Main | A Congress Obsessed With Federal Jurisdiction »
Sunday, December 04, 2005
Suing BAR/BRI
It looks like another lawyer-entrepeneur is after BAR/BRI for their monopoly and for their overcharging. I'm all for finding a way to regulate BAR/BRI's insane cost -- which prevents many minorities and people who can't get firms to pay for their bar prep courses from passing the exam. To be sure, however, you can get the BAR/BRI books and study on your own for a mere fraction of the cost by surfing over to Craigslist and illegally buying copies of their materials, which do not change dramatically from year to year.
But let's not forget the advantages of the near-monopoly: without substantial competition, nearly everyone is using the same source materials -- materials the Bar Examiners in the various states do not provide (are they complicit?). And if everyone uses the same source materials, the exam is curved to those materials, enabling anyone who can get their hands on them the ability to master them. This makes the exam -- which can seem like it covers an infinite amount of material -- somewhat manageable.
Posted by Ethan Leib on December 4, 2005 at 03:59 PM in Current Affairs | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c6a7953ef00d83424663b53ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Suing BAR/BRI:
» Harm to Competition? from madisonian.net
Todays New York Times contains this engaging story about an antitrust suit against the leading bar review course provider, BAR/BRI. Its worth a read.
UPDATE 1: Ethan Leib, at Prawfsblawg, makes an intriguing point about a possible ups... [Read More]
Tracked on Dec 4, 2005 4:22:43 PM
» News Online from Mary's Blog
Online news, breaking news, feature stories and more... [Read More]
Tracked on Dec 21, 2005 12:30:24 PM
Comments
Ethan -- I couldn't agree with you more on the advantages point. But there's a serious problem with that, too, no? Instead of the Bar Examiners having control over the exam, it's now as if BAR/BRI effectively controls the exam... Indeed, at times, it's almost as if a topic not covered in BAR/BRI simply isn't part of the materials that could possibly be tested... And, as anyone who took the July 2004 NY Bar and experienced the joys of no-fault insurance can attest, that isn't at all true.
:-)
Posted by: Steve Vladeck | Dec 4, 2005 5:32:07 PM
IIRC, the legality of reselling Bar/Bri books varies from state to state. In California it's permitted, but in New York and Ohio it is not, either by state law or by the contract between Bar/Bri & the student.
Incidentally, the exam is more than just curved to the Bar/Bri materials; in one case a few years ago, there was a substantive error in the Bar/Bri book w/r/t an issue that was tested on the exam. The question had to be thrown out because so many people missed it due to Bar/Bri's market dominance. This anecdote was cited during Bar/Bri's lecture as proof that you were made safe by swallowing whatever they dished out.
Posted by: Amber | Dec 4, 2005 6:09:51 PM
The question had to be thrown out because so many people missed it due to Bar/Bri's market dominance.
Did BarBri provide proof that this was the case; could be they were just lying.
Posted by: Mike | Dec 4, 2005 8:56:32 PM
It's way past time to can the whole medical and legal certification scheme. It does not serve the American people well, and I hope one of the first things Bin Laden does when he takes over is to eliminate both medical and legal monopolies.
I have contributed to the design of intercontinental ballistic missiles, the B1 bomber, the F-111 fighter and nuclear weapons trigger testing, without ever having been certified or licensed.
Science is truth: its laws are valid on Jupiter's moons. Law sucks: you can't even practice it in the next state!
Posted by: Jimbino | Dec 4, 2005 9:50:58 PM
No, there was no proof provided. According to the lecturers, they are not permitted to grade bar exams, but some of their colleagues do work as graders and thus they procure information about grading through those indirect channels. It was third hand gossip at best, and at worst a panic-producing lie. Both possibilities are entirely consistent with the professional standards I experienced from Bar/Bri.
Posted by: Amber | Dec 4, 2005 11:21:27 PM
But let's not forget the advantages of the near-monopoly: without substantial competition, nearly everyone is using the same source materials -- materials the Bar Examiners in the various states do not provide (are they complicit?). And if everyone uses the same source materials, the exam is curved to those materials
More enlightened attorneys would call this a "network effect" and a "barrier to entry."
Posted by: Ted | Dec 5, 2005 4:38:37 PM
But let's not forget the advantages of the near-monopoly: without substantial competition, nearly everyone is using the same source materials -- materials the Bar Examiners in the various states do not provide (are they complicit?). And if everyone uses the same source materials, the exam is curved to those materials
More enlightened attorneys would call this a "network effect" and a "barrier to entry."
Posted by: Ted | Dec 5, 2005 4:39:32 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
