Talk:Black's Law Dictionary

message: objection. a reason in support of the contention that the matter or proceeding is improper.  Talk page - discussion of encyclopedia entry. In this case, Black's Law Dictionary.  Expansion of 44th most popular page, good call, 2nd edition search, also good call, note response link, some online legal dictionaries, good call to move, Software, good call, the rest of this page, garbage. As a research tool, the entry should be positive and informative. Suijur (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 13:40, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
replies: text: supreme court cases needs citation tag removed, citation of PATTERSON v WALGREEN CO. added. Suijur (talk) 14:46, 6 January 2019 (UTC)

text: how to win against the department of child safety WPTTR (talk) 06:12, 23 February 2023 (UTC)
thread_title: yada,yada

message: This page is the 44th most popular page in Wikipedia. It really needs more content. I however, am only in a position to complain, unfortunately. Aldie 13:23 Oct 24, 2002 (UTC)
If justice is defined as the fair, impartial consideration of opposing interests,are law opposing interests, are law and justice the same thing  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.139.237.146 (talk) 00:15, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: 44th Most Popular Page, Needs EXPANSION

message: Can someone please find an online version of the 2nd edition? True 15:27, 26 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: https://www.freelawdictionary.org/  Suijur (talk) 13:09, 6 January 2019 (UTC)
thread_title: 2nd Ed. Search

message: Is section 3.1, "Some online legal dictionaries," appropriate content for the Black's Law Dictionary page? Wouldn't it be better suited for the generic Law Dictionary page?
Actually, that's rhetorical, I'm just going to move it. I will, however, add a "See Also" section. For now, only the "Law Dictionary" page will be included, but I would appreciate it if others would help expand it. 24.175.54.43 15:09, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: 3.1, "Some online legal dictionaries"

message: Black's Law Dictionary is now available in a software format. -- Toytoy 19:34, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Software 

message: Shouldnt we put how it was founded as a hoax?  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.107.16.114 (talk) 03:19, 24 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hoax? 

message: In § 'Availability', the sentence below seems to state that some unnamed rule or criteria precludes access, by individuals younger than some unspecified age, to digitized versions, hosted online, of editions of Black's Law Dictionary, which have passed into the public domain.  This is expressed in the final, independent clause, where 'one' is the subject which must reach a certain age.  The dependent, infinitive clause, which precedes the independent clause in the same sentence, provides a description of what the mandate in the independent clause ('reach a certain age') permits, i.e., acquiring the ability to use an online version of editions in the public domain.  'One' is acting as a pronoun, and its only conceivable antecedent is the implied subject in the infinitive clause, which generates the interpretation I suggested.  
"The second edition of Black's Law Dictionary (1910) is now in the public domain and could be read online for free (see External Links below). However, to be able to use this online, one must reach a certain age"
— Preceding unsigned comment added by Fitzws (talk • contribs) 
: I agree; that part stood out to me as well. At least one of the links (thelawdictionary.org) has no sign of any such requirement, not even the often-unenforced terms-of-use boilerplate you see on a lot of sites. I've gone ahead and removed that part. flarn2006 [u t c] time: 21:43, 8 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  There exists some unstated criteria which requires a person to have reached a certain age in order to access any online instance of a version of Black's Law Dictionary, which has passed into the public domain?