We are into the realm of legalese, a language none of us -- not even lawyers -- truly understand.

 First, abstractors (as we call ourselves on this site and elsewhere) do not actually produce abstracts -- not in the historical sense.  An "abstract" is a list of ALL DOCUMENTS pertaining to a piece of property through time.  That includes discharged mortgages, released rights of way, etc. etc. etc ad nauseum.  That's not what we do.  We are reporting what we find that is of public record in response to a client's request for specific information.  That is not an "abstract."  Am I splitting hairs?  Yes.  Do lawyers and other lawmakers?  Absolutely.

Next, the phrase "...making abstracts of title and issuing certificates showing ownership of, or interest in, or liens upon any lands..." disqualifies most of us from needing licensing.  Neither my company nor my subcontractors nor the CLIENTS (nationwide vendor managers that I work for in MN) "issue certificates" of any kind.  We merely give a report to whoever is asking and liability is limited to the cost of the search.  That is not in any way a "certificate" and in no way "certifies" anything except that we searched the public records. 

Thoughts?