5 ms·

I hate to rock the bandwagon, but this will accomplish nothing and it's pretty tactless. As rayiner has already pointed out, PACER is a source of court document

I hate to rock the bandwagon, but this will accomplish nothing and it's pretty tactless. As rayiner has already pointed out, PACER is a source of court documents, not case law. 99% of the public would have no use for PACER documents even if they had completely free, open access. The people who truly have a legitimate need to access PACER documents are able to afford the fees, although that still doesn't mean the current fee structure is justified or fair. Many lawyers who use PACER also rely heavily on the fact that it's updated almost immediately -- a project like this could never accomplish that, and could lead to malpractice if used in its place. For example, you can't sue people for certain things if they've declared bankruptcy, so you need a reliable, up-to-date way to verify they haven't (a common strategy is to wait until the last minute to file bankruptcy just to delay legal proceedings). What's worse is that this project seems to be encouraging some kind of witch hunt: > Now he wants to make "every U.S. Attorney and AUSA's full career as a prosecutor available to the public to examine in its entirety." So those are the links queued up in Project Asymptote. That's how you want to honor Aaron? By using PACER and an army of volunteers to pursue someone's personal vendetta? I can't even begin to describe how tasteless that is; to take one of Aaron's projects and turn it into some kind of misguided inquisition, then call it a "poetic tribute to Aaron Swartz's memory". If you really want to make court documents available to everyone for free, then do that. Don't use Aaron as an excuse to target US prosecutors.

analog 14y ago
99% of the public wouldn't know what to do with PACER even if they had completely free, open access You could say the same about having free open access to your server's source code though.
- hect0r 14y ago
  Not really as a lot of the PACER content relates to matters -- divorce, custody disputes, etc -- that is of no direct interest to you. Unlike your server source code.
  - jonknee 14y ago
    Who's to say what you're interested in. Most people would not know what to do with either PACER content or server source code, but in the hands of someone that does know what to do both are quite valuable. We have the ability for all this information to be free, I don't see why it shouldn't be taken advantage of.
    - hect0r 14y ago
      We are talking about divorce cases (amongst other things). These should be private matters and there is no public benefit in this being made available for free via Google. To take your argument to its natural conclusion, all your interactions with publicly funded entities should be freely available as well. For example, maybe your medical records, your school transcripts, transcripts of complaints made to police about you, etc. I think most people who are lionising Aaron's efforts in "freeing" the PACER data really do so because they are in love with an idea rather than because of any considered assessment of the value (and harm) that this content could bring if made freely available.
      - jonknee 14y ago
        Again, who's to say what's useful? They're not private matters by rule, it's all public record. I could think of a bunch of uses for the data. I don't have any problem with public record actually being public (and I do have a problem with public records that aren't actually public). Medical records and school transcripts are not public records. 911 calls are public, but you have to know how to request them and that usually means they aren't released unless it's a newsworthy story and a local media outlet jumps through the hoop. Visitor logs should be public (like they are for the White House). You can request anyone's FBI file after they die, but that system could be quite a bit more efficient.
        hect0r 14y ago
        The fundamental question is who decides what is a public record and what is not? Why are your medical records private but your ex-wife's court-room accusations that you were sexually promiscuous, impotent, or secretly homosexual to be considered public records that must be "freed"?
detst 14y ago
> 99% of the public wouldn't know what to do with PACER 99% of the public wouldn't know what to do with the YouTube API[1] but the fact that it's readily accessible means the 1% can do interesting things for the 99%. Don't be so presumptuous about the value of this information being freely available. Neither you nor I can envision all of the possible use cases. [1] Replace with government data, open source code, etc.
- Irregardless 14y ago
  My point was that PACER documents are not inherently useful to the public -- edited to make that more clear. Several people have already pointed out that there are also malicious uses for this data that could negatively impact normal people. Do you want all your neighbors and potential employers to know you've filed for bankruptcy? And would you want to give them completely open access to all court filings in your name?
  - AnthonyMouse 14y ago
    >Do you want all your neighbors and potential employers to know you've filed for bankruptcy? And would you want to give them completely open access to all court filings in your name? Isn't that a completely separate question? You can argue that things like that should be sealed, but if they're not sealed then they're a matter of public record and the government should publish them for free on the internet.
  - stdgy 14y ago
    We don't really know that they're not inherently useful to the public, though. As parent points out, there may be use cases that only become feasible once the information is freely available.
  - darkarmani 14y ago
    > Do you want all your neighbors and potential employers to know you've filed for bankruptcy? And would you want to give them completely open access to all court filings in your name? Yes. Isn't this supposed to be public information? Corporations know more about us from our credit rating and other private DBs than this information.
kragen 14y ago
That's how you want to honor Aaron? By using PACER and an army of volunteers to pursue someone's personal vendetta? I can't even begin to describe how tasteless that is; to take one of Aaron's projects and turn it into some kind of misguided inquisition, then call it a "poetic tribute to Aaron Swartz's memory". I don't know who you are, but I'm pretty sure Aaron Greenspan was a personal friend of Aaron Swartz, who hosted a lot of people who came from out of town to Aaron's memorial service. I don't think making public officials' public records public in order to make them accountable to the public is "tasteless" or a "witch hunt" or a "vendetta"; it's the kind of transparency that is basic to a democracy. Aaron Swartz spent hundreds, if not thousands, of hours doing just that.

analog 14y ago

99% of the public wouldn't know what to do with PACER even if they had completely free, open access You could say the same about having free open access to your server's source code though.

hect0r 14y ago
Not really as a lot of the PACER content relates to matters -- divorce, custody disputes, etc -- that is of no direct interest to you. Unlike your server source code.
- jonknee 14y ago
  Who's to say what you're interested in. Most people would not know what to do with either PACER content or server source code, but in the hands of someone that does know what to do both are quite valuable. We have the ability for all this information to be free, I don't see why it shouldn't be taken advantage of.
  - hect0r 14y ago
    We are talking about divorce cases (amongst other things). These should be private matters and there is no public benefit in this being made available for free via Google. To take your argument to its natural conclusion, all your interactions with publicly funded entities should be freely available as well. For example, maybe your medical records, your school transcripts, transcripts of complaints made to police about you, etc. I think most people who are lionising Aaron's efforts in "freeing" the PACER data really do so because they are in love with an idea rather than because of any considered assessment of the value (and harm) that this content could bring if made freely available.
    - jonknee 14y ago
      Again, who's to say what's useful? They're not private matters by rule, it's all public record. I could think of a bunch of uses for the data. I don't have any problem with public record actually being public (and I do have a problem with public records that aren't actually public). Medical records and school transcripts are not public records. 911 calls are public, but you have to know how to request them and that usually means they aren't released unless it's a newsworthy story and a local media outlet jumps through the hoop. Visitor logs should be public (like they are for the White House). You can request anyone's FBI file after they die, but that system could be quite a bit more efficient.
      - hect0r 14y ago
        The fundamental question is who decides what is a public record and what is not? Why are your medical records private but your ex-wife's court-room accusations that you were sexually promiscuous, impotent, or secretly homosexual to be considered public records that must be "freed"?

detst 14y ago

> 99% of the public wouldn't know what to do with PACER 99% of the public wouldn't know what to do with the YouTube API[1] but the fact that it's readily accessible means the 1% can do interesting things for the 99%. Don't be so presumptuous about the value of this information being freely available. Neither you nor I can envision all of the possible use cases. [1] Replace with government data, open source code, etc.

Irregardless 14y ago
My point was that PACER documents are not inherently useful to the public -- edited to make that more clear. Several people have already pointed out that there are also malicious uses for this data that could negatively impact normal people. Do you want all your neighbors and potential employers to know you've filed for bankruptcy? And would you want to give them completely open access to all court filings in your name?
- AnthonyMouse 14y ago
  >Do you want all your neighbors and potential employers to know you've filed for bankruptcy? And would you want to give them completely open access to all court filings in your name? Isn't that a completely separate question? You can argue that things like that should be sealed, but if they're not sealed then they're a matter of public record and the government should publish them for free on the internet.
- stdgy 14y ago
  We don't really know that they're not inherently useful to the public, though. As parent points out, there may be use cases that only become feasible once the information is freely available.
- darkarmani 14y ago
  > Do you want all your neighbors and potential employers to know you've filed for bankruptcy? And would you want to give them completely open access to all court filings in your name? Yes. Isn't this supposed to be public information? Corporations know more about us from our credit rating and other private DBs than this information.

kragen 14y ago

That's how you want to honor Aaron? By using PACER and an army of volunteers to pursue someone's personal vendetta? I can't even begin to describe how tasteless that is; to take one of Aaron's projects and turn it into some kind of misguided inquisition, then call it a "poetic tribute to Aaron Swartz's memory". I don't know who you are, but I'm pretty sure Aaron Greenspan was a personal friend of Aaron Swartz, who hosted a lot of people who came from out of town to Aaron's memorial service. I don't think making public officials' public records public in order to make them accountable to the public is "tasteless" or a "witch hunt" or a "vendetta"; it's the kind of transparency that is basic to a democracy. Aaron Swartz spent hundreds, if not thousands, of hours doing just that.