7 ms·

"We examined the Courts’ budget documents from the past few years, and we discovered that the Courts claim PACER expenses of roughly $25 million per year. But i

"We examined the Courts’ budget documents from the past few years, and we discovered that the Courts claim PACER expenses of roughly $25 million per year. But in 2010, PACER users paid about $90 million in fees to access the system [5]." https://www.recapthelaw.org/2012/01/10/recap-featured-in-xrds-magazine/ https://www.recapthelaw.org/2012/01/10/recap-featured-in-xrd... I operate PlainSite on a budget of far less than $5,000 per year. It's far more advanced than PACER in a number of ways. Even multiplying PlainSite's budget by a factor of 100 to account for features that PACER has but PlainSite does not, you still get pretty close to zero on a cost-per-page basis.

tsaoutourpants 13y ago
To expand on that, PACER charges $0.10 per "page." A single pageview can count as multiple pages, depending on length. They charge for not just actual docs, but for search queries, viewing the docket sheet, etc. The rate is clearly not commensurate with the cost to maintain the system.
testing12341234 13y ago
Maybe it would be helpful to modify "entitled free of charge on PACER" to a phrasing that includes information about how the charges are unreasonable. I happen to know that under the law, PACER access is not required to be "free of charge", and thus the rest of the statement falls flat. Even though I agree that PACER pricing is out of touch with the law due it's pricing being well above the costs required to maintain the system. While I'm not sure of your target audience with your statement, it's clear that on some level federal employees of the court system are included. They may also know "free of charge" is not what the law says, and thus it may also undermine your argument with them as well.
- thinkcomp 13y ago
  There is already a link in the statement to this letter, which is quite detailed: http://www.thinkcomputer.org/20120209.pacer.pdf http://www.thinkcomputer.org/20120209.pacer.pdf Furthermore, many at the courts have read this blog post: http://www.aarongreenspan.com/writing/essay.html?id=84 http://www.aarongreenspan.com/writing/essay.html?id=84 They are well aware of what is going on.

tsaoutourpants 13y ago

To expand on that, PACER charges $0.10 per "page." A single pageview can count as multiple pages, depending on length. They charge for not just actual docs, but for search queries, viewing the docket sheet, etc. The rate is clearly not commensurate with the cost to maintain the system.

testing12341234 13y ago

Maybe it would be helpful to modify "entitled free of charge on PACER" to a phrasing that includes information about how the charges are unreasonable. I happen to know that under the law, PACER access is not required to be "free of charge", and thus the rest of the statement falls flat. Even though I agree that PACER pricing is out of touch with the law due it's pricing being well above the costs required to maintain the system. While I'm not sure of your target audience with your statement, it's clear that on some level federal employees of the court system are included. They may also know "free of charge" is not what the law says, and thus it may also undermine your argument with them as well.

thinkcomp 13y ago
There is already a link in the statement to this letter, which is quite detailed: http://www.thinkcomputer.org/20120209.pacer.pdf http://www.thinkcomputer.org/20120209.pacer.pdf Furthermore, many at the courts have read this blog post: http://www.aarongreenspan.com/writing/essay.html?id=84 http://www.aarongreenspan.com/writing/essay.html?id=84 They are well aware of what is going on.