A Note on RECAP’s Commitment to Privacy

Posted on the RECAP site today:

A Note on RECAP’s Commitment to Privacy

We’ve gotten our first official reaction from the judiciary, in the form of a statement on the New Mexico Bankruptcy court’s website. It contains two important points about the PACER terms of use, and a misleading statement about privacy that we want to correct.

First, the good news: the court acknowledges the point we’ve made before: use of RECAP is consistent with the law and the PACER terms of use. The only potential exception is if you’ve received a fee waiver for PACER. In that case, use of RECAP could violate the terms of the fee waiver, which reads: “Any transfer of data obtained as the result of a fee exemption is prohibited unless expressly authorized by the court.” We’re not lawyers, so we don’t know if the court’s interpretation is correct, but we encourage our users to honor the terms of the fee waiver.

Now, an important correction. The statement raises the concern that RECAP could compromise sealed or private documents that attorneys access via the CM/ECF, the system attorneys use for electronic filing and retrieval of documents in pending cases. Protecting privacy is our top priority, and we specifically designed RECAP to safeguard the privacy of CM/ECF documents. As we describe
in our privacy FAQ
, RECAP is carefully designed not to upload documents from the CM/ECF system. When a user logs into the CM/ECF system, a cookie is set on the user’s browser that’s different from the cookie that’s set when a user is logged into the public PACER system. RECAP monitors for this cookie and automatically deactivates itself whenever the user is logged into CM/ECF. We tested this thoroughly, with some CM/ECF users, before we released the public beta.

We’re confident that RECAP maintains the security model set up by the courts, and that it will never upload documents while a user is logged into CM/ECF. The code is open source, so anyone with concerns is welcome to inspect it for themselves. We’d like to work with the judiciary in the coming weeks to ensure they understand how RECAP protects privacy and security, and to incorporate any further enhancements they might suggest. In the meantime, users can continue using RECAP with the knowledge that it’s designed with privacy as our top priority.

2 new working papers on judicial opinions

“Judges and Their Editors”

Albany Government Law Review, Forthcoming
University of Missouri School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2009-18

DOUGLAS E. ABRAMS, University of Missouri School of Law

This essay discusses the roles of personal law clerks, central staff clerks, and Reporters of Decisions in editing judges’ opinions at the drafting stage. “The overarching lesson [is] that by submerging pride of authorship during an opinion’s gestation and by weighing editorial input with an open mind, judges secure in their craft advance the interests of justice.” The essay also discusses the constraints imposed by the ABA Model Code of Judicial Conduct on the circle of persons a judge may consult without giving the parties advance notice. The essay is adapted from Prof. Abrams’ address to the international meeting of the Association of Reporters of Judicial Decisions in Halifax, Nova Scotia on August 7, 2009.

 

“Sports in the Courts: The Role of Sports References in Judicial Opinions”

DOUGLAS E. ABRAMS, University of Missouri School of Law
Villanova Sports and Entertainment Law Journal, Forthcoming
University of Missouri School of Law Legal Studies Research Paper No. 2009-19

In cases with no claims or defenses concerning sports, the Supreme Court and lower federal and state courts frequently publish opinions that draw analogies to the rules or terminology of sports familiar to broad segments of the American people. Sports analogies can help the court explain factual or legal points because today’s generation, including the lawyers and litigants who comprise the prime audience for written opinions, grew into adulthood amid an unprecedented saturation of professional and amateur sports in the broadcast and print media, and more recently on the Internet.

This article surveys the broad array of sports whose references now lace written judicial opinions, and then discusses the use and misuse of these references. Sports references can help courts explain and resolve complexity, but may also implicate Rule 1.3 of the Model Code of Judicial Conduct by detracting unacceptably from the prestige indispensable to the judicial role. A sports reference remains incompatible with judging when a reasonable reader would conclude that the court invoked it primarily for the judge’s personal pleasure and not to facilitate the communication of ideas.

 

Source:  LSN: University of Missouri School of Law Legal Studies Research
 Paper Series Vol. 4 No. 4,  08/20/2009

New collaboration tools

I’ve written before about Bloomberglaw.com’s Active Workspace collaboration tool.

Now the Wall Street Journal just announced its feature called My Journal which “introduces a new level of versatility with new ways to organize, manage and share breaking news, articles, videos and more.”

In My Journal users can set up folders to email content to friends and colleagues.  Users can set up “Collections” and whenever new content is added to the collection, it’s automatically e-mailed to the addresses the user has identified to receive such updates.  I’ll try this with our advanced legal research class this fall.