The One-Way Mirror: Enhancing Participation and Securing Privacy for Government 2.0

“The One-Way Mirror: Enhancing Participation and Securing Privacy for Government 2.0″

Danielle Keats Citron
University of Maryland School of Law

Maryland Legal Scholarship Network RPS
University of Maryland – School of Law

George Washington Law Review, Vol. 78, 2010
University of Maryland Legal Studies Research, 2009-41

Abstract:     
The public can now “friend” the White House and scores of agencies on social networks, virtual worlds, and video-sharing sites. The Obama Administration sees this trend as crucial to enhancing governmental transparency, public participation, and collaboration. As the President has underscored, government needs to tap into the public’s expertise because it doesn’t have all of the answers. To be sure, Government 2.0 might improve civic engagement. But it also might produce privacy vulnerabilities because agencies often gain access to individuals’ social network profiles, photographs, videos, and contact lists when interacting with individuals online. Little would prevent agencies from using and sharing individuals’ social media data for more than policymaking, including law enforcement, immigration, tax, and benefits matters. Although people may be prepared to share their views on health care and the environment with agencies and executive departments, they may be dismayed to learn that such policy collaborations carry a risk of government surveillance. This essay argues that government should refrain from accessing individuals’ social media data on Government 2.0 sites. Agencies should treat these sites as one-way mirrors, where individuals can see government’s activities and engage in policy discussions but where government cannot use, collect, or distribute individuals’ social media information. A “one-way mirror” policy would facilitate democratic discourse, enhance government accountability, and protect privacy.

Source:  LSN Information Privacy Law Vol. 2 No. 41,  11/09/2009

The Decline and Fall of the Dominant Paradigm: Trustworthiness of Case Reports in the Digital Age

The latest issue of the New York Law School Law Review just crossed my desk, with many interesting articles,  including this one by William R. Mills, associate librarian and professor of Legal Research:

New York Law School Law Review

Volume 53 2008/09

William R. Mills

The Decline and Fall of the Dominant Paradigm: Trustworthiness of Case Reports in the Digital Age

Professor Mills’s conclusion:

The foundation of trust that underpins our system of case law reporting has now been undermined. Cases posted to many mainstream Internet legal research sources, other than Lexis or Westlaw, appear with no strong guarantee of accuracy or authenticity. Scrupulous legal researchers who wish to independently verify the accuracy of the case reports they cite from Internet sources are met with the burden of comparing the electronic reports against print versions, which are the only ones that courts deem to be official. On a large scale, this burden can prove insurmountable. Furthermore, readers of modern legal literature, when encountering citations from the National Reporter System, have good reason to harbor doubt that the authors who wrote those citations actually consulted the editions that they cited. Moreover, if the authors did not actually consult the National Reporter System, or its established electronic counterparts Lexis or Westlaw, then there is no assurance that the sources they did consult were reliably accurate.

In the digital age, the foundation of trust in our case law reporting system, and in legal citation generally, must be rebuilt. Such a rebuilding effort cannot succeed by utilizing the technology of printed books. Today’s legal researchers are increasingly abandoning print sources in favor of their Internet-based counterparts. The rebuilding of trust in the case reporting system must take place in the realm of digital technology. It must focus on implementing digital safeguards within the process of dissemination of case law databases to better ensure the accuracy and security of information found in those databases.

While court systems and other government entities will obviously play major roles in this rebuilding effort, the legal profession would be naive to expect the government alone to accomplish this work. The government, after all, has never succeeded in creating an efficient case reporting system that served the needs of lawyers nationwide.  Rather, the rebuilding of the American case reporting system for the digital age must be an effort undertaken jointly by government, professional groups, and private enterprise.  The corporate proprietors of Westlaw and Lexis, as the inheritors of the West paradigm, ought not to resist this effort, but instead join in to facilitate its speedy success. Cooperation among all parties is essential, and private enterprise would be an ultimate beneficiary. The companies that market databases of case reports to lawyers have nothing to lose and much to gain from an improved system that bolsters the trustworthiness of these products.

Data.gov

Democratizing Data

“Today, I’m pleased to announce that the Federal CIO Council is launching Data.gov. Created as part of the President’s commitment to open government and democratizing information, Data.gov will open up the workings of government by making economic, healthcare, environmental, and other government information available on a single website, allowing the public to access raw data and transform it in innovative ways. Such data are currently fragmented across multiple sites and formats–making them hard to use and even harder to access in the first place. Data.gov will change this, by creating a one-stop shop for free access to data generated across all federal agencies. The Data.gov catalog will allow the American people to find, use, and repackage data held and generated by the government, which we hope will result in citizen feedback and new ideas.”

http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/Democratizing-Data/

 

Announcing Apps for America 2: The Data.gov Challenge

“We’ve been planning this for awhile. Ever since we heard about Data.gov we have been planning a contest, and if you’re reading this blog post, that means Data.gov has finally launched. I’m pleased to wave the green flag on Apps for America 2: The Data.gov Challenge. This is a development and visualization challenge to see who can come up with the best application and visualization for data from Data.gov.”

http://blog.sunlightfoundation.com/2009/05/21/announcing-apps-for-america-2-the-datagov-challenge/

 
Keeping an Eye on Data.gov

“One thing that’s curiously missing from Data.gov is an RSS feed for new data feeds. Sort of shockingly, and glaringly left out. We were disappointed, and didn’t want to wait. Scraping here is such an easy thing to do that we decided to just build our own. Sunlight Labs’ James Turk did it, and it’s handy. Here’s the feed and here’s the source that makes the feed. This should be useful to anyone who wants to see what new stuff is coming out of Data.gov.”

http://sunlightlabs.com/blog/2009/05/22/keeping-eye-datagov/

 

Source:

The Intersect Alert is the excellent newsletter of the Government Relations Committee, San Francisco Bay Region Chapter, Special Libraries Association

http://units.sla.org/chapter/csfo/csfo.html

The Next Generation of Legal Citations Survey, and Authentication and Link Rot Issues

Link rot is a pet peeve of mine.  A posting I made on June 11, 2008, “Law School Laptop Bans,” already has a broken link to a news story and the posting isn’t even a year old yet.  And I can’t count the number of times I have found a terrific-sounding right-on-point resource in a law review footnote, only to find its URL leads to the dreaded “404 Not Found.”  But it’s more than a pet peeve issue, as this survey makes clear:

“The Next Generation of Legal Citations: A Survey of Internet Citations in the Opinions of the Washington Supreme Court and Washington Appellate Courts, 1999-2005″

Journal of Appellate Practice and Process, Vol. 9, No. 2, Fall 2007

TINA CHING, Seattle University School of Law

As more legal research is conducted online, it is reasonable to conclude that there will be a corresponding increase in citations to the Internet by judges in their opinions. With the widespread public use of the Internet to access information along with the constant changes and impermanence of websites, citing to the Internet should be an issue of increasing concern to the legal community across the country. This paper surveys the types of Internet sources the Washington state Supreme Court and Appellate Court justices are citing. It discusses the interrelated issues of link rot and the impermanence of web pages, citation format, authentication and preservation of online electronic legal information.

 

Source:  LSN Legal Information & Technology Vol. 1 No. 11,  04/29/2009

Copyright, Technology, and Access to the Law: An Opinionated Primer

“Copyright, Technology, and Access to the Law: An Opinionated Primer”


NYLS Legal Studies Research Paper No. 08/09-1

JAMES GRIMMELMANN, New York Law School

Recently, the state of Oregon has used copyright law to threaten people who were publishing its laws online. Can they really do that?

More to the point, why would they? This essay will put the Oregon fracas in historical context, and explain the public policies at stake. Ultimately, it’ll try to convince you that Oregon’s demands, while wrong, aren’t unprecedented. People have been claiming copyright in the law for a long time, and at times they’ve been able to make a halfway convincing case for it. While there are good answers to these arguments, they’re not always the first ones that come to hand. It’s really only the arrival of the Internet that genuinely puts the long-standing goal of free and unencumbered access to the law within our grasp.

This essay, written for nonlawyers and people interested in contemporary debates over access to the law, explains what’s at stake in the Oregon dispute, how people have tried such things before, the role of new technologies in improving legal publishing, what the law has to say about it, and where we ought to go from here.

 

Source:  LSN Legal Information & Technology Vol. 1 No. 8,  04/08/2009

Court-System Transparency

Here’s a new law review article of note:

Lynn M. LoPucki, “Court-System Transparency,” 94 Iowa Law Review 481-538 (February 2009).

ABSTRACT: Over the past decade, the federal courts became the world’s most transparent court system by switching from paper to electronic filing, resolving daunting privacy problems, and posting their case files on the Internet. Now they are embarking on a second, equally important transformation–the use of relational forms from which court data can be extracted automatically. This Article describes the technology and seeks to project and evaluate the effects of that second transformation.

If it occurs, the second transformation would create millions of windows into the courts at virtually no cost to the government. Policymakers, litigants, and the public would be able to see and understand the patterns of judicial decisionmaking–who wins what and how often. That would provide policy makers the feedback needed to fine tune the system, lawyers the ability to predict the outcomes of their cases, and the public the ability to see what courts actually do. All could also see whether the precautions they take for supposed legal reasons are the right ones.

Opponents argue that court-record transparency (1) would expose parties and witnesses to the risk of identity theft and other harms, (2) would invade privacy by making previously-difficult-to-obtain public-record information about individuals readily available, and (3) would pressure judges in ways that deprive them of judicial independence. This Article argues that none of those objections is well-founded.

Selling the Law: The Business of Public Access to Court Records

Stephen Schultze and Shubham Mukherjee – Selling the Law: The Business of Public Access to Court Records

“As government documents are increasingly digitized and put online, two orthogonal approaches to distributing these documents have developed. Under one approach, the documents are made easily and freely accessible. In others, the government retains or introduces barriers to access that are inspired by traditional physical access. When these barriers are fee-based, the government can inadvertently create downstream monopolies or architectures of control over public information. This problem is especially severe in the case of federal district court documents, which are available only via an outdated, fee-based, court-run system or from expensive aggregators like Lexis or Westlaw. Indeed, evidence indicates that the courts are using public access fees to subsidize other activities. If we are to be a nation of laws, citizens must have access to the law. The upfront cost of making court documents freely available is far outweighed by the long-term benefits to society. Widespread digitization combined with Internet connectivity has placed these benefits within reach. The courts must now address the task of revamping outmoded policies and funding structures in order to align their practice with this reality.”

http://citp.princeton.edu/events/lectures/stephen-schultze-and-shubham-mukherjee/?/

Video of Schultze and Mukherjee Lecture
http://citp.princeton.edu/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2009/02/citp_200925.html

Source: Special Libraries Association San Andreas Chapter, Intersect Alert March 29, 2009

President Obama’s social-networking maven

From a feature article in today’s San Jose Mercury News, “Obama’s Bay Area brain trust:”

Sonal Shah

Google.org

The White House hasn’t made it official, but Google.org’s Shah has e-mailed her work colleagues that she’s headed to the White House as director of social innovation and civic engagement. Easiest translation for her title: social-networking maven. Obama has often promised to make the inner workings of government, and his own White House, more transparent and interactive. Shah will be part of a team, including a chief information officer and still-to-be-named chief technology officer, charged with figuring out how to integrate Web 2.0 tools into a government digital network historically hobbled by massive bureaucracy. . . .  ”Tweets” from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. could be coming soon.

Internet empowerment

Good op-ed in today’s USA Today“Internet empowerment,” by Ellen S. Miller (co-founder of Sunlight Foundation).

Faith in government is rooted in transparency, and online resources are giving citizens an indispensible weapon in the arsenal of democracy.

. . .

To take advantage of the full power of the Internet, there are some simple things every agency should do. All data should be made available in formats that are open, searchable and “mashable.” That way, creative programmers can more easily create new ways of looking at things. For example, the EarmarkWatch.org map shows thousands of earmarks in the fiscal 2008 defense-appropriations bill layered over a map of the country.

Towards an Open Source Legal Operating System

Here’s an article by Katie Fortney, who was an intern at our library.

Abstract:     
An informed democratic society needs open access to the law, but states’ attempts to protect copyright interests in their laws are a major roadblock. This article urges broader access, analyzes the implications and legal arguments for and against copyright in the law, and considers strategies for access advocacy.

Fortney, Katie,Towards an Open Source Legal Operating System(February 20, 2009). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=1347158