from the open-format-man-to-the-rescue? dept.
According to the Washington Post the federal court system's PACER electronic database of court records had deleted a ton of old cases. Charles Hall, a spokesperson for the Administrative Office, told The Post via e-mail that the change was made on Aug. 11 in preparation for an overhaul of the the PACER architecture, including the implementation of the next generation of the Judiciary's Case Management and Electronic Case Files System.
"However, as a result of the changes the locally developed legacy case management systems of some courts were no longer compatible with PACER, he says. Since PACER works as a sort of distributed network of different archives rather than one centralized database, that's a major problem.
However, Hall says, the dockets and documents no longer available through the system could still be obtained directly from the relevant court and "all open cases, as well as any new filings, will continue to be available on PACER."
Techdirt has coverage on efforts being made by parties interested in restoring and preserving digital access to these records.
[Ed's Note: Although TFA is saying 'deleted' it is more accurate to say that some documents will not be stored on PACER. There is more in the article regarding an alternative effort to archive the documents in question, as referred to in the TFS.]
Related Stories
A news item we covered last month here on SoylentNews has come full circle and the Administrative Office of the Courts has agreed to restore Ten Years of records purged from their on-line system without warning.
ArsTechnica is reporting that the move angered members of Congress, because most of these documents were electronically available nowhere else, and would require traveling to one of the 5 various court's main offices to dig through paper documents. Slightly better than being "on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard” but hardly fitting anyone's definition of accessible.
Affected under the online purge are about a combined decade's worth of court dockets and all manner of documents at the US Courts of Appeals for the 2nd, 7th, 11th, and Federal Circuits, as well as the Bankruptcy Court for the Central District of California.
(Score: 2) by Dunbal on Thursday August 28 2014, @08:36PM
"The database" hasn't deleted shit. That's not what databases do. Now the database operator, he can delete stuff FROM the database... But saying "the database did it" is just an excuse because you're too damned lazy to find who was responsible. Bureaucracy at it's finest. Everyone do the approved shoulder shrug. Now get back to work.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 28 2014, @09:09PM
> "The database" hasn't deleted shit.
In what world do you think a pedant's rant like that adds any value to the discussion?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 28 2014, @09:55PM
without a pedant's rant your equally pointless rant may never be heard and you might go insane
the value is in providing you with something to reply to
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 28 2014, @10:44PM
On the contrary - pedantry is a scourge, especially on a site like this.
It needs to be shot down whenever and wherever it raises its head lest it spread.
(Score: 2) by Dunbal on Friday August 29 2014, @12:26AM
One man's pedantry is another man's insightful remark. We don't have to agree. On the other hand I'm not wrong.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 29 2014, @09:56AM
> One man's pedantry is another man's insightful remark.
More like one writer's insightful remark is everyone else's pedantry.
The only person impressed by your post is yourself. It's just public masturbation.
(Score: 2) by Dunbal on Friday August 29 2014, @11:04AM
Speaking of public masturbation, you realize that of the ten (10) whole replies to this post, 70% of them have to do with my comment and your response(s) to it? Seriously get over it and get over yourself. No one cares. At least I had some on-topic point to make. What did you bring to the discussion? An anonymous rant because of your obviously unresolved personal issues.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Thursday August 28 2014, @09:40PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 2) by EvilSS on Thursday August 28 2014, @11:24PM
So does anyone know the conversion rate for tons to gigabytes?
(Score: 2, Funny) by J053 on Friday August 29 2014, @12:23AM