Open Access in Peril for Wisconsin Documents?
[cross posted on legalresearchplus] Wisconsin’s Public-Records Law: Preserving the Presumption of Complete Public Access in the Age of Electronic Records, by Leanne Holcomb and James Isaac, 2008 Wisconsin Law Review 515 (2008).
Under Wisconsin’s public-records law, the public is permitted access to the actions of government officials in order to act as an effective check on government power and give force to the democratic system. This policy translates into the legal right of inspection by any person of any public record, . . . Over the last three decades, however, statutes have not kept pace with technological advancements that have dramatically transformed public records, threatening the presumption of complete public access. The emergence of electronic documents as the preeminent record of government activity has complicated the application of existing public-records law to records-retention practice and the disclosure of public records. As e-mail illustrates, primary electronic documents are often capable of being “deleted,” but not in the traditional sense of this term. this difference begs the question whether deleted e-mail, and other deleted electronic documents like it, belongs to the public record and should be disclosed upon request. This Comment argues for an answer in the affirmative. Additionally, the creation of each primary record in electronic form includes numerous unseen secondary records, such as metadata, that do not accompany traditional paper records. While secondary records are unintentionally created, they nonetheless provide a considerable amount of information about the creation and history of the record, information that is sometimes of great use to the requester and arguably in line with the existing statutory definition of record. Wisconsin needs to address these electronic-records issues in order to maintain an up-to-date and relevant public-records law. This Comment therefore suggests adapted statutory language and continued judicial recognition of electronic documents’ peculiarities, aiming to modernize the public-records law and provide a solid platform from which the legislature can address inevitable technological advances in the future.Continue reading
Open Access in Peril for EU Documents?
[Cross posted on legalresearchplus] Shrinking access to EU documents? This is from a press release on the European Ombudsman site: “The European Ombudsman, P. Nikiforos Diamandouros, has called on the European Parliament (EP) to defend the European Union’s commitment to transparency and the citizens’ right of access to EU documents. This follows the European Commission’s recent proposals to revise the law on public access to documents. In his contribution to today’s public hearing in the EP’s LIBE Committee (Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs), the Ombudsman said: “The Commission’s proposals would mean access to fewer, not more, documents. This raises fundamental issues of principle about the EU’s commitment to openness and transparency.” Read the entire contribution given by the Ombudsman The EU proposals sharply limit the definition of what is a “document” — ”The Commission’s proposed definition of a document would mean that, in many cases, citizens could only apply for access to a document if it appeared in a register.” Read the full text of the EU proposal to revise Regulation 1049/2001: “Proposal for a REGULATION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents” [4/30/2008] Hat tip to the lawlibrarians blog for tracking this! Continue reading
Pentagon Posts Documents on its “Military Analysts” Propaganda Program
In April, the New York Times broke a story about the now infamous Pentagon information apparatus that used retired military officers in a "campaign to generate favorable news coverage of the administration’s wartime performance" (Behind Military Analysts, the Pentagon's Hidden Hand By David Barstow, New York Times, April 20, 2008). The Times also published some of the documents it obtained through Freedom of Information Act requests on its web site (NY Times publishes some FOIA documents). Now, the Pentagon has published documents it released. This collection appears more complete than what the NYT released.
- Military Analysts "These documents were released to the New York Times regarding the Pentagon's Military Analyst program." (last updated 28-May-08)
Pig book
The 2008 Congressional Pig Book, published annually since 1991 by Citizens Against Government Waste (CAGW), is now available. This year's Pig Book identified 11,610 projects at a cost of $17.2 billion in the 12 Appropriations Acts for fiscal 2008. A "pork" project is a line-item in an appropriations bill that designates tax dollars for a specific purpose in circumvention of established budgetary procedures. To qualify as pork, a project must meet one of seven criteria that were developed in 1991 by CAGW and the Congressional Porkbusters Coalition. You can download the summary in PDF, or serve up all the 2008 information from their pork database. But for a small fee, you can order the books in paper for your library reference collection (or buy them and donate to your local library!). This and more are what you get from the daily feed of Docuticker. Subscribe to the docuticker feed or check out their latest documents in the left hand column of FGI. Thanks to our buddies Gary Price and Shirl kennedy for keeping docuticker chugging along, feeding us with great govt documents from all levels of government! Continue reading
The Military’s Internet ‘Civil War’
The first two parts of a three part series on how the military is adapting to the Internet are online: from the Air Force banning access from official networks to many blogs (because they are not "established, reputable media"), to the Army setting up its own, password protected version of MySpace ("MilSpace"?).
- The Military's Internet 'Civil War' by David Axe, The Washington Independent
- Part One: How the Army Found Middle Ground to Embrace the Internet, 05/30/2008
- Part Two: How the Coast Guard Botched Its Online Start, 06/03/2008