Slashdot Mirror
New Rules Proposed on Electronic Evidence
davidtspf writes "The committee that makes the rules of procedure for U.S. federal courts is now considering new rules governing electronic evidence, how much litigants need to produce at trial, and under what circumstances. Civil rights attorneys are arguing that the rules will make it harder to find smoking guns, while a number of corporations, including Microsoft have submitted comments arguing for further limits. LawMeme has an article with more background, comparing the process to debates over IP law that occur in a vacuum of empirical data, and encouraging techies to submit requests to extend the public comment period, which ended today."
Of course they do, otherwise their emails will continue to show in court that they are guilty as hell. There should be no different standard applied to electronic communcations over written notes. If you write a note its admissable, if its electronic it should be equally admissable (and easier to get hold of).
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
Now, we can hope that punishment for computer-related crimes is brought down to reasonable levels. As much as I hate the fear of identity thieves and hackers, I think it's ridiculous that someone can get less time in jail for committing murder than for hacking into a corporate network.
And we've all heard of "consultants" who were jailed by a company because the consultant tested the company's network security, but the company didn't like it. Penalties and jail-time were harsh, even though no bad intentions were evident.
I'm thinking that this is a good thing. I like how the proposed amendment to 37(f) leaves things nice and open by saying, "...should not be subject to sanctions when information is destroyed 'because of the routine operation of the party's electronic information system.'"
Could we see a new ISP springing up that 'routinely' wipes out logs every week? Might it provide better security and anonymity for its customers?
Of course there's the downside of better protecting true criminals, but I think in today's Big Brother-esque, PATRIOT act society, a little more protection from overreaching laws is a good thing.
Don't buy WoW Gold! Make it yourself!
Would stricter rules not force the RIAA (and their ilk) to produce stronger evidence against defendants in copyright violation lawsuits?
I doubt it. Rules for whistleblowing will have one standard, rules corporations can use against individuals will have another.
It won't be phrased that blatently. Instead it will be one set of rules for submitting confidential data (internal memos, emails, chatroom logs) and another, much laxer set of rules, for accusations of copyright infringement.
Be assured, the end result will almost certainly mean less corporate accountability, and less protection of individuals against corporate whichhunts.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
The same goes for paper documents, what's your point?
What?
Reading through the comments, I see several people misinterpreting the nature of the rule changes.
The proposed changes are to the Federal Rules of CIVIL Procedure. This affects CIVIL lawsuits, and does not (directly) impact criminal prosecutions (for "hacking" or otherwise). The rule changes also don't have much to do with the admissibility or authentication of evidence.
Among other things, if adopted, the rule changes would do things like require electronic production of electronic records (i.e., don't bother trying to print out that database). Also, the proposed Rule 37(f) safe harbor for failure to preserve doesn't protect parties from sanctions for intentional or reckless failure to preserve information.
IAAL. So, there.