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."

Comments

Not Entirely Bad

[Trolling4Columbine]

Would stricter rules not force the RIAA (and their ilk) to produce stronger evidence against defendants in copyright violation lawsuits?

Fool

[Anonymous Coward]

If you beleive that electronic data can't be forged to fit what ever you want then I have a big bridge to sell you too.

Good news I guess

[null etc.]

This is clearly a step in the right direction.

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.

1 step forward, 1 step back?

[ChibiLZ]

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.