Metadata In Arizona Public Records Can't Be Withheld

jasonbuechler writes in with news of the first state to declare that metadata is part of public records and must be released when the records are. "Hidden data embedded in electronic public records must be disclosed under Arizona's public records law, the state Supreme Court said Thursday... The Supreme Court's unanimous decision, which overturned lower court rulings, is believed to be the first by a state supreme court on whether a public records law applies to so-called metadata. 'This is at the cutting edge — it's the law trying to catch up with technology,' [one lawyer said]. The Arizona ruling came in a case involving a demoted Phoenix police officer's request for data embedded in notes written by a supervisor. The officer got a printed copy but said he wanted the metadata to see whether the supervisor backdated the notes to before the demotion."

Comments

Just a part

[Philip K Dickhead]

of an ordinary "Audit Trail". Now, you don't have to rely on manual log-entries and sign-out sheets.

Re:Just a part

[causality]

of an ordinary "Audit Trail". Now, you don't have to rely on manual log-entries and sign-out sheets.

It says a lot that this actually went to court in the first place, let alone that it went to the state Supreme Court. What part of "public record" needed clarification, exactly?

Re:Cutting edge?

[maxume]

I think perhaps he was talking about it being the cutting edge of the law. Maybe. But probably.

Re:Smart police officer

[Mikkeles]

'He told me to make sure to pay taxes as if she was a contractor, ...'

This being embezzlement and all, there's a good chance that no income was declared. By you filing a tax form, the IRS would probably become extremely interested and start asking questions. An audit would not be pleasant for him or his wife.