decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books
Your contributions keep Groklaw going.
To donate to Groklaw 2.0:

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


To read comments to this article, go here
Judges Using the Internet
Saturday, May 15 2004 @ 01:07 PM EDT

I get a lot of mail asking if judges are allowed to read Groklaw. The answer is, Yes. There are some footnotes with respect to what judges can use in deciding a case, and rules can vary according to which state and which kind of judge, but the general answer is yes, they can read whatever they think will be helpful and use it too, with some limitations.

Here is an article that talks about judges using the Internet. The trend is to use the Internet more and more, particularly on the appellate level, it says. There are some who feel they shouldn't use Google in deciding cases and should stick to facts in evidence, which is another topic. Trademark cases are one type where it seems more and more use search engines, because one part of a trademark case involves how well-known your mark is. A search can demonstrate your fame or lack of it. Domain name disputes also often involve search engine work. Again, the issue is trademarks in such disputes.

Here is how the article explains it:

"Rules governing out-of-court research are ambiguous about the use of search engines and, in the United States, tend to vary by state. In general, though, appeals courts have leeway in the sources they use. 'Often appellate arguments require going outside the record of a particular case, because a judge or a panel must weigh the ramifications. What does this mean down the road?' said Dick Carelli, a spokesman for the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts (AOC). 'Tradition dictates that anything is fair game in terms of the research a judge or a judge's staff can do online.' . . .

"Trial judges are more constrained. Rule 201 of the Federal Rules of Evidence says trial judges may take notice of public information only when they 'resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned.' Most of the cases reviewed by CNET News.com involved trial judges using Google."

Here is one relevant section from the article, showing the trend to use search engines:

"In the United States and abroad, judges are turning to search engines such as Google to check facts, to look up information about companies embroiled in litigation, and to challenge statistics presented by attorneys in court. Dozens of judges have penned opinions describing Google as a valuable--and sometimes crucial--source of knowledge.

"To be sure, Google has no monopoly in the legal system. Yahoo's search engine popped up in the landmark Napster copyright case four years ago, and Oregon police tried to track a criminal defendant accused of firearm violations through Yahoo searches. When AltaVista was in its heyday, it also was mentioned in a handful of cases.

So, yes, judges can read whatever they think would be helpful, and they are free to use the information even in their decision-making, subject to the above limitations. That's why I am always so careful not to put any information on Groklaw unless I have two sources and why we provide links to proofs of whatever we write. It's also why -- well, part of why -- I ask that comments be phrased in language a judge might be accustomed to read and would not be offended by. Judges can read Groklaw, and if any do stop by, I hope they will feel very welcome here.


  View Printable Version


Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )