Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ministry of Justice orders deletion of the UK's largest court reporting database

legalcheek.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 368 posts

Re: Ministry of Justice orders deletion of the UK's largest court reporting database

#31

Post by delichon »

londons_explore wrote: post #18
nonethewiser wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>We should give up with the idea of databases which are 'open' to the public, but you have to pay to access, reproduction isn't allowed, records cost pounds per page, and bulk scraping is denied. That isn't open. How about rate limited?

No. Open is open. Beyond DDoS protections, there should be no limits. If load on the server is a concern, make the whole database available as a torrent. People who run scrapers tend to prefer that anyway. This isn't someone's hobby project run from a $5 VPS - they can afford to serve 10k qps of readonly data if needed, and it would cost far less than the salary of 1 staff member.

Rate limiting is a DDoS protection.

Re: Ministry of Justice orders deletion of the UK's largest court reporting database

#32

Post by harel »

whizzter wrote: post #21
londons_explore wrote: post #6

Something is either public record - in which case it should be on a government website for free, and the AI companies should be free to scrape to their hearts desire... Or it should be sealed for X years and then public record. Where X might be 1 in cases where you don't want to hurt an ongoing investigation, or 100 if it's someone's private affairs. Nothing that goes through the courts should be sealed forever. We s…

Open to research yes. Free to ingest and make someones crimes a permanent part of AI datasets resulting in forever-convictions? No thanks. AI firms have shown themselves to be playing fast and loose with copyrighted works, a teenager shouldn't have their permanent AI profile become "shoplifter" because they did a crime at 15 yo that would otherwise have been expunged after a few years.

Between not delivering the data to AI companies, and barring it altogether is a fair distance. As far as I know, the MoJ is in talks with openAI themselves (https://www.ukauthority.com/articles/ministry-of-justice-rea...).

Re: Ministry of Justice orders deletion of the UK's largest court reporting database

#34

Post by pjc50 »

krona wrote: post #14

Along with the attempt to prevent jury trials for all but the most serious criminal cases, this is beginning to look like an attempt to prevent reporting on an upcoming case. I can think of one happening in April, involving the prime minister. Given he was head of the CPS for 5 years, would know exactly which levers to pull. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c20dyzp4r42o

Why do you think "they" are trying to suppress reporting on a Russian-recruited Ukranian national carrying out arson attacks against properties the PM is "linked to" but does not live in? What's the supposed angle?

Re: Ministry of Justice orders deletion of the UK's largest court reporting database

#35

Post by spacebanana7 »

whizzter wrote: post #21
londons_explore wrote: post #6

Something is either public record - in which case it should be on a government website for free, and the AI companies should be free to scrape to their hearts desire... Or it should be sealed for X years and then public record. Where X might be 1 in cases where you don't want to hurt an ongoing investigation, or 100 if it's someone's private affairs. Nothing that goes through the courts should be sealed forever. We s…

Open to research yes. Free to ingest and make someones crimes a permanent part of AI datasets resulting in forever-convictions? No thanks. AI firms have shown themselves to be playing fast and loose with copyrighted works, a teenager shouldn't have their permanent AI profile become "shoplifter" because they did a crime at 15 yo that would otherwise have been expunged after a few years.

The names of minors should never be released in public (with a handful of exceptions).

But why shouldn't a 19 year old shoplifter have that on their public record? Would you prevent newspapers from reporting on it, or stop users posting about it on public forums?

Re: Ministry of Justice orders deletion of the UK's largest court reporting database

#36

Post by gulfofamerica »

pjc50 wrote: post #29
cs02rm0 wrote: post #5

The minister who set this up claims this is a cover up: https://x.com/CPhilpOfficial/status/2021295301017923762 https://xcancel.com/CPhilpOfficial/status/202129530101792376...

Anyone banging on about coverups of crime due to immigrants should get immediately put in the bad faith argument bin, even if they were a Minister.

[dead]

Re: Ministry of Justice orders deletion of the UK's largest court reporting database

#37

Post by bko »

whizzter wrote: post #21
londons_explore wrote: post #6

Something is either public record - in which case it should be on a government website for free, and the AI companies should be free to scrape to their hearts desire... Or it should be sealed for X years and then public record. Where X might be 1 in cases where you don't want to hurt an ongoing investigation, or 100 if it's someone's private affairs. Nothing that goes through the courts should be sealed forever. We s…

Open to research yes. Free to ingest and make someones crimes a permanent part of AI datasets resulting in forever-convictions? No thanks. AI firms have shown themselves to be playing fast and loose with copyrighted works, a teenager shouldn't have their permanent AI profile become "shoplifter" because they did a crime at 15 yo that would otherwise have been expunged after a few years.

Im sorry but that's the equivalent of "I believe in free speech but not the right to hate speech". Its either free or not

Re: Ministry of Justice orders deletion of the UK's largest court reporting database

#38

Post by helsinkiandrew »

Better overview of what the complaint was here:

https://www.tremark.co.uk/moj-orders-deletion-of-courtsdesk-...

They raise the interesting point that "publicly available" doesn't necessarily mean its free to store/process etc:

> One important distinction is that “publicly available” does not automatically mean “free to collect, combine, republish and retain indefinitely” in a searchable archive. Court lists and registers can include personal data, and compliance concerns often turn on how that information is processed at scale: who can access it, how long it is kept, whether it is shared onward, and what safeguards exist to reduce the risk of harm, especially in sensitive matters.

Re: Ministry of Justice orders deletion of the UK's largest court reporting database

#39

Post by rwmj »

krona wrote: post #14

Along with the attempt to prevent jury trials for all but the most serious criminal cases, this is beginning to look like an attempt to prevent reporting on an upcoming case. I can think of one happening in April, involving the prime minister. Given he was head of the CPS for 5 years, would know exactly which levers to pull. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c20dyzp4r42o

There's no world in which this case is being covered up. It's literally on the BBC News website and you have linked to it.

Re: Ministry of Justice orders deletion of the UK's largest court reporting database

#40

Post by carlosjobim »

whizzter wrote: post #21
londons_explore wrote: post #6

Something is either public record - in which case it should be on a government website for free, and the AI companies should be free to scrape to their hearts desire... Or it should be sealed for X years and then public record. Where X might be 1 in cases where you don't want to hurt an ongoing investigation, or 100 if it's someone's private affairs. Nothing that goes through the courts should be sealed forever. We s…

Open to research yes. Free to ingest and make someones crimes a permanent part of AI datasets resulting in forever-convictions? No thanks. AI firms have shown themselves to be playing fast and loose with copyrighted works, a teenager shouldn't have their permanent AI profile become "shoplifter" because they did a crime at 15 yo that would otherwise have been expunged after a few years.

No, public doesn't mean access should be limited to academics of acceptable political alignment, it means open to the public: everybody.

That is the entire point of having courts, since the time of Hammurabi. Otherwise it's back to the clan system, where justice is made by avenging blood.

Making and using any "profiles" of people is an entirely different thing than having court rulings accessible to the public.

Post reply on HN