Metadata in State Documents Is Public Record, Court Rules

By Kim Zetter
October 30, 2009
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/10/metadata

Arizona’s Supreme Court, in a surprising but welcome ruling, has declared that electronic metadata is part of the public record under state law, in a case involving an Arizona police officer who suspects his superiors of backdating a document related to his work performance.

Phoenix, Arizona, police officer David Lake had filed a federal lawsuit against the city alleging employment discrimination.

He’d also filed a public records request to obtain documents related to his work, including notes written by his supervisor documenting his performance. When he subsequently sought the electronic metadata for the records, because he believed at least one of the paper documents had been backdated, the city refused.

The city argued that metadata — digital information that can reveal when a document was created and subsequently accessed or modified — was not part of the public record. Releasing such information to the public would result in an “administrative nightmare” and force public officials to spend “countless hours” trying to identify the metadata, the city claimed.

Two lower courts agreed with the city, noting a distinction between “record” and “public record.”

But the state Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that “if a public entity maintains a public record in an electronic format, then the electronic version, including any embedded metadata, is subject to disclosure (.pdf) under our public records laws.”

Supreme Court Justice W. Scott Bales wrote in the ruling that metadata “is part of the underlying document; it does not stand on its own. When a public officer uses a computer to make a public record, the metadata forms part of the document as much as the words on the page.”

The court responded to the city’s claim that supplying metadata would place an unnatural burden on city workers by noting that the request for metadata could easily be satisfied by supplying requesters with documents in their original electronic format, rather than printing them out.

Several media organizations, as well as the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, wrote an amicus brief in support of Lake’s request.

“The decision is important because we live in an electronic age where maintenance and preservation of public records in electronic format is quickly becoming the norm,” said David Bodney, who helped write the brief. “Public bodies should not be permitted to withhold that information from public inspection.”

Although the ruling applies only in Arizona, the case could influence other courts. The Supreme Court in Washington state is set to hear a similar metadata case.

(Hat tip: Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press)