On Fri, 3 Feb 1995, Nancy Mcmurrer wrote:
> Just a comment about the amount courts charge to copy materials. Trying
> to compare those costs to a Kinko cost overlooks the nature of the two
> organizations. A copying company is in the business of copying and
> staffs its office to that end. Court offices are not funded to be in the
> copying business. If you wish courts to become "Kinko" business, the
> place to address that change is through those who fund Court functions.
> I wonder how taxpayers would view your proposal?
The private sector charge is one way to guage the appropriateness
of the governmental charge. One thing interesting is that over the past
ten years, while the cost of photocopying machines and photcopying in
general incresed, some courts have raised their charges.
I do not think the courts need to be in the copying business, and that is
the point. They are to the extent they make a "profit" on providing the
service. In addition, providing a means to obtain photocopies of court
documents is I would argue a function of the courts as part of the
requirement that court proceedings be open to the public.
Some courts, but the way, are rather creative. They contract out
photocopying to an outside company ... and the charges are much lower.
Some courts, on the other hand, have proceduures that raise their own
internal costs. For example, to obtain a photocopy of a recent opinion
from some courts, one must telephone and ask for the document. A clerk
calls back with a page count, and tells you how much to pay, and then you
send a check for the exact amount and wait for the documents. Other
courts permit one to send in not to exceed checks or to even use a Visa
Card. I assume that most libraries have to deal with this problem --
with the issues of copyright which does not exist at a court. It is a
pleasure to use a library that has attended to the issue in a business
like way and not as a "burden".
A few years ago, I worked on a case involving information affecting
the public interest that had been sealed in a court action. Since the
law was on our side, the Judge had no choice but to rule in our favor.
We then went back to photocopy the material and were told that we would
have to pay $.50 a page to photocopy on the court's photocopying machine.
We offered to bring in our own machine and use a court conference room to
do the photocopying ... and pointed out that the same constitutional
issues that required the court to unseal the files would also argue that
a $.50 charge was an unreasonable burden impinging our constitutional
rights. Suddenly, despite the "rule", we were able to photocopy at $.10
a page.
Please also remember that a court cannot charge for you to go to the
clerk's office and ask to see the file. To then charge $.50 a page when
one wishes to photocopy a document in the file is I believe questionable.
Alan Sugarman
HyperLaw ®
sugarman@panix.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : 03/09/00 PST