As a "pay for view" system, I kind of doubt that the PACER folks take too kindly to folks taking info intended for personal use and posting it on the internet. It seems it would cheat them out of their precious 8 cents per view from some unknown number of other folks. Maybe there's a "Napster" version of PACER out there? LOL

I'd also, IMO, be violating the terms I agreed to when I registered:

The PACER account being registered is for my use only, unless specifically designated otherwise on the registration form. I am responsible for preventing unauthorized use of the account. If I believe there has been unauthorized use, I must notify the PACER Service Center immediately.

Public Access to Court Electronic Records is supported by user fees. Any attempt to collect data from PACER in a manner which avoids billing is strictly prohibited and may result in criminal prosecution or civil action. PACER privileges will be terminated if, in the judgment of judiciary personnel, they are being misused.

Shucks, based on that last one, we may all already be in trouble!

SGE"

Though IMO this not an offensive reply, it was followed by this response from you (which was allowed to stand):

"You know, I assumed that you were an intelligent guy. Based on your post, I now have my doubts about my original assumption. You know what "they" same about "assuming" something about someone.

You are saying that posting public information on a public message board is a crime? LOL, keep your day job. If I tried to access YOUR PACER account, I would be in pretty big trouble. Sharing PUBLIC information is not a crime. The information obtained from PACER is PUBLIC information, and is not proprietary, imho.

DISCLAIMER: I am not an attorney but I do possess common sense and have 23 years of law enforcement experience (actually, I have been a peace officer for 31 years) and possess formal education in criminal justice, including a Master of Science degree in Justice Policy.

Have a great weekend and don't forget to set your clock forward one hour.

Pete Lozano"

Now, in addition to the terms of use for PACER I cited in my original response (above) which you chose to ignore based on "common sense", I suggest you note what is printed at the bottom of every PACER document:

"This disposition is not designated for publication."

Now, I'll give you an "out", in that it appears this footnote was added in 2010 with the publication of the revised PACER Manual.

So you can argue that you were not cognizant of the change in PACER rules (which would be understandable), or you can continue to argue "common sense" and ignore the terms of use and what's printed on every page.

Interestingly, my version of common sense tells me that if you have to pay for something intended for personal use and on-screen viewing only, they probably frown on you taking it and giving it away for free. You don't "own it", you paid for permission to VIEW it.

Please use the "out" I graciously provide, and back off on the demeaning commentary - which happens to be wrong.

Thank you,

SGE