Previous  Next

24-71.3-121. Construction with other laws.

Statute text

In the event of any conflict between article 71 of this title and this article, this article shall control, but only to the extent of such conflict.

History

Source: L. 2002: Entire article added, p. 856, 1, effective May 30.


ARTICLE 71.5
UNIFORM ELECTRONIC LEGAL MATERIAL ACT

Annotations

Editor's note: Section 24-71.5-112 provides that the operative effective date of this article is March 31, 2014.

 

Section

24-71.5-101. Short title.

24-71.5-102. Definitions.

24-71.5-103. Applicability.

24-71.5-104. Legal material in official electronic record.

24-71.5-105. Authentication of official electronic record.

24-71.5-106. Effect of authentication.

24-71.5-107. Preservation of legal material in official electronic record.

24-71.5-108. Public access to legal material in official electronic record.

24-71.5-109. Standards.

24-71.5-110. Uniformity of application and construction.

24-71.5-111. Relation to electronic signatures in global and national commerce act.

24-71.5-112. Effective date.

Annotations

 

UNIFORM ELECTRONIC LEGAL MATERIAL ACT
PREFATORY NOTE

Introduction. Providing information online is integral to the conduct of state government in the 21st century. The ease and speed with which information can be created, updated, and distributed electronically, especially in contrast to the time required for the production of print materials, enables governments to meet their obligations to provide legal information to the public in a timely and cost-effective manner. State governments have moved rapidly to the online distribution of legal information, in some instances designating a publication in electronic format to be an official publication. Some state governments are eliminating certain print publications altogether. The availability of government information online facilitates transparency and accountability, provides widespread access, and encourages citizen participation in the democratic process.

Changing to an electronic environment also raises new issues in information management. Electronic legal information moves from its originating computer through a series of other computers or servers until it eventually reaches the individual user. The information is susceptible to being altered, whether accidentally or maliciously, at each point where it is stored, transferred, or accessed. Any such alterations can be virtually undetectable by the consumer. A major issue raised by the change to an electronic format, therefore, is whether the information presented to consumers is trustworthy, or authentic.

"An authentic text is one whose content has been verified by a government entity to be complete and unaltered when compared to the version approved or published by the content originator." (American Association of Law Libraries, STATE-BY-STATE REPORT ON AUTHENTICATION OF ONLINE LEGAL RESOURCES 8 (2007)). In the context of this act, the content originator is the official publisher. When a document is authentic, it means that the version of the legal resource presented to the user is the same as that published by the official publisher. Authentication provides an electronic method to establish the integrity of the document, demonstrating that the information has not been tampered with or altered during the transfer between the official publisher and the end-user. Few state governments have taken the actions necessary to ensure that the electronic legal information they create and distribute remains unaltered and is, therefore, trustworthy or authentic.

Authenticity is a much larger concern in the electronic age than in the print age, where legal information typically exists in multiple copies. The content of a print work is "fixed" once printed, making the text easily verifiable and changes readily detectible. Many years of experience allow us to determine when we can trust the integrity of a printed document. It stands to reason, therefore, that before state governments can transition fully into the electronic legal information environment they must develop procedures to ensure the trustworthiness of their electronic legal information.

The ease with which electronic legal information is created and changed raises a second critical consideration: how is legal information with long-term, historical value (including, for example, amended statutes, repealed sections of regulations, and overruled cases) preserved for future use? In a print environment, information is preserved by maintaining paper copies of key legislative documents, administrative materials, and judicial decisions and other resources. It is typical for more than one library, archive, or institution to keep a copy of these historical documents, further assuring their preservation.

Electronic information resides, however, on a computer or other storage device. New versions of computer hardware and software and changing storage media continually result in an inability to read or access older files, thereby making their content unavailable. As hardware, software, and storage media change, old documents are preserved by "migrating" to new formats. Electronic legal information of long-term value must be preserved in a usable format. Unfortunately, few states have addressed this critical need, and fewer still have an infrastructure in place to monitor older data and keep their storage methods up-to-date. The governmental and societal benefits of electronic creation and distribution are limited severely if state government information becomes unusable because of technological changes.

A third issue raised by the electronic creation and distribution of legal material flows from the necessity of preserving all forms of documents with long-term value: the issue is the responsibility of state government to make its legal resources easily, and permanently, accessible. Legal information is consulted by citizens, legislators, government administrators and officials, judges, attorneys, researchers, and scholars, all of whom may require access to both the current law and to older materials, including that which has been amended and superseded. Once properly preserved, electronic legal information of long-term value must also be easily accessible on the same basis as other legal information; that is, electronic legal information should be authenticated and widely available on a permanent basis. State governments must ensure an informed citizenry, which is essential for our democracy to function.

The issues that arise as state governments transition to an electronic legal information environment are common to every state. These issues are also encountered by subdivisions of state government, including municipalities and counties, as well as American Indian tribes. These governments face the same issues as the larger state government, and likewise must manage the entire life cycle of government information, from creation and publication to preservation. This act can be adapted for use by any governmental entity.

About the act. The Uniform Electronic Legal Material Act (UELMA) provides states with an outcomes-based approach to the authentication and preservation of electronic legal material. That is, the goals of the authentication and preservation program outlined in the act are to enable end-users to verify the trustworthiness of the legal material they are using and to provide a framework for states to preserve legal material in perpetuity in a manner that allows for permanent access.

The act does not require specific technologies, leaving the choice of technology for authentication and preservation up to the states. Giving states the flexibility to choose any technology that meets the required outcomes allows each state to choose the best and most cost-effective method for that state. In addition, this flexible, outcomes-based approach anticipates that technologies will change over time; the act does not tie a state to any specific technology at any time.

It should be noted that there are some important issues this act does not address, leaving them to other law or policy. First, this act does not mandate that states publish legal material electronically; choice of format is left entirely to a state's discretion. Second, the act does not require a state to convert older legal material from print format to electronic format. Print remains an accepted medium for preservation of and access to legal material. If, however, a state converts older legal material from print to electronic format, and if the state then designates that electronic format as official, the requirements of the act apply.

Third, this act does not deal with copyright issues, leaving those to federal law and state practice. Fourth, this act does not affect or supersede any rules of evidence; it only provides that electronic legal material that is authenticated is presumed to be a true copy. Fifth, the act does not affect existing state law regarding the certification of printed documents.

Sixth, this act does not interfere with the contractual relationship between a state and a commercial publisher with which the state contracts for the production of its legal material. The act requires that the official publisher be responsible for implementing the terms of the act, regardless of where or by whom the legal material is actually printed or distributed. For the purposes of the act, only a state agency, officer, or employee can be the official publisher, although state policy may allow a commercial entity to produce an official version of the state's legal material.

The UELMA is intended to be complementary to the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC, which covers sales and many commercial transactions), the Uniform Real Property Electronic Recording Act (URPERA, which provides for electronic recording of real property instruments), and the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA, which deals with electronic commerce). Each of these acts covers a unique topic, as does the UELMA, which addresses management of the most important state-level legal materials. The UELMA is not intended to conflict with any of these acts.

Conclusion. The use of digital information formats has become fundamental and indispensable to the operation of state government. This act addresses the critical need to manage electronic legal information in a manner that guarantees the trustworthiness of and continuing access to important state legal material. Technology changes quickly enough that state governments must address this issue, as existing electronic legal information is already in danger of being lost. A uniform act will allow state governments to develop similar systems of authentication and preservation, aiding the free flow of information across state lines and the sharing of experiences and expertise to keep costs as low as possible.

A uniform act should set forth provisions that can be efficiently followed and that achieve the stated purposes of the act. The Drafting Committee believes that this proposed uniform act meets these requirements. The act is straightforward in its terms, creates no additional administrative offices, and has no requirement of judicial or administrative oversight. The act was developed through extensive discussion and debate during five meetings of the Drafting Committee.

The Drafting Committee was assisted by numerous advisors and observers, representing a wide range of organizations. In addition to the American Bar Association advisors listed above, important contributions were made by the observers who attended meetings, participated in conference calls, and submitted many comments on and suggestions for the various drafts of the act. The act is better for their contributions.