Oh, there *can* be, but only if the filer put it there. (There’s at least one firm I know of that files in New York State with a full-color insert of their firm’s logo on the cover page right under the caption)
Comments
Log in with your Bluesky account to leave a comment
If Elias were posting court docs FOR YOU or other attorneys, then I could see you being annoyed by the watermark, BUT they are posting information FOR THE GENERAL PUBLIC, so using the watermark simply provides the sourcing that everyone online insists be provided.
THE SOURCING FOR WHERE THE PERSON SHARING THE INFORMATION GOT THE INFORMATION is what is what regular, everyday people require, perhaps you don't spend much time online, but if someone "sources" the original document upload, MOST people aren't going to go try to read it
Right. And that is provided by the stamps on documents - you know that the document that Democracy Docket shared is the authentic court document because it has the stamping that the court places on the document.
MOST people want a source that EXPLAINS the document to them, they don't HAVE the legal background to disseminate court filings so they WANT the link to the lawyer who share it because that lawyer USUALLY posts it with an explanation of what that document MEANS.
Comments
This is stupid, needless pettiness
The source is PACER in both cases. Why does the everyday person see (or maybe trust is the right word) the two documents differently?
Leave them plain. Figure out how to promote your org in organic ways.
The elitist crap is lame