I was curious why a law like that would not cause more scrutinity other than that one website. After looking it up, the law is from this past March and has only

I was curious why a law like that would not cause more scrutinity other than that one website. After looking it up, the law is from this past March and has only been discussed by a couple of French-language sites. This is not causing more alarm because the data was previously available only in printed form, which meant that typically only a lawyer would access it, and only on a case-per-case basis. So in practice the data is being made more easily available, but in a limited form. They're basically handling this like it's a whois request. The law specifically state that what is illegal is publishing data identifying a judge ("Les données d'identité des magistrats et des membres du greffe ne peuvent faire l'objet..."), so publishing general or anonymized stats is legal. For stats regarding a judge I guess one would have to rely on the previously available printed format. Why that is I have no idea, the only argument I've seen is some vague reference to protecting againt "judge/lawyer AI", which I can't make sense of in this context (is judge AI even a thing?). This seems to me to be some kind of over-reaction to new tech. I've come to call these type of laws 'Peak French': unforeseen issue on the horizon? No worries, just lock everything down and pretend the problem is solved.