Google Does eDiscovery
April 4, 2012
The freethinking Google has decided to launch an eDiscovery app to help reduce the cost of finding and capturing data for litigation. CBR writes about the new app in, “Google Adds eDiscovery Option to Apps Platform.” Google’s new app dubbed Vault allows businesses to preserve and identify information for legal purposes. Once the data is saved in the Vault a “legal hold” is placed on it, meaning it cannot be modified. We learned:
Vault helps protect your business with easy-to-use search so you can quickly find and preserve data to respond to unexpected customer claims, lawsuits or investigations. With an instant-on functionality and availability of your data a few clicks away, Vault provides access to all of your Gmail and on-the-record chats and can provide significant savings to your business over the traditional costs of litigation and eDiscovery,” Jack Halprin, Google’s head of eDiscovery, added.
Vault uses the same architecture as other Google Business Apps and it can easily be added to clients’ accounts for another $5/month. Vault can also record IM messages and G-mail accounts, but it cannot capture any data outside the Google platform. It does prove that Google is dedicated to expanding their capabilities, especially their cloud-based software. Google has been lauded as the business model of the IT world with a jeans, sneakers, and T-shirt approach to business, but now Google is serving enterprise niches and it suggests a more disciplined approach to the enterprise market. Will a suit and tie be next?
Whitney Grace, April 4, 2012
Sponsored by Pandia.com
Law Firms Learn Staff Can Be Repurposed
March 30, 2012
I know there is considerable enthusiasm for smart software. Most of the eDiscovery vendors suggest that humans and whizzy new systems can coexist. Now, a new chapter in justifiable staff reductions may be upon us. Navigate to “A New View of Review: Predictive Coding Vows to Cut E-Discovery Drudgery” to learn that recently released research from an Ivory Tower-type says that a “predictive coding approach can do a better job of sifting through more than 800,000 documents than humans.”
For many law school graduates, scouring documents for material of value to a case has long been a secure if somewhat tedious means of entering the legal profession. This will no longer be true, however, if a new type of software lives up to its creator’s claims Known as predictive coding, it can supposedly do the same job, faster, cheaper, and as well as humans. But lawyers live to bill, so perhaps software may force law firms to get rid of staff and trust the algorithms.
We learn:
There has been a long-standing myth in the legal field that exhaustive manual review is the gold standard, or nearly perfect, but that has been shown to be a fallacy, according to Maura R. Grossman, a New York City attorney. Research has shown that, under the best circumstances, manual review will identify about 70 percent of the responsive documents in a large data collection. Some technology-assisted approaches have been shown to perform at least as well as that, if not better, at far less cost.
Attorneys, paralegals, unpaid interns, and experts in India will miss 30 percent of the pertinent documents. Smart software is the path to the future.
Some observers worry about the legal defensibility of predictive coding. But such concerns are unfounded, so long as both sides agree to its use. That’s according to Craig Carpenter, a marketer for Recommind, a software development firm focused on the legal and corporate market
But even sophisticated programs don’t actually think. Without that capacity, they cannot understand the subtle nuances and informal connections that underlie written documents. It’s unlikely that predictive coding will live up to the sales hype surrounding it. But what’s new about search vendors’ marketing is that reality is often different from Spock’s world on Star Trek.
Stephen E Arnold, March 20, 2012
Sponsored by Pandia.com
The Risks of Disorganized Data
March 28, 2012
Ah, eDiscovery, you spin a wide web of repercussions. Australia’s Lawyers Weekly reports, “Messy Info Systems Could Cost Firms Millions.” Allison Walton, an eDiscovery attorney at Symantec, spoke recently at the Australian Corporate Lawyers Association’s 2012 Victorian Corporate Counsel Day. Information management company Symantec helps clients with eDiscovery needs, among other things.
The article reports on Walton’s session:
’E-discovery has been a very expensive, painful process in America over the last 15 years and some of that has started to happen in Australia. The same trends of over-collection, having to sort through duplicates, being at the mercy of outside service providers and their bills, and generally not owning the process,’ she said. Walton aims to accelerate that ‘painful process’ in Australia, by giving those who own information within law firms, power over it. ‘That’s the information governance message I want to get across,’ she told Lawyers Weekly.’
Information governance, she says, should take the form of end-to-end archiving across an “electronic discovery reference model” she supplied. See the article for an illustration of that model.
Hoping Aussies learn from the mistakes of US companies, Walton emphasizes that organizations need to let go of the old. Fearing the very real danger of being prosecuted for deleting data they should have kept, many firms just refuse to delete anything. This approach, however, can hamper a system so that retrieving relevant information quickly might be impossible. That’s not much help. Furthermore, it can mean that “tons of different pieces of sensitive information end up getting all mixed up together and probably don’t have the right security parameters around them.” Even less than unhelpful.
Walton informed her listeners that a number of US companies have been very heavily penalized for being unable to produce required records. She cautions that if businesses wish to have offices in the US, they must understand and follow US laws. They should lay the groundwork for efficient compliance from the beginning.
So, now we understand about the cost to lawyers of unkempt information systems, but what about to the clients? Oh, clients. Yep, they can be important. . . .
Cynthia Murrell, March 26, 2012
Sponsored by Pandia.com
ZyLAB Captures Email in the Cloud
February 27, 2012
Digital Technology recently reported on the information management technology company ZyLAB, in the article, “New ZyLAB eDiscovery Cloud Collectors Retrieve Messages, Calendar Items, and Contacts from Microsoft Office 365 and Other Web-based Email”
According to the article, the company has released the first in its series of new ZyLAB Cloud Collectors to capture email from Microsoft Exchange Online.
the article states:
“With this release, ZyLAB becomes the only end-to-end eDiscovery company to offer both traditional email collection and integrated collection of cloud-based email systems via a hosted or on premise application. This capability enables ZyLAB clients to easily migrate previously collected and processed email from their SaaS-based ZyLAB eDiscovery system to a fully-featured ZyLAB eDiscovery system that is behind the firewall and poised to manage multiple litigation or regulatory matters as well as corporate governance.”
With the increase of mobile technology users, the use of Cloud computing becomes more and more vital. ZyLAB’s new products are an excellent addition to the array of products currently in circulation.
Jasmine Ashton, February 27, 2012
Sponsored by Pandia.com
Instant Technologies: Findability Push
February 14, 2012
Poor, poor search vendors. Competition comes from start ups, old outfits dosing on Krating Daeng, and outliers staffed with Smith College and Radcliffe college medieval studies and environmental science and policy majors working in technical marketing.
We noted the Instant Technologies’ Integrys Archive Viewer’s tweaking of its archiving, compliance, search, and discovery solution. The enhancement makes it possible to “discover” instant messages. According to the announcement:
Instant Archive Viewer is the leading archiving and compliance, search, and discovery solution for Microsoft OCS and Lync 2010. Instant Archive Viewer helps organizations enforce internal IM usage policies and quickly respond to compliance audits and legal discovery requests. Instant Archive Viewer is a highly scalable, and stable, OCS/Lync 2010 archiving application and is in use at many of the leading financial service organizations.
Several observations:
The solution appears to be just the ticket for outfits embracing Microsoft and IBM solutions. The Instant Technologies’ solution calls my attention to this question, “Aren’t Microsoft and IBM already providing these functions with their cornucopia of components?”
Then I realized, “If Instant Technologies has an innovation, what does that suggest about the native Microsoft and IBM solutions or the functions now available from other third party solution providers?”
Finally, I wondered, “How will companies buying older solutions such as Clearwell, Stratify, and similar vendors going to respond?”
In short, traditional key word search seems to be going the way of the dodo. In its place are traditional key word search systems with tweaks and some features. The task of deciding “which system” gets more difficult each day I conclude. Perhaps an azure chip consultant will aim its intellectual fire power at this market niche, roll out a crazy matrix, and estimate that add-ins are worth billions in 2016”? One can only wait with bated breath.
Stephen E Arnold, February 14, 2012
Sponsored by Pandia.com
Proportionality Cuts eDiscovery Costs
January 28, 2012
There is no question that eDiscovery has gotten expensive and collateral discovery disputes are on the rise. In response to this trend, the concept of proportionality is being emphasized. Existing provisions are often bypassed and numerous are in support of an amended federal rule regarding proportionality. In fact, an amended rule is already in place in Utah. An interesting article titled “New Utah Rule 26: A Blueprint for Proportionality in eDiscovery” tells us more. The article informs us:
Utah Rule 26 has changed the permissible scope of discovery to expressly condition that all discovery meet the standards of proportionality. That means parties may seek discovery of relevant, non-privileged materials “if the discovery satisfies the standards of proportionality.” This effectively shifts the burden of proof on proportionality from the responding party to the requesting party. Indeed, Utah Rule 26(b)(3) specifically codifies this stunning change: ‘The party seeking discovery always has the burden of showing proportionality and relevance.’
Utah Rule 26 could be a potential model for implementing a federal rule and make proportionality the standard governing eDiscovery. The new federal rule based on this blueprint could be amended to expressly condition discovery on meeting the principles of proportionality. This could drastically lower the costs surrounding eDiscovery. On the other hand, when clients pay, advisors bill. Ultimately clients have to manage legal fees, proportionality or not.
Andrea Hayden, January 28, 2012
Sponsored by Pandia.com
eDiscovery Search May Not Be Worth It
January 12, 2012
According to the eDiscovery Daily blog piece “eDiscovery Case Law: Plaintiff Not Required to Review Millions of Pages of Unallocated Space” eDiscovery search is in big trouble. The case I-Med Pharma, Inc. vs. Biomatrix Inc. shed light on eDiscovery search and how troublesome it can be. This case highlights the dangers of carelessness and inattention in e-discovery,” District Judge Dickinson Debevoise wrote in his ruling. eDiscovery has made its way to Congress. Attorney William Butterfield, a partner at Hausefeld LLP was one of several asked to testify before the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on the Constitution on the costs and burdens of eDiscovery according to the Clear Well Systems article “Q&A with William P. Butterfield on his Testimony Regarding the Costs and Burdens of eDiscovery Before the House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on the Constitution.” He and others stressed the importance of letting the Judicial Rules Review Committee continue to handle the situation instead of Congress prematurely interfering. Butterfield felt that “Nothing during the hearing led me to believe that Congress would interfere with the Rules Committee’s work and process.” Looks like eDiscovery dodged a bullet.
April Holmes, January 12, 2012
Sponsored by Pandia.com
The Solution to Email Overload? No Email
December 4, 2011
I enjoy France and the French. The country is essentially an engineering outfit with a soft spot for art, a love of intellectual discussion, and a clever approach to thorny problems. Consider email. At Atos, the senior management has found a solution to email overload, the risks of eDiscovery, and the cost of trying to manage unfindable PowerPoint attachments. (My hunch is that the news report missed some of the story, but, hey, that’s okay.
How? Here’s what I learned in “Tech Firm Implements Employee ‘Zero Email’ Policy.” Let’s assume ABC News has the facts lined up like Napoleon’s army before it did the Moscow in Autumn thing. Here’s what I learned:
The company says by 2013, more than half of all new digital content will be the result of updates to, and editing of existing information. Middle managers spend more than 25 percent of their time searching for information, according to the company. Crouch said Atos is evaluating a number of new tools to replace internal email including collaborative and social media tools. Those include the Atos Wiki, which allows all employees to communicate by contributing or modifying online content, and Office Communicator, the company’s online chat system which allows video conferencing, and file and application sharing.
So “zero” does not mean zero. Social interactions are not email. Okay, ABC News, close enough for horseshoes. I assume the cloud, Gmail, and various on premises solutions along the lines of SharePoint and Exchange would not work.
The reality is that email is going to be tough to eliminate even if one calls the outputs “collaboration” with a “social” twist of lemon. No lemonade here, however. Search vendors can rest easy. Atos is a prospect. Symantec, HP, and Recommind can make sales calls confident that non-email digital information must be searched, made findable, and discoverable by avocats which are lawyers no matter what one calls these fine professionals.
Stephen E Arnold, December 4, 2011
Sponsored by Pandia.com
ZyLAB Offers Guidance about eDiscovery
November 21, 2011
ZyLAB goes back to the content lore about records management in “eDiscovery and Information Management: Factors that drive solid records management.” The piece emphasizes the importance of meeting legal obligations and points to several sources for guidance: the UK National Archives, the National Archives of Australia, and the US Department of Defense. However, it also acknowledges that crafting a records management program is a highly individual effort:
Although regulatory guidelines exist, every organization is different. . . . There are basic tenants and principles to good records management—not just in terms of ‘managing records’ but also in terms of creating a positive impact on the organization’s overriding knowledge management goals—but this construct doesn’t mean that there is a ‘one size fits all’ solution to every situation.
The article helpfully suggests ZyLAB’s 8-Point Inspection tool for assessing an organization’s data management needs. Clients from corporations to government agencies use this industry leader’s robust tools to cover their backsides.
This is an interesting write up, and a reminder that the content management systems for Web sites are destined to be a hassle.
Cynthia Murrell, November 21, 2011
Sponsored by Pandia.com
Search to Management: The eDiscovery Play
November 16, 2011
New regulations in both the US and the UK have e-discovery vendors anticipating profits. FT.com advises, “E-discovery: Manage Your Data Wisely—Regulators Now Have Teeth.” (This wise publisher wants you to subscribe to read the full document. Get out your credit card.)
Of course, managing data for e-discovery purposes takes time and resources, so most companies tend to put the issue off until regulators come knocking. This can mean last minute scrambling and, as a result, disadvantage in any proceedings. What can be done?
Writer Jessica Twentyman points to some key advice:
Dean Gonsowski, e-discovery counsel in the information management group at Symantec, a security software company, believes the answer lies in making e-discovery a ‘repeatable business process’, rather than a one-off response to a request. That means establishing company-wide rules on electronic information, governing what should be deleted or retained, applying those rules and using e-discovery software to retrieve information quickly, he says.
Perhaps surprisingly, email comes in third as an e-discovery request target. Files/ documents are the most requested, followed by database/ applications data. Social media records, corporate blogs, instant messages, and texts are growing categories.
It’s important that companies understand e-discovery at least as much as regulators do. Do your research and invest in good e-discovery software. Be prepared, even as you hope you never have to respond to a regulator’s request for information.
Vendors of search will have to “move up the value rope”. Finding is no longer enough we believe.
Cynthia Murrell November 15, 2011
Sponsored by Pandia.com
-
- Subscribe to Beyond Search
Feature archive
News archive
-
