By Tamara EmoryAt this year’s Legal Tech, I once again had the honor of moderating the Judges Panel, on which Judge John Facciola (D.D.C., retired), Judge Andrew Peck (S.D.N.Y), Judge Frank Maas (S.D.N.Y), and Judge Elizabeth Laporte (N.D.Cal.) presented. This time, we had a provocative topic (or, perhaps –as Judge Peck put it–, a depressing one): “What’s Wrong with Discovery?” The judges had plenty of insight into why discovery has become risky and expensive, what causes attorney misconduct in discovery, and implications for access to justice. Below are ten highlights of that discussion.
News, views, discussions and data associated with the field of electronic discovery.
Information Governance (InfoGovernance) is the specification of decision rights and an accountability framework to encourage desirable behavior in the valuation, creation, storage, use, archiving and deletion of information. It includes the processes, roles, standards and metrics that ensure the effective and efficient use of information to enable an organization to achieve its goals. Information governance should be an element in planning an enterprise's information architecture.
(Gartner Hype Cycle for Legal and Regulatory Information Governance, 2009, December 2009).
An Engagement Area (EA) is an area where the commander of a military force intends to contain and destroy an enemy force with the massed effects of all available weapons systems.
(FM 1-02, Operational Terms and Graphics, September 2004).
Friday, March 20, 2015
‘Have you Taken Leave of Your Senses?': Top 10 Takeaways from 2015 LegalTech Judges Panel
Tuesday, March 17, 2015
2015 Big Data and Analytics Survey
By IDG EnterpriseThe 2015 Big Data and Analytics study highlights data-driven initiatives and strategies driving data investments within IT organizations. In order to gain a deeper understanding of organizations’ big data goals and tactics, the research shows data deployment trends, future investment growth and opportunities for vendors.
Wednesday, March 11, 2015
Elephants, Review, and Marilyn Monroe Wallpaper: Why eDiscovery Review is so Inconsistent
By Herbert L. RoitblatOne advantage of using computer assisted review, for example, predictive coding, is that the computer does, in fact, examine all of the available evidence in a document. Unlike human reviewers, the computer sees all parts of the elephant and, as a result, consistently judges documents based on the full complement of information in them. Each of reviewer judgment used to train the system may be based on a sample of features, but the computer system aggregates all of these partial judgments and chooses the category that is most consistent with this aggregation of cues, rather than with any individual sample. As a result, the computer can be more consistent than the human reviewer who trains trains it. Under appropriate circumstances, this consistency further enhances the accuracy and reliability of computer assisted review.
A Short List of eDiscovery Investors
Tuesday, March 10, 2015
The eDisclosure Systems Buyers Guide – 2015 Edition
The eDisclosure Systems – Buyers Guide – 2015 Edition
- Authored by Andrew Haslam, Allvision Computing.
- Prepared in Conjunction with LegalIT Insider.
The Cost of Email: Metrics and Mentions (Cartoon and Clip)
The Cartoon and Clip of the Week for March 11, 2015
Managing Email? Four Mentions of Interest
Predictive Coding – what happened to the next big thing?
In 2010, “predictive coding” or “computer-assisted review” was considered the next big thing in ediscovery, destined to replace linear review and keyword searching as the predominant methodology during document review. Fast forward 5 years and where are we? Has the “next big thing” arrived? Predictive coding, which uses computer algorithms to determine which documents are most likely to be relevant based on a sample set of documents reviewed by a subject matter expert (i.e. lawyers), can result in substantial cost savings. It can be used to cull the volume of documents to be reviewed or prioritise […]