eDiscovery Daily Blog
Pick Six! eDiscovery Daily is Six Years Old!
Believe it or not, it has been six years ago today since we launched the eDiscovery Daily blog!
When we launched five years ago on September 20, 2010, we told you to not get “wild” with wildcards (and did it again last week) and we published our first case law post about a case where the spoliator of data was actually threatened with jail time. We’ve now actually published exactly 500 posts about case law, involving more than 330 distinct cases!
Not only that, today is another milestone – we have now published 1,500 lifetime posts! And, every post is still available on the site for your reference, which has made eDiscovery Daily into quite a knowledgebase! We’re quite proud of that.
Back in 2010, our goal was to be a daily resource for eDiscovery news and analysis and we’ve continued to do so for six years now.
As always, we have you to thank for all of that success! Thanks for making the eDiscovery Daily blog a regular resource for your eDiscovery news and analysis! We really appreciate the support!
As many of you know by now, we like to take a look back every six months at some of the important stories and topics during that time. So, here are some posts over the last six months you may have missed. Enjoy!
You would be amazed what happens on the Internet every minute of every day.
Can you steal 11.5 million electronic documents from a law firm without being detected? Apparently, you can.
Nearly two-thirds of all data breaches were due to password issues.
BakerHostetler recently “hired” a new “attorney”, but that “attorney” doesn’t carry a briefcase.
If you have a rush eDiscovery project to get done, where do you turn for help? The cloud, of course.
This seems obvious, but, if you’re running for office, don’t forget to close your porn tabs before taking a screenshot and posting it to your social media account.
If you’re a former IT administrator at a company and you deleted files before you left, you could go to jail.
The EU-US Privacy Shield was formally adopted. Will it hold up better than the old “Safe Harbor”? We’ll see.
The Wisconsin Supreme Court ruled that sentencing judges may (with some restrictions) take into account algorithms that score offenders based on their risk of committing future crimes.
Parties can cooperate in a predictive coding process, yet still disagree on the outcome of what’s produced. Here’s proof.
Bad faith deletion of emails can cost you $3 million.
Believe it or not, Judge Peck refused to order a defendant to use Technology Assisted Review in this case.
Speaking of TAR, here’s another case in England which approved it, despite objections from the receiving party. And, there is a bit of debate among TAR experts.
Have you ever seen an interview conducted online over a couple of days? Here’s one that was.
Did you know that EDRM has a new owner?
Here’s the latest information on eDiscovery Business Confidence within the industry. And, here’s a link to the webinar where we discussed it.
According to Gartner, Machine Learning is at the Peak of Inflated Expectations. Their words, not mine. Also according to Gartner, cloud eDiscovery solutions are gaining momentum in the marketplace.
I thought my example of 269 unique words that can be retrieved with a wildcard of min* to search for mining-related terms was a lot. This example from a case we covered last week for a search for “apps” related terms has even more!
This is just a sampling of topics that we’ve covered. Hope you enjoyed them!
Thanks for the interest you’ve shown in the topics! We will do our best to continue to provide interesting and useful eDiscovery news and analysis. And, as always, please share any comments you might have or if you’d like to know more about a particular topic! We’re already at 1,500! Can we break Pete Rose’s record? I’ll bet we can! :o)
Disclaimer: The views represented herein are exclusively the views of the author, and do not necessarily represent the views held by CloudNine. eDiscovery Daily is made available by CloudNine solely for educational purposes to provide general information about general eDiscovery principles and not to provide specific legal advice applicable to any particular circumstance. eDiscovery Daily should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a lawyer you have retained and who has agreed to represent you.