Extract from article by Marc Zamsky
For many attorneys working in a corporate legal department, their image of the role they serve is that of a chivalrous knight, there to protect and defend the castle from nefarious predators. While that still may be true, today’s in-house attorneys may find themselves having to serve another role, more akin to that of a gatekeeper, ensuring that the appropriate preservation, collection, and flow of information is meticulously maintained in the event of litigation or audit.
Without question, corporate legal operations want and genuinely need to find ways to reduce their costs, control their relationships with outside counsel and service providers, and maximize the value received from these third parties in managing their litigation. But figuring out how to achieve these goals without sacrificing long-trusted affiliations, exposing the company to additional risk on eDiscovery issues, and coordinating compliant data management policies may be more than in-house legal teams can handle alone.
So what’s a corporate legal department to do?
This entry was posted on Thursday, March 10th, 2016 at 11:33 am. It is filed under chronology, industry and tagged with compliance, ediscovery, electronic discovery, privacy, security. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
Taken from a combination of public market sizing estimations as shared in leading electronic discovery reports, publications and posts over time, the following eDiscovery Market Size Mashup shares general worldwide market sizing considerations for software and services in the electronic discovery market for the years between 2017 and 2022.
In navigating the glittering generalities presented by individuals and organizations seeking to influence eDiscovery software selection decisions, remember that there may be many right choices for your specific needs. Considering those choices through the lens of security, capability, complexity, and cost may help ensure that you not only make the right choice but make the best choice for your needs.
Packaged services may help legal technology providers bridge the gap between traditional hourly consulting offerings and fully managed services. They may also provide a strong opportunity to create additional sales entry points and potential new revenue streams by making access to current consulting offerings easier to understand, easier to evaluate, and easier to purchase.
With recent eDiscovery provider announcements that highlight the use of the terms “Continuous Active Learning” and “CAL”, provided below is a quick review and current update on Recommind’s (Recommind, Inc.) opposition to the trademark/service mark application by Maura Grossman and Gordan V. Cormack for trademarking CONTINUOUS ACTIVE LEARNING and CAL.
The recent eDiscovery failures at Wells Fargo and at the Department of Justice show that eDiscovery mistakes and failures happen even at the largest corporations and government agencies. This CLE-approved webcast will discuss the various issues that occurred in these high-profile cases and what to do to avoid them in your own cases.
ComplexDiscovery | Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
The Privacy Shield’s core compliance obligations are built around its “Privacy Principles,” which U.S. companies must agree to adhere to...