Posts Tagged ‘software’
hide story details [-]
- May 17th
-
Separating the Wheat from the eDiscovery Software Chaff
There are hundreds of e-discovery software applications available. Every stage of the EDRM can be assisted by one or more commercially available applications. Some of these are designed for very specific functions, such as trial presentation, while others claim to have multiple parts that can be used at different EDRM stages, such as software that collects, processes, analyses and reviews electronic information. The marketing collateral that accompanies many of these products proclaim each of them as “the best” at what they do. They advertise various types of functions, such as near duplicate identification, conceptual clustering, predictive coding, etc. With all the different options available, how can one filter out the “sales-speak” and actually evaluate an e-discovery offering on its merits? The following tips may help: 1. Make sure the software fits you, not the other way around The reason you [...]
posted at 10:00am on May 17th
- May 1st
-
Digital Forensics and Discovery Management are Certified Specialties
Digital Forensics and Discovery Management are Certified Specialties
posted at 3:35pm on May 1st
- April 30th
-
A Review of the iCONECT Global Summit 2012 – Day One
I was pleased to participate in day one of iCONECT’s Global Summit in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida last week. The Summit, designed for iConect’s clients and partners, was well done and very educational. The program consisted of sessions featuring iCONECT’s Xera product, as well as keynotes, presentations and panels on hot eDiscovery topics led by industry experts. As one of the early (1999-ish) users of iCONECT, I am excited to see how the product has evolved over the years. It is a challenge for early-to-market software to maintain the “latest and greatest” market perception that consumers are looking for. iCONECT appears to be working diligently to stay fresh, relevant and focused on customer needs as is demonstrated by its launch of iPad review capabilities and an increasingly intuitive user interface. Further, the iCONECT roadmap introduces advanced analytic capabilities. iCONECT designed its Summit [...]
posted at 11:39am on Apr 30th
- April 25th
-
Vendors – A Dying Breed? Thoughts from IPRO Innovations
I always enjoy speaking at the IPRO Innovations conferences. They are a good mix of IPRO channel partners and corporate/firm customers, which makes for an excellent market sampling without the crazy crowds or sales intensity of Legal Tech. The IPRO team knows how to create a fun, relaxing atmosphere with enough real content to keep attendees engaged. You may have noticed my deliberate use of the slightly pejorative term “vendors” in my headline. I normally prefer ‘service providers’ to call out the ‘service’ and expertise that I hope is part of every eDiscovery project. ‘Vendor’ has always reminded me of a bulk commodity seller, think of Walmart selling eDiscovery.
posted at 11:35am on Apr 25th
- March 27th
-
Is Linear Review Dead?
Last week I was a panelist at the 2012 Masters Series event in Houston and enjoyed the lively and frank discussions about purchasing trends, privacy issues and more that continued into the social gathering afterward. As you might expect, predictive coding and the latest Da Silva filing were a hot topic, especially amongst providers of managed review. One remark by Jim Wagner, CEO of DiscoverReady, resonated with me and I told him that I was going to steal it for a blog. To paraphrase, “The market sees linear review as disorganized review.” He was right on target. Linear review has become synonymous with plowing through millions of randomized email/documents in the least efficient or effective manner. I ask you, “In the last 5 years, have you reviewed collections that had not been culled, searched, prioritized, deduplicated, email threaded or otherwise optimized for review batching?”
posted at 9:00am on Mar 27th
- March 20th
-
Defining the eDiscovery Platform – Autodesk Interview
One of the bright points of designing the new eDJ Matrix has been our analyst sessions over what functionality is required for software and services to qualify for our market categories. It may sound geeky to you, but I have grumbled over ‘waves’ and ‘squares’ that were real apple-orange comparisons too many times. I want to get this right in our next big release. The ‘eDiscovery Platform’ was a prominent theme at LTNY 2012, but what do providers mean when they call their software a ‘platform’. They want to give buyers the impression that they cover the entire eDiscovery lifecycle, generally by showing the EDRM diagram covered by their software logo. As nice as that sounds, no one covers document creation through trial presentation in one program, NO ONE. But a more realistic corporate eDiscovery platform seems to be attainable. We spoke with the litigation and compliance team at Autodesk about their selection of Symantec’s Clearwell software.
posted at 11:43am on Mar 20th
- March 7th
-
Activate SharePoint Features Before You Start a Project
One thing I dislike about bureaucracy is that there are always hidden forms and codes no one ever seems to tell you about. I can relate this to IT, because when you are troubleshooting a problem there always seems to be one step you are missing. SharePoint developers experience this teeth-grinding situation everyday, but I [...]
posted at 10:57am on Mar 7th
-
Tech Take Aways in Judge Peck’s Da Silva Opinion
The value promise of ‘black box’ predictive coding or ‘Easy Button’ review gets marketing departments all excited. So excited that eDJ was inundated with copies of the hearing transcript and opinion of Da Silva Moore v. Publicis Groupe & MSL Group, No. 11 Civ. 1279 (ALC) (AJP) (S.D.N.Y. Feb. 24, 2012) along with their interpretations on how this changed the ground rules of eDiscovery. Marketing departments can spin a mountain out of a mole hill. In his final order, Judge Peck pushed back, “To correct the many blogs about this case, initiated by a press release from plaintiffs’ vendor – the Court did not order the parties to use predictive coding. The parties had agreed to defendants’ use of it, but had disputes over the scope and implementation, which the Court ruled on, thus accepting the use of computer-assisted review in this lawsuit.” Check out Mikki Tomlinson’s interviews with Judge Peck or Conor Crowley’s excellent legal summary for more practical interpretations. The arguments over how you know when your predictive training are ‘good enough’ are worth dissecting. eDJ has been researching the methods of technology assisted review, so I thought it worth extracting some of these key points. Remember that even the vendor experts in this case are representing their technology. Preliminary raw hearing transcripts rarely released to the public and I wonder if the parties are as happy as their vendors about all the publicity. This is a nice glimpse into the fray before the dust has settled on technology assisted review.
posted at 8:00am on Mar 7th
- March 6th
-
Hacker Points to Weakness in LexisNexis Concordance
A security weakness in the LexisNexis Concordance system could allow people to hijack database passwords, putting attorneys’ client data at risk of theft, according to the hacker who discovered it. Concordance helps legal …
posted at 10:00pm on Mar 6th
- February 29th
-
Buckles LegalTech Micro Briefs – It’s a Wrap
Wrapping up my quick takeaways, I want to say that I really enjoyed the upbeat attitude at LTNY 2012. It was a great show for us and the follow up demos, proposals and new development work has kept us hopping. So here are the last of my briefs, with apologies to all of the providers who did not manage to get time with us or who could not deliver a memorable message to pass on.
kCura – The latest release (version 7.3) may feel a bit retro to any of us who remember having to install 20+ applications to every Discovery Cracker workstation in order to TIFF collections. As it was explained to eDJ, the new Relativity Native Imaging feature is optional, only requires 16 applications for full support and is intended to improve the quality and performance of productions. My own take away is that this is the foundation for processing native collections, which is the next logical step in growing Relativity from a review point solution to a broader eDiscovery platform. We followed up with several major Relativity service partners who confirmed our theory. So the real question is whether this will blunt the meteoric rise of kCura’s channel or simply launch them into broader corporate sales. We have seen other market leaders stumble and lose momentum when making this transition, so kCura should be watched closely over the next year.posted at 3:50pm on Feb 29th