Migrated from eDJGroupInc.com. Author: . Published: 2011-11-03 18:13:43  I had the opportunity to attend and speak at the IQPC 6th Annual eDiscovery for Pharma, Biotech, and Medical Devices in Philadelphia last week (October 24-26, 2011).  I have been to several IQPC eDiscovery events in the past and this one was very much on par with the others I’ve seen over the years.IQPC events typically have a pre-conference workshop day and then two main conference days.  The workshops on Monday were very intimate which I find to be a good educational situation.  There were three workshops on Monday including the one I led on Global Matters: From International Data Collection to Foreign Language Review.  It always surprises me on the complexity of the issues surrounding data privacy especially in the E.U.  (Click here for a copy of the presentation – IQPC_IntlDataPrivacy_IQPC_Pharma_Oct2011.)   As I was preparing for the presentation, I came across an interesting case that basically waives attorney privilege for in-house counsel in Europe when involved in competitive investigations.  If you have an international presence in your company, please make sure you are aware of the Akzo Nobel matter.I was very impressed with the workshop on  Building a Defensible Program of Technology-Assisted Review led by Karl Schieneman (President and Founder of Review Less, LLC), Tom Gricks (Head of eDiscovery at Schnader Harrison Lewis & Segal), and Brenda  Dodd (Litigation Paralegal with Mylan Laboratories).  These folks really knew their stuff on the topic and this is the best presentation on validating predictive analytics I’ve seen to date.  The panel equated using traditional keyword strategies to a game of “Go Fish” and using Predictive Coding as “Poker”.  I actually got that analogy since poker is a game of incomplete information, but forces you to make a decision based on incomplete, but available information whereas Go Fish is simply a random guess based on your immediate needs.  Karl is truly an evangelist for the Predictive Coding cause and Karl and Tom have spent a considerable amount of time putting together the metrics and legal strategy.  Based on the findings presented, we’re seeing a higher precision and recall rate using the predictive technology than the traditional review workflow which saves significant money in the long-term.  Hopefully we’ll be able to get some of the members of this panel to do a eDiscovery Journal webinar in the near future.The other panel I was very impressed with was the one on Data Security in the Cloud and its Implications on eDiscovery led by Cliff Dutton (President of Dutton LLC) and Phil Yannella (Partner at Ballard Spahr LLP).   The panel did a great job of outlining the general issues related to cloud computing and eDiscovery from the perspective of both  counsel and IT.  I agreed with their perspective that people should be asking about the negotiability of the Cloud provider agreements (I would love to hear stories if anyone has any) and the “what-if” scenario if the Cloud provider goes out of business.  This is very scary stuff that everyone should be aware of when considering moving to Cloud provider.  eDJ Group‘s goal is to put as much in the Cloud as possible so that we can be in the trenches ahead of time for our readers, so this topic was near and dear to me.I unfortunately had to leave early on the last day of the conference and was disappointed I missed some of the panels.  If anyone has any comments or would like to do a post on any of the other panels, please email me at jason@edjgroupinc.com or feel free to comment directly on this post.  We would really enjoy your insight as well.  Thanks to the folks at IQPC for putting on another informative eDiscovery event.

0 0 votes
Article Rating