At a recent Big Data and High Performance Computing Summit in Boston hosted by Amazon Web Services (AWS), data scientist John Rauser mentioned a simple definition: Any amount of data that’s too big to be handled by one computer.

Some says that’s too simplistic. Others say it’s spot on.

“Big data has to be one of the most hyped technologies since, well the last most hyped technology, and when that happens, definition become muddled,” says Jeffrey Breen of Atmosphere Research Group.

The lack of a standard definition points to the immaturity of the market, says Dan Vesset, IDC program vice president of the business analytics division of the research firm. But, he isn’t quite buying the definition floated by AWS. “I’d like to see something that actually talks about data instead of the infrastructure needed to process it,” he says.

via Defining ‘big data’ depends on who’s doing the defining – Computerworld.

A derivative action is a lawsuit brought by shareholders on behalf of a company against a third party, and the California entity, which is the second-largest U.S. public pension fund, holds more than 5.3 million shares of Wal-Mart, valued at more than $313.5 million as of Tuesday, according to the fund and its lawsuit.

via California pension fund sues Wal-Mart execs over alleged Mexico bribery | WTVR.com – Richmond News & Weather from WTVR Television CBS 6.

You may be in for a rude awakening.

Many lawyers and IT staffers “just assume if they put data in the cloud it’s going to be at their fingertips, that it’s inherently discoverable,” says Barry Murphy, co-founder and principal analyst at eDJ Group, a consulting firm specializing in e-discovery. “That’s not necessarily the case.”

Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a party to litigation is expected to preserve and be able to produce electronically stored information that is in its “possession, custody or control.” But in the cloud, the situation isn’t so clear. Information that’s electronically stored in the cloud is presumably under your control, but it may not technically be in your possession, says James M. Kunick, principal and chair of the intellectual property and technology practice at law firm Much Shelist.

via E-discovery in the Cloud – Computerworld.

via Lawyer: Hedge Funds Must Heed Foreign Corrupt Practices Act | FINalternatives.

In January, you may recall, U.S. District Judge Colleen McMahon of Manhattan federal court attempted to moot a hot e-discovery dispute between the audit firm KPMG and a putative class of audit associates suing KPMG for unpaid overtime. The federal magistrate overseeing discovery in the case had ordered KPMG to preserve the computer hard drives of every potential class member, including those who had left the firm. KPMG’s lawyers at Sidley Austin argued that storing the hard drives could end up costing more than the plaintiffs’ claims are worth. The Chamber of Commerce and the International Association of Defense Counsel piled on, asserting that the magistrate’s e-discovery order had the potential to fundamentally change the balance of power in class actions by making it too expensive for KPMG and other defendants in similar situations to continue litigating cases against them.

McMahon was clearly reluctant to second-guess U.S. Magistrate Judge James Cott, so in a Jan. 3 order conditionally certifying a class of audit associates, she hinted that her ruling, which focused on a classwide question of KPMG’s policy rather than individualized facts, had mooted the e-discovery flap. KPMG and the plaintiffs, represented by Outten & Golden, declined to take the hint. KPMG continued its call for McMahon to overturn the magistrate’s discovery order.

On Friday, McMahon said no — and blamed KPMG for the predicament. Significantly, the judge agreed with KPMG’s amici that “proportionality is necessarily a factor in determining a party’s preservation obligations.” She said that it doesn’t make sense for the cost of retaining e-discovery to outweigh the potential value of the information that’s being preserved. But McMahon’s 22-page opinion concluded that KPMG had been so obdurate in refusing access to the hard drives that she couldn’t conduct a proportionality analysis.

via Judge to KPMG: Save the hard drives — and blame yourself.

One should note that there are a number of locations in the world where there simply is not enough local demand to support a legal technology business.  Many legal systems outside of the US and UK do not have discovery and disclosure requirements, thus there a few resources to support such services.  Not only can this be noted for global finance centers such as Shanghai, Zurich and Dubai, but many regions in the United States where there is not a demand for electronic discovery services.  Some scanning and reprographics shops have taken the initiative to invest in the appropriate software, but unfortunately may not have the in-house knowledge and experience to execute the requirements of a project successfully.  This leaves critical decisions for the corporation and firm involved in a case – blindly search for an unknown vendor with unproven skills or leverage a relationship with a specialist that has a range of direct experience and experience?  At what point does cost – or perceived cost – outweigh potential risks such as spoliation?

There are, however, a growing number of options to the historical norms within the industry.   Boutique companies such as Global EDD Group are bridging the gap between organizations and their growing national and international electronic discovery needs by leveraging proven experience, low operational expenses and an extensive network of resources to offer clients legal technology services around the globe at price points typically associated with local vendors.

So, the next time you have a cross-border or geographically-dispersed matter with e-discovery requirements, take a moment to evaluate all of the options available to you and your client.  You might be very surprised at the robust options available for high quality remote/onsite services.

Related articles

• Global EDD Group Celebrates The Year Of The Dragon With Expanded Asia Pacific Services (legaltechtoday.com)
• Global EDD Group Introduces iReview Analytics™ for Electronic Discovery (legaltechtoday.com)
• The Sedona Conference Issues “International Principles on Discovery, Disclosure & Data Protection” : Electronic Discovery Law (legaltechtoday.com)

Complying with a multitude of regional and international laws when consumers’ personal information is compromised is critical. And depending on the size and reach of the organization breached, that could mean complying with dozens of mandates and regulations in various parts of the country and world.

Sotto, who focuses on privacy and information security, says the role of attorneys has changed significantly in recent years. After a data breach, attorneys handle many facets during the response process. “A lawyer who’s well-versed in managing data breaches knows that she or he needs to manage really much more than the straight legal compliance issues,” Sotto says in an interview with BankInfoSecurity’s Tracy Kitten

via Breach Response: The Legal View.

In a court filing, BP has alleged that the US oil services firm of intentionally destroying evidence about possible problems with its cement slurry poured into the deep-sea Macondo well about 100 miles (160 km) off the Louisiana coast. An oil well must be cemented properly to avoid blowouts.

Also in the documents filed in a New Orleans federal court, BP accuses Halliburton of failing to produce incriminating computer modelling evidence.

BP asked a US judge to penalise Halliburton and order a court-sponsored computer forensic team to recover the modelling results.

Halliburton has told media outlets that the accusations are untrue.

The allegations in the 310-page motion add to a showdown among BP and the contractors Halliburton and Transocean over blame in the Deepwater Horizon blast in April 2010, which killed 11 workers and led to 206m US gallons (780m litres) of crude oil escaping into the Gulf of Mexico. So far, BP, the majority owner of the Macondo well, has footed the bill for the emergency response and cleanup.

Also involved are Anadarko Petroleum and Cameron International.

via BP accuses Halliburton over Gulf of Mexico oil spill | Environment | guardian.co.uk.

Microsoft faces a tough sell with the new operating system, IDC said, because Windows 8 tries to “offer the best of both worlds” with a single OS suitable for both desktops and tablets.

“Windows 8 will be largely irrelevant to the users of traditional PCs, and we expect effectively no upgrade activity from Windows 7 to Windows 8 in that form factor,” said IDC.

Al Gillen, an IDC research vice president, authored the prediction, one of 10 on a list of prognostications for 2012 that the firm released last week.

In an interview Monday, Gillen explained his dour Windows 8-on-the-desktop forecast.

“Customers will be asking ‘What value does Windows 8 bring to my desktops and laptops?’ and the only real benefit I can see is that it provides access to the Windows app store,” Gillen said.

Microsoft first confirmed in August that Windows 8 will sport a “Windows Store,” and disclosed more details about the distribution market a month later at a major developer conference. Microsoft is to reveal additional information about the store Tuesday, Dec. 6, at a San Francisco event.

Gillen said that application compatibility issues with Windows 8, and the recent push by enterprises to adopt Windows 7 will also hamper Windows 8 acceptance on PCs.

via Windows 8 will be ‘largely irrelevant’ on PCs, predicts IDC – Computerworld.

If the number of convictions is any indication, the strategy may be paying off: since 2005, dozens of corporate executives have been convicted of violating the FCPA, paid hefty fines from their personal assets, and spent years in prison. (Of course, companies are still the subject of federal agencies’ wrath: the most recent case will result in Pfizer paying more than $60 million to settle FCPA charges, according to the Wall Street Journal.)

Last month, law firm Chadbourne & Parke released a study of the 61 FCPA prosecutions involving individual defendants over the past six years. A surprising number, 35%, of the defendants were the president, chief executive officer, or chief operating officer of their firm. In all, 53 of the individuals charged with violating the FCPA during this period were senior officers — a staggering 87% of all defendants.

These findings should be of concern to corporate executives worldwide. Though the U.K. Bribery Act — which went into effect earlier this year — has captured headlines as a force to be reckoned with, in many ways, the 33-year-old FCPA still reigns supreme in its threat to CEOs and CFOs who do business in the United States.

To understand the potential magnitude, one need look no further than the recent News of the World phone-hacking scandal that has consumed Rupert Murdoch and his News Corp. for much of the year. The gravest threat of criminal prosecution facing the Murdochs and other senior executives of News Corp. might come not from British authorities, who would directly oversee the publication, but from the FCPA.

via Why FCPA Prosecution Risk Has Become Personal.