Crowdsourcing legal data: are we all e-discovery agents now? | New Legal Review (Matt Packer)

Legal professionals will always play a vital role in building up trial evidence. However, writes Matt Packer, a creature called ‘the crowd’ is starting to do this automatically – all through everyday online usage

‘Mob rule’ and ‘herd mentality’ are just two of the many phrases used by journalists to criticise ignorant or sheep-like behaviour in large masses of people. The internet, though, helps to bring crowd wisdom to life. ‘Crowdsourcing’ is a term coined in 2006 by technology expert Jeff Howe, who became interested in how companies were engaging customers in key corporate functions, such as marketing. That year, Doritos gave an example by launching its Crash the Superbowl campaign, inviting snack fans to create their own Doritos commercials and upload them to a website for user rating. The winner was broadcast in a commercial break during Superbowl XLI.

Since then, crowdsourcing has had a positive impact on the world of intellectual property (IP) through the Peer to Patent initiatives in the US and UK. These enable technical experts of all types to sign up and provide their insights on select patent applications. But this year, web-based crowds have also played major roles in the gathering of raw evidence – firstly, for litigation in a US trademark suit; and secondly, for the prosecution of key participants in the UK riots.

via Crowdsourcing legal data: are we all e-discovery agents now?.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare

Podcast: Cost-Effective E-Discovery in Small Cases | Legal Talk Network

The high cost of e-discovery is a major problem for most small firms and solo lawyers.  On Digital Detectives, co-hosts Sharon D. Nelson, Esq., President of Sensei Enterprises, Inc. and John W. Simek, Vice President of Sensei Enterprises, welcome guest, Bruce Olson, the President of ONLAW Trial Technologies, and discuss cost-effective e-discovery for small cases.  Find out what is the single most important step an attorney can take to minimize e-discovery costs, when is the right time to seek outside expert advice and which software tools and cloud based solutions can help contain costs.

Listen Here

via Cost-Effective E-Discovery in Small Cases | Legal Talk Network.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare

Legal Outsourcing: Is the Bloom Already off the Rose? – Law Blog – WSJ

Things are tough all over in the legal world these days, with even those pesky offshore outsourcing outfits likely to see a profitability squeeze, according to this 2012 outlook issued Friday from Fronterion, a group that tracks such matters for law firms.

One problem the report identified: wages are rising in developing countries such as India (per this projection from Aon Hewitt) but remain relatively soft here in the U.S. and the U.K. That could hamper profitability for the legal process outsource (LPO) industry as a whole—something unlikely to bring tears to the eyes of job-hunting young  lawyers stateside.

So what’s the problem? The price gap has narrowed between offshore legal processing groups—which charge between $25-$35 an hour for basic legal services such as document review—and domestic services offered by contract review attorneys in places such as the Midwest, which might charge $25 to $30 per hour. (Here Fronterion cites our own Vanessa O’Connell’s piece this June on lawyer temps).

The glut of new law school graduates in 2012 will likely put offshore legal services outfits at a further disadvantage, the report found.  “Most legal professionals, all things being equal, prefer to keep legal work domestically,” it said.  In response, some offshore vendors are opening up in places such as Chicago and Washington D.C., said Fronterion managing Principal Michael Bell.

via Legal Outsourcing: Is the Bloom Already off the Rose? – Law Blog – WSJ.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare

Podcast: E-discovery Preservation: Reset to Neutral | Legal Talk Network

The landmark Zubulake e-discovery decisions were the first of many to transform a narrow duty not to spoliate into a much broader duty to affirmatively preserve all possibly relevant evidence when there exists a “reasonable anticipation of litigation.”  But have these judicial opinions gone too far? In the December edition of Law Technology Now, Robert Owen, a partner at Sutherland Asbill & Brennan, says it’s time to shift gears and restore the balance. He talks with Monica Bay, editor-in-chief of Law Technology News, about his five proposed rules that he says will prevent substantial injustices, yet be comprehensive and comprehensible.

Listen Here

via E-discovery Preservation: Reset to Neutral | Legal Talk Network.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare

TAMING THE E-DISCOVERY BEAST : IP Legal Watch

The Federal Circuit’s proposed Model Order on E-Discovery offers a number of good suggestions that should help reduce the burden of electronic discovery in patent cases, and some that merit further consideration and debate. Among the best ideas are the following three:

1. Requiring separate requests for email, rather than permitting email to be included in requests such as “all documents and electronic information” (¶6). This will sharpen the focus on just what types of email communications are relevant. We should consider whether all types of electronic information should be requested separately, and indeed whether to require that specific types of “documents” (correspondence, memoranda, drawings, etc.) should be specifically requested rather than encompassed with omnibus terms.

2. Limiting the metadata parties are required to produce to that revealing times of sending and receipt and the distribution list (¶5). There are times when creation and edit dates are important, so perhaps that also should be included. Most other metadata is typically irrelevant.

3. Presumptive limits of 5 custodians and 5 search terms (¶¶ 10-11). Those limits obviously will not be suitable in all cases, but at least we have a low-number starting point. The suggestions about how to treat conjunctive and disjunctive combinations of terms, and encouragement of the use of narrowing search criteria, are excellent.

via TAMING THE E-DISCOVERY BEAST : IP Legal Watch.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare

In First U.K. Bribery Act Sentencing, Former Court Clerk Handed 6-Year Term | Legal Week

former magistrates’ court clerk has become the first person to be sentenced under the U.K. Bribery Act, after he admitted accepting a £500 bribe to “get rid” of a speeding charge.

Munir Patel was sentenced to six years in prison at Southwark Crown Court Friday after last month pleading guilty to bribery and misconduct in public office during his employment as an administrative clerk at London’s Redbridge Magistrates’ Court.

He has been handed a three-year sentence under the Bribery Act and a six-year sentence for misconduct in public office. The two sentences will run concurrently, resulting in six years imprisonment.

Patel accepted the bribe in exchange for omitting to record a traffic offense on a court database and has been prosecuted under Section 2 of the Bribery Act for requesting and receiving a bribe intending to improperly perform his functions, as well as misconduct in public office.

Ashurst dispute resolution partner Angela Pearson said: “The sentencing of Munir Patel for three years for bribery under the new Bribery Act demonstrates the significant sentences that the courts are willing to impose on individuals who commit an offense under the act.

“This is to run concurrently with a six-year sentence for misconduct in a public office. It is only a matter of time before the Serious Fraud Office bares its teeth and prosecutes the first corporate or its directors under the act. In the meantime, the business community collectively hold their breath.”

via In First U.K. Bribery Act Sentencing, Former Court Clerk Handed 6-Year Term.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare

PODCAST: The Future of E-Discovery | Legal Talk Network

What does the future hold when it comes to e-discovery? On Digital Detectives, co-hosts Sharon D. Nelson, Esq., President of Sensei Enterprises, Inc. and John W. Simek, Vice President of Sensei Enterprises, welcome John Munro, the Vice President and Managing Director of Orange Legal Technologies, to discuss some upcoming trends in e-discovery.  John explores the future of predictive coding, shares his thoughts on amending the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, e-discovery in the cloud and the trend toward bringing e-discovery in-house.

PODCAST LINK

via The Future of E-Discovery | Legal Talk Network.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare

Podcast: The Future of E-Discovery | Legal Talk Network

What does the future hold when it comes to e-discovery? On Digital Detectives, co-hosts Sharon D. Nelson, Esq., President of Sensei Enterprises, Inc. and John W. Simek, Vice President of Sensei Enterprises, welcome John Munro, the Vice President and Managing Director of Orange Legal Technologies, to discuss some upcoming trends in e-discovery.  John explores the future of predictive coding, shares his thoughts on amending the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, e-discovery in the cloud and the trend toward bringing e-discovery in-house.

Podcast: Play in new window

via The Future of E-Discovery | Legal Talk Network.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare

Podcast: Controversial Issues in E-Discovery | Legal Talk Network

This has been quite a year of controversy and e-discovery! On Digital Detectives, co-hosts Sharon D. Nelson, Esq., President of Sensei Enterprises, Inc. and John W. Simek, Vice President of Sensei Enterprises welcome Ralph Losey, a partner in the law firm of Jackson Lewis and a nationally known expert, author and lecturer on e-discovery, to spotlight some recent controversial issues in e-discovery. Ralph explores issues such as predictive coding, e-discovery certifications, whether we need to amend the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure again to address e-discovery problems and how to solve the problem of “e-discovery extortion.”

PODCAST

via Controversial Issues in E-Discovery | Legal Talk Network.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare

Podcast: Controversial Issues in E-Discovery | Legal Talk Network

This has been quite a year of controversy and e-discovery! On Digital Detectives, co-hosts Sharon D. Nelson, Esq., President of Sensei Enterprises, Inc. and John W. Simek, Vice President of Sensei Enterprises welcome Ralph Losey, a partner in the law firm of Jackson Lewis and a nationally known expert, author and lecturer on e-discovery, to spotlight some recent controversial issues in e-discovery. Ralph explores issues such as predictive coding, e-discovery certifications, whether we need to amend the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure again to address e-discovery problems and how to solve the problem of “e-discovery extortion.”

Listen here

via Controversial Issues in E-Discovery | Legal Talk Network.

LinkedInPinterestEvernoteWordPressBlogger PostEmailShare