Rob Robinson | The ComplexDiscovery Blog

A technology blog highlighting data and legal discovery insight and intelligence.

    Avoiding Glittering Generalities in Selecting eDiscovery Software

    Avoiding Glittering Generalities in Selecting eDiscovery Software

    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.

    Continue Reading

    Activity Patterns for eDiscovery Mergers, Acquisitions, and Investments (2001-2017)

    Activity Patterns for eDiscovery Mergers, Acquisitions, and Investments (2001-2017)

    Since beginning to track the number of publicly highlighted merger, acquisition, and investment (M&A+I) events in the eDiscovery ecosystem, ComplexDiscovery has noted more than 300 M&A+I events between November 2001 and today. The following article highlights the pattern of these activities on an annual and monthly basis.

    Continue Reading

    An Abridged Look at the Business of eDiscovery: Mergers, Acquisitions, and Investments

    An Abridged Look at the Business of eDiscovery: Mergers, Acquisitions, and Investments

    The presented listing highlights key industry business moves by sharing the announcement date, acquired company, acquiring or investing company, and acquisition amount (if known) of significant eDiscovery-related mergers, acquisitions, and investments.

    Continue Reading

    A Running List: Top 100+ eDiscovery Providers

    A Running List: Top 100+ eDiscovery Providers

    Based on a compilation of research from analyst firms and industry expert reports in the electronic discovery arena, the following “Top 100+Provider” list provides a short listing that may be useful in the consideration of eDiscovery providers. This listing is taken primarily from eDiscovery provider mentions in selected key formal industry reports and surveys published between August 2011 and today.

    Continue Reading

    A Concise Framework for Discovery Automation

    A Concise Framework for Discovery Automation

    One of the biggest challenges facing information, business, and legal professionals is the ability to cohesively consider the elements of data discovery and legal discovery within a technology framework that is comprehensive enough to address critical discovery tasks throughout information and legal lifecycles yet concise enough to be realistically approached from an automation perspective.

    Continue Reading

    industry

    Consolidation in Legal Tech: How the ‘New Normal’ Benefits Companies and Customers

    Extract from article by Avaneesh Marwaha

    Better Resource and Time Management

    Everyone stands to save time and effort when companies combine their resources. Legal technology companies may be attracted to a merger by the prospect of growing their staff, their physical resources, and their attendant technical capabilities. In addition, mergers create significant time savings: by combining two companies’ expertise to create a single elegant solution that improved product can make it to market faster than either company could have accomplished alone.

    Also, clients save just as much time and effort as the companies themselves do. Working with a single vendor that can provide enhanced services is faster, easier, and less expensive than communicating with multiple diverse vendors that can each only provide a piece of the overall puzzle. Not only can customers’ total costs be lower, but the predictability of those costs is also dramatically improved by working with a single consolidated vendor.

    Clients also save time by using a consolidated technology service.

    Additional Reading:

    Norton Rose Fulbright 2017 Litigation Trends Annual Survey

    Web Announcement

    Thirteenth Edition of Litigation Trends Survey Highlights Ever-Increasing Threat to Cyber Security and Data Protection

    Global law firm Norton Rose Fulbright today [October 25, 2017) released its 2017 Litigation Trends Annual Survey. This year’s survey polled more than 300 corporate counsel – primarily general counsel – representing US-based organizations on disputes-related issues and concerns.

    Survey respondents point to a growing threat to cyber security, an issue they indicate stands as the greatest emerging threat to a business. Nearly two-thirds of those polled (63 percent) feel more exposed to disputes in this area.

    Gerry Pecht, Norton Rose Fulbright’s Global Head of Dispute Resolution and Litigation, said:

    “For large companies that work with massive amounts of sensitive personal data, data protection is an absolute imperative. A single cyber event has the potential to expose a business to class actions and serious reputational risk. These are high stakes, and this report looks at measures companies take to mitigate this increasing risk.”

    This year’s survey report also revisits its litigation minimization framework, a tool introduced last year to suit a company’s specific situation. In-house counsel can use this framework to review their current approach and implement measures to reduce litigation risk and costs.The program was well-received in its first year, with 95 percent of respondents implementing at least one recommended key measure. Training emerges as the leading factor in preventing litigation. Early case resolution, embedding lawyers in the business and proactive contract review have also shown to be highly effective.

    An expansive report detailing Norton Rose Fulbright’s 2017 Litigation Trends Annual Survey can be found at www.litigationtrends.com. Highlights of the report include

    • Companies who had no lawsuits commenced against them increased slightly from 18 percent to 21 percent over the last 12 months, with 79 percent of respondents being sued in the past year.
    • A review of the 10-year trend in disputes shows 2012 was the peak in terms of average volume. Mean disputes per $100 million in revenue fell slightly to 11.5 in 2017 from 11.8 in 2016.
    • Labor and employment and contracts remain the most numerous types of dispute for respondents. Contract litigation showed the largest year-over-year increase from 35 percent in 2016 to 43 percent in 2017.
    • This year, 74 percent of respondents indicated that regulators have become more interventionist, down from 97 percent in 2016. Also, 26 percent have moved to become less interventionist, a marked increase on last year’s 3 percent.
    • Alternative fee arrangements (AFAs) were used by 58 percent of respondents, with 96 percent of them satisfied with the work from an AFA. Fixed-fee AFA use increased from 67 percent in 2016 to 77 percent this year.
    • On average, a legal department spends 30 percent of its budget in-house; however, spending on disputes as a proportion of the organization’s revenue is least when its internal spend is between 41 percent and 60 percent of overall budget.
    • A detailed analysis of litigation expenditure data collected in this survey reveals that both team size and the typical spend relative to revenue has increased since 2016.

    Introduced in 2004, this is the largest survey of corporate counsel on litigation issues and trends. The 13thedition of Norton Rose Fulbright’s Litigation Trends Annual Survey was conducted by Acritas, a global legal services market business research firm, which polled 318 corporate counsel, the majority of whom were US-based or represented US-based organizations.

    Additional Reading:

    Is Copying Ever OK? Software Practices on Line in Copyright Case

    Extract from article by Anandashankar Mazumdar

    The software industry’s ability to easily create new products that are compatible with existing ones hangs on the outcome of a closely watched federal court case.

    The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit will weigh whether copying bits of code from Oracle America Corp.’s Java programming language by Alphabet Inc.’s Google was a fair use under copyright law, or whether it infringed Oracle’s copyright to the tune of $9 billion. Fair use allows limited copying from protected works that would otherwise be infringing. Following a Dec. 7 oral argument, a ruling is likely in the first half of 2018.

    The case pits software developers’ ability to make products that work together against creators’ rights to control how their software is used. The decision will impact companies beyond the two tech giants. It may affect the speed and variety of technological products available to consumers, businesses, and developers ( Oracle Am., Inc. v. Google, Inc., Fed. Cir., No. 17-1118, argument scheduled 12/7/17 ).

    Additional Reading:


    industry

    Consolidation in Legal Tech: How the 'New Normal' Benefits Companies and Customers
    Consolidation in Legal Tech: How the ‘New Normal’ Benefits Companies and Customers

    Through consolidation, one expert writes that customers receive better, more comprehensive services …

    More in industry

    Insight

    The Top Issue Impacting eDiscovery Business Performance: Budgetary Constraints (Fall 2017)
    The Top Issue Impacting eDiscovery Business Performance: Budgetary Constraints (Fall 2017)

    In the Fall of 2017, 31% of respondents viewed budgetary constraints as potentially having the great…

    More in Insight

    Newsletters

    Five Great Reads on Information Governance and eDiscovery: From Events and Education to Client and Software Considerations
    Five Great Reads on Information Governance and eDiscovery: From Events and Education to Client and Software Considerations

    This edition of the newsletter highlights five key posts on information governance and electronic di…

    More in Newsletters