82,891
edits
E-discovery: Difference between revisions
no edit summary
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{a|devil|}}The JC rarely strays into matters of litigation, regarding court-based resolution of commercial disputes as a kind of admission of liability in itself. Bu...") |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
In one sense, e-discovery exists to solve a problem that was only created by technology in the first place. As we have remarked [[Ijnnovation paradox|elsewhere]], before the advent of [[email]] — before lawyers had screens on desktops and were dependent on paying someone to put their words onto paper the very act of generating a document, let alone sending one, was orders of magnitude more difficult and expensive. This provided strong incentive not to create ''unnecessary'' documents and to make sure the documents one did create were ''short and to the point''. These incentives no longer remain. The volume of information that now passes is monstrous; its ''quality'' is dismal. To the extent it is the only means of handling this volume, this is not e-discovery ''solving'' a problem. This is technology ''creating'' one. | In one sense, e-discovery exists to solve a problem that was only created by technology in the first place. As we have remarked [[Ijnnovation paradox|elsewhere]], before the advent of [[email]] — before lawyers had screens on desktops and were dependent on paying someone to put their words onto paper the very act of generating a document, let alone sending one, was orders of magnitude more difficult and expensive. This provided strong incentive not to create ''unnecessary'' documents and to make sure the documents one did create were ''short and to the point''. These incentives no longer remain. The volume of information that now passes is monstrous; its ''quality'' is dismal. To the extent it is the only means of handling this volume, this is not e-discovery ''solving'' a problem. This is technology ''creating'' one. | ||
We wonder, too, whether the advent of e-discovery has made litigation ''cheaper'', ''faster'' or ''more effective''. Litigation does not, generally, seem to be getting cheaper.<ref>There are 80,100 hits for | We wonder, too, whether the advent of e-discovery has made litigation ''cheaper'', ''faster'' or ''more effective''. Litigation does not, generally, seem to be getting cheaper.<ref>There are 80,100 Google hits for [https://www.google.com/search?q=%22rising+costs+of+litigation%22 “rising costs of litigation”]. There were ''no'' results for [https://www.google.com/search?q=%22falling+costs+of+litigation%22 “falling costs of litigation”].</ref> | ||
{{sa}} | {{sa}} | ||
*[[Innovation paradox]] | *[[Innovation paradox]] | ||
{{ref}} | {{ref}} | ||