The Electronic Discovery Reference Model, a group that set out in 2005 to create clear electronic data discovery standards, released its EDRM Search Intent Framework on June 30.
The framework is intended to help EDD and information governance organizations use the right technologies and processes in various search contexts, said EDRM co-founder Tom Gelbmann, principal of Roseville, Minn.-based consultancy Gelbmann & Associates. The framework is not a rule, but rather a guidance tool, he said.
Dominic Brown, vice president of Sunnyvale, Calif.-based HP Autonomy, led the six-person team, which included Gene Eames, director of legal search and data analytics at Pfizer; Chris Paskach, retired partner at KPMG; Phil Strauss, associate general counsel at Ebates Inc.; Mark Lindquist, senior consultant at Ernst & Young; Wade Peterson, director of practice support at Bowman and Brooke; and Brent Larson, graphics specialist at Bowman and Brooke.
The framework authors stress that all searches are not created equal. “The term ‘search’ is used interchangeably in records management, archiving, and e-discovery," reads the introduction. "One might assume all search is similar—not only from a technical perspective, but also from the perspective of intent," it states. "But they are not. Some searches have much more legal impact than others.”
EDRM participants requested the framework, said Gelbmann. EDRM active participants include Nuix, Exterro Inc., Guidance Software Inc., DLA Piper, Littler Mendelson and kCura, among various other law firms, corporate counsel, vendors, and individuals. Gelbmann and co-founder George Socha of Socha Consulting announced last October that they would be transitioning into new roles, and that EDRM would become a nonprofit organization.
Reaction
The framework is a good step forward in terms of helping attorneys understand and explain how EDD technology works, said David Horrigan, analyst/counsel at 451 Research and a frequent LTN contributor. “EDRM has the right idea with its new Search Intent Framework, and it may help give lawyers some relief from Rule 26(g) nightmares of certifying the completeness of discovery productions in an era of big data,” Horrigan said. “As search has grown more complex, attorneys used to the world of linear review have justifiable concerns about signing a certification when many don’t understand the underlying search technologies,” he said. “Having the EDRM framework as a tool to help develop and articulate the search process gets lawyers out of the uncomfortable situation of having to tell a court, ‘Well, I really don’t know how it was done, but my IT guy said it was okay.’”
No comments:
Post a Comment