Kevin L. Nichols will be a panelist at The Exchange SF in March 2014

Use Code EM100 for FREE Registration Today's General Counsel Institute
PRESENTS

The Exchange
The Leading Interactive Corporate e-Discovery Program Series

San Francisco
Location: Omni San Francisco Hotel
March 17-18, 2014
Free CLE Credit*

TGCI presents The Exchange in San Francisco

SPECIAL INVITATION FOR GENERAL COUNSELS, PRESIDENTS, VPS, CORPORATE EXECUTIVES, OTHER IN-HOUSE COUNSEL AND PRIVATE PRACTICE ATTORNEYS

FREE Registration Here / Use code EM100    ($450 VALUE)

NO VENDORS OR SERVICE PROVIDERS PERMITTED UNLESS SPONSORING.

Why Should You Attend?

As In-House Counsel, you know litigation costs can spiral out of control. The Exchangeconference allows you the unprecedented opportunity to explore ways of containing and controlling those costs. The program’s interactive format between audience and faculty provides a true understanding along with practical advice regarding the major e-Discovery challenges facing an organization today. Learn more.

LEAD MODERATORS:
Robert Brownstone

Robert Brownstone
Technology & eDiscovery Counsel, and Co-Chair, Electronic Information Management Group
Fenwick & West LLP

David Kessler

David Kessler
Partner
Norton Rose Fulbright

Michael J. Burg

Michael J. Burg
Corporate Counsel 
DISH Network L.L.C.

Discussion topics will include:

  • Create a routine and repeatable e-discovery business process
  • Deal with challenges of litigation holds
  • The importance of project and process management skills
  • Effective cost and risk containment steps
  • The need to document your e-discovery efforts
  • Real ECA and risk analysis
  • Recognize and reconcile the ethical tensions that can arise between inside counsel, outside counsel and providers
  • And more!

Click here for full agenda.

Hear what past attendees have said:

“I really enjoyed the conference–excellent information and great networking!”
James Carroll, Legal Department, Occidental Petroleum Corporation

Read more feedback from previous attendees.

Register Now FREE!
Use code EM100    ($450 VALUE)
FACULTY/MODERATORS:
Our expert moderators will help you find solutions to the current challenges facing your organization.

View the full list of Faculty/Moderators who will be at the
The Exchange San Francisco.

TGCI SPONSORS:
Recommmind Xerox Nuix Celeritas FTI Technology Discovia Catalyst Gulfstream Legal   ARMA International
Register Now FREE!
Use code EM100    ($450 VALUE)

*CLE Accreditation: Today’s General Counsel Institute is in the process of securing CLE accreditation.


Please contact Neil Signore, Senior VP and Managing Director, TGCI, at nsignore@todaysgc.com with any questions or in regard to sponsorship. www.todaysgeneralcounsel.com/institute


You are receiving this email because of your standing in the legal and business communities. CLICK HERE and we will immediately remove you from any future Today’s General Counsel promotional emails.

Today’s General Counsel   |   20 North Wacker Drive, 40th Floor   |   Chicago, IL 60606

An Interview Regarding Social Media Monitoring and eDiscovery

Recently, a reporter asked me the following questions:

1.  Currently, social media monitoring/archiving/discovery/capture software such as X1 Social Discovery (http://www.x1.com/products/x1_social_discovery/) and SocialWare (http://www.socialware.com/) appears to be focused on only a few, major social networks:  Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn.  Realistically, is coverage of these three networks alone really enough — given that there are literally hundreds of thousands of discussions forums where an employee might make a post?

 

It depends.  If the company monitoring the social media activity is a federally regulated entity (such as a financial institution), where any posting containing non-public or proprietary information could irreparably effect a patent or its stock price, only monitoring the “Big Three” would not be enough.  However, generally speaking, due to the number of users, followers, and friends, monitoring the “Big Three” is sufficient because most people want a lot of people to see what they post and the majority of people do not even know that others exist (mostly only tech savvy ones know).

 
2.  If a law firm asked you which software products/services you believe they should look at as a solution for social media monitoring/archiving/discovery/capture, which products/services would you point them to — and why?

X1 Discovery appears to be the market leader in this space.  It is very robust and the database archiving and retrieval of user data is very powerful.  

 

Actiance has a product that I am familiar with that can be useful, especially in the financial services/federally regulated industries because it can monitor social media posts of employees before they actually post the information to the social media site itself.  The downside is that employees have to link their social media accounts via an API which allows access to their private accounts in order for this to be effective.

 

3.  Realistically, do you envision a day when a software product will truly be able to monitor every post on every conceivable social network, discussion board, video upload site, etc.?  If not, will this be troublesome when it comes to eDiscovery?  Why/Why not?

No, I do not think that it is realistic that one software product or solution can monitor every post on every site for several reasons.  First of all, these sites are developed by various programmers in different languages, etc. It is very difficult to gain the appropriate access to the code for every site out there and have another programmer develop the appropriate code to monitor it.  Secondly, it would be extremely time consuming for one company to try to locate/identify “all” the sites in the first place.  Lastly, it would be incredibly expensive to try to accomplish same.

 

4.  Looking ahead, what do you believe will constitute the ultimate software suite for social media monitoring/archiving/discovery/capture?  What will it be able to do?  What will it still be missing?  How close are we to getting to that software, and which companies, if any, do you believe may get us there?

 

Great questions.  The dilemma with the next generation of social media monitoring is overcome the inherent privacy issues that exist with monitoring “closed” or “private” pages.  None of the existing software suites can collect data from such sites without having permission from the users (which is highly unlikely if there is a hint of litigiousness in the inquiry).  Logically, people should be smart enough to have their accounts privately protected if they are engaging in inappropriate behavior, nevertheless, you will be surprised to see what people will publicly post.  This is probably the biggest problem and the only way that we will overcome it is determining whether or not social media participation is a public or private endeavor.
5.  Do you have any other insights you’d like to share regarding social media monitoring/archiving/discovery/capture?

 

One thing that I wanted to add is that many law firms use the Way Back Machine http://archive.org that can point to any webpage on the internet to see what it looked like at any given period of time (going back to about 10 years).  This is useful to show what items/content has been deleted, etc. and allows an attorney to question the company or user why it is missing.  

Panelist at BASF’s Barristers Annual Meeting

Barristers Conference

 

I am looking forward to being a speaker on the “Why Incorporating Diversity Into Your Strategic Branding Benefits Both You and the Legal Profession” panel.  If you would like to attend, please visit  http://www.sfbar.org/calendar/eventdetail.aspx?id=B137320/B137320

Next Level Social Media Strategies

Image

Learn strategies that will help you succeed in social media. In this seminar we will teach you how to network your way up the corporate ladder, grow your own business, fine tune your branding and increase your social sales. If you are a novice or an industry professional, this seminar will equip you with an effective combination of knowledge and tools that will catapult you ahead of the competition by teaching you creative ways to engage your audience. 

This first seminar in the series is being offered at an unbeatable rate by two experts in the field with a trusted track record of industry experience. At the end of each of each half, there will be room to answer your specific social media questions for your business.

 

Part 1: Kevin L. Nichols

  • Career Development
  • Personal Online Branding
  • LinkedIn For Sales And Marketing

Part 2: Kumi Rauf

  • How We Grew To 6 Million Fans
  • Making Sales On Facebook
  • Social Media Time Management

** Photographer Auintard will be taking LinkedIn / Facebook profile headshots for free!Photographer link

 

FAQs

 

Are there ID requirements or an age limit to enter the event?

No.

 

What are my transport/parking options getting to the event?

There is street parking and a lot across the street.

 

Where can I contact the organizer with any questions?

Contact us

 

Do I have to bring my printed ticket to the event?

Either printed or a copy of the ticket on your mobile device

 

What is the refund policy?

Due to the limited seating there are no refunds.

Demystifying the Analysis Phase of the EDRM

Image

By: Kevin L. Nichols

 

The Analysis stage of the Electronic Discovery Reference Model (EDRM) occurs throughout the entire model.  Different times require actions, and there are different roles and responsibilities for three professionals involved throughout: the Litigation Support Professional, the Litigation Paralegal, and the Litigation Attorney.  Together, they will insure that the data collected is culled properly, reviewed, and produced to the opposing side.  Validation and quality controlling (QC’ing) are essential to produce the appropriate results which will ultimately lead to admissible evidence at trial.  Because the analysis stage can span the entire model, this discussion will be limited to the data assessment phase regarding review.  There are certain “best practices” that each litigation professional should have at their disposal to access when necessary and this document will assist them in this endeavor.

 

Litigation Support Professional (LSP):

 

Since the LSPs oversee the data processing and review phases, analyzing and QC’ing data falls right in their laps as well.  Removing unwanted and unneeded data increases the productivity of the document review team exponentially.  Much of the analysis can be performed in conjunction with the vendor because it has a duty to QC the project before turning it over to the law firm.  LSPs are typically responsible for or should be responsible for the following during this phase:

  1. Working with the vendor to correct any errors and problems with the data that may impact the document review, for example, spreadsheets may be truncated, the time zone may be incorrect, or there may be incorrect images linked to native formatted documents, etc.;
  2. Create and maintain relevant documentation such as data maps, custodian interviews, and a detailed gap analysis;
  3. Insuring that all data fields containing metadata are accurate, have been de-duped appropriately, and that all parent/child relationships are in tact;
  4. Maintaining a log of all errors and problems just in case these exceptions have to be disclosed to the other side and or to the court;
  5. Acting as the liaison between the vendor and the document review team.

 

Although this list is not exhaustive, the role of the LSP is essential while allowing the document review team to focus on more substantive analysis of the data set for production and admissible evidence at trial.

 

 

Litigation Paralegal:

 

Paralegals’ role during the analysis stage picks up where the LSPs’ role leaves off.  The paralegal should be the gate keeper of the sheer volume of the data set and disseminating the review sets for the document review team.  They should utilize the Early Case Assessment (ECA) and review platform software solutions to identify which documents are responsive and non-responsive and manage the production based upon same.  Paralegals should do the following during this phase:

 

  1. Analyze the data to make sure that all documents are searchable and can be organized appropriately in preparation for review;
  2. Upload the issue code list provided by the attorneys to appropriately categorize and flag documents during a substantive review;
  3. Prepare reports and generate relevant work product such as chronologies, summaries, etc. based on this analysis for attorney review; and
  4. Make sure that the attorneys have the analytics that they need to accurately respond to document requests and to utilize the data that they have acquired to defend their client and win the case.

Paralegals are often “the glue” when it comes to the production and analysis of documents.  They effectively manage the review team by providing them with what they need, when they need it, while working out technical problems with LSPs.

 

 

Litigation Attorneys:

 

The analysis phase is where the 3 years of law school and work related experience comes in handy for attorneys.  Deciphering what documents truly are privileged, what legal theories they are going to implore, and what documents/evidence they will need to substantiate them is the paramount focus and purpose of a document review and/or production.  Here are some of the ways lawyers can use their expertise during this phase:

 

  1. Determine what the appropriate legal theories that are required to win the case;
  2. Develop relevant issue codes so that document reviewers can tag and flag appropriately for follow-up review;
  3. Conduct a thorough 2nd and 3rd level review of key documents flagged pursuant to various issue codes prior to production;
  4. QC a representative sample of privileged and/or redacted documents prior to production; and
  5. Make sure that they have appropriate “claw back” provisions in place just in case they inadvertently produced privileged communications or attorney work product protected documents.

 

Attorneys have the most important task of providing the final say of what will and will not be produced and are the ones who will ultimately be held accountable for whatever goes array.  While paralegals, contract document reviewers, etc. may assist with document reviews, it is better for the attorneys who are going to tri a case to be extremely hands on with the data, analyze the issues, and designate the appropriate non-privileged/responsive documents.

 

 

The analysis stage is a broad phase of the EDRM model.  Electronically stored information (ESI) is manipulated in various ways in order to analyze the documents that will eventually be produced to the other side.  It is important to reduce the data size by conventional methods while checking the data to make sure the software being used is working properly.  QC’ing and validating data is vital in making sure that the files are not corrupted and that maintaining the hash tags will keep the data organized properly.  These steps make the document review more productive and allow the attorneys’ litigation skills to shine.

 

 

Kevin L. Nichols is the Principal of KLN Consulting Group located in San Francisco, which specializes in Litigation, Diversity and Business Development/Social Media consulting.

For more information, please visit http://www.klnconsultinggroup.com.

Follow Kevin on Twitter @Kevnix

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 4,203 other followers

%d bloggers like this: