Crane on Law by James Crane

Many attorneys are in the very early stages of accepting technological tools to deal with massive discovery challenges. Even in cases involving more than a hundred thousand documents, counsel still asks that digital documents be blown-back to paper for review, and then produced as paper to the opposing party. My question is, WHY? I can only assume that it's due to lack of training and knowlege regarding use of the available technologies, and people's sense of comfort with the “traditional” ways in which things have always been done.

The technological and methodological innovations of an advanced e-discovery company like Altep are such a radical break from the past. It usually takes a combination of creativity, experience, ambition and nerve to drive an industry toward progress - like the man said, if you want to make an omelette, you'll need to break some eggs.

Only 50 years ago, Jack Kilby of Texas Instruments worked alone in the lab during his summer vacation to create the integrated circuit. Modern electronics was then born when his little silicon chip, capable of carrying the required minute connections, hit the market.

Here at Altep, we are always seeking ways to further electronic discovery to the benefit of our clients. We were among the first to develop comprehensive true native review, hybrid production techniques, and a variety of advanced methodolgies and tools to search and cull through large data populations.

Now, the industry is starting to consider the possibilities of true-native productions and shared review platforms, and is wrestling with the question of whether metadata should be available and/or produced at all. I’m interested to hear your thoughts with regard to the direction of e-discovery “advances” and the associated benefits and drawbacks.