On Tue, 30 Nov 2004 08:44:17 -0800, Nemchek, Lee R. <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:

>From the November 30, 2004 issue of Ignites.com:
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Industry: Clearer E-Mail Retention Regs Needed
>   By Alison Sahoo
>Laura Dubois, director of product
>management at electronic storage specialist Permabit, says that both
>regulations and litigation are driving demand for enhanced e-mail
>storage solutions.

>"Customers want to start with e-mail, then expand into other types of
>record retention like MS Word, Excel, PDF and content management like
>check imaging," she says. "E-mail is an easy place to start because it's
>relatively contained and there is good precedent from the SEC on how
>e-mails should be retained."


Did anyone else read the above paragraph with astonishment like I did? As
we struggle to explain to folks that it is not the container (email), but
the content (message) that matters in retention along comes a vendor who
continues the misconception of records retention by focusing on the various
file formats.

Is there anything we as a profession can do to change this? or is it an
uphill battle? How can we explain to someone like Ms. Dubois that an MS
Word doc and a PDF file can (and many times do) have the same content, and
thus will have the same retention. Or that one is a draft and the other is
the final version?

or am I just feeling terribly grumpy this a.m. even after two big cups of
java

Peterk

List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance