Hi John. I believe your reply actually is in response to Dwight's
questions. I do, however, have some comments to offer regarding some of the
points you raise here (and in one of your earlier messages from today), but
those will have to wait until later because I am quickly running out of time
today and still have a pile of things to finish before the sun sets.
Regards,
Randy
--
Randy Preston
Project Coordinator, InterPARES Project
The University of British Columbia
Suite 470, 1961 East Mall
Vancouver, British Columbia V6T 1Z1 Canada
tel: +1(604)822-2694 fax: +1(604)822-6006
[log in to unmask]
www.interpares.org
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of John Phillips
Sent: February 27, 2009 16:28
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Metadata in the courts
Randy,
Good questions. My post probably did not elaborate enough, because there
were some additional issues that came to mind even after I reread it myself.
I am not questioning that the "best" evidence is often a complete record
with both the original content and metadata. For historical purposes and
many legal purposes, the combination of original record components - content
and metadata - would seem best in most cases. But it comes at a cost of
maintenance and more complex information management responsibilities. The
costs of maintenance and risks of maintaining unneeded metadata that could
be misused in litigation, may indicate that it is not always best for
everyone to maintain all metadata in all copies of a record.
Some scenarios come to mind.
1) If a person prints/scans to PDF or TIF they will probably lose a lot of
native file metadata. But they have a record of the content and possibly
some of the metadata that may serve the business processes quite well and is
actually a "better" record (some would say) for long term retention. Those
file formats are generally less subject to hardware/software technology
obsolescence.
2) Unfortunately in today's litigious America, there is much combative
litigation and an emphasis on "making their case" rather than responsibly
seeking "justice for all". Some attorneys will use the "everyone has a right
to their day in court and a good defense" excuse to use spurious means of
attacking the credibility of witnesses, records, and opposing legal counsel.
That includes using any available records and metadata in making wild and
ridiculous claims in an effort to sway a jury based on emotional reasons if
necessary to get their client free of any charges (remember OJ Simpson?).
This is one reason it is often best to not create large poorly reviewed
repositories of records, and to consider simply getting rid of records AND
metadata with no demonstrable value to the LOB.
3) By pointing out the interest in "scrubbing the metadata" I meant to
illustrate the value of reducing risk from inappropriate release of
information, by simply not having information that was not really needed. I
did not mean to imply that scrubbed records would always be better records
or even the best evidence in many cases. It just shows that sometimes, not
being loaded down with "extra" information (metadata) that may not be
needed, one can simplify information management concerns and potentially
reduce some risks and costs.
Look at it this way. If your normal course of business is to scan to images
physically signed paper documents and convert native files to PDF, and then
throw away the signed paper and discard the original native files, then the
TIF/PDF file is going to have to be your "best evidence." And it will be
acceptable in court and for audits, despite their being less metadata
available, simply because that is your normal course of business.
I am just trying to not write a dissertation with every posting!
John
****************************
John Phillips
Information Technology Decisions
www.infotechdecisions.com
865-966-9413
-----Original Message-----
From: Records Management Program [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf
Of WALLIS Dwight D
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2009 2:57 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Metadata in the courts
John, another great posting, but a bit confusing to me. I agree with
everything you said, but metadata is not something separate from a
record, its something that is a component of a record. If you decide to
keep a record for a business purpose, it would appear that you would
keep its associated metadata. If components of that record's metadata
serve no business purpose, those components could be scrubbed, if that
too serves a business purpose. I'm not entirely convinced that this is
necessary in most instances, as I am assuming the scrubbing of that
metadata also entails overhead.
The only concern I have raised relates to records authenticity (as well
as utilizing one business process to justify another unrelated one). If
the metadata is a key component of that authenticity (and, as Randy
pointed out, that isn't always the case) I'm assuming you wouldn't want
to scrub it, otherwise you have undermined the records value, regardless
of litigation concerns. And, as I said at the beginning of this
conversation, if you are scrubbing that fundamental metadata because of
litigation concerns, and in the process destroying key components of a
record's authenticity, how is this any different than destroying records
without reference to a retention schedule, or, in the example I
originally cited, removing a signature from a contract? I can understand
the application of this in a legal records keeping context, where it
appears all parties agree in the practice, but I really question the
scrubbing of metadata fundamental to records authenticity. I'm assuming
that is not what anyone is actually proposing. I also note that many of
the examples cited don't appear to me to be applying to record copy, but
rather to copies provided externally.
I guess I'm confused in this thread as how this turned into a
conversation on "keeping everything" or "all metadata", since I actually
haven't seen anyone suggest that.
Dwight Wallis, CRM
Records Administrator
Multnomah County Fleet, Records, Electronics, Distribution and Stores
(FREDS)
1620 S.E. 190th Avenue
Portland, OR 97233
Phone: (503)988-3741
Fax: (503)988-3754
[log in to unmask]
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present,
place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present,
place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]
List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
Contact [log in to unmask] for assistance
To unsubscribe from this list, click the below link. If not already present, place UNSUBSCRIBE RECMGMT-L or UNSUB RECMGMT-L in the body of the message.
mailto:[log in to unmask]
|
