RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"David T. Macknet" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Date:
Thu, 26 Jul 2012 16:13:33 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (76 lines)
 Gordy,

 Sounds reasonable.  It also sounds reasonable that the audit metadata
could be used to prove that certain people had accessed or modified a
document (or done neither), which in and of itself could expose the company
to legal risk, depending upon the particular legal case at hand.  The
audit metadata could also be used to expand electronic discovery to the
computers of those individuals listed in the metadata, in the hopes that
some additional information had been retained (if they, as so many do, had
kept their own copy of the document).

 Sounds like the argument would be to treat the metadata as a record of
some sort, and deal with it according to some retention schedule.

 -D

		David T. Macknet
		 

		[log in to unmask] [1]
		Skype: david.t.macknet [2]

		Photography [3]
		Blog [4]

		LinkedIn [5]
		Stack Overflow [6]

 On Thu 26/07/12 4:04 PM , "Gordy Hoke" [log in to unmask] sent:
 Going over the elucidating conversation from earlier this month about
whether to keep metadata after the records are rightfully disposed, I had a
thought worth considering. Disclaimer: I am not an attorney, and I
certainly don't claim any legal expertise. But I do think about these
things:

 If retained metadata contains an audit trail of the people that retrieved
particular records, it is possible that an opposing attorney could subpoena
a reader of the record to testify from memory what was in the disposed
record. In that case, the content of the record would not really be
gone...it would just be transferred to a less authoritative format. That
sounds risky to me, and a good motivator to, at least, delete audit trail
metadata when a record is disposed.

 What do you think? Am I missing something?

 Gordy
 Gordon E.J. Hoke, CRM
 [log in to unmask]

 Gordon E.J. Hoke, CRM

 List archives at http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html
[7]">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.
 [log in to unmask]

 

Links:
------
[1] mailto:[log in to unmask]
[2] http://webmail.sonic.net/callto://david.t.macknet
[3] http://www.flickr.com/photos/wishiwerebaking/
[4] http://davimack.members.sonic.net/blog/
[5] http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidmacknet
[6] http://stackoverflow.com/users/6850/david-t-macknet
[7] http://lists.ufl.edu/archives/recmgmt-l.html

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]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2