RECMGMT-L Archives

Records Management

RECMGMT-L@LISTSERV.IGGURU.US

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Sender:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
pakurilecz <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 10 Nov 2008 16:50:37 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed; delsp=yes
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Records Management Program <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (54 lines)
use this link to access the full blog posting

http://shrinkster.com/12um

Sent to you by pakurilecz via Google Reader: Is De-Duplication Legal?
via Death By Email Blog by Roger Matus on 10/28/08
Many email archiving companies have touted their de-duplication
capabilities. The argument is that substantial savings can be found by
saving one copy of a message when there are copies that are identical.
One study from a vendor claims that 80% of all emails are duplicates.

But, when is a duplicate actually a duplicate? InBoxer believes a
duplicate is only a duplicate when it is 100% identical including the
meta tags (such as date, time and routing information). At least one
court now seems to agree.

In Nursing Home Pension Fund v. Oracle, a shareholders' class action
was brought by purchasers of Oracle Corp. stock against officers of the
company and related defendants, The defendants produced more than 1,665
emails to or from Oracle CEO Larry Ellison, but that only 15 of those
emails were actually identified as having come from Ellison's email
box. Why? It is not clear. But, it is possible that Ellison's name
appeared in the TO field of an email sent to another recipient. Did
Ellison also get a copy?

The court found spoliation because it thought that it "could have been
helpful to plaintiffs to demonstrate that certain e-mails were
discovered in Ellison's files; otherwise, for instance, Ellison could
argue that he never actually read or received an email that was sent to
him, and thus had no knowledge of its contents." (Pennsylvania Law
Weekly)

Leonard Deutchman, general counsel and administrative partner of
LDiscovery LLC, said in Legal Technology that the ruling does not make
sense because the de-duplication logs show what was removed. He had a
lengthy discussion of the topic that is worth reading if you are into
these legal issues.

I expect that the fight around de-duplication will grow. Some email
archiving vendors could be at risk if their customers take legal action
against their de-duplication practices. InBoxer strongly believes that
only 100% duplicates should be removed and that all companies should be
held to that standard. (More details on de-duplication from Deutchman.)

Things you can do from here:
- Subscribe to Death By Email Blog using Google Reader
- Get started using Google Reader to easily keep up with all your
favorite sites

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