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