Since my conclusion back in December 2007

I’ve just re-read the conclusion in my research paper published here.

In the litigation arena, I have found that there are many more blogs on various aspects of ediscovery coming from the US and still hardly any blogs from elsewhere. Worldwide searching/linking is still lopsided when it comes to online knowledge and information distribution. Perhaps the very concept of knowledge or data or information divides the technology ‘haves and haves not’. For a survey of the ‘haves’ check out what others have compiled at Guide to E-Discovery Resources on the Web.

In my conclusion I stated ‘Whether the benchmarks set by the Sedona Principles will further be incorporated into IBA Rules or modified by the various international organisations such as the ICC, LCIA, IBA, UNCITRAL and the American Arbitration Association, to meet the expectations of the international businesses will be an event worth earmarking.‘.

With the lopsided information world and even with search engines allowing me to specify whatever I want to seach, I have to say there is so far no such event worth earmarking. Instead, these organisations have gone their own separate ways and with others (e.g. CIArb) joining in the bandwagon to come up with protocols/standards/models etc. So…expect more to come.

It’s nearly a year since I wrote my conclusion and this year I have attended most of the momentous ediscovery/edisclosure events hosted in the UK. One notable observation in all the events I’ve attended is that the international arbitration arena is also lopsided in that the participants are invited by the organisers’ arrangement/selection of the topics/themes. Hence the participants are driven by the (commercially driven) organisers’ goals instead of a truly opening forum for a wider participation by the end users or people/businesses who are the primary ‘stick’ when it comes to ediscovery/edisclosure related matters. Personally, I find the ‘carrot & stick’ (this idiom or expression conveys the way I feel about these seminars/events) approach rather limiting especially in areas whereby technology, law and other social sciences are involved i.e. like in ediscovery/edisclosure. Heh! I’m not blaming the organisers, in fact without them the ‘ediscovery’ industry will be less exciting (as I will have less to compare and contrast!).

I’m sure in due course there will be open forum(s) on ediscovery/edisclosure whereby there will be protocols/guidelines/procedures/standards etc designed/developed with participation from the wider businesses/communities rather than a select few or lone individual. I guess with the nature of the international arbitration arena whereby not a lot of cases are widely publicised, the ‘one size fits all’ stuff for edisclosure will remain elusive and challenging.

Post a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.