Mmm… I guess the specialist will also read it, perhaps more drawn to the ‘multi-million dollar’ problem. There are still IT folks, even IT security folks (from my own recent exposure at a recent gathering) who are not aware of ediscovery and they are ‘specialist’ in their own fields and in terms of ediscovery they are amongst the ‘masses’.

From another fellow traveller to others, I feel that the ediscovery space has been over-sold or over-rated or even over-exaggerated by (ediscovery) specialists on the few multi-million dollar cases. What about those cases where ediscovery were also ‘the issue’? For me, I certainly would relish more facts or stories from cases whereby ediscovery is a ‘non-issue’. These stories may not be ‘hot hot’ for the press or the masses but from a problem solving angle, it may reveal stuff which even the specialist have not thought about.

For me, ediscovery is about solving problems or involve problem solving. Even in simple problem, there will be questions and answers. So even if ediscovery is a ‘non-issue’ (a simple problem?) what is/are the problem(s), questions and answers?

I guess asking questions or more constructively, knowing what questions to ask and who is/are around or available to ask are ‘issues’ in ediscovery. Hence, I like the post by Dave Healey, with lots of questions.

Finally, put someone you trust, who is diligent, and who is on the case, in charge of eDiscovery, and task them to actively monitor the process on a daily basis!

Who? – another issue in ediscovery!

Perhaps more importantly, can the international commercial arbitration regime escape or be totally immune from these ‘myriad of issues’ and continue to attract international businesses and play a dominant judicial role in the globalised, digital world of commerce with the fundamental concept of party autonomy and autonomy  in arbitration procedure?

The ‘myriad of issues’ are the e-discovery issues raised by the Sedona Conference  Working Group on Best Practices for Electronic Document & Production.