Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Sorting Software With the e-Discovery Application Matrix
With so many products that describe themselves as end-to-end solutions and the resulting struggle in the legal technology community in determining which products solve a particular problem, it was only a matter of time before an enterprising consultant created a tool to navigate the sea of product information. That tool, the e-Discovery Application Matrix (www.reason-ed.com/reasoned/matrix), arrived earlier this year just prior to Legal Tech New York, thanks to Greg Buckles, an independent e-discovery consultant to corporate legal departments and outside software providers, of Houston, TX-based Reason-eD LLC.
“As part of my consulting practice in the last two years, I've spent a lot of time compiling spreadsheets, demonstrating the specific features and functionality of competing products, and I realized it's too big for an individual or even an analyst to track,” says Buckles. “Instead, it needs to be a collective effort to track this and to keep this type of information up to date.” For that reason, the Matrix is a publicly available resource that contains features and functions for 56 e-discovery software applications.
The Response
In the few months since its launch at LTNY 2009, the database has grown fivefold. Buckles expects that growth to continue as the database begins featuring a more complete spectrum of available applications beyond the initial group of market leaders. Its independence is a strong factor favoring its growth. “It is meant to be a resource that is unbiased and devoid of market messaging,” he says.
Until early March, independent consultants and software providers themselves were populating the majority of the entries by actually writing the descriptions and selecting the features that apply to their current application releases. There is now a feedback form that is built into every listing, so any time a viewer is looking at a search result or description of an application, he or she can immediately fill out a feedback form (the contents of which are sent to Buckles).
EDRM Framework
Given that each listed application could have many different features, Buckles is using the Electronic Discovery Reference Model (“EDRM”) paradigm to organize the entries and streamline the Matrix. “The reality is that when you put a hundred-plus listings on a Web page, it's too much.” His goal is to provide clarity and transparency. “This is really all about the ability to see things in a simple, clean format that you present on a Web page.”
Users can evaluate products by EDRM phase in a form that offers a side-by-side comparison. It then provides the URL for the vendor so that interested individuals can go directly to the application site to download full information.
Despite the structural benefits, the EDRM connection creates some confusion as well. “One of the problems I've seen in the market is that people will indicate whether software is EDRM compliant, which is actually not the purpose of the EDRM project at all,” Buckles highlights. The Matrix is not meant to serve any compliance reconciliation function. Rather, it is meant to organize the process to improve decision-making. Its cross-referencing purpose is the reason Buckles designated it a “matrix.” The tables include information about the applications themselves, their URL and even their booth number during LegalTech.
An Independent Source
To maintain independence and an unbiased nature, the Matrix form design eliminates the use of any marketing information other than in the functional description field.
Buckles has ensured that the site is free of rankings, judgments or scoring. The system is intended simply as a reference tool. There is also no sponsorship and the site does not have a single advertisement. The order in which the products appear is based on the order in which authors entered them into the matrix.
With the upcoming LegalTech West, the Matrix is sure to be reloaded.
Ari Kaplan, the principal of Ari Kaplan Advisors, is a lawyer and a writer based in the New York area. A member of this newsletter's Board of Editors, he is the author of The Opportunity Maker (Thomson-West, 2008). Kaplan has recently released 'Five Ways to Find Opportunity in a Faltering Economy,' a free special report that may be accessed at CreateOpportunityNow.com.
With so many products that describe themselves as end-to-end solutions and the resulting struggle in the legal technology community in determining which products solve a particular problem, it was only a matter of time before an enterprising consultant created a tool to navigate the sea of product information. That tool, the e-Discovery Application Matrix (www.reason-ed.com/reasoned/matrix), arrived earlier this year just prior to Legal Tech
“As part of my consulting practice in the last two years, I've spent a lot of time compiling spreadsheets, demonstrating the specific features and functionality of competing products, and I realized it's too big for an individual or even an analyst to track,” says Buckles. “Instead, it needs to be a collective effort to track this and to keep this type of information up to date.” For that reason, the Matrix is a publicly available resource that contains features and functions for 56 e-discovery software applications.
The Response
In the few months since its launch at LTNY 2009, the database has grown fivefold. Buckles expects that growth to continue as the database begins featuring a more complete spectrum of available applications beyond the initial group of market leaders. Its independence is a strong factor favoring its growth. “It is meant to be a resource that is unbiased and devoid of market messaging,” he says.
Until early March, independent consultants and software providers themselves were populating the majority of the entries by actually writing the descriptions and selecting the features that apply to their current application releases. There is now a feedback form that is built into every listing, so any time a viewer is looking at a search result or description of an application, he or she can immediately fill out a feedback form (the contents of which are sent to Buckles).
EDRM Framework
Given that each listed application could have many different features, Buckles is using the Electronic Discovery Reference Model (“EDRM”) paradigm to organize the entries and streamline the Matrix. “The reality is that when you put a hundred-plus listings on a Web page, it's too much.” His goal is to provide clarity and transparency. “This is really all about the ability to see things in a simple, clean format that you present on a Web page.”
Users can evaluate products by EDRM phase in a form that offers a side-by-side comparison. It then provides the URL for the vendor so that interested individuals can go directly to the application site to download full information.
Despite the structural benefits, the EDRM connection creates some confusion as well. “One of the problems I've seen in the market is that people will indicate whether software is EDRM compliant, which is actually not the purpose of the EDRM project at all,” Buckles highlights. The Matrix is not meant to serve any compliance reconciliation function. Rather, it is meant to organize the process to improve decision-making. Its cross-referencing purpose is the reason Buckles designated it a “matrix.” The tables include information about the applications themselves, their URL and even their booth number during LegalTech.
An Independent Source
To maintain independence and an unbiased nature, the Matrix form design eliminates the use of any marketing information other than in the functional description field.
Buckles has ensured that the site is free of rankings, judgments or scoring. The system is intended simply as a reference tool. There is also no sponsorship and the site does not have a single advertisement. The order in which the products appear is based on the order in which authors entered them into the matrix.
With the upcoming LegalTech West, the Matrix is sure to be reloaded.
Ari Kaplan, the principal of Ari Kaplan Advisors, is a lawyer and a writer based in the
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.
The Stranger to the Deed Rule
In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.