Clients to Firms: Ask Permission Before Storing Our Data on the Cloud
A new survey from CLOC and the firm of Fish & Richardson indicates that while organizations want firms to ask their permission before moving data to the cloud, that level of communication may not yet be happening.
January 30, 2020 at 11:30 AM
4 minute read
Who knows better than lawyers that there's always a catch? A new survey produced by the Corporate Legal Operations Consortium (CLOC) and the law firm of Fish & Richardson indicated that while organizations are generally amenable to legal service providers such as law firms storing their information in the cloud, most expect for their permission to be obtained first.
The survey is comprised of 76 responses from law firms, Fortune 500 companies and financial institutions. When asked if their organization allowed data to be stored in the cloud by a legal service provider, 82% of respondents—excluding law firms—said 'yes.' But 77% of that same demographic also said that they require notification first.
This could pose both a challenge and an opportunity to law firms, who may have to think long and hard about the most efficient method of obtaining that permission and how to best educate clients on the virtues of the cloud. Beau Mersereau, chief legal technology solutions officer at Fish & Richardson, highlighted the risk that firms take.
"I think that there's some reluctance there to asking for permission, because if the wrong clients say 'no' then you are effectively doubling your storage costs by having to maintain systems on prem[ises] and systems in the cloud," Mersereau said.
There's a chance that many law firms have not yet broached the problem. Last August, Fish & Richardson partnered with the International Legal Technology Association (ILTA) on another cloud usage survey featuring 102 respondents, including members of the Am Law 100 and Global 100. While 78% of all law firm respondents said they were storing client data in the cloud, the majority of that group also indicated they were not asking client permission first.
But the CLOC survey notes that many firm organizations would require some sort of notification—so where is the disconnect occurring? It's possible that some firms are still attempting to find the most efficient methodology for retrieving client permissions to go to the cloud, a process that could wind up taking some twists and turns.
"Some of these mega firms have thousands and thousands of clients that, if they don't respond, what do you do?," Mersereau said
Jason Barnwell, assistant general counsel at Microsoft and a CLOC board member, posited that legal professionals will always opt for permission if given the choice, but in practice might prefer a less cumbersome arrangement.
"You end up being burdened with these choices that you probably don't want to stop the world to wait for your response. … Maybe there is actually a more risk-adjusted approach to this," Barnwell said.
He suggested that rather than organizations requiring permission as sort of a general rule, that they instead ask law firms to keep them informed "when there's some truly interesting here," that they should know about.
For now, organizations appear split on how they want legal service providers to go about seeking their permission to put data into the cloud. Among CLOC survey respondents, the majority (56%) thought legal service providers should ask for permission by sending an engagement letter amendment. "Other" was the second most popular choice at 19%.
But no matter how firms ask permission to move clients' data to the cloud, there may always be the risk of getting a 'no' in response. Per Barnwell, attempting to maintain a hybrid approach—storing some client data in the cloud and some on-site—can wind up being costly for all involved.
"When you are pushing firms into that hybrid scenario, you're putting more cost on them that ultimately has to be born by the clients. Again, I'm not sure that people ultimately understand the trade-offs of what they are asking for," Barnwell said.
It may be up to firms to plug any knowledge gaps that do exist as they go about the process of seeking permissions related to the cloud, including emphasizing any potential benefits that may exist from a security or operations standpoint. Fish & Richardson, for example, is building cloud-specific machine learning models to drive insights around litigation pricing and automatically classify and route documents and information as it comes into the firm. Even if some clients are hesitant about the cloud, efficiency has a broad appeal.
"You can't have good machine learning models unless you have good data, and we need to be able to take the data that we have and be able to filter and clean it up. The fastest way to do that is in the cloud," Mersereau said.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTrending Stories
- 1Munger, Gibson Dunn Billed $63 Million to Snap in 2024
- 2January Petitions Press High Court on Guns, Birth Certificate Sex Classifications
- 3'A Waste of Your Time': Practice Tips From Judges in the Oakland Federal Courthouse
- 4Judge Extends Tom Girardi's Time in Prison Medical Facility to Feb. 20
- 5Supreme Court Denies Trump's Request to Pause Pending Environmental Cases
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250