Right now, the tides of e-discovery favor production of electronically stored information in native form — i.e., within the original application in which it was created. Because no outlay is needed to convert the data to a static image, those going with e-discovery’s current flow believe that native productions cost less and should thus serve as the default production format for all e-discovery.
But leaping into a wholesale native production without consideration of the format’s potential significant hidden costs and case-management problems can put some litigants in over their heads. A more thorough examination of the issues associated with native-format production, along with a more nuanced approach to ESI production overall, show that the best format for e-discovery really depends on the specific circumstances of each case. To craft a strategic e-discovery plan, litigants need to understand the advantages and disadvantages associated with production in both native and traditional static-image format so that ESI production meets — rather than dictates — litigation strategy.
This content has been archived.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
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
