3 ms·
It's also just a massive time/money sink to have your own legal team review all of that stuff. You don't want to send anything to another party before you have
by mattmcknight 3y ago
It's also just a massive time/money sink to have your own legal team review all of that stuff. You don't want to send anything to another party before you have reviewed it. In addition, there are often conflicting rules there, where there is private information of unrelated parties in the messages, so the review process just becomes unmanageable if it is an archive over a long period of time.
Meanwhile, we now have people putting stuff into their own personal information management systems, training various models on the data, etc. When the company ceases to be a valuable library of the information necessary to do your job, people start specifically archiving things that might be useful at some point in the future, and the discovery process becomes unbounded.
- dmoy 3y agoYup this one is it, right here. It's absolutely about discovery costs. Document review is typically like a quarter of all litigation cost, and that's assuming the problem of "get all the docs" is solved already.
- snapplebobapple 3y agoThis is what got a company I worked at several years ago. It cost hundreds of thousands of dollars just to have everything reviewed to be sent off to the government agency investigating us. We ended up settling for about a quarter of what it would have cost us to fight them in an actual court trial just because we were a large pile of money in before we even got near a trial and they abused their position and knowing our cash position to low ball us on settlement and force us into a settlement so they could save some face. The whole experience made it pretty obvious most of these agencies should be mostly gutted and rebuilt.