Print Bookmark

KMK's May 2015 E-Discovery Round-up

Good afternoon E-Discovery enthusiasts!  This month we take a look at the evolution of social media’s privacy laws, get reminded that the amended rules of civil procedure recently cleared a hurdle and take a swim in the deep end of the “predictive coding” pool.  Let’s dive in, shall we?

Social Media Privacy Developments
The states of Connecticut and Virginia both passed into law measures prohibiting employers’ access to job applicants’ and employees’ social media accounts.  In both states, the new laws would restrict employers from asking potential or current employees for usernames and passwords to access their online accounts.  The Connecticut law allows fines to be doled out for any violations of the law by employers.  The Virginia measure will go into effect July 1st and Connecticut’s as of October 1st.   To date, at least 18 additional states have social media privacy laws in place.

FRCP Milestones
Amendments to the FRCP leaped another hurdle at the end of last month, being adopted by the Supreme Court, April 29th. The Amendments now move to Congress for approval.  If Congress takes no action, the amendments will take effect December 1st, 2015.

F-Measures under the Microscope
Bill Dimm, CEO of Hot Neuron, pens an interesting paper titled “Information Retrieval Performance Measurement Using Extrapolated Precision” where he highlights the ineffectiveness of the F-score (particularly F1, a mathematical harmonic mean between recall and precision) in information retrieval exercises. Dimm’s paper, backed by Dimm’s mathematical proof, aims to erode the notion that F-measures should be considered for use at all in the E-Discovery context.  Dimm’s proof shows that F-score, when looked at within the context of FRCP 26(b)(2)(C), “is completely blind to the value of the case being litigated or any of the other factors that are considered when determining the limits imposed by proportionality.” Dimm’s proof may prove to be informative and could possibly be used effectively where parties disagree on the use of F-measure to satisfy either discovery obligations or compliance.

Thanks for checking in to this month’s E-Discovery Round-up.  As always, if you find this article, interesting, please let people know by clicking the share link below.  And, if you would like to share your feedback or comments with me directly you can do so by clicking my contact link! 

Get Updates by Email


Subscribe to RSS

Recent Posts

Other KMK Blogs