i work in criminal law and criminal defendants often have their phones imaged and prosecution sees absolutely everything including their porn etc. there are of course privilege issues. You do not tend to sew stuff within apps though . If they did communications within an app that isn’t IM the prosecution probably would never find it .Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Agree TAR sucks so it won’t replace humans for a while. But this is not a job that will exist in DC. The last few insured cases I’ve had massive pushback — they want everything done by contract outfits in Florida or Ohio that charge like $20/hour or something ridiculous. And some of these contractors are using people in India or the carribean who get American bar licenses and are fluent English speakers but work for a fraction of the cost.
I’m also wondering if the increasing use of disappearing communications methods like slack will cut down on docs to be reviewed. Email may have already hit its zenith.
No, it will just change with things like slack. I have had cases where they demanded production of slack messages. The tech issues with producing slack messages were horrible, but it can be done and companies are going to find that they will need to preserve and produce these kinds of messages too.
Anonymous wrote:Agree TAR sucks so it won’t replace humans for a while. But this is not a job that will exist in DC. The last few insured cases I’ve had massive pushback — they want everything done by contract outfits in Florida or Ohio that charge like $20/hour or something ridiculous. And some of these contractors are using people in India or the carribean who get American bar licenses and are fluent English speakers but work for a fraction of the cost.
I’m also wondering if the increasing use of disappearing communications methods like slack will cut down on docs to be reviewed. Email may have already hit its zenith.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:As a litigator who pays for a combo of TAR and human review, it's really really hard for me to imagine human review will, in my lifetime, be phased out to the point this question will be a serious concern. I think some sect of clients will always be uncomfortable with exclusive TAR of their potentially privileged documents.
This. TAR is okay for a first line review but you will never be able to just upload docs to a TAR platform and then produce what it spits out. Not even close. Computers don't get nuance.
Clients don’t care. Most doc reviewers jobs will be eliminated . What do those people do then ?
IDK who your clients are but my clients care. I even had a client who demanded all doc review be done by us or local counsel—no contract reviewers. They didn’t want their docs floating around with random reviewers. No effing way they were gonna rely on TAR.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:As a litigator who pays for a combo of TAR and human review, it's really really hard for me to imagine human review will, in my lifetime, be phased out to the point this question will be a serious concern. I think some sect of clients will always be uncomfortable with exclusive TAR of their potentially privileged documents.
This. TAR is okay for a first line review but you will never be able to just upload docs to a TAR platform and then produce what it spits out. Not even close. Computers don't get nuance.
Clients don’t care. Most doc reviewers jobs will be eliminated . What do those people do then ?