The panel discussed international eDiscovery issues including differing privacy standards and blocking statutes across jurisdictions, trends toward increased privacy protections in the US and Europe, and practical challenges of cross-border eDiscovery such as dealing with non-English languages and legacy IT systems. Proportionality, risk mitigation strategies, and continued communication were presented as ways to address these challenges.
Ceic 2010 international panel slide deckJames Daley
This document summarizes a panel discussion on international eDiscovery and cross-border privacy and data protection issues. The panel consisted of experts from law firms and technology companies who discussed differing privacy standards between jurisdictions, challenges of cross-border data transfers, and trends toward greater recognition of blocking statutes that restrict discovery of information for foreign judicial proceedings.
Cross-Border E-discovery: Navigating Rules and Regulations Across Multiple J...rashbaum
This document discusses the complexities of cross-border e-discovery due to varying privacy and data protection laws across jurisdictions. It outlines key concepts like what constitutes personal data, differences between common law and civil law approaches to discovery and disclosure, and challenges of collecting electronic evidence located outside the US due to blocking statutes and criminal penalties in some countries. Practical suggestions are provided for how to navigate these issues, including tailoring legal holds, obtaining consent where possible, and educating courts on foreign law considerations.
1) The document discusses client-attorney privilege (CAP) and whether it applies to communications with foreign patent agents and Japanese patent attorneys.
2) CAP is recognized in some U.S. courts for communications with Japanese patent attorneys since 1998 amendments to Japanese civil procedure codes established a professional secrecy obligation comparable to CAP.
3) However, there is no uniform international rule on CAP. The World Intellectual Property Organization is studying the issue but making slow progress. Bilateral agreements may be a faster way to resolve differences between countries.
American Discovery In Foreign Courts (by L.O\'Naghten 2009)onaghtenl
Please contact Luis O'Naghten if you need any assistance with international litigation or
arbitration matters. He has extensive experience in complex commercial disputes before US
courts and international arbitration panels.
Bridging U.S. Cross-Border Ediscovery Obligations and EU Data Protection Obli...AltheimPrivacy
These slides are part of a presentation given at the IAPP Europe Data Protection Congress on November 15, 2012, by, in order of presentation, Monique Altheim, James Daley and Alexander Dix. The panel was moderated by Florian Thoma.
This document summarizes a panel discussion on the legal and practical challenges of cross-border e-discovery disputes. It outlines differences between American-style discovery rules and foreign frameworks like the EU Data Protection Directive. The Hague Convention provides an alternative but courts often disregard it. Blocking statutes criminalize sharing information with foreign authorities. Practical considerations include assessing safety, conducting interviews abroad, choosing data processing tools, reviewing foreign documents, and controlling costs. Organizations must coordinate legal, IT, and compliance functions on data policies, records management, and audits.
This document discusses the split among US courts on whether private international arbitral bodies are considered "foreign or international tribunals" under 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a), which governs US judicial assistance for foreign discovery requests. Prior to 2004, the Second and Fifth Circuits held that private arbitrations were not covered by the statute. However, the Supreme Court's 2004 Intel decision gave an expansive interpretation of the statute without directly addressing private arbitrations. This led to differing approaches among lower courts, with the Eleventh Circuit initially holding in 2012 that private arbitrations are covered before vacating that ruling in 2014. The issue remains unresolved and may lead to a circuit split.
The CREATE Act -- As viewed from the Ivory Towers and from the TrenchesKevin E. Flynn
The CREATE Act aims to promote collaborative research by allowing research partners to share confidential information without risk of creating prior art that could bar patentability of their joint inventions. However, the CREATE Act has had limited effect so far. While intended to benefit collaborations, its requirements of disclosing partner names and the research field introduce confidentiality issues. It also does not address challenges in determining inventorship dates and scope of the research agreement. From a practical perspective, the CREATE Act is best viewed as a fallback protection rather than an initial strategy during prosecution due to its requirements and risks of other rejections. Overall, the CREATE Act provides some safeguards for collaborative research but confidentiality concerns and procedural challenges have limited its impact to date.
Ceic 2010 international panel slide deckJames Daley
This document summarizes a panel discussion on international eDiscovery and cross-border privacy and data protection issues. The panel consisted of experts from law firms and technology companies who discussed differing privacy standards between jurisdictions, challenges of cross-border data transfers, and trends toward greater recognition of blocking statutes that restrict discovery of information for foreign judicial proceedings.
Cross-Border E-discovery: Navigating Rules and Regulations Across Multiple J...rashbaum
This document discusses the complexities of cross-border e-discovery due to varying privacy and data protection laws across jurisdictions. It outlines key concepts like what constitutes personal data, differences between common law and civil law approaches to discovery and disclosure, and challenges of collecting electronic evidence located outside the US due to blocking statutes and criminal penalties in some countries. Practical suggestions are provided for how to navigate these issues, including tailoring legal holds, obtaining consent where possible, and educating courts on foreign law considerations.
1) The document discusses client-attorney privilege (CAP) and whether it applies to communications with foreign patent agents and Japanese patent attorneys.
2) CAP is recognized in some U.S. courts for communications with Japanese patent attorneys since 1998 amendments to Japanese civil procedure codes established a professional secrecy obligation comparable to CAP.
3) However, there is no uniform international rule on CAP. The World Intellectual Property Organization is studying the issue but making slow progress. Bilateral agreements may be a faster way to resolve differences between countries.
American Discovery In Foreign Courts (by L.O\'Naghten 2009)onaghtenl
Please contact Luis O'Naghten if you need any assistance with international litigation or
arbitration matters. He has extensive experience in complex commercial disputes before US
courts and international arbitration panels.
Bridging U.S. Cross-Border Ediscovery Obligations and EU Data Protection Obli...AltheimPrivacy
These slides are part of a presentation given at the IAPP Europe Data Protection Congress on November 15, 2012, by, in order of presentation, Monique Altheim, James Daley and Alexander Dix. The panel was moderated by Florian Thoma.
This document summarizes a panel discussion on the legal and practical challenges of cross-border e-discovery disputes. It outlines differences between American-style discovery rules and foreign frameworks like the EU Data Protection Directive. The Hague Convention provides an alternative but courts often disregard it. Blocking statutes criminalize sharing information with foreign authorities. Practical considerations include assessing safety, conducting interviews abroad, choosing data processing tools, reviewing foreign documents, and controlling costs. Organizations must coordinate legal, IT, and compliance functions on data policies, records management, and audits.
This document discusses the split among US courts on whether private international arbitral bodies are considered "foreign or international tribunals" under 28 U.S.C. § 1782(a), which governs US judicial assistance for foreign discovery requests. Prior to 2004, the Second and Fifth Circuits held that private arbitrations were not covered by the statute. However, the Supreme Court's 2004 Intel decision gave an expansive interpretation of the statute without directly addressing private arbitrations. This led to differing approaches among lower courts, with the Eleventh Circuit initially holding in 2012 that private arbitrations are covered before vacating that ruling in 2014. The issue remains unresolved and may lead to a circuit split.
The CREATE Act -- As viewed from the Ivory Towers and from the TrenchesKevin E. Flynn
The CREATE Act aims to promote collaborative research by allowing research partners to share confidential information without risk of creating prior art that could bar patentability of their joint inventions. However, the CREATE Act has had limited effect so far. While intended to benefit collaborations, its requirements of disclosing partner names and the research field introduce confidentiality issues. It also does not address challenges in determining inventorship dates and scope of the research agreement. From a practical perspective, the CREATE Act is best viewed as a fallback protection rather than an initial strategy during prosecution due to its requirements and risks of other rejections. Overall, the CREATE Act provides some safeguards for collaborative research but confidentiality concerns and procedural challenges have limited its impact to date.
I presented comprehensive e-discovery webinar with Eric Mandel, national e-discovery counsel and leader of the information law practice group at Zelle Hofmann Voelbel & Mason LLP.
Here are a selection of the slides that I created for the presentation
Electronic Discovery - GODWIN PC - What you Need to KnowEd Sothcott
E-Discovery is becoming an increasing important part of the legal process. The effect of social media, e-mail and other electronic correspondence in lawsuits including civil and criminal matters and even divorce has become dramatic. What do lawyers need to do to preserve this evidence? What can happen if you don't?
Just Intellectuals Newsletter (March 2017 ed)Kristy Downing
The Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Life Technologies v. Promega regarding the interpretation of "substantial portion" under 35 USC §271(f)(1). The Court held that (1) "substantial portion" refers to a quantitative, not qualitative, measure and (2) exporting a single component is insufficient to create liability without being tailored for infringement under §271(f)(2). However, the Court did not specify how many components would need to be exported to be considered a "substantial portion."
The document provides an overview of disclosure practices across different jurisdictions. It discusses how the United States has the broadest discovery process, requiring disclosure of all relevant information as well as information that could lead to relevant material. English disclosure requires parties to disclose documents that their case relies on, adversely affects their case, or supports the other party's case. Civil code jurisdictions tend to have a more restrictive approach, sometimes requiring disclosure only of documents supporting a party's own case. The document outlines the scope, timing, exceptions and reasonable search requirements for disclosure under English law.
Presentation given to the International Marine Contractors Association Conference in Amsterdam 28 & 29 November 2012 .
Iin the current economic climate Clyde & Co suggest that claims handling issues of the kind Graeme will discuss are likely to be increasingly relevant and topical as far as the IMCA’s members are concerned.
Contractors are being pressured by operators to accept more risk on projects and insurers are increasing their deductibles which means contractors are bearing increasingly large exposures to uninsured losses.
Claims which would once have fallen to the operator or to project insurers are increasingly becoming the responsibility of contractors. Further, it is clear from the number of recent high-profile incidents that offshore operations are themselves becoming inherently riskier as projects move to more extreme environments and more unstable jurisdictions.
Unlike operators, many contrators may not have an in-house legal function or may not have one with claims handling experience. Graeme discusses basic legal concepts which contractors may face.
Graeme’s presentation mainly discusses claims handling issues but is equally relevant to those who are involved in contract drafting, on the basis that prevention is better than cure.
The Cost of Litigation: A Case Study, Business Law, Plymouth State University...Kevin O'Shea
This document summarizes a case study on the costs of litigation between the Real Estate Bar Association for Massachusetts (REBA) and National Real Estate Information Services (NREIS). REBA claimed NREIS engaged in unauthorized practice of law, while NREIS counterclaimed under the Dormant Commerce Clause. The court granted summary judgment for NREIS, finding REBA's definition of legal practice violated the Constitution. NREIS then requested attorney's fees, which the court approved after reviewing billing rates, hours worked, staffing levels, and finding the fees reasonable given the complexity and public interest in the case.
This document discusses the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine. It covers the basic rules for these privileges, including that the attorney-client privilege protects confidential communications between attorneys and their clients, while work product protects documents prepared in anticipation of litigation. The document also discusses exceptions to these privileges, such as when privileged information has been disclosed to third parties, as well as rules around inadvertent disclosure of privileged information during discovery.
Morse IPO Slides Joint Defense Of Ip Litigation November 2009morsemh
Slides presented to Intellectual Property Owners Association IP Chat Channel webinar on November 4, 2009, entitled "Strategy for Defendants in Multi-Defendant Patent Cases - United We Stand?" addressing Antitrust Considerations
The document discusses international issues related to e-discovery and cross-border data privacy laws. It notes fundamental differences between common law discovery traditions and civil law traditions, as well as differing notions of privacy between the U.S. and other countries. Blocking statutes, data protection laws, and differing legal systems can create conflicts and challenges for obtaining electronic information across borders for litigation purposes. International frameworks like The Hague Convention have attempted to resolve some of these issues but are rarely used.
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), Standing Committee on the Law of Patents (SCP) 14th Session, January 25-29, 2010 (Geneva, Switzerland)
If you're a legal or security professional, the looming General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, is likely causing your blood pressure to rise. Expected to impose strict limitations on organizations that do business in the European Union, or otherwise collect the data of European citizens, the regulation is said to raise the stakes for privacy compliance as well as for transcontinental discovery. Organizations that don't meet its standards by May 2018 will be the subject of potentially business-rattling sanctions.
The document summarizes key electronic discovery cases and issues from 2011, including failures to preserve evidence resulting in sanctions, the crafting of search and privilege protocols among parties, and the obligation to preserve potentially relevant documents. It also discusses trends related to the use of e-discovery counsel and consultants to help navigate technical and legal issues surrounding electronically stored information in litigation.
Cross-Border eDiscovery is a hot topic this year. Globalization of businesses and mass mergers and acquisitions has caused an increase in the need for an understanding of how eDiscovery should be handled in other countries. All over the world, courts and local governments have instituted new rules for how parties will engage in discovery related to digital evidence. These new rules have been causing issues between the attorneys required by the US discovery rules to discover digital evidence for their cases and the various governments outside the US and across the world.
While the law in the United States makes it clear that parties to a litigation must preserve documents and electronically stored information, laws in other countries make it equally clear that preserving or collecting that data may violate their data protection laws. In this seminar, you will learn the updates in the local discovery and privacy rules of the top trade partners of the U.S. so that you will be able to handle overseas eDiscovery requirements with greater ease and more knowledge.
This document discusses the Sedona Canada Principles of E-Discovery and Privacy Protection. It provides an overview of privacy and e-discovery, noting the tension between privacy rights and the need for disclosure in litigation. It discusses the Sedona Canada principles, which address proportionality and protecting privileges and privacy in electronic document production. The document also discusses issues around pre-litigation access to employee communications and social media, as well as discovery practices regarding sensitive personal information.
Legally Correct But Technologically Off the Mark - The Case of Arie GengerMark Hyde
Trump v Arie Genger involved the battle for control of an investment company known as TRI,. The dispute was between the Trump Group, the new owners, and Arie Genger, the original owner. As is standard in such cases, the court entered a “status quo order”, enjoining both parties from “tampering with, destroying, or in any way disposing of any Company-related documents, books, or records.”
The document discusses delivering electronic discovery globally. It begins with introductions of the presenters, Emily Cobb from Ropes & Gray, Andrew Szczech from Kroll Ontrack, and Thomas Sely from Kroll Ontrack. The webinar then covers legal frameworks for eDiscovery across jurisdictions, cultural considerations regarding privacy, and practical experiences in collecting data from different countries and complying with varying privacy laws.
Raising the EU Data Protection Laws in a U.S. Litigation: A Guidepost for the...Freshfields
Your client, a U.S. company with a subsidiary located in Germany, is served with a non-party subpoena in a U.S. litigation for documents located on its subsidiary's server in Germany. The documents sought are protected from disclosure by the German Federal Data Protection Act and, if produced, may expose your client to monetary fines under that Act. Your client faces a conflict—comply with the discovery request and violate EU privacy law, or, comply with EU law and contravene the discovery request.
The UK and EU Personal Data Regime After Brexit: Another Switzerland?David Erdos
These slides provide an overview of the personal data relationship between the UK and EU after Brexit. Under the Trade and Cooperation Agreement, the UK will have the closest connection with the EU here outside the European Economic Area and Switzerland. This is especially clear in the area of justice and security where there is very extensive provision for data exchange based on common standards. However, in the general area of data protection the framework only points to mutual adequacy. Even with the evolving formulation of this as “essential equivalence”, significant flexibility is retained and this may ultimately result in more substantive divergence than EU-Switzerland given the UK’s more distinct data protection approach. Common bona fide implementation of the Council of Europe’s Data Protection Convention 108+ may provide a good lodestar in the medium term and I very tentatively map out what this may could mean for default standards in the UK related to sensitive data and integrity and also specific substantive restrictions to ensure a more graduated approach and reconciliation with other competing rights.
I presented comprehensive e-discovery webinar with Eric Mandel, national e-discovery counsel and leader of the information law practice group at Zelle Hofmann Voelbel & Mason LLP.
Here are a selection of the slides that I created for the presentation
Electronic Discovery - GODWIN PC - What you Need to KnowEd Sothcott
E-Discovery is becoming an increasing important part of the legal process. The effect of social media, e-mail and other electronic correspondence in lawsuits including civil and criminal matters and even divorce has become dramatic. What do lawyers need to do to preserve this evidence? What can happen if you don't?
Just Intellectuals Newsletter (March 2017 ed)Kristy Downing
The Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Life Technologies v. Promega regarding the interpretation of "substantial portion" under 35 USC §271(f)(1). The Court held that (1) "substantial portion" refers to a quantitative, not qualitative, measure and (2) exporting a single component is insufficient to create liability without being tailored for infringement under §271(f)(2). However, the Court did not specify how many components would need to be exported to be considered a "substantial portion."
The document provides an overview of disclosure practices across different jurisdictions. It discusses how the United States has the broadest discovery process, requiring disclosure of all relevant information as well as information that could lead to relevant material. English disclosure requires parties to disclose documents that their case relies on, adversely affects their case, or supports the other party's case. Civil code jurisdictions tend to have a more restrictive approach, sometimes requiring disclosure only of documents supporting a party's own case. The document outlines the scope, timing, exceptions and reasonable search requirements for disclosure under English law.
Presentation given to the International Marine Contractors Association Conference in Amsterdam 28 & 29 November 2012 .
Iin the current economic climate Clyde & Co suggest that claims handling issues of the kind Graeme will discuss are likely to be increasingly relevant and topical as far as the IMCA’s members are concerned.
Contractors are being pressured by operators to accept more risk on projects and insurers are increasing their deductibles which means contractors are bearing increasingly large exposures to uninsured losses.
Claims which would once have fallen to the operator or to project insurers are increasingly becoming the responsibility of contractors. Further, it is clear from the number of recent high-profile incidents that offshore operations are themselves becoming inherently riskier as projects move to more extreme environments and more unstable jurisdictions.
Unlike operators, many contrators may not have an in-house legal function or may not have one with claims handling experience. Graeme discusses basic legal concepts which contractors may face.
Graeme’s presentation mainly discusses claims handling issues but is equally relevant to those who are involved in contract drafting, on the basis that prevention is better than cure.
The Cost of Litigation: A Case Study, Business Law, Plymouth State University...Kevin O'Shea
This document summarizes a case study on the costs of litigation between the Real Estate Bar Association for Massachusetts (REBA) and National Real Estate Information Services (NREIS). REBA claimed NREIS engaged in unauthorized practice of law, while NREIS counterclaimed under the Dormant Commerce Clause. The court granted summary judgment for NREIS, finding REBA's definition of legal practice violated the Constitution. NREIS then requested attorney's fees, which the court approved after reviewing billing rates, hours worked, staffing levels, and finding the fees reasonable given the complexity and public interest in the case.
This document discusses the attorney-client privilege and work product doctrine. It covers the basic rules for these privileges, including that the attorney-client privilege protects confidential communications between attorneys and their clients, while work product protects documents prepared in anticipation of litigation. The document also discusses exceptions to these privileges, such as when privileged information has been disclosed to third parties, as well as rules around inadvertent disclosure of privileged information during discovery.
Morse IPO Slides Joint Defense Of Ip Litigation November 2009morsemh
Slides presented to Intellectual Property Owners Association IP Chat Channel webinar on November 4, 2009, entitled "Strategy for Defendants in Multi-Defendant Patent Cases - United We Stand?" addressing Antitrust Considerations
The document discusses international issues related to e-discovery and cross-border data privacy laws. It notes fundamental differences between common law discovery traditions and civil law traditions, as well as differing notions of privacy between the U.S. and other countries. Blocking statutes, data protection laws, and differing legal systems can create conflicts and challenges for obtaining electronic information across borders for litigation purposes. International frameworks like The Hague Convention have attempted to resolve some of these issues but are rarely used.
World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), Standing Committee on the Law of Patents (SCP) 14th Session, January 25-29, 2010 (Geneva, Switzerland)
If you're a legal or security professional, the looming General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, is likely causing your blood pressure to rise. Expected to impose strict limitations on organizations that do business in the European Union, or otherwise collect the data of European citizens, the regulation is said to raise the stakes for privacy compliance as well as for transcontinental discovery. Organizations that don't meet its standards by May 2018 will be the subject of potentially business-rattling sanctions.
The document summarizes key electronic discovery cases and issues from 2011, including failures to preserve evidence resulting in sanctions, the crafting of search and privilege protocols among parties, and the obligation to preserve potentially relevant documents. It also discusses trends related to the use of e-discovery counsel and consultants to help navigate technical and legal issues surrounding electronically stored information in litigation.
Cross-Border eDiscovery is a hot topic this year. Globalization of businesses and mass mergers and acquisitions has caused an increase in the need for an understanding of how eDiscovery should be handled in other countries. All over the world, courts and local governments have instituted new rules for how parties will engage in discovery related to digital evidence. These new rules have been causing issues between the attorneys required by the US discovery rules to discover digital evidence for their cases and the various governments outside the US and across the world.
While the law in the United States makes it clear that parties to a litigation must preserve documents and electronically stored information, laws in other countries make it equally clear that preserving or collecting that data may violate their data protection laws. In this seminar, you will learn the updates in the local discovery and privacy rules of the top trade partners of the U.S. so that you will be able to handle overseas eDiscovery requirements with greater ease and more knowledge.
This document discusses the Sedona Canada Principles of E-Discovery and Privacy Protection. It provides an overview of privacy and e-discovery, noting the tension between privacy rights and the need for disclosure in litigation. It discusses the Sedona Canada principles, which address proportionality and protecting privileges and privacy in electronic document production. The document also discusses issues around pre-litigation access to employee communications and social media, as well as discovery practices regarding sensitive personal information.
Legally Correct But Technologically Off the Mark - The Case of Arie GengerMark Hyde
Trump v Arie Genger involved the battle for control of an investment company known as TRI,. The dispute was between the Trump Group, the new owners, and Arie Genger, the original owner. As is standard in such cases, the court entered a “status quo order”, enjoining both parties from “tampering with, destroying, or in any way disposing of any Company-related documents, books, or records.”
The document discusses delivering electronic discovery globally. It begins with introductions of the presenters, Emily Cobb from Ropes & Gray, Andrew Szczech from Kroll Ontrack, and Thomas Sely from Kroll Ontrack. The webinar then covers legal frameworks for eDiscovery across jurisdictions, cultural considerations regarding privacy, and practical experiences in collecting data from different countries and complying with varying privacy laws.
Raising the EU Data Protection Laws in a U.S. Litigation: A Guidepost for the...Freshfields
Your client, a U.S. company with a subsidiary located in Germany, is served with a non-party subpoena in a U.S. litigation for documents located on its subsidiary's server in Germany. The documents sought are protected from disclosure by the German Federal Data Protection Act and, if produced, may expose your client to monetary fines under that Act. Your client faces a conflict—comply with the discovery request and violate EU privacy law, or, comply with EU law and contravene the discovery request.
The UK and EU Personal Data Regime After Brexit: Another Switzerland?David Erdos
These slides provide an overview of the personal data relationship between the UK and EU after Brexit. Under the Trade and Cooperation Agreement, the UK will have the closest connection with the EU here outside the European Economic Area and Switzerland. This is especially clear in the area of justice and security where there is very extensive provision for data exchange based on common standards. However, in the general area of data protection the framework only points to mutual adequacy. Even with the evolving formulation of this as “essential equivalence”, significant flexibility is retained and this may ultimately result in more substantive divergence than EU-Switzerland given the UK’s more distinct data protection approach. Common bona fide implementation of the Council of Europe’s Data Protection Convention 108+ may provide a good lodestar in the medium term and I very tentatively map out what this may could mean for default standards in the UK related to sensitive data and integrity and also specific substantive restrictions to ensure a more graduated approach and reconciliation with other competing rights.
USA and Europe (EU) do have a different way of looking into privacy. This PPT is about who is responsible and what kind of rules are in place. This is a A Medved Consultants LLC Presentation. This may not be considered as a legal advice.
Linking Data: The Legal Implications - SemTech2010mleyden
To date most of the focus on the Semantic Web has, quite rightly, been focused on the enabling technologies. However, as the technologies are becoming more mainstream, and as ever increasing volumes of Linked Data is produced, the implications of linking this data becomes more of an issue. This presentation highlights some of the current thinking as to the possible legal implications of linking data while discussing some solutions that are emerging.
This document outlines the distinction between private international law and public international law. Private international law determines which law applies in cases involving foreign elements and regulates relationships between private individuals in different countries. Public international law regulates relationships between nation states and determines some rights and duties for non-state entities. The document then discusses the Yahoo incorporation case, where French groups sued Yahoo for allowing auctions of Nazi memorabilia on its site, which was accessible in France and violated French law. The court ordered Yahoo to block French users from accessing these auctions. Finally, the document notes that a rule of private international law can become public international law if incorporated into a treaty or established as international custom through decisions of international tribunals.
This document summarizes a case involving a Public Interest Immunity (PII) certificate signed by the Home Secretary to hold proceedings in camera for the trial of Wang Yam, who was charged with murder. PII certificates aim to protect national security, identities of informants, and other sensitive information, but they can restrict the right to a fair public trial. Legal experts argue there is a risk to justice when trials are held privately without public scrutiny of proceedings. Newspapers applied to overturn the PII certificate, and the balance between a fair trial requiring full disclosure and protecting sensitive information will be a difficult issue for the court to determine.
This document summarizes cartel enforcement in the United States. It discusses that the US remains uniquely aggressive in prosecuting cartels criminally through imprisonment, fines, and private damages suits. The DOJ plays the primary role in detecting cartels and establishing their existence in court, while private parties can establish the full scope of injury. Individuals can face up to 10 years in prison and $1m fines, while corporations face fines of $100m or double damages. Recent years have seen record fines collected and increased international cooperation in prosecutions. Most enforcement still targets price-fixing in industries like auto parts, air transportation, and chemicals.
This document analyzes how judicial rulings regarding Exemption 1 of the Freedom of Information Act have affected journalists' ability to obtain government documents over the past decade. It finds that while more FOIA requests are being approved initially by agencies, success rates in lawsuits have declined from 7.7% in 2008 to 6.2% in 2014. Exemption 1, involving national security, continues to be frequently claimed and rarely overturned by courts. However, a few notable cases found in favor of transparency, like the New York Times obtaining drone targeting documents. Overall, journalists still face challenges in litigation but some progress has been made in initial request approvals.
The US and EU finalized a long-awaited data-sharing agreement that will allow personal data to continue flowing freely between the two regions. The deal establishes an independent review body for Europeans to appeal potential improper data collection by US intelligence agencies. It also outlines more clearly when intelligence agencies can access personal data of EU residents and how Europeans can appeal such collection. Some privacy advocates and EU lawmakers remain skeptical that it does enough to curb US mass surveillance.
The document discusses the case for paperless courtrooms. It argues that digital courtrooms can reduce costs through eliminating paper, printing, storage and duplication of documents. It also claims that digital courtrooms can improve efficiency by enabling easy searching of evidence, reducing delays, and enhancing lawyers' ability to present evidence persuasively. However, it notes there are also issues to address, such as lawyers' conflicts of interest regarding billing practices, judges' and lawyers' computer literacy, and courts not being designed for digital technologies. Overall, the document advocates for "radio shack courtrooms" where lawyers and judges use off-the-shelf technologies to transition courts to digital environments.
Information Governance-a programmatic perspective on driving value through RI...Ledjit
This document discusses information governance and records management at Citigroup. It describes how Records Management Officers (RMOs) help ensure compliance with retention obligations by classifying records, setting retention periods, and handling exceptions. RMOs answer questions about files and compile requirements for retaining, disposing of, archiving, and retrieving information. They track issues until a compliant retention and disposition process is established. The document emphasizes that improper handling of information poses significant legal and financial risks, so employees should contact RMOs before acting.
The Effective eDocument Retention Program - Policies, Processes and SolutionsLedjit
The document discusses the need for effective electronic document (eDocument) retention programs in organizations. It notes that changes to legal discovery rules have prompted companies to rethink their information management strategies. Key drivers for eDocument retention programs include regulatory compliance, industry standards, and mitigating business risks. The challenges include a lack of clear ownership, the perception that storage is cheap so everything can be kept, and that retention is not a high priority initiative. Effective programs require structuring information as assets, creating a records management framework with policies on retention, legal holds, and destruction. Questions are welcomed.
Documents and Discovery in Government - Alberta’s PerspectiveLedjit
The document summarizes Alberta's perspective on documents and discovery in government. It discusses the complexity of the Alberta government with over 59,000 employees creating electronic information daily across various devices and media. It outlines lessons learned regarding developing an information environment strategy, overcoming challenges with resources, technology, eDiscovery tools, training, records management policies, and preparing for litigation. The presentation aims to improve the government's management of electronic records and readiness for electronic discovery.
The document discusses electronic documents and digital evidence from a legal and forensic perspective. It defines electronic documents, outlines the differences between electronic and paper documents, and discusses various types of digital media that may contain potential evidence. The document also covers best practices for handling digital evidence, including using write blockers, documenting the chain of custody, and preserving file system structure to avoid modifying data on storage devices.
This document discusses the key stages of electronic discovery (eDiscovery) readiness and processes. It covers evaluating an organization's eDiscovery needs through network and data mapping, establishing policies and procedures, and educating teams. It then outlines the stages of identification, preservation, collection, processing for eDiscovery, including scoping data sources, applying holds, forensic imaging, filtering data, and generating load files compatible with review platforms. The document provides an overview of people, processes, and technologies needed for effective eDiscovery.
The document discusses the benefits of paperless courtrooms, including reducing costs through eliminating paper documents, improving efficiency by reducing duplication and search times, and maintaining evidence integrity. It notes challenges such as lawyers' resistance due to potential loss of revenue from billable hours and printing profits. It recommends that judges take responsibility to require technology in courtrooms to maintain access to justice and reduce costs. Lawyers are also obligated to adapt to these changes. Overall, paperless technologies can reduce delays, costs and improve access to justice and the image of the justice system through increased efficiency and enhanced presentations of evidence.
Production of Documents, Technology and CostsLedjit
This document discusses the production of documents in both paper and electronic formats. It addresses topics such as the various technologies used to store electronic documents like hard drives, cell phones, and servers. The document also discusses the different file formats for electronic documents like word files, emails, and databases. Finally, it outlines the e-discovery process, including identifying, preserving, collecting, and reviewing electronic documents that may be relevant to legal proceedings.
eDiscovery - Advising your Clients on how to be Litigation Ready in the 21st ...Ledjit
This document discusses e-discovery best practices for litigation preparedness. It recommends that law firms advise clients to establish information governance policies including document retention, an electronic communications policy, and a document management system. It also recommends processes for litigation holds, preservation, collection, processing, review, and production. Templates are suggested for holds, custodian forms, and meet and confer agreements. Both manual and technology-assisted methods are outlined for collection, processing, and review in document management platforms.
বাংলাদেশের অর্থনৈতিক সমীক্ষা ২০২৪ [Bangladesh Economic Review 2024 Bangla.pdf] কম্পিউটার , ট্যাব ও স্মার্ট ফোন ভার্সন সহ সম্পূর্ণ বাংলা ই-বুক বা pdf বই " সুচিপত্র ...বুকমার্ক মেনু 🔖 ও হাইপার লিংক মেনু 📝👆 যুক্ত ..
আমাদের সবার জন্য খুব খুব গুরুত্বপূর্ণ একটি বই ..বিসিএস, ব্যাংক, ইউনিভার্সিটি ভর্তি ও যে কোন প্রতিযোগিতা মূলক পরীক্ষার জন্য এর খুব ইম্পরট্যান্ট একটি বিষয় ...তাছাড়া বাংলাদেশের সাম্প্রতিক যে কোন ডাটা বা তথ্য এই বইতে পাবেন ...
তাই একজন নাগরিক হিসাবে এই তথ্য গুলো আপনার জানা প্রয়োজন ...।
বিসিএস ও ব্যাংক এর লিখিত পরীক্ষা ...+এছাড়া মাধ্যমিক ও উচ্চমাধ্যমিকের স্টুডেন্টদের জন্য অনেক কাজে আসবে ...
This presentation includes basic of PCOS their pathology and treatment and also Ayurveda correlation of PCOS and Ayurvedic line of treatment mentioned in classics.
ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 42001, and GDPR: Best Practices for Implementation and...PECB
Denis is a dynamic and results-driven Chief Information Officer (CIO) with a distinguished career spanning information systems analysis and technical project management. With a proven track record of spearheading the design and delivery of cutting-edge Information Management solutions, he has consistently elevated business operations, streamlined reporting functions, and maximized process efficiency.
Certified as an ISO/IEC 27001: Information Security Management Systems (ISMS) Lead Implementer, Data Protection Officer, and Cyber Risks Analyst, Denis brings a heightened focus on data security, privacy, and cyber resilience to every endeavor.
His expertise extends across a diverse spectrum of reporting, database, and web development applications, underpinned by an exceptional grasp of data storage and virtualization technologies. His proficiency in application testing, database administration, and data cleansing ensures seamless execution of complex projects.
What sets Denis apart is his comprehensive understanding of Business and Systems Analysis technologies, honed through involvement in all phases of the Software Development Lifecycle (SDLC). From meticulous requirements gathering to precise analysis, innovative design, rigorous development, thorough testing, and successful implementation, he has consistently delivered exceptional results.
Throughout his career, he has taken on multifaceted roles, from leading technical project management teams to owning solutions that drive operational excellence. His conscientious and proactive approach is unwavering, whether he is working independently or collaboratively within a team. His ability to connect with colleagues on a personal level underscores his commitment to fostering a harmonious and productive workplace environment.
Date: May 29, 2024
Tags: Information Security, ISO/IEC 27001, ISO/IEC 42001, Artificial Intelligence, GDPR
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Find out more about ISO training and certification services
Training: ISO/IEC 27001 Information Security Management System - EN | PECB
ISO/IEC 42001 Artificial Intelligence Management System - EN | PECB
General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) - Training Courses - EN | PECB
Webinars: https://pecb.com/webinars
Article: https://pecb.com/article
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For more information about PECB:
Website: https://pecb.com/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/pecb/
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/PECBInternational/
Slideshare: http://www.slideshare.net/PECBCERTIFICATION
Chapter wise All Notes of First year Basic Civil Engineering.pptxDenish Jangid
Chapter wise All Notes of First year Basic Civil Engineering
Syllabus
Chapter-1
Introduction to objective, scope and outcome the subject
Chapter 2
Introduction: Scope and Specialization of Civil Engineering, Role of civil Engineer in Society, Impact of infrastructural development on economy of country.
Chapter 3
Surveying: Object Principles & Types of Surveying; Site Plans, Plans & Maps; Scales & Unit of different Measurements.
Linear Measurements: Instruments used. Linear Measurement by Tape, Ranging out Survey Lines and overcoming Obstructions; Measurements on sloping ground; Tape corrections, conventional symbols. Angular Measurements: Instruments used; Introduction to Compass Surveying, Bearings and Longitude & Latitude of a Line, Introduction to total station.
Levelling: Instrument used Object of levelling, Methods of levelling in brief, and Contour maps.
Chapter 4
Buildings: Selection of site for Buildings, Layout of Building Plan, Types of buildings, Plinth area, carpet area, floor space index, Introduction to building byelaws, concept of sun light & ventilation. Components of Buildings & their functions, Basic concept of R.C.C., Introduction to types of foundation
Chapter 5
Transportation: Introduction to Transportation Engineering; Traffic and Road Safety: Types and Characteristics of Various Modes of Transportation; Various Road Traffic Signs, Causes of Accidents and Road Safety Measures.
Chapter 6
Environmental Engineering: Environmental Pollution, Environmental Acts and Regulations, Functional Concepts of Ecology, Basics of Species, Biodiversity, Ecosystem, Hydrological Cycle; Chemical Cycles: Carbon, Nitrogen & Phosphorus; Energy Flow in Ecosystems.
Water Pollution: Water Quality standards, Introduction to Treatment & Disposal of Waste Water. Reuse and Saving of Water, Rain Water Harvesting. Solid Waste Management: Classification of Solid Waste, Collection, Transportation and Disposal of Solid. Recycling of Solid Waste: Energy Recovery, Sanitary Landfill, On-Site Sanitation. Air & Noise Pollution: Primary and Secondary air pollutants, Harmful effects of Air Pollution, Control of Air Pollution. . Noise Pollution Harmful Effects of noise pollution, control of noise pollution, Global warming & Climate Change, Ozone depletion, Greenhouse effect
Text Books:
1. Palancharmy, Basic Civil Engineering, McGraw Hill publishers.
2. Satheesh Gopi, Basic Civil Engineering, Pearson Publishers.
3. Ketki Rangwala Dalal, Essentials of Civil Engineering, Charotar Publishing House.
4. BCP, Surveying volume 1
This document provides an overview of wound healing, its functions, stages, mechanisms, factors affecting it, and complications.
A wound is a break in the integrity of the skin or tissues, which may be associated with disruption of the structure and function.
Healing is the body’s response to injury in an attempt to restore normal structure and functions.
Healing can occur in two ways: Regeneration and Repair
There are 4 phases of wound healing: hemostasis, inflammation, proliferation, and remodeling. This document also describes the mechanism of wound healing. Factors that affect healing include infection, uncontrolled diabetes, poor nutrition, age, anemia, the presence of foreign bodies, etc.
Complications of wound healing like infection, hyperpigmentation of scar, contractures, and keloid formation.
This presentation was provided by Steph Pollock of The American Psychological Association’s Journals Program, and Damita Snow, of The American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), for the initial session of NISO's 2024 Training Series "DEIA in the Scholarly Landscape." Session One: 'Setting Expectations: a DEIA Primer,' was held June 6, 2024.
it describes the bony anatomy including the femoral head , acetabulum, labrum . also discusses the capsule , ligaments . muscle that act on the hip joint and the range of motion are outlined. factors affecting hip joint stability and weight transmission through the joint are summarized.
A workshop hosted by the South African Journal of Science aimed at postgraduate students and early career researchers with little or no experience in writing and publishing journal articles.
How to Setup Warehouse & Location in Odoo 17 InventoryCeline George
In this slide, we'll explore how to set up warehouses and locations in Odoo 17 Inventory. This will help us manage our stock effectively, track inventory levels, and streamline warehouse operations.
How to Setup Warehouse & Location in Odoo 17 Inventory
CEIC 2010 international panel
1. International eDiscovery: Data Protection,
eDiscovery:
Privacy & Cross-Border Issues
Cross-
Red Rock Resort
Summerlin, Nevada
May 26, 2010
y ,
2. Agenda
The Panel
Moderator: Patrick Burke, Guidance
Software
M. James Daley, Esq., Daley & Fey LLP
Dominic Jaar, Ledjit inc.
George Rudoy, Shearman & Sterling LLP
P A G E 1
3. M. James Daley
M. James Daley, Esq., CIPP
Partner, Daley & Fey LLP
Partners with clients to contain the costs and reduce the risks of global
data privacy, e-discovery and data security challenges
p y, y y g
Chair of The Sedona Conference® Working Group on International E-
Disclosure and Records Management (WG6)
Co-Editor-in-Chief of The Sedona Conference® Framework for Analysis
Of Cross-Border Discovery Conflicts (2008)
Certified Information Privacy Professional (CIPP) – International
Association of Privacy Professionals
P A G E 2
4. Dominic Jaar
Dominic Jaar
President, Ledjit Consulting inc.
CEO, Canadian Centre for Court Technology
Member of the Sedona Conference
Editorial board (Sedona Canada)
WG1
WG6
Guidance Software Strategic Advisory Board
P A G E 3
5. George Rudoy
George Rudoy
Shearman & Sterling, LLP
Director, Global Practice, Information & Knowledge Management
Founding member of the E-Discovery Training Academy at Georgetown
E Discovery
Law Center
Chair of the ALM Law & Business’s Legal Tech Educational Board
Vice President of the International Legal Technology Association (ILTA)
Practice Management Peer Group
P A G E 4
7. The Current Landscape
Cross-border ediscovery is a “Catch 22”
Catch 22
U.S. Courts require production or relevant
information located outside the U.S.
US
Many non-U.S. jurisdictions restrict and/or
block th
bl k the processing and transfer of such
i dt f f h
information to the U.S.
P A G E 6
8. Differing notions of privacy
Privacy is a fundamental right in much of the
world
ld
Definitions of personal data subject to privacy
protection outside th U S are extremely
t ti t id the U.S. t l
broad
Privacy protections in the U.S. are industry
specific
Personal data subject to protection is limited to
specific categories (e.g., Social Security
numbers, medical i f
b di l information, b ki d t )
ti banking data)
P A G E 7
9. Differing Notions of Privacy
Restrictions on disclosure outside the
European Economic Area (E.U. member states
plus Norway, Iceland, and Liechtenstein)
Generally, personal data cannot be sent to
countries with less privacy/data protection
p y p
than in the E.U.
Only a handful of jurisdictions meet
standards to allow data transfer
P A G E 8
10. Transfers outside the EU
Exceptions and derogations to general
principle
Issues include necessity for the transfer,
y
proportionality (how the truly personal data is
culled), and specifics in enabling laws of
member states.
b t t
Critical to consult local counsel
Transmission may require
notification/permission of local Data Protection
Agencies
P A G E 9
11. Differing Notions of Discovery
Common law: expansive pre-trial discovery y
conducted by the parties with judicial supervision as
needed to resolve disputes or manage court calendar
U S most expansive: di
U.S. t i discovery permitted of
itt d f
documents which may lead to admissible evidence
Canadian “semblance of relevance test almost as
semblance relevance”
expansive
U.K.: parties must p
p produce “documents relied upon
p
and documents that adversely affect or support
litigant’s position” but document request must seek
specific documents not broad categories
documents,
P A G E 10
12. Civil Code jurisdictions
Disclosure is limited to admissible evidence
Court closely supervises disclosure and
determines admissibility and relevance of
proposed evidence
For example, in Germany, litigants need only
F l i G liti t d l
produce those documents which will support
their claims
P A G E 11
13. The Hague Convention
Hague Convention on the Taking of Evidence
Abroad (1972)
Ab d
An attempt at compromise: a uniform
procedure f collection of evidence b t
d for ll ti f id between
common law and civil law jurisdictions.
Letters of request (“
L f (“rogatory”) i
”) issue f
from court
in one nation to designated central authority
(often a court) in another requesting
another,
assistance in obtaining information
P A G E 12
14. The Hague Convention
Aerospatiale: U.S. courts are not required to resort
to the Hague Convention procedures over the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure
Fi f t b l
Five-factor balancing test:
i t t
Importance of the evidence to the litigation
R
Respective i t
ti interests of the U.S. and th f i
t f th U S d the foreign
nation where the information is located
Specificity of the request
Whether the information originated in the U.S.
Availability of alternative means to obtain the
information
P A G E 13
15. Blocking statutes
Shields for nationally sensitive data
Statutes which restrict cross-border discovery
of information intended for use in foreign
judicial
j di i l proceedings
di
Not limited to civil law jurisdictions (Australia
and C
d Canada h
d have bl ki statutes)
blocking )
May be general (France and Venezuela) or
industry-specific (e.g., Switzerland re banking
information)
P A G E 14
16. Blocking Statutes
Contrary to certain U.S. and U.K. judicial
decisions, blocking statutes can have severe
consequences
Venezuela: In Lynondell-Citgo Refining LP v.
Petroleos de Venezuela, defendant accepted
an adverse i f
d inference i t ti rather th
instruction th than
turn over board minutes and related documents
France: In January, 2008, the French Supreme
Court affirmed a criminal conviction for
speaking to a potential witness about a U S
U.S.
lawsuit
P A G E 15
17. Trends
The French Supreme Court decision, related
to U.S.
t U S case of St
f Straus v. Credit Lyonnais, may
C dit L i
tip the balancing test in favor of recognition
of the significance of blocking statutes and
result in more recourse to the Hague
Convention
Some U.S. courts had already required
recourse to the Hague Convention
(Connecticut District Court, In Re Perrier
Bottled Water Litigation; New Jersey State
Court, Husa v. Labatoires Servier S.A.)
P A G E 16
18. Trends
Potential narrowing of the definition of
“personal data” in U.K.
“ ld t ”i UK
Durant v. Financial Services Authority, Court of
Appeal (Ci il Di i i ) 2003 “O l
A l (Civil Division), 2003: “Only
information that names the (the individual) or
refers to him” qualifies for protection under the
him
Directives and U.K. enabling laws
Court described its holding as a “a narrow
a
interpretation of personal data” and is not
u e sa y o o ed
universally followed
P A G E 17
21. Trends
Increased attention to privacy in the United
States
Media coverage of compromises of personal data
through loss of laptops and backup tapes
Security breaches of large public and private
databases
Increasing incidence of identity theft
Recent (and first) HIPAA civil monetary penalty
proceeding to result in penalties, revamped electronic
privacy plan and compliance reports
P A G E 20
22. Ways to Mitigate Risk
Dialogue with Data Protection Authorities on
g
common interests
In-country collection, processing and culling
collection
and possibly review
Development of a uniform confidentiality
designation, i.e., “EU Confidential,” for
personal data involved in
discovery/disclosure cross borders
P A G E 21
23. Ways to Mitigate Risk
Development of specific E.U. (and perhaps
Asia- Pacific d S th A
A i P ifi and South America) provisions
i ) i i
for U.S. court protective orders and case
management orders
Addition of cross-border discovery and
conflicts training to judicial education curricula
Development of approved protocols for
processing and pre filtering of personal data in
pre-filtering
the host country to assure only relevant
pe so a
personal data is t a s e ed for d sco e y
s transferred o discovery
purposes
P A G E 22
24. A way forward
Education and Awareness:
Legal Restrictions
Records Management – Cultural Divide
Records
Technology Realities
Risk Benefit A l i
Ri k B fit Analysis
Efforts to Mitigate Risk
Continued Communication and Collaboration
P A G E 23
26. Upcoming event
The Sedona Conference®
International Program
I t ti lP
on Cross-Border eDiscovery,
eDisclosure & Data Privacy
15-17 September 2010
p
Washington, D.C.
P A G E 25
29. Canada
The State of E-Discovery
Ontario Guidelines
Sedona Canada Principles
Rules of Civil Procedure
Nova Scotia
Ontario
Practice Directions
British Columbia
Alberta
Quebec Code of Civil
Procedure
Federal
P A G E 28
30. Privacy
Canada as the Safest Harbour
Principles
Purpose
Consent
Limited
— Collection
C ll ti
— Use
— Disclosure
— Retention
Accuracy
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedom
Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act
(PIPEDA)
P
Provincial Legislation
i i l L i l ti
Sedona Canada White Paper on Privacy (To be published)
P A G E 29
31. Blocking Statutes
Reacting to USA’s Extraterritorial
Laws
Cuban Policy
Asbestos
Uranium
National and Provincial
Politics and Economics
Federal
Foreign Extraterritorial Measures Act
Provincial
Quebec Business Concerns Records Act
Ontario Business Records Protection Act
P A G E 30
32. Privileges (Solicitor-Client and Litigation)
Quasi-Constitutional Rights
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Waiver
Explicit
p
Implicit
Cross-Border Production
P A G E 31
33. Proportionality
A Reality, not a Mere Principle
Rules of Civil Procedure
Nature of the case
Value
Burden
Accessibility
Relative Relevance
Confidentiality
— Privacy
— Privileges
— Intellectual Property
p y
— Commercial/Industrial Secrets
P A G E 32
34. International E-Discovery
Practical Challenges
Language
Identification
Processing
Review
Presentation
Technological
g
Standards
Legacy systems
Multinational enterprise-
wide content search
Criminal/Penal charges
Jurisdiction over act
P A G E 33
36. Non English Language Documents
ASCII vs. Unicode
• Computers only understand
l d d
numbers—0’s and 1’s..
• ASCII d i d t allow humans
designed to ll h
to communicate with computers.
• Invented for teletypes
• Original ASCII character set
limited to 127 characters.
A -> 0100 0001
P A G E 35
37. Non English Language Documents
Printable ASCII Characters
0123456789abcdefg
hIjklmnopqrstuvwx
yz
ABCDEFGHIJKLM
NOPQRSTUVWXYZ
~ ! @ # $ % ^ & * ( ) _ + ` -= =
[ ] { } | ; ’: ” , . / < > ?
P A G E 36
38. Non English Language Documents
ASCII vs. Unicode
• Other languages needed additional
characters.
• Extended ASCII added ramped to
256 characters.
• Special encoding developed to reach
beyond extended ASCII.
• Result: multiple coding sets emerged
p g g
using the same byte sequences.
P A G E 37
39. Non English Language Documents
The bottom line…
• Chinese language has 65,000+
g g ,
symbols
• Unicode assigns numbers to every
possible character set.
• UTF-8 has become defacto
Unicode standard to represent
multi-byte languages.
E-Discovery processing software must support Unicode!
P A G E 38
40. Non English Language Documents
Non English Language Tokenisation
• Western search based on spaces
and punctuation.
P A G E 39
41. Non English Language Documents
Non English Language Tokenisation
• Some llanguages often don’t use
f d
spaces or punctuation.
P A G E 40
42. Non English Language Documents
Non English Language Tokenisation
Thedogatemydinnerbeforeicouldstophimnexttimeiwill
p
puthimoutbeforeieat
The dog ate my dinner before I could stop him.
Next time I will put him out before I eat.
裁判所はどこにありますか?
Where is the courthouse?
P A G E 41
44. Non English Language Documents
Non English Language
Chinese
Tokenisation
中國人
• Words may consist of one or
d
more symbols
i f
Middle country person
yp
China
中國
Middle country
y
P A G E 43
50. EU
Location: Europe between the North Atlantic Ocean in the west
and Russia, Belarus, and Ukraine to the east
, ,
Legal System: comparable to the legal systems of member
states; first supranational law system
P liti l structure: a h b id intergovernmental and supranational
Political t t hybrid i t t l d ti l
organization
Population: 491,018,683
Languages: Bulgarian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, English, Estonian,
Finnish, French, Gaelic, German, Greek, Hungarian, Italian,
Latvian, Lithuanian, Maltese, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian,
Slovak, Slovene, Spanish, Swedish
P A G E 49
51. EU
Be aware of balance and possible conflict of individual country
rules vs. EU rules
Transport and use of data is highly guarded and restricted
Prepare schedule of annual holidays and observances
p y
Polite direct requests
Take the time to clarify project purpose and plan
Clarify vernacular for technology (Services v. Share)
Establish client-side project liaison
C
Consider local labor laws
id l ll b l
P A G E 50
52. EU
Minimal experienced local vendor support, most located in UK
I
Involve IT in interview process to identify relevant technology
l i i i id if l h l
landscape
Explain discovery process in detail with the support of visual
p yp pp
diagrams and documentation
Local Counsel
IT Personnel
Interview process
Translate project requirements and scope
P A G E 51
54. Former USSR
English not widely spoken, even less so in non-capital cities
Remaining xenophobia of foreigners, especially Americans
foreigners
Local customs are unique and expected to be followed
Very little regard for privacy
Many layers of authority and management
Border security varies and customs can be negotiated with
No local vendors
Limited familiarity with litigation requests
“Government secrets” still an issue
Persistent refusal to sign any documents (chain of custody
form, privacy waiver, etc)
P A G E 53
57. Collecting ESI in Russia
Privacy Rights in Russia
Article 23 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation
— Everyone has the right to privacy, personal and family secrets, protection of
one’s honor and good name.
— Right to privacy of correspondence, telephone communications, mail, cables
and other communications.
— Any restriction of these rights require a court order.
Federal law “on information”
— Each person has the right to search and receive any information in any forms
and from any sources subject to specific limitations.
— Limitations provide only for data related to a state secret, commercial secret,
official or other secret (e.g. tax secret), professional secret, privacy or family
( g ), p ,p y y
secrets which are regulated by separate federal laws.
P A G E 56
58. Penalties
Penalties can be disciplinary, civil, administrative or criminal.
Specifically criminal liability for violation of the immunity of private life
Specifically, life,
violation of secrecy of communications and infringement of home
involiability, as well as liability for unauthorized access to legally
protected computer information.
Civil liability if an individual suffers physical or moral damages by violation
of his or her non-property rights or any other non-material welfare rights.
A court can force financial compensation.
P A G E 57
59. Russian law on transferring data through data
telecommunications networks
Article 15(5) of the Federal law “On Information” provides that
data can be transferred through data telecommunications
g
networks without any limitations subject to the protection of
intellectual property except
“On personal data” (
p (Article 7) requires the operator ensure for the
) q p
confidentiality of received personal data with two exceptions:
— Instances involving depersonalization of personal data, and
— Publically available personal data.
— Most importantly, the operator can process personal data only with a person’s
consent (Article 6) subject to certain exceptions.
— Personal data is broadly defined to include “any information related to an
individual…or information on the basis of which an individual may be
identified.” Examples include surname, birthdate, address, family status,
income and education.
P A G E 58
60. Consent
On the one hand, consent is required “when directed by law” such as
collection and transborder transfer of personal data.
On the other hand, in practice, where a company puts employees on
written notice by policy or specific notice that their email and
documents are company property and can be accessed for business
uses at any time, written consent can be made by the company.
Written consent is prudent – the burden of proof is on the operator and
Russian courts usually require documentation.
No standard consent form, but lists six criteria to include:
,
— full name of person giving consent including address, passport number, date of issue and
issuing authority.
— Name and address of operator to whom consent is given.
— List of personal data that may be processed.
— List of operations to be performed with personal data, and general description of the
processing methods.
— Term of validity of the consent and the procedure for its revocation.
P A G E 59
61. Exceptions to Consent
Personal data process on the basis of federal law (primarily supporting
law enforcement).
Personal data processed to perform an agreement to which such
individual is a party (e.g. employment agreement).
Personal data processed for scientific or statistical purposes, and it is
sanitized.
iti d
Personal data processed to protect life, health or important individual
interests and it’s not possible to obtain consent.
Personal data processed to deliver mail or telecommunications
customer settlements.
Processed for professional activity of a journalist or for scientific
literature or creative activity
activity.
Data subject to publication in compliance with federal laws such as
state officials or candidates to elective posts.
P A G E 60
62. Australia
Land Mass: Slightly smaller than the US contiguous 48 states
Legal System: Based on English common law; accepts
compulsory ICJ jurisdiction, with reservations
Population: 21,007,310
Ethnicity: Caucasian 92% Asian 7% aboriginal and other 1%
92%, 7%,
Languages: English or strine spoken
P A G E 61
63. Australia – Cultural
Highly regulated environment
Legal compliance is accepted and valued
Polite direct requests
Informal business environment
High use of technology, mobile technology and email
Due to “listing” requirements objective data and metadata
integrity is important
The Legal Hold concept loosely translates
Vigilant customs and security
L
Local vendors
l d
Familiar with litigation requests
P A G E 62
64. China
Land Mass: Slightly smaller than the US
Legal System: Based on civil law system; derived from Soviet
and continental civil code legal principles; legislature retains
power to interpret statutes; constitution ambiguous on judicial
review of legislation; has not accepted compulsory ICJ
jurisdiction
Population: 1,330,044,544
Ethnicity: Han Chinese 91.5%, Zhuang, Manchu, Hui, Miao,
Uyghur, Tujia Yi, Mongol, Tibetan Buyi Dong Yao Korean
Uyghur Tujia, Yi Mongol Tibetan, Buyi, Dong, Yao, Korean, and
other nationalities 8.5%
Languages: Standard Chinese or Mandarin (Putonghua, based
on the Beijing dialect), Yue (Cantonese), Wu (Shanghainese),
Minbei (Fuzhou), Minnan (Hokkien-Taiwanese), Xiang, Gan,
Hakka dialects, minority languages
P A G E 63
65. China - Cultural
Dispute resolution process not aligned
Not familiar with litigation requests
Many layers of authority and management
“Party” plays a role
Titles and formality is important
Timeframes may slip
Can be difficult getting hardware in and out
Payment customs can be misunderstood
Exceptions based on relationships
Labour cost and efficiency y
Self service
Vendor selection and testing
P A G E 64
66. Privacy in China
China lacks comprehensive privacy legislation.
A draft Personal Data Protection Law has been submitted to the State
Council, China’s executive branch.
It is not unusual for searches to be undertaken on company computers
without an employee’s consent.
p y
Nonetheless, obtaining written consent is a prudent practice.
P A G E 65
67. Privacy in Hong Kong
Two sources of privacy protection
Personal Data (Privacy) Ordinance
Common law (generally applies only to information which has the necessary quality of
confidence, was imparted in confidence, and used without authorization to the detriment of the
party communicating it (Coco v AN Clark (Engineers) Ltd. [1969] RPC 41).
Under Personal Data (Privacy Ordinance), “personal data” is defined as any data
(a) relating directly or indirectly to a living individual,
(b) from which it is practicable for the identity of the individual to be directly or indirectly
ascertained, and
(c) in a form in which access to or processing or use of the data is practicable.
The use of personal data (including collection, processing and transfer) must be
consistent with the purpose for which the data were originally collected or
directly related to it, otherwise the prior consent of the employee must be sought
and obtained.
Beware a newly enacted section 33 of the Privacy Ordinance – which may not yet
be in force – which prohibits the transfer of personal data outside Hong Kong
and unclear if consent overcomes that.
P A G E 66