Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Hyperlinked Documents: The Latest e-Discovery Challenge
Dynamic files shared as links rather than attachments — known as hyperlinked documents — are emerging as a new frontier in the e-discovery landscape. As courts and discovery experts debate whether hyperlinked content should be treated the same as traditional attachments, legal practitioners are grappling with the technical and legal complexities of collecting, analyzing and reviewing these documents in real-world cases.
How Cloud Storage Changed File Sharing
Cloud storage services such as OneDrive, SharePoint, and Google Drive have revolutionized file sharing, facilitating collaboration in an increasingly global workplace. By sharing links, users can distribute documents quickly, bypassing email attachment limits and physical transfers. These links allow recipients to view and edit files in real time, ensuring they always see the most up-to-date version. While convenient, hyperlinked documents introduce significant challenges for e-discovery professionals.
Understanding Hyperlinked Documents
A hyperlinked document is shared via a link or URL in an email or chat, rather than being physically transmitted as an attachment. The underlying file remains on a cloud server and can be accessed by clicking the link. Examples include:
- Microsoft: Share > Copy Link > Paste the link.
- Google Docs: Bookmark icon > Right-click Link > Copy link address.
- Box: Hover over file/folder > Create and Copy Shared Link > Send Shared Link > Enter collaborator's email/name > Type a message > Send.
These documents are common in collaborative applications, offering advantages such as reduced email storage and real-time collaboration. However, their dynamic nature poses unique challenges for e-discovery.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
Role and Responsibilities of Practice Group Leaders
Ideally, the objective of defining the role and responsibilities of Practice Group Leaders should be to establish just enough structure and accountability within their respective practice group to maximize the economic potential of the firm, while institutionalizing the principles of leadership and teamwork.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?