Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Computer Law
E-Discovery: Reasonable Search, Proportionality, Cooperation, And Advancing Technology, 30 J. Marshall J. Info. Tech. & Privacy L. 433 (2014), Steven Bennett
E-Discovery: Reasonable Search, Proportionality, Cooperation, And Advancing Technology, 30 J. Marshall J. Info. Tech. & Privacy L. 433 (2014), Steven Bennett
UIC John Marshall Journal of Information Technology & Privacy Law
Rule 26(g)(1)(A) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (the “Federal Rules”) requires that an attorney responding to a discovery request verify by signature, after “reasonable inquiry,” that the disclosure is, to the best of the attorney’s knowledge, “complete and correct.” In a digital environment, with masses of data in multiple formats and locations, the determination of whether a “reasonable” effort to meet the completeness requirement has occurred may turn on an assessment of the practices used to conduct a search of electronic materials. Those practices, in turn, must be judged on a standard of “proportionality” (i.e., that the effort …
Shutting Down The Ex Parte Party: How To Keep Bittorrent Copyright Trolls From Abusing The Federal Court’S Discovery System, 31 J. Marshall J. Info. Tech. & Privacy L. 105 (2014), Jennifer L. Hunter
Shutting Down The Ex Parte Party: How To Keep Bittorrent Copyright Trolls From Abusing The Federal Court’S Discovery System, 31 J. Marshall J. Info. Tech. & Privacy L. 105 (2014), Jennifer L. Hunter
UIC John Marshall Journal of Information Technology & Privacy Law
No abstract provided.
The Scientological Defenestration Of Choice-Of-Law Doctrines For Publication Torts On The Internet, 15 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 361 (1997), Christopher P. Beall
The Scientological Defenestration Of Choice-Of-Law Doctrines For Publication Torts On The Internet, 15 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 361 (1997), Christopher P. Beall
UIC John Marshall Journal of Information Technology & Privacy Law
Two major doctrines exist for choosing which state's law applies to an interstate tort: the "lex loci deliciti" (the law of the place of the wrong) approach and the "most significant relationship" approach. In the context of the Internet, the "lex loci deliciti" approach has been criticized for its harshness. For example, it is possible for an e-mail posting to be non-actionable where written, but actionable where read. Likewise, the "most significant relationship" approach has been criticized for its indeterminacy and lack of predictability because the outcome as to the extent of liability for a publication tort on the Internet …