The Experts below are selected from a list of 2199 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform

Edward J. Appel - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Cybervetting: Internet Searches for Vetting, Investigations, and Open-Source Intelligence
    2014
    Co-Authors: Edward J. Appel
    Abstract:

    Researching an individuals, firms or brands online presence has become standard practice for many employers, investigators, and intelligence officers, including law enforcement. Countless companies and organizations are implementing their own policies, procedures, and practices for Internet investigations, cybervetting, and intelligence. Cybervetting: Internet Searches for Vetting, Investigations, and Open-Source Intelligence, Second Edition examines our societys growing dependence on networked systems, exploring how individuals, businesses, and governments have embraced the Internet, including social networking for communications and transactions. It presents two previously unpublished studies of the effectiveness of cybervetting, and provides best practices for ethical cybervetting, advocating strengthened online security. Relevant to investigators, researchers, legal and policy professionals, educators, law enforcement, intelligence, and other practitioners, this book establishes the core skills, applicable techniques, and suitable guidelines to greatly enhance their practices. The book includes the outcomes of recent legal cases relating to Discoverable Information on social media that have established guidelines for using the Internet in vetting, investigations, and open-source intelligence. It outlines new tools and tactics, and indicates what is and isnt admissible under current laws. It also highlights current cybervetting methods, provides legal frameworks for Internet searching as part of investigations, and describes how to effectively integrate cybervetting into an existing screening procedure. Whats New in the Second Edition: Presents and analyzes results of two recent studies of the effectiveness of cybervetting Updates key litigation trends, investigative advances, HR practices, policy considerations, social networking, and Web 2.0 searching Includes the latest tactics and guidelines for cybervetting Covers policy, legal issues, professional methodology, and the operational techniques of cybervetting Provides a strengthened rationale, legal foundation, and procedures for successful cybervetting Contains compelling evidence that trends in legal, policy, and procedural developments argue for early adoption of cybervetting Presents new strategies and methodologies Cybervetting: Internet Searches for Vetting, Investigations, and Open-Source Intelligence, Second Edition is a relevant and timely resource well suited to businesses, government, non-profits, and academia looking to formulate effective Internet search strategies, methodologies, policies, and procedures for their practices or organizations.

  • Cybervetting: Internet Searches for Vetting, Investigations, and Open-Source Intelligence
    2014
    Co-Authors: Edward J. Appel
    Abstract:

    Researching an individuals, firms or brands online presence has become standard practice for many employers, investigators, and intelligence officers, including law enforcement. Countless companies and organizations are implementing their own policies, procedures, and practices for Internet investigations, cybervetting, and intelligence. Cybervetting: Internet Searches for Vetting, Investigations, and Open-Source Intelligence, Second Edition examines our societys growing dependence on networked systems, exploring how individuals, businesses, and governments have embraced the Internet, including social networking for communications and transactions. It presents two previously unpublished studies of the effectiveness of cybervetting, and provides best practices for ethical cybervetting, advocating strengthened online security. Relevant to investigators, researchers, legal and policy professionals, educators, law enforcement, intelligence, and other practitioners, this book establishes the core skills, applicable techniques, and suitable guidelines to greatly enhance their practices. The book includes the outcomes of recent legal cases relating to Discoverable Information on social media that have established guidelines for using the Internet in vetting, investigations, and open-source intelligence. It outlines new tools and tactics, and indicates what is and isnt admissible under current laws. It also highlights current cybervetting methods, provides legal frameworks for Internet searching as part of investigations, and describes how to effectively integrate cybervetting into an existing screening procedure. Whats New in the Second Edition: Presents and analyzes results of two recent studies of the effectiveness of cybervetting Updates key litigation trends, investigative advances, HR practices, policy considerations, social networking, and Web 2.0 searching Includes the latest tactics and guidelines for cybervetting Covers policy, legal issues, professional methodology, and the operational techniques of cybervetting Provides a strengthened rationale, legal foundation, and procedures for successful cybervetting Contains compelling evidence that trends in legal, policy, and procedural developments argue for early adoption of cybervetting Presents new strategies and methodologies Cybervetting: Internet Searches for Vetting, Investigations, and Open-Source Intelligence, Second Edition is a relevant and timely resource well suited to businesses, government, non-profits, and academia looking to formulate effective Internet search strategies, methodologies, policies, and procedures for their practices or organizations.

William A. Fenwick - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Ediscovery: Preserving, Requesting & Producing Electronic Information
    Santa Clara High Technology Law Journal, 2003
    Co-Authors: Lisa M. Arent, Robert D. Brownstone, William A. Fenwick
    Abstract:

    I. INTRODUCTION (1) As one federal judge so astutely predicted two decades ago: It may well be that Judge Charles E. Clark and the framers of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure could not foresee the computer age. However, we know we now live in an era when much of the data which our society desires to retain is stored in computer discs. This process will escalate in years to come; we suspect that by the year 2000 virtually all data will be stored in some form of computer memory. (2) The 1980 prediction was not too far off. In our high-tech era, a body of law (3) has evolved regarding the parameters of the preservation, collection, and production of electronic evidence. (4) This Essay discusses the application of discovery rules and common law discovery principles to electronic Information issues. II. PRESERVATION AND COLLECTION OF ELECTRONIC DATA A. The Duty to Preserve Evidence 1. Preservation Obligations in the Electronic Context A party has a duty to preserve potentially relevant evidence. Evidence includes all forms of Information, not only hard-copy documents, (5) but also electronic Information stored on a computer, in a database, or in any other electronic format. A requesting party is entitled to obtain Discoverable Information from an electronic source to the same extent as from a filing cabinet. (6) In each situation, the responding party must determine the potential sources and locations of responsive Information and then conduct a diligent search for responsive materials. Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure defines the term "document" broadly, to include Information in any tangible format. (7) Although discovery of electronic data has become an issue of increased interest and concern over the last several years, the notion that computer data is Discoverable is not new. In 1970, Congress modified Rule 34 to explicate that the term "documents" encompassed more than just hardcopies. (8) Neither of the California Discovery Act provisions regarding the production of "documents and tangible things" defines "document." (9) Instead, in all Discovery Act sections, by virtue of section 2016(b)(3) of the California Code of Civil Procedure, "document" is coextensive with "writing" as defined in section 250 of the California Evidence Code. Section 250 defines "writing" as "handwriting, typewriting, printing, photostating, photographing, and every other means of recording upon any tangible thing any form of communication or representation, including letters, words, pictures, sounds, or symbols, or combinations thereof." That definition has been interpreted broadly to include Information in electronic form. (10) The broad definition of "documents" typically used in requests for production encompasses Information stored on computers and on computer media, such as floppy disks, zip drives, jaz drives, (11) and archival/emergency storage devices (such as back-up tapes). (12) Moreover, electronic versions of documents can contain additional, non-printed Information, such as the dates of creation, access and/or modification and, if relevant, sending and receiving details. (13) 2. Nature and Consequences of Duty to Preserve The responding party's failure to preserve evidence or destruction of evidence can lead to a variety of adverse consequences. It may preclude the requesting party from obtaining otherwise relevant or Discoverable evidence; it may harm the integrity of the court proceedings; and it may ultimately harm the blameworthy party. a. Ethical Obligations When conducting discovery, an attorney should keep in mind several principles set forth in the ethics rules. Model Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4(c)-(d) proscribes "dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation [or] conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. …

Lisa M. Arent - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Ediscovery: Preserving, Requesting & Producing Electronic Information
    Santa Clara High Technology Law Journal, 2003
    Co-Authors: Lisa M. Arent, Robert D. Brownstone, William A. Fenwick
    Abstract:

    I. INTRODUCTION (1) As one federal judge so astutely predicted two decades ago: It may well be that Judge Charles E. Clark and the framers of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure could not foresee the computer age. However, we know we now live in an era when much of the data which our society desires to retain is stored in computer discs. This process will escalate in years to come; we suspect that by the year 2000 virtually all data will be stored in some form of computer memory. (2) The 1980 prediction was not too far off. In our high-tech era, a body of law (3) has evolved regarding the parameters of the preservation, collection, and production of electronic evidence. (4) This Essay discusses the application of discovery rules and common law discovery principles to electronic Information issues. II. PRESERVATION AND COLLECTION OF ELECTRONIC DATA A. The Duty to Preserve Evidence 1. Preservation Obligations in the Electronic Context A party has a duty to preserve potentially relevant evidence. Evidence includes all forms of Information, not only hard-copy documents, (5) but also electronic Information stored on a computer, in a database, or in any other electronic format. A requesting party is entitled to obtain Discoverable Information from an electronic source to the same extent as from a filing cabinet. (6) In each situation, the responding party must determine the potential sources and locations of responsive Information and then conduct a diligent search for responsive materials. Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure defines the term "document" broadly, to include Information in any tangible format. (7) Although discovery of electronic data has become an issue of increased interest and concern over the last several years, the notion that computer data is Discoverable is not new. In 1970, Congress modified Rule 34 to explicate that the term "documents" encompassed more than just hardcopies. (8) Neither of the California Discovery Act provisions regarding the production of "documents and tangible things" defines "document." (9) Instead, in all Discovery Act sections, by virtue of section 2016(b)(3) of the California Code of Civil Procedure, "document" is coextensive with "writing" as defined in section 250 of the California Evidence Code. Section 250 defines "writing" as "handwriting, typewriting, printing, photostating, photographing, and every other means of recording upon any tangible thing any form of communication or representation, including letters, words, pictures, sounds, or symbols, or combinations thereof." That definition has been interpreted broadly to include Information in electronic form. (10) The broad definition of "documents" typically used in requests for production encompasses Information stored on computers and on computer media, such as floppy disks, zip drives, jaz drives, (11) and archival/emergency storage devices (such as back-up tapes). (12) Moreover, electronic versions of documents can contain additional, non-printed Information, such as the dates of creation, access and/or modification and, if relevant, sending and receiving details. (13) 2. Nature and Consequences of Duty to Preserve The responding party's failure to preserve evidence or destruction of evidence can lead to a variety of adverse consequences. It may preclude the requesting party from obtaining otherwise relevant or Discoverable evidence; it may harm the integrity of the court proceedings; and it may ultimately harm the blameworthy party. a. Ethical Obligations When conducting discovery, an attorney should keep in mind several principles set forth in the ethics rules. Model Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4(c)-(d) proscribes "dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation [or] conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. …

Robert D. Brownstone - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.

  • Ediscovery: Preserving, Requesting & Producing Electronic Information
    Santa Clara High Technology Law Journal, 2003
    Co-Authors: Lisa M. Arent, Robert D. Brownstone, William A. Fenwick
    Abstract:

    I. INTRODUCTION (1) As one federal judge so astutely predicted two decades ago: It may well be that Judge Charles E. Clark and the framers of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure could not foresee the computer age. However, we know we now live in an era when much of the data which our society desires to retain is stored in computer discs. This process will escalate in years to come; we suspect that by the year 2000 virtually all data will be stored in some form of computer memory. (2) The 1980 prediction was not too far off. In our high-tech era, a body of law (3) has evolved regarding the parameters of the preservation, collection, and production of electronic evidence. (4) This Essay discusses the application of discovery rules and common law discovery principles to electronic Information issues. II. PRESERVATION AND COLLECTION OF ELECTRONIC DATA A. The Duty to Preserve Evidence 1. Preservation Obligations in the Electronic Context A party has a duty to preserve potentially relevant evidence. Evidence includes all forms of Information, not only hard-copy documents, (5) but also electronic Information stored on a computer, in a database, or in any other electronic format. A requesting party is entitled to obtain Discoverable Information from an electronic source to the same extent as from a filing cabinet. (6) In each situation, the responding party must determine the potential sources and locations of responsive Information and then conduct a diligent search for responsive materials. Rule 34 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure defines the term "document" broadly, to include Information in any tangible format. (7) Although discovery of electronic data has become an issue of increased interest and concern over the last several years, the notion that computer data is Discoverable is not new. In 1970, Congress modified Rule 34 to explicate that the term "documents" encompassed more than just hardcopies. (8) Neither of the California Discovery Act provisions regarding the production of "documents and tangible things" defines "document." (9) Instead, in all Discovery Act sections, by virtue of section 2016(b)(3) of the California Code of Civil Procedure, "document" is coextensive with "writing" as defined in section 250 of the California Evidence Code. Section 250 defines "writing" as "handwriting, typewriting, printing, photostating, photographing, and every other means of recording upon any tangible thing any form of communication or representation, including letters, words, pictures, sounds, or symbols, or combinations thereof." That definition has been interpreted broadly to include Information in electronic form. (10) The broad definition of "documents" typically used in requests for production encompasses Information stored on computers and on computer media, such as floppy disks, zip drives, jaz drives, (11) and archival/emergency storage devices (such as back-up tapes). (12) Moreover, electronic versions of documents can contain additional, non-printed Information, such as the dates of creation, access and/or modification and, if relevant, sending and receiving details. (13) 2. Nature and Consequences of Duty to Preserve The responding party's failure to preserve evidence or destruction of evidence can lead to a variety of adverse consequences. It may preclude the requesting party from obtaining otherwise relevant or Discoverable evidence; it may harm the integrity of the court proceedings; and it may ultimately harm the blameworthy party. a. Ethical Obligations When conducting discovery, an attorney should keep in mind several principles set forth in the ethics rules. Model Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4(c)-(d) proscribes "dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation [or] conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice. …

Yixin Zhang - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.